PDA

View Full Version : Poll: Do you think that alternate realities exist?



banquo's_bumble_puppy
2005-Jun-02, 10:56 AM
Poll: Do you think that alternate realities exist?

My post on Hitler's nuke got me thinking about some science fiction novels that I have read in which the Nazi's won WWII. Do you think that maybe such a world exists?

worzel
2005-Jun-02, 02:09 PM
Bit hard to say really.

Moose
2005-Jun-02, 02:25 PM
It's an interesting idea, but there's no evidence (that I'm aware of, anyway) to suggest this is the case. So, given the lack of evidence, I stay camped on the status quo: No.

Russ
2005-Jun-02, 03:24 PM
Given some of the unbelievable krap the Democrats pull, there just hasta be. :roll: ;)

mwill
2005-Jun-02, 04:57 PM
I sure hope so because otherwise I'm a cat killer.


I didn't know there were many alternate WW2 history novels. Which novels did you read? I read Fatherland by Harris and I have to say that was pretty good book.

Candy
2005-Jun-02, 05:12 PM
I voted YES. 8-[

worzel
2005-Jun-02, 05:23 PM
I voted YES. 8-[
And presumably you have a perfectly rational reason for believing in the existance of alternative realities :)

Candy
2005-Jun-02, 05:32 PM
I voted YES. 8-[
And presumably you have a perfectly rational reason for believing in the existance of alternative realities :)
I think of it as alternate dimensions, so yes. 8-[

banquo's_bumble_puppy
2005-Jun-02, 05:56 PM
I sure hope so because otherwise I'm a cat killer.


I didn't know there were many alternate WW2 history novels. Which novels did you read? I read Fatherland by Harris and I have to say that was pretty good book.

http://www.uchronia.net/bib.cgi/label.html?id=tsoudisast

just found the above by googling

also read Man In The High Castle by Philip K. Dick

01101001
2005-Jun-02, 05:57 PM
Had to vote no.

I'm not even sure this reality exists.

Candy
2005-Jun-02, 06:00 PM
I voted YES. 8-[
And presumably you have a perfectly rational reason for believing in the existance of alternative realities :)
I think of it as alternate dimensions, so yes. 8-[
My answer is based on the poll question, not the original post. Does that help with my way of thinking? :)

Humphrey
2005-Jun-02, 06:06 PM
If they do exxist they have alot to answer for.

They do not know the glory of my Emprire..but they soon will...oh they will.


"Begin the maiking fo the Mime Clones! Today it will be Bunny world, Tomorrow its Kansas!"

banquo's_bumble_puppy
2005-Jun-02, 06:18 PM
Had to vote no.

I'm not even sure this reality exists.


well said.... 8-[ 8-[ 8-[

banquo's_bumble_puppy
2005-Jun-02, 06:34 PM
yeah...in the alternate universe I'm 6'2" tall, blonde, blue eyed, muscular and a Doctor...instead of...Mr. Dumpy...

skwirlinator
2005-Jun-02, 06:37 PM
I voted YES. 8-[
And presumably you have a perfectly rational reason for believing in the existance of alternative realities :)
I think of it as alternate dimensions, so yes. 8-[

I voted yes:

I think of alternate dimensions as alternate realities as well.

I don't think of a 'Sliders' kind of situation tho... More like a onion layer situation.

I even once put some deep thought into how God could exist. I came up with the baggie theory.
Baggie Theory states that like goldfish in a bag, God has created a 'reality' with physics and a universe for Man to exist in. All of everything we percieve is inside this Bag of Reality. Outside the baggie we have no clue what is there or if it even exists. According to belief Heaven and Earth were created. Whether it be a big bang or not it suggests there was something before creation/Outside creation. Reality is very real physics from the graviton to the galactic supercluster. But that is just the contents of this particular baggie. The whole fabric of space-time is but a construct to accomodate perhaps an experiment in this dimension. In a higher 'layer' 'God' is working on a post-doctorate on the behavior of 3d space-time physics and we were put here to see how much we could guess right about our environment.

