Reality Straight Up!

Thoughts & Observations of a Free Range Astrophysicist

multiverse fractal

Not Science Fiction

Three cheers for multiverses!

Reality need not conform to our preferences. To complain that multiverses are “outlandish” or “unscientific” is to ignore the history of scientific discovery.

This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.


When quantum mechanics was young, scientific giants of the day went toe to toe over the unquestionably bizarre, almost preposterous new theory. For Albert Einstein, wave functions and indeterminate outcomes just didn’t smell right. He famously declared, “God does not play dice!” Niels Bohr is said to have responded with equal bravado, “Albert, stop telling God what to do!”

Multiverses may seem outlandish, but then so did quantum mechanics.

For those acquainted with the tumultuous birth of quantum mechanics, today’s debates over the existence of multiple universes might inspire a feeling of déjà vu. Physicists like Stephen Hawking and Max Tegmark see multiverses as unavoidable. Others like Peter Woit counter that the idea is not only wrong, but a threat to science itself. To multiverse or not to multiverse — that is the question. This is fun stuff!

Multiverses may seem outlandish, but they are hardly misbegotten brainchildren of demented theorists. From the physics of the Big Bang, to the flatness of the observable universe, to the mass of the Higgs boson and a paucity of particles seen at the European particle physics lab CERN’s Large Hadron Collider, to the ambiguous fate of Schrödinger’s cat, multiverses arise from promising efforts to fill gaping holes in the foundations of physics and cosmology.

If multiverses are such a powerful idea, why do some people wish them a speedy and ignominious death? While there are certainly outstanding scientific questions, some of the most passionate critics focus on more philosophical concerns. In particular, some insist that absent falsifiable predictions, multiverses have no place in science at all.

I understand that concern. If you’ve read my past columns, you know that falsifiability is a really big deal with me. Scientific knowledge is built on testing falsifiable predictions. But that is not the same thing as saying that everything we know can be or needs to be tested directly.

Multiverse theories do not “break” science.

Quoting Alfred North Whitehead: “There are no whole truths; all truths are half-truths. It is trying to treat them as whole truths that plays the devil.” When it comes to falsifiability, like it or not, gray areas exist. Scientists routinely accept necessary consequences of well-tested theories, regardless of whether those consequences are independently testable. Cosmology is a case in point.

The cosmological principle is the bedrock of our understanding of the structure and evolution of the universe. Simply put, the cosmological principle says that there is nothing special about our place in the universe. Yet that statement is patently absurd. We live in a very special place in the observable universe; we are right at its center.

The whole science of cosmology rests on the untestable claim that our observable universe lies buried within a vastly larger universe filled with stars and galaxies that we can never see. We know those galaxies are there because well-tested theories rely on them. Multiverses may be different in degree, but they are no different in principle. Sorry, but if you want to restrict science to things that we can directly observe, you are out of luck. That ship has sailed.

The fact that we can’t see multiverses doesn’t mean they don’t exist, nor is talking about them a threat to science. Karl Popper, the father of falsifiability himself, noted that unfalsifiable statements can still be true, and even if not true can still be scientifically useful.

David Deutsch is a pioneer in the emerging science of quantum information. He says that everything he does depends on one particular multiverse, Hugh Everett’s “many-worlds interpretation” of quantum mechanics. Regardless of whether it exists, without the idea of Everett’s multiverse, quantum computers, quantum encryption, and quantum teleportation might have yet to be invented.

Rolling dice in multiverses

The universe has a habit of ignoring human ideas about what is reasonable and what isn’t. Even Albert Einstein hated the counterintuitive non-deterministic universe of quantum mechanics, insisting, “God does not play dice!” But in a way, Einstein might yet turn out to have been correct, because according to some multiverse theories, every possible outcome of the rolled dice is as real as any other. God may not roll dice, but neither does he choose.

The lesson of cosmology has always been, “There is more out there than we thought there was.”

Certainly the philosophical implications of multiverses are profound. From the moment that Copernicus dislodged Earth from the center of creation, scientific progress has gone hand in hand with an ever-expanding concept of the cosmos. Multiverses represent the ultimate culmination of that journey.

In most multiverse theories, every universe that can exist does exist, has always existed, and always will exist. The question of, “why this universe” is meaningless. Of course we find ourselves in a universe suspiciously well suited for life. Where else could we be? Einstein could be right. Perhaps God does not play dice, but neither does he choose!

Demanding that existence limit itself to what humankind can directly observe is pretty egotistical, a bit like the medieval insistence that Earth is the center of all things.

Scientifically, the statement “multiverses exist” deserves to be on equal footing with the statement “multiverses do not exist.” There is no a priori reason to prefer one statement over the other.

