Re: [asa] The Multiverse - Physics or Metaphysics?

The worst part of the string landscape multiverse is that it means the death
of physics in that it holds that the search for a fundamental theory is a
fool's errand. Susskind even likens such a search to a religious endeavor,
which is not intended as a compliment.

Smolin can not take the high road, however. In spite of claims to the
contrary, his explanation of the anthropic coincidences vis his theory of
cosmic evolution:

1. Black holes beget new universes
2. The child universes will have similar (but not quite the same) physics
3. Therefore universes good at producing black holes will evolve via natural
selection
4. coincidentally they, since they have stars and galaxies, are the same
types of universes that can support life

 is not testable, beyond his challenge to imagine a universe that is much
better at creating black holes. Plus he never satisfactorily justifies why
the child universes should have "close to but not exactly the same" physics.

David Heddle
Associate Professor of Physics
Christopher Newport University &
The Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility

On 9/11/07, David Heddle <heddle@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The worst part of the string landscape multiverse is that it means the
> death of physics in that it holds that the search for a fundamental theory
> is a fool's errand. Susskind even likens such a search to a religious
> endeavor, which is not intended as a compliment.
>
> Smolin can not take the high road, however. In spite of claims to the
> contrary, his explanation of the anthropic coincidences vis his theory of
> cosmic evolution:
>
> 1. Black holes beget new universes
> 2. The child universes will have similar (but not quite the same) physics
> 3. Therefore universes good at producing black holes will evolve via
> natural selection
> 4. coincidentally they, since they have stars and galaxies, are the same
> types of universes that can support life
>
> is not testable, beyond his challenge to imagine a universe that is much
> better at creating black holes. Plus he never satisfactorily justifies why
> the child universes should have "close to but not exactly the same" physics.
>
>
> David Heddle
> Associate Professor of Physics
> Christopher Newport University &
> The Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility
>
>
> On 9/11/07, Iain Strachan <igd.strachan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > A small correction to my last post.
> >
> > The author of the Physics World review of Smolin's book is Michael
> > Riordan, not Houghton Mifflin (which is the publisher!). Sorry, my brain
> > went into a parallel universe momentarily...
> >
> > Iain
> > -----------
>
>
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Sep 11 09:47:51 2007