Quwstion for JW

[HRM Resident]

If the multi-universe theory is true, what's the name of the thing
that holds all of them?

[James Warren]

Post by HRM Resident
If the multi-universe theory is true, what's the name of the thing
that holds all of them?

Multiverse? Universe? We would need a new name for what is our little
corner of the universe. So far, no new naming system has been suggested.

[HRM Resident]

Post by James Warren
Multiverse? Universe? We would need a new name for
what is our little corner of the universe. So far, no new
naming system has been suggested.

I disagree. The universe is defined as the totality of existence, or
everything that exists, everything that has existed, and everything that
will exist. So if it is all that,
how can there be 2, or 2 googolplex of them?

That is like saying a Warren of rabbits is more than all
the rabbits that exist, have ever existed, and ever will exist.
How can there be more rabbits than that?

[James Warren]

Post by HRM Resident

Post by James Warren
Multiverse? Universe? We would need a new name for
what is our little corner of the universe. So far, no new
naming system has been suggested.

I disagree. The universe is defined as the totality of existence, or
everything that exists, everything that has existed, and everything that
will exist. So if it is all that,
how can there be 2, or 2 googolplex of them?
That is like saying a Warren of rabbits is more than all
the rabbits that exist, have ever existed, and ever will exist.
How can there be more rabbits than that?

Our universe is causally disconnected to all other regions outside of
our observable boundary. If other regions exist that are forever
unreachable from other regions, that is a "universe" for everything in
those regions. The totality of such regions may be infinite in number.
That might reasonable be called the UNIVERSE while any of those other
regions might reasonably be call a universe by any beings existing
within them.

[HRM Resident]

Post by James Warren
Our universe is causally disconnected to all other regions
outside of our observable boundary. If other regions exist
that are forever unreachable from other regions, that is a
"universe" for everything in those regions. The totality of
such regions may be infinite in number. That might
reasonable be called the UNIVERSE while any of those
other regions might reasonably be call a universe by any
beings existing within them.

So everything means more than everything, and there is
even more than that? And DM/DE might exist, and it might
not. Cosmology is jabberwocky. Yes means no, and no
means yes. Did Lewis Carroll invent cosmology too?

[James Warren]

Post by HRM Resident

Post by James Warren
Our universe is causally disconnected to all other regions
outside of our observable boundary. If other regions exist
that are forever unreachable from other regions, that is a
"universe" for everything in those regions. The totality of
such regions may be infinite in number. That might
reasonable be called the UNIVERSE while any of those
other regions might reasonably be call a universe by any
beings existing within them.

So everything means more than everything, and there is
even more than that? And DM/DE might exist, and it might
not. Cosmology is jabberwocky. Yes means no, and no
means yes. Did Lewis Carroll invent cosmology too?

This response in nonsensical. The only evidence you provide is your
infallible intuition. You need more than that.

[HRM Resident]

Post by James Warren
This response in nonsensical. The only evidence you
provide is your infallible intuition. You need more than that.

Yes, it is jabberwocky, just like cosmology. You need more
than . . . jabberwocky. It is the best term I can think of to
describe your diatribes.

[James Warren]

Post by HRM Resident

Post by James Warren
This response in nonsensical. The only evidence you
provide is your infallible intuition. You need more than that.

Yes, it is jabberwocky, just like cosmology. You need more
than . . . jabberwocky. It is the best term I can think of to
describe your diatribes.

Your personal incredulity is neither evidence nor argument. You are
dismissed.

[HRM Resident]

Post by James Warren
Your personal incredulity is neither evidence nor argument. You are
dismissed.

You can dismiss me if you like. When you spout twaddle, I call it
like I see it. I won't use the term jabberwocky anymore as it seems
to have hit a nerve. :-)

When you're talking malarkey and hogwash, it's hard to take it
seriously. I asked, if you remember, "If the multi-universe theory is
correct. what is the thing that contains all of these universes?" You
can't answer it because the the theory is self-contradicting and pure
mumbo jumbo.

Maybe it's the heat that has gotten to you. :-)

[James Warren]

Post by HRM Resident

Post by James Warren
Your personal incredulity is neither evidence nor argument. You are
dismissed.

You can dismiss me if you like. When you spout twaddle, I call it
like I see it. I won't use the term jabberwocky anymore as it seems
to have hit a nerve. :-)
When you're talking malarkey and hogwash, it's hard to take it
seriously. I asked, if you remember, "If the multi-universe theory is
correct. what is the thing that contains all of these universes?" You
can't answer it because the the theory is self-contradicting and pure
mumbo jumbo.
Maybe it's the heat that has gotten to you. :-)

Still no evidence or argument, just meaningless verbiage. :)

[HRM Resident]

Post by James Warren
Still no evidence or argument, just meaningless verbiage. :)

What evidence did you provide for your answer to my
original question? :-) Seemed like a long winded answer
to say you don’t know. (Which I, apparently, am not allowed
to say. :-))

[James Warren]

Post by HRM Resident

Post by James Warren
Still no evidence or argument, just meaningless verbiage. :)

What evidence did you provide for your answer to my
original question? :-) Seemed like a long winded answer
to say you don’t know. (Which I, apparently, am not allowed
to say. :-))

I answered with a very reasonable answer. The terminology is not firmly
established. But, what is meant is clear whether a word has been defined
for the concepts or not.