Can we observe multiverses? That’s the wrong question. The right question is whether theories that rely on multiverses are more or less successful than theories that do not. Putting it differently, the statement “multiverse theories will make more interesting and correct predictions than theories without multiverses” is itself a testable prediction. On that basis, the scientific case for multiverses could prove very compelling, indeed.

Not Science Fiction ^ Three cheers for multiverses!  © Dr. Jeff Hester
Content may not be copied to other sites. All Rights Reserved.

Reality Straight Up!

  • Great Deceiverism 101  Explanation or Theory? Therein lies the rub.Posted in For Your ConsiderationUnreasonable Faith
  • One Step at a Time  The  not-so-mysterious origin of lifePosted in For Your ConsiderationUnreasonable Faith
  • The Mind’s Siren Call  Being certain is a primrose pathPosted in For Your ConsiderationUnreasonable Faith
  • Constrained Hallucinations  How the brain uses science to perceive the worldPosted in For Your ConsiderationUnreasonable Faith
  • Entropy Redux  Why our universe isn’t boringPosted in For Your ConsiderationUnreasonable Faith
  • Entropy’s Rainbow  The statistically likely path to complexityPosted in For Your ConsiderationUnreasonable Faith
  • Cassandra Smiling  Science, politics and a march in the rainPosted in For Your ConsiderationUnreasonable Faith
  • EPA Rehash  A suddenly partisan NASA faces its futurePosted in Thoughts
  • The Hermeneutics of  Bunk  Alan Sokal and postmodernism’s black eyePosted in For Your ConsiderationUnreasonable Faith
  • A Dunning-Kruger Universe  Everyone, it seems, has a “theory”Posted in For Your ConsiderationUnreasonable Faith
  • Our Need to Know  We crave certainty, even when it is only an illusionPosted in CoachingThoughtsUnreasonable Faith
  • A Saguaro’s universe  Building a cactus starts with the Big BangPosted in For Your Consideration
  • Great Deceiverism 101
    Explanation or Theory? Therein lies the rub.

    If someone can’t tell you how they would know that they are wrong, they don’t have a clue whether they are right.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

    Read Article

  • One Step at a Time
    The not-so-mysterious origin of life

    Once seemingly incomprehensible, the origin of life no longer seems such a mystery. Most of what once appeared as roadblocks are turning out to be superhighways.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

    Read Article

  • The Mind’s Siren Call
    Being certain is a primrose path

    Being certain lights up our brains like a junkie’s next hit. Literally. Unfortunately, being certain and being right are two very, very different things.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

    Read Article

  • Constrained Hallucinations
    How the brain uses science to perceive the world

    The unique worlds we each consciously inhabit – the only worlds we will ever experience – are constrained hallucinations, products of hypothesis testing by our predictive brains.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

    Read Article

  • Entropy Redux
    Why our universe isn’t boring

    A month’s worth of sunlight could pay the entropy bill for a billion years of biological evolution. Entropy is evolution’s best friend.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

    Read Article

  • Entropy’s Rainbow
    The statistically likely path to complexity

    Entropy is often maligned as the enemy of order. In truth, without the inexorable march of entropy, the universe would be a very boring place.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

    Read Article

  • Cassandra Smiling
    Science, politics and a march in the rain

    On a cold day in April, 2017 scientists gathered in Washington DC and cities around the world for the March for Science. Their message was a single powerful idea. Truth is not a political expediency. Reality cannot be ignored. In the year that has followed the vital importance of that message has only grown.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

    Read Article

  • EPA Rehash
    A suddenly partisan NASA faces its future

    When I look at NASA’s new Administrator, Jim Bridenstine, it is his fellow Oklahoman Scott Pruitt’s EPA that jumps to mind. As politically uncomfortable science is pushed aside, NASA’s history of nonpartisanship appears headed for an abrupt end. Will a strongly partisan NASA have a target on its back?

    Read Article

  • The Hermeneutics of Bunk
    Alan Sokal and postmodernism’s black eye

    Some years ago, NYU physicist Alan Sokal wondered whether anti-science postmodernists could recognize politically-correct-sounding nonsense even if he rubbed their noses in it. The unwitting subjects of the Sokal Hoax jumped at the bait.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

    Read Article

  • A Dunning-Kruger Universe
    Everyone, it seems, has a “theory”

    Some people are sure they know more than the experts, but it can take a lot of knowledge to realize just how wrong an idea is.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

    Read Article

  • Our Need to Know
    We crave certainty, even when it is only an illusion

    The human brain craves the sensation of knowing like a drug addict craves the next fix. If real knowledge is uncomfortable or not at hand, we are quite content to just make something up, then convince ourselves it’s real. In a world where knowledge matters, that’s dangerous.