WoW, I'm really out there ain't I? It's a good thing they don't let me play with sharp things!

mannisue
2005-Jun-02, 06:37 PM
Had to vote no.

I'm not even sure this reality exists.


well said.... 8-[ 8-[ 8-[

I concur as well (especially this morning . . .) :o

mannisue
2005-Jun-02, 06:42 PM
If I had to say yes in any way to this question, it would be in the context of alternate dimensions, just as Candy said. Otherwise, the sci-fi idea of having a mirror personality of oneself, living a better or worse existence than its counterpart (and, depending on how that mirror image was constructed, I wouldn't cry about it) just seems a bit much. :lol:

skwirlinator
2005-Jun-02, 06:52 PM
If I had to say yes in any way to this question, it would be in the context of alternate dimensions, just as Candy said. Otherwise, the sci-fi idea of having a mirror personality of oneself, living a better or worse existence than its counterpart (and, depending on how that mirror image was constructed, I wouldn't cry about it) just seems a bit much. :lol:

I remember seeing a movie a long time ago about an astronaut that went to a mirror Earth on the other side of the sun. Anyone remember what the name of the movie was so I can google out the originating author?

Van Rijn
2005-Jun-02, 07:05 PM
I remember seeing a movie a long time ago about an astronaut that went to a mirror Earth on the other side of the sun. Anyone remember what the name of the movie was so I can google out the originating author?

It was called ...

"Journey To The Far Side of the Sun" :)

and the original name was "Doppelganger." See:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0064519/

This movie had the typical Gerry Anderson feel, and even the sound effects are almost identical in the "UFO" series.

skwirlinator
2005-Jun-02, 07:19 PM
That's It! Thanx!

Now all I have to do is figure out if there were references to this concept before 1969 and whether it was an idea generated by Gerry & Sylvia Anderson or if they got the concept from somewhere else.

The point of this quest is to figure out where the concept of the mirrored reality came from because it's quite common.

Is the concept based on some kind of science or is it truly a fantasy based idea?

Is it related to 'spooky' theory? Did the whole Quantum Idea originate from this idea or the other way around?

Did someone read a book about a mirrored universe and say "Hey, lets see if it's possible!" or did someone read a paper on the quantum theory and say "Hey, lets build a story about this!"

frogesque
2005-Jun-02, 07:59 PM
Why does Ace Rimmer spring to mind? :lol:

Parrothead
2005-Jun-02, 08:05 PM
I'm a parrothead and I spend some time in Margaritaville, so of course alternate realities exist...well in my mind :P

skwirlinator
2005-Jun-02, 08:18 PM
Why does Ace Rimmer spring to mind? :lol:


Yes, RD is an influence!

Halcyon Dayz
2005-Jun-02, 08:27 PM
A fun book to read is Frederic Brown's 1950's novel "What Mad Universe"

An editor of a SF-magazine ends up in an alternate reality where all
the clichés of the genre of the time ARE TRUE.

Including space-babes in transparent spacesuits, BEMs, etc.

worzel
2005-Jun-03, 12:13 AM
Now all I have to do is figure out if there were references to this concept before 1969 and whether it was an idea generated by Gerry & Sylvia Anderson or if they got the concept from somewhere else.

Is the concept based on some kind of science or is it truly a fantasy based idea?

Is it related to 'spooky' theory? Did the whole Quantum Idea originate from this idea or the other way around?

Did someone read a book about a mirrored universe and say "Hey, lets see if it's possible!" or did someone read a paper on the quantum theory and say "Hey, lets build a story about this!"
I think it all originates from, or at least gained a lot of legitimacy from, the many worlds interpretation of quatum physics, and was around before 1969. My personal opinion is that when we have to come up with such ludicrous and unfalsifiable interpretations to get the randomness out of our theories then either we're missing something fundamental or we're just bigoted against randomness. Either way, and in my opinion, the many worlds idea is just a cop out for some, and a psuedo-scientific "there must be somethign out there that is, in principle, beyond our comprehension" comfort blanket for others.