[HRM Resident]

I answered with a very reasonable answer. The terminology is not firmly > established. But, what is meant is clear whether a word has been defined
for the concepts or not.

All you are saying is there is no word for multiple universes.
If a universe is everything, how can there be more than everything?
Even if there is no word in cosmology for it. Or, for that matter,
less than nothing?

Cosmology is nonsense if it makes up crap all the time.

[James Warren]

Post by James Warren
I answered with a very reasonable answer. The terminology is not
firmly > established. But, what is meant is clear whether a word has
been defined
for the concepts or not.

    All you are saying is there is no word for multiple universes.
If a universe is everything, how can there be more than everything?
Even if there is no word in cosmology for it.  Or, for that matter,
less than nothing?
   Cosmology is nonsense if it makes up crap all the time.

Yes it does, as does all the sciences. The "crap" is suggested by
observations and tested by observations. That's how it works. You are
beginning to understand.

As for your claim that cosmology is crap, we have only your personal
incredulity to go on. I doubt that would be good enough for very many. :)

[HRM Resident]

Post by James Warren
Yes it does, as does all the sciences. The "crap" is
suggested by observations and tested by observations.
That's how it works. You are beginning to understand.
As for your claim that cosmology is crap, we have only
your personal incredulity to go on. I doubt that would be
good enough for very many. :)

What is the evidence you claimed there was in your
initial response?

At least the DM/DE ding-a-lings gave their crap a name.
Apparently the multi-universe crew are not even sure enough
their crap is real to hang a moniker on it! I keep asking,
and you keep deflecting: How can there be more than
everything? How? :-)

[James Warren]

Post by HRM Resident

Post by James Warren
Yes it does, as does all the sciences. The "crap" is
suggested by observations and tested by observations.
That's how it works. You are beginning to understand.
As for your claim that cosmology is crap, we have only
your personal incredulity to go on. I doubt that would be
good enough for very many. :)

What is the evidence you claimed there was in your
initial response?
At least the DM/DE ding-a-lings gave their crap a name.
Apparently the multi-universe crew are not even sure enough
their crap is real to hang a moniker on it! I keep asking,
and you keep deflecting: How can there be more than
everything? How? :-)

The multiverse stuff is just an hypothesis, or maybe less than that. It
depends of string theory, for which there is no evidence, or eternal
inflation which may have a little support. In any case, it can't be
taken seriously at this point. Your what was *if* the multiverse is
true, then what. At the moment it is mere speculation.

DM/DE OTOH does have observational evidence. Not enough to elevate it to
a theory but are definitely viable hypotheses.

If you want to reject them then you will need to say why the evidence
for them does not justify treating them as good working hypotheses.
Personal incredulity does not qualify.

Why not tackle Quantum Theory. There is something definitely non
intuitive about it. In fact, it is totally absurd except for the fact
that it passed every attempt to disprove it with flying colours and has
made our modern electronic age possible. Wrap your mind around that!

Let us know what your infallible intuition has to say about that.

After that tackle General Relativity - more absurdity, but passes all tests.

[HRM Resident]

Post by James Warren
Why not tackle Quantum Theory.
snip<
After that tackle General Relativity - more absurdity,
but passes all tests.

I am not going to dispute either of those because they
are, as you said, almost proven. But you did a nice job of
dismissing the multi-universe nonsense after claiming
there was evidence they existed. Bobbing and weaving
like Mohammad Ali, you are doing. I taught you well, and I
thought it’d be easier to train an orangutan. :-)

The subject change was clever too. You get 2 points!

[James Warren]

Post by HRM Resident

Post by James Warren
Why not tackle Quantum Theory.
snip<
After that tackle General Relativity - more absurdity,
but passes all tests.

I am not going to dispute either of those because they
are, as you said, almost proven. But you did a nice job of
dismissing the multi-universe nonsense after claiming
there was evidence they existed. Bobbing and weaving
like Mohammad Ali, you are doing. I taught you well, and I
thought it’d be easier to train an orangutan. :-)
The subject change was clever too. You get 2 points!

No, you claimed DM/DE was nonsense, which you conveniently forgot about.
You did this on nothing stronger than your personal incredulity.

Your Trumpism game gets stronger by the day. Maybe you can get some
followers too.

[HRM Resident]

Post by James Warren
No, you claimed DM/DE was nonsense, which you conveniently forgot about.
You did this on nothing stronger than your personal incredulity.
Your Trumpism game gets stronger by the day. Maybe
you can get some followers too.

That is an interesting post, but it has nothing to do with
what the thing containing the multi-universes is called.
This theory has been around for decades and it is crap.
That is what I said, and I want you to tell me what the
name of more than everything is. But I suppose I might as
well ask the cat.