    Read Article

  • A Saguaro’s universe
    Building a cactus starts with the Big Bang

    The iconic saguaro cactus gives the desert an otherwordly beauty. That beauty does not exist in isolation. It embodies the fascinating and awe-inspiring processes that have shaped the universe, going all the way back to the Big Bang itself.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

    Read Article

Click on thumbnail to select post:

  • Great Deceiverism 101  Explanation or Theory? Therein lies the rub.Posted in For Your ConsiderationUnreasonable Faith
  • One Step at a Time  The  not-so-mysterious origin of lifePosted in For Your ConsiderationUnreasonable Faith
  • The Mind’s Siren Call  Being certain is a primrose pathPosted in For Your ConsiderationUnreasonable Faith
  • Constrained Hallucinations  How the brain uses science to perceive the worldPosted in For Your ConsiderationUnreasonable Faith
  • Entropy Redux  Why our universe isn’t boringPosted in For Your ConsiderationUnreasonable Faith
  • Entropy’s Rainbow  The statistically likely path to complexityPosted in For Your ConsiderationUnreasonable Faith
  • Cassandra Smiling  Science, politics and a march in the rainPosted in For Your ConsiderationUnreasonable Faith
  • EPA Rehash  A suddenly partisan NASA faces its futurePosted in Thoughts
  • The Hermeneutics of  Bunk  Alan Sokal and postmodernism’s black eyePosted in For Your ConsiderationUnreasonable Faith
  • A Dunning-Kruger Universe  Everyone, it seems, has a “theory”Posted in For Your ConsiderationUnreasonable Faith
  • Our Need to Know  We crave certainty, even when it is only an illusionPosted in CoachingThoughtsUnreasonable Faith
  • A Saguaro’s universe  Building a cactus starts with the Big BangPosted in For Your Consideration
  • If someone can’t tell you how they would know that they are wrong, they don’t have a clue whether they are right.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

  • Once seemingly incomprehensible, the origin of life no longer seems such a mystery. Most of what once appeared as roadblocks are turning out to be superhighways.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

  • Being certain lights up our brains like a junkie’s next hit. Literally. Unfortunately, being certain and being right are two very, very different things.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

  • The unique worlds we each consciously inhabit – the only worlds we will ever experience – are constrained hallucinations, products of hypothesis testing by our predictive brains.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

  • A month’s worth of sunlight could pay the entropy bill for a billion years of biological evolution. Entropy is evolution’s best friend.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

  • Entropy is often maligned as the enemy of order. In truth, without the inexorable march of entropy, the universe would be a very boring place.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

  • On a cold day in April, 2017 scientists gathered in Washington DC and cities around the world for the March for Science. Their message was a single powerful idea. Truth is not a political expediency. Reality cannot be ignored. In the year that has followed the vital importance of that message has only grown.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

  • When I look at NASA’s new Administrator, Jim Bridenstine, it is his fellow Oklahoman Scott Pruitt’s EPA that jumps to mind. As politically uncomfortable science is pushed aside, NASA’s history of nonpartisanship appears headed for an abrupt end. Will a strongly partisan NASA have a target on its back?

  • Some years ago, NYU physicist Alan Sokal wondered whether anti-science postmodernists could recognize politically-correct-sounding nonsense even if he rubbed their noses in it. The unwitting subjects of the Sokal Hoax jumped at the bait.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

  • Some people are sure they know more than the experts, but it can take a lot of knowledge to realize just how wrong an idea is.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

  • The human brain craves the sensation of knowing like a drug addict craves the next fix. If real knowledge is uncomfortable or not at hand, we are quite content to just make something up, then convince ourselves it’s real. In a world where knowledge matters, that’s dangerous.

  • The iconic saguaro cactus gives the desert an otherwordly beauty. That beauty does not exist in isolation. It embodies the fascinating and awe-inspiring processes that have shaped the universe, going all the way back to the Big Bang itself.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

Over his 30 year career as an internationally known astrophysicist, Dr. Jeff Hester was a key member of the team that repaired the Hubble Space Telescope. With one foot always on the frontiers of knowledge, he has been mentor, coach, team leader, award-winning teacher, administrator and speaker, to name a few of the hats he has worn. His Hubble image, the Pillars of Creation, was chosen by Time Magazine as among the 100 most influential photographs in history.
©Dr. Jeff Hester LLC, 5301 S. Superstition Mountain Dr., Suite 104 #171, Gold Canyon, AZ 85118