Welcome to Moorcock's Miscellany

Dear reader,

Many people have given their valuable time to create a website for the pleasure of posing questions to Michael Moorcock, meeting people from around the world, and mining the site for information. Please follow one of the links above to learn more about the site.

Thank you,
Reinart der Fuchs
See more
See less

Your opinion on science partially proving you right?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Your opinion on science partially proving you right?

    I don't know how much you keep abreast of relatively current scientific theories... but have you heard that theoretical physicists have come up with not one, but FOUR theories on possible alternate universes... which are not mutually exclusive, and actually are likely all true?

    The first is "Same Dimensions, Different area". The theory holds that our 'Hubble volume', that is our observable universe, is not the only one in Spacetime. Something like 10^40 or so lightyears from our hubble volume is likely another one. This one also underwent hyperexpansion at some point in the distant or relatively recent past, effectively a totally different universe. And looking at the estimated number of particles of matter in the universe and all of its potential states, they estimate a universe almost like our own, down to a Planet Earth etc, etc, is "only" 10^119 universes away...

    The second, IIRC, is "Different dimensions, Different area". Related to the first, it postulates that different spatial and temporal dimensions underwent hyperexpansion in a different region of Spacetime. I don't remember the exact numbers, but immediately before the Big Bang, there were something like nine spatial and four temporal dimensions. Only three spatial and one temporal dimension underwent hyperexpansion in our universe. In others, different combinations may have undergone hyperexpansion, with unpredictable results (possibly the Realms of Chaos if they ALL underwent hyperexpansion?)

    The third is the "Schroedinger's Cat" style alternate universe. Basically, the cat may be dead in this universe, but you have just split off a branch of time where the cat lived, or vise versa. This style alternate universe seems to be the easiest for non-theoretical physicists to wrap their noggins around.

    The fourth one I have absolutely no clue how to explain, as I don't understand it myself. It has something to do with graphical representations of the laws of physics, and complex math that just boggles my mind...

    Anyway, four different and in some ways supporting theories point to a real Multiverse. Your opinion, good sir?

  • #2
    My experience is that physicists read a lot of sf and fantasy and that this in itself influences them. So the multiverse idea which was first postulated in The Sundered Worlds circa 1961 eventually makes its way into the genre (especially comics) which are read by young people who then get into theoretical physics and start producing the scientific formulae and rationalisations for the stuff they enjoyed. I have sometimes deliberately slipped an idea into a story or article in the hope that some bright person out there will come back with the math in a few years time. These ideas are in the air, of course, and few of us are
    untouched by the zeitgeist. I love reading the stuff when it turns up in Nature or Scientific America, all the more so if it reflects an imaginative idea I had myself. But that doesn't make me a seer or anything more than a child of my time.

    Pre-order or Buy my latest titles in Europe:
    The Whispering Swarm: Book One of the Sanctuary of the White Friars - The Laughter of Carthage - Byzantium Endures - London Peculiar and Other Nonfiction
    Doctor Who: The Coming of the Terraphiles - Kizuna: Fiction for Japan - Modem Times 2.0 - The Sunday Books - The Sundered Worlds

    Pre-order or Buy my latest titles in the USA:
    The Laughter of Carthage - Byzantium Endures - London Peculiar and Other Nonfiction - The Sunday Books - Doctor Who: The Coming of the Terraphiles
    Kizuna: Fiction for Japan - The Sundered Worlds - The Winds of Limbo - Modem Times 2.0 - Elric: Swords and Roses


    • #3
      Well, perhaps a child of Time anyway!

      Isn't there also rather a lot of fun and mental exercise to be had out of 'pure fiction science', too? In other words, creating a set of physical laws and conditions for which there is absolutely no scientific evidence, but which one can then impose upon one's characters - a bit like 'cartoon physics', eg. character does not start falling into abyss until consciously aware that self is hanging, unsupported, in space? I suppose the 'End of Time' scenario with 'Power Rings' that can morph and rearrange matter in an unlimited way falls into this category. Although, I'm sure that one day...