[James Warren]

Post by HRM Resident

Post by James Warren
No, you claimed DM/DE was nonsense, which you conveniently forgot about.
You did this on nothing stronger than your personal incredulity.
Your Trumpism game gets stronger by the day. Maybe
you can get some followers too.

That is an interesting post, but it has nothing to do with
what the thing containing the multi-universes is called.
This theory has been around for decades and it is crap.
That is what I said, and I want you to tell me what the
name of more than everything is. But I suppose I might as
well ask the cat.

Yes, ask your cat. A name has not been decided. The concept,
nevertheless, exists as a speculation. You can play with words all you
want. Nothing changes. Also, words often change meaning over time. Their
meaning is not carved in stone. The same may apply to the word universe.
at one time it meant our galaxy. Then other galaxies were discovered.
The meaning then changed to all the galaxies. Then the universe was
discovered to be expanding so that there was more beyond the limits of
what we could observe. The meaning changed again. If the multiverse
exists then the meaning will change once more. Is the concept of change
beyond your ability to understand, or perhaps you are just playing a
childish game?

[HRM Resident]

Post by James Warren
Yes, ask your cat.

I don’t have one, but I asked the neighbour’s cat. It
opined that you are an Arguebot, and it offered to scratch
your dogs’ noses. :-)

[James Warren]

Post by HRM Resident

Post by James Warren
Yes, ask your cat.

I don’t have one, but I asked the neighbour’s cat. It
opined that you are an Arguebot, and it offered to scratch
your dogs’ noses. :-)

Apology accepted. :)

[HRM Resident]

Post by James Warren
Apology accepted. :)

Call it whatever you like. :-) Around 1978-1979 I was at a
stop sign in a rural area. Across the road was one of those
Doberman things. The ones with the tail cut off. A big, mean
looking one. He was approaching a cat 1/10th his size on
the road’s shoulder. There were no cars behind me so I
shoved into park, thinking this will be fun to watch the dog
take the cat’s head off in one snap.

He got pretty close and there was a blur of something
flashing. The dog went running down the road with its
tail between its legs and whining. The cat looked satisfied.
I had picked the wrong one! Dogs ought not to be messing
around with cats. :-) Even those ugly creatures you have!
:-)

[HRM Resident]

Post by HRM Resident

Post by James Warren
Apology accepted. :)

Call it whatever you like. :-) Around 1978-1979 I was at a
stop sign in a rural area. Across the road was one of those
Doberman things. The ones with the tail cut off. A big, mean
looking one. He was approaching a cat 1/10th his size on
the road’s shoulder. There were no cars behind me so I
shoved into park, thinking this will be fun to watch the dog
take the cat’s head off in one snap.
He got pretty close and there was a blur of something
flashing. The dog went running down the road with its
tail between its legs and whining. The cat looked satisfied.
I had picked the wrong one! Dogs ought not to be messing
around with cats. :-) Even those ugly creatures you have!
:-)

PS: It had its tail cut off, but it still had a 3-4 inch long stub.
That was what it had between its legs.

[James Warren]

Post by HRM Resident

Post by HRM Resident

Post by James Warren
Apology accepted. :)

Call it whatever you like. :-) Around 1978-1979 I was at a
stop sign in a rural area. Across the road was one of those
Doberman things. The ones with the tail cut off. A big, mean
looking one. He was approaching a cat 1/10th his size on
the road’s shoulder. There were no cars behind me so I
shoved into park, thinking this will be fun to watch the dog
take the cat’s head off in one snap.
He got pretty close and there was a blur of something
flashing. The dog went running down the road with its
tail between its legs and whining. The cat looked satisfied.
I had picked the wrong one! Dogs ought not to be messing
around with cats. :-) Even those ugly creatures you have!
:-)

PS: It had its tail cut off, but it still had a 3-4 inch long stub.
That was what it had between its legs.

I gather you have a short tail too. :)

[HRM Resident]

Post by James Warren
I gather you have a short tail too. :)

Very small in that respect. I am not half nuts like you. :-)

[James Warren]

Post by HRM Resident

Post by James Warren
I gather you have a short tail too. :)

Very small in that respect. I am not half nuts like you. :-)

I agree, it's better than being totally nuts. :)

[James Warren]

Post by HRM Resident

Post by James Warren
Apology accepted. :)

Call it whatever you like. :-) Around 1978-1979 I was at a
stop sign in a rural area. Across the road was one of those
Doberman things. The ones with the tail cut off. A big, mean
looking one. He was approaching a cat 1/10th his size on
the road’s shoulder. There were no cars behind me so I
shoved into park, thinking this will be fun to watch the dog
take the cat’s head off in one snap.
He got pretty close and there was a blur of something
flashing. The dog went running down the road with its
tail between its legs and whining. The cat looked satisfied.
I had picked the wrong one! Dogs ought not to be messing
around with cats. :-) Even those ugly creatures you have!
:-)

My dogs are beautiful. We have a golden doodle and a border collie. They
wouldn't mess with cats.