The real problem with the #multiverse theory | Janna Levin

Janna Levin is a distinguished theoretical astrophysicist, author, and professor known for her profound contributions to our understanding of the cosmos. Born on September 12, 1967, in the United States, Levin has carved a niche for herself in the world of cosmology, focusing on the intricacies of black holes, the nature of spacetime, and the universe's topology.

Levin holds a Bachelor of Science in Astronomy and Physics from Barnard College and a Ph.D. in theoretical physics from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Her academic journey is marked by an unyielding pursuit of the mysteries that define our universe, blending rigorous scientific research with a deep philosophical inquiry into the nature of existence.

As a professor of physics and astronomy at Barnard College, Columbia University, Levin is not only at the forefront of astrophysical research but also deeply committed to educating the next generation of scientists. Her work is renowned for its clarity and accessibility, making complex concepts in cosmology understandable to both her students and the general public.

Levin is also a celebrated author, known for her ability to weave scientific truth into narratives that captivate and enlighten readers. Her books, including "How the Universe Got Its Spots: Diary of a Finite Time in a Finite Space" and "Black Hole Blues and Other Songs from Outer Space," explore the beauty and mysteries of the cosmos through a deeply personal and poetic lens.

Her contributions extend beyond academia and literature into public science communication, where she has become a prominent voice in discussions about the universe's mysteries. Levin's work has not only advanced our understanding of astrophysics but has also inspired a broader appreciation for the poetic dimensions of scientific inquiry.

In recognition of her contributions to science and literature, Levin has received numerous accolades and has been featured in various media outlets, spreading her passion for the cosmos to a wider audience. Janna Levin's career stands as a testament to the power of curiosity, intellect, and imagination in unlocking the secrets of the universe.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Go Deeper with Big Think:

►Become a Big Think Member

►Get Big Think+ for Business

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

About [Speaker Name]:

Bio

[kirmie]

Congrats, you have defined the line between philosophy and science

[Rupture-]

If the multiverse does exist but we can never prove it, then there's nothing to accept. Accepting that it does exist at that point is no different from accepting that it doesn't exist.

Also, since when is a multiverse per definition never observable?

[BrianHartman]

In one sense she's right: You can have an intuition about the way the universe works that turns out to be true without being able to prove it. That's certainly on the list of "Things That Can Happen". But science is about knowing. You can't *know* without proof. If you can't bring evidence to the table, no one's under any obligation to take you seriously.

[finaldestination]

universe is under no obligation to make sense to us

[felixcumpleanos]

The universe is under no obligation to make sense to us.

[lukenath]

Depending on how it impacts society and social policies/norms, it makes a big difference if we just “accept it”.

[MichaelNiles]

Particle/Wave duality and entanglement, IMHO is us witnessing the multiverse. Entanglement collapse is, in Everett's Universal Wave Function, us colliding with that "bubble" reality that has it's own wave function and when we merge with that there's no "collapse" or spooky action at a distance - we just suddenly find ourselves as part of that wave function - we find ourselves in one of those probability waves, and our other multi-verse selves see the other possibilities.

[RobRaptor]

No ma'am. If you can't observe it, can't collect data, can't show that the thing is consistent in different measurements, well. What you have is an idea, but it's not science. In fact, "it's just the truth, but I can't prove it" sounds a lot like something different - we call it religion.

[paulpease]

If that is the standard, then the Copenhagen interpretation of wave function collapse is equally unscientific because we also cannot observe that. It’s an interpretation of phenomena we do observe.

[Eliza-swkj]

I imagine that quantum physics comes into play with this, the depth, unknown patterns and intricacies of the quantum realm that explain what we don't yet understand or can't yet prove. Viewing changes energy, thinking changes energy, etc.

[SimonGeraedts]

Dark energy could well be an effect of parallel universes on our universe.

[TheGreenRa]

You’ve stated the obvious…..of course there are truths of the universe that we still don’t know. And of course these truths about its nature don’t care, they are what they are. 100% agree.

BUT, the most effective method we as human beings have developed thus far to discover those truths, is the scientific method. That requires us to obey certain rules of observation and replication. If the multiverse idea cannot be observed and replicated experimentally, then it remains a thought experiment.
These aren’t just silly rituals that have been made up, these are some of the most effective ways to actually find truth.

So maybe there is a multiverse out there, maybe god is out there, maybe the flying spaghetti monster, or maybe all of them. But until we have something to actually work with, we will never know.

[kenzab]

She didn't say " we can't prove it " she said, "we can't observe it" which is two very different things. Actually, we can prove its existence without observing it. It's been this way with a lot of theory, especially the one einstein discovered.

[mojorn]

This is just reinventing faith, which is cool but you’re not doing science at that point.

[thenavajoknow]

Metaphysical speculation should perhaps be postponed until we have managed current existential threats to our global civilization (and good luck with that).

[saikatbis]

Thanks for saying this Janna Levin (hats off)

[scottbraun]

An awesome way to kick the argument..in the teeth. "..nature doesn't care if it doesn't satisfy".

[rianamohamed]

The problem with that theory is that usually we can see what nature is. When we start to make theories about what we cant see or cant measure, therein lies the problem. Those need to be substantiated with fact or measurement. Otherwise anyone could just make up a 'theory'. Like, what if we have 7 other moons hiding perfectly behind the one we know so that they are never seen. I need to be able to substantiate that.

[juleskain]

The John Templeton Foundation is a philanthropic organization that reflects the ideas of its founder, John Templeton. Templeton used his wealth to support progress in religious and spiritual knowledge, especially at the intersection of religion and science. Unfortunately the intersection of religion and science is the null set.

[coolbreeze]

We don't know what we don't know. Science can only attempt to explain what's in front of us. There's a lot more that we can't perceive but still have an influence on us. This will rightfully remain a mystery and where spirituality takes over.