      Einstein always said that imagination was more important than knowledge...


      • #5
        This is true. Knowledge is just a small section of Imagination that just happens to be accurate in the Mundane World.


        • #7
          Just as a self-indulgent aside on this subject, you might be 'interested' in the 'fictional spacetime' model I'm using for my current 'work' (a set of short stories that all went to the same masquerade party dressed as a novel).

          From the point of origin (t=0) different independent 'main timestreams' radiate on divergent axes. There are seven main 'lines'. The history with which we are familiar constitutes one of these (dependent on your viewpoint).

          The mainlines show essentially a 'Schroedinger's Cat' format; divergences occur as 'alternate' futures develop. For instance, in 1933, in one 'branching', the Hindenburg lands quite safely. This can be technically described as (say) a 'fifteen degree' divergence (ie. a divergence of quite high magnitude). At another divergence, the differential may exist only in the position of one electron in one shell of one carbon atom - a divergence of one nano- ten-to-the-whateverth of a degree.

          Thus the seven main temporal streams can be represented as a progressively dendritic pattern.

          To progress into an 'alternative' future, the 'chrononaut' (is that copyrighted??! :roll: ) has first to 'shunt' themselves back onto the nearest 'common branch' from which their own future and the alternate future branch - they must then effectively 'reset the points' to travel into the alternate future - the magnitude of the divergence increases the difficulty of the resetting and hence their forward progress. Thus an exact time-space locus must be described by its main stream, its main divergencies and the degree of each of those divergencies. However, as the seven alternate timestreams originate at Zero Time, it is profoundly difficult to cross between main timestreams without self-destruction(except for characters capable of 'cross-hacking' - hazradous, and I won't blather on about that here...!)

          A further difficulty is created by the limitations of the (technological)accuracy of most backward travel - the chrononaut can only aim for a general 'envelope' of time period, unless a 'beacon' exists at the exact chronological locus to guide them in (the beacon may be left by a 'naut progressing forwards in normal time speed, or deposited by a 'recce' to mark a point they would wish to revisit or mark for other travellers.

          Outside of the 'physical' travel undertaken by conventional 'nauts, it is also possible with training and certain 'inputs' to 'backtrack' along one's own history - travelling mentally to reoccupy a younger version of self. The consequences of this are of course even more potentially serious than 'conventional' temporal navigation! It also requires 'fuelling' by an excess of 'emotional potential energy' - obtained parasitically from others...

          The dodgy story 'Spuyten Duyvil's Alpine Adventure' on the writer's forum is part of this concoction.

          Sorry about that if it's a bit boring. Just thought it fitted in the mix here somewhere... 8O


          • #8
            Actually it was boring. Ignore it.


            • #9
              no, actually i found it quite an interesting idea.

              i have my own take of the possibility of endless realms and speculations on it are always interesting for me.


              • #10
                Just gotta hope no one swipes it!
                Honest... Weren't me guv.


                • #11
                  I don't mind, 8th Son. I'm a caring, sharing type; it's not as if anyone's likely to publish the blasted thing (except 'Perdix House Ltd: Short-run spiral-bound books done on an out-of-date Mac to hide in a cupboard'). I feel that it's quite difficult to restrict conceptual ideas and...

                  ...What? Iain M Banks has got a character with emotic-potential retrodrive? He wrote what?

                  Hello? Dunn & Smythe solicitors? I'd like you to do a little job for me...

                  Anyway, all our rights on this site are preserved forever. FOREVER DO YOU HEAR!

                  A- HAAA-HAA-HAA-HAA-HA!

                  PS, Ta, Snowman505. You r kind.


                  • #12
                    I'm not sure what a non-conceptual idea would be like. Soz, bit of a non-secateur...


                    • #13
                      "Imagination is more important that knowledge" --- Einstein'
                      "I know this defies the laws of gravity, but frankly, I never studied law." ---Bugs Bunny

                      Originally posted by Michael Moorcock
                      Einstein and Bugs Bunny should know. Two of my preferred authorities on almost everything.