Religion said that everything was created by God . Science showed that there was no Great Plan. But….
... the latest discoveries of Science have made scientists rethink the issue.
It seems that the ideas of antiquity are closer than scientists had come to imagine.
There may be a CREATOR but CREATION may also not be what we thought.
Martin Rees Cosmologist
(What we don't still know, are we real?)
I had already heard about the Theory of the Multiverse, but I had no idea why or how it had come to be developed, much less the implications it could have for the beliefs of Humanity.
I am also clear that in this century, extraordinary things are going to be discovered that will turn our belief system upside down.
Surely what "already said" will be confirmed sooner rather than later and it is clear to me that we are in times of a speed of vertigo, where surely, as the teacher Parvathi Kumar says, the next 2, 500 years will contain a level of events similar to what they would have happened from year 0 of our era until year 18, 000, that is, many more. But still, I am still surprised when Science publicly confesses what it discovers, even if it is against what it wishes to discover. Even at the hypothesis level.
1. ANTHROPIC INTELLIGENCE, WE ARE AN ACCIDENT OF NATURE : all part of the idea that we are a coincidence. At first, Martin Rees makes it clear that the initial and still persistent goal of Science is to show that God does not exist that we are the result of a coincidence. For this it has been maintained that we are the fruit of atoms, time and mathematics.
Facts like the laws of nature are so perfect are chance. The fact that in the mathematics of the universe there are numbers that predominate significantly over others and that without them the universe would be sterile and would not evolve are pure chance or are facts that belong to a theory that we still do not know.
However, the day came that scientists discovered a new law of nature or physical law in the Universe that questioned their position. This law is known as the "cosmological constant." While the values of the universe as the law of gravity are adjusted to 1%, this new value, anti-gravitational, is set to a zero point and 120 decimal places plus percent.
In other words, values such as gravity could vary up to 1% above or below and the universe and we would continue to exist, but the recently discovered anti-gravitational law, COULD NOT VARY! What is a "perfect fit" of the universe and therefore, impossible to sustain, on a scientific level, that its creation is a coincidence.
2. TO BE AN ACCIDENT OF NATURE, THE MULTIVERSO THEORY HAS TO BE GIVEN: and that is why scientists reached the Theory of the Multiverse. If there is only one Universe and it is perfect, there is an architect of the Universe, but if there are thousands of more universe, we could scientifically continue to be an accident of nature, a coincidence within the creation of thousands of Universes.
3. THE TRAP OF THE MULTIVERSO THEORY: but the theory that saved scientists from thinking of a creator has a trick, since if there are thousands of Universes we must assume that there are less evolved Universes than we do at the same time assuming there are Universes more evolved than ours. And so scientists begin to question the hypothesis of a universe more evolved than ours and how we would be in about 6, 000 million years. Well, very easy, as different as we are now from a bacterium, which is the time that has elapsed since the creation of our sun until today.
4. THE HYPOTHESIS OF THE SIMULATION: but and if we were so different, would our brain grow in the same proportion as it has in these years of evolution? Scientific studies show that if our brain grows we would lose our intelligence power, we would not improve evolutionarily, which leads scientists to believe, based on what is already a reality, that what will evolve is the technology and the use we make of she.
Therefore we could get to create computers so powerful that they simulate the creation of the universe and our own evolution and that is where they have come to develop the scientific hypothesis from which, if there were other universes and if at least one of them was more evolved, I could have got that computer and we could be its simulation.
As the documentary says, in the end, “in seeking an alternative idea to Religion on Creation, Cosmologists have revealed a very similar scientific possibility: the existence of an all-powerful, omniscient and super-intelligent BE, an entity whose motives are inscrutable and cannot be demonstrated.
Now we have to wait to know the level of success that our scientists have had. Yes, as we know the atomic theory of the Greeks has taken 2, 500 years to prove, at least we should not discard any hypothesis even if it cannot be proven. As one of the interviewees says, if so, today we would not know neither the atoms, nor the black holes, nor the Bossom of Higgs .
In a few months, of this documentary with the publication of a NASA discovery of a photo of the Universe that showed certain indications, to investigate, that we could well be a hologram. This idea is already old in our Philosophy and that Calder n de la Barca could have already suggested. A different concept of REALITY. A fun concept of reality that could free us from many conditions, because if everything is a game, then it would only be a matter of knowing the rules and having FUN !!!
Source: http://shamballadeluz.blogspot.com.es
What we still do not know, are we real? What is reality?