Van Rijn
2005-Jun-03, 12:21 AM
"Other world" stories long predate quantum physics, but the many worlds interpretation was a great one for science fiction, and has been used heavily. There are all sorts of spirit world, hollow earth and other weird ideas used in stories (and even believed by more people than you would expect). There's also the anti-matter world/universe bit from another idea in physics.

The world on the other side of the sun is still another variation - since you couldn't see there, it left open the possibility. In practice, the L3 point is unstable, so no world would stay there for long, geologically speaking. This idea too long predates the Gerry Anderson movie.

[added minor edits]

skwirlinator
2005-Jun-03, 12:27 AM
I was just wondering if it was fantasy based science or science based fantasy?

01101001
2005-Jun-03, 12:48 AM
The point of this quest is to figure out where the concept of the mirrored reality came from because it's quite common.

A lot of people have looked in a mirror, and wondered what-if. I know I did as a child. Dodgson sent Alice through the looking glass in 1871.

I'm sure people considered another more serious sort of what-if when it became clear that the weak interaction gave Conservation of Parity a kick in the shins.

Revolver
2005-Jun-03, 01:07 AM
I voted No so the alternate me would vote yes!

















Just Kidding, I voted God Like Productions 8-[

Chuck
2005-Jun-03, 01:11 AM
I remember seeing a movie a long time ago about an astronaut that went to a mirror Earth on the other side of the sun. Anyone remember what the name of the movie was so I can google out the originating author?

It was called ...

"Journey To The Far Side of the Sun" :)

and the original name was "Doppelganger." See:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0064519/

This movie had the typical Gerry Anderson feel, and even the sound effects are almost identical in the "UFO" series.

The mirror earth was the mirror image of ours down to the last detail. One problem with that is when an astronomer on earth is observing Mars the mirror earth astronomer would be looking into empty space.

Revolver
2005-Jun-03, 01:49 AM
Since its a mirror world are peoples skin inside-out and / or is it 14 years curse for breaking a mirror? :wink:

skwirlinator
2005-Jun-03, 01:57 AM
Since its a mirror world are peoples skin inside-out and / or is it 14 years curse for breaking a mirror? :wink:

no its 7 blessings if you don't repair something non-reflective (there's a word)

Insects are endo and humans are exo....skeletal

mannisue
2005-Jun-05, 10:59 PM
EEEEEEEWWWWWWWW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(cough, cough, hack-gag)

That would be something. :o

mickal555
2005-Jun-06, 01:09 AM
THe idea is (to get around the uncertanty priciple or something) that every time a decision has to be made a new reality is formed. Since it is impossible to dectect these by definiton. So you can belive it or not, for all intents and purpoises it doesn't matter anyway...

mwill
2005-Jun-06, 02:48 AM
Isn't there implications for that theory regarding conciousness. Like if you performed that "cat experiment" (with the box and the randomly decaying substance) on yourself you would always live?

mickal555
2005-Jun-06, 03:01 AM
*shrugs*

who's to say the cat doesn't observe itself...

01101001
2005-Jun-06, 05:07 AM
Isn't there implications for that theory regarding conciousness. Like if you performed that "cat experiment" (with the box and the randomly decaying substance) on yourself you would always live?

You'd always believe you lived. Until you didn't.

Fram
2005-Jun-06, 08:06 AM
THe idea is (to get around the uncertanty priciple or something) that every time a decision has to be made a new reality is formed. Since it is impossible to dectect these by definiton. So you can belive it or not, for all intents and purpoises it doesn't matter anyway...

Isn't the uncertainty principle that until the decision is made, the two (or more) realities exist, but that once the decision is made, the other realities collapse again?
I still don't believe it, I think too much importance is placed on our observation, which seems a bit arrogant to me, but that's how I understood the theory. I don't think there is a serious theory where all those alternate realities exist parallel for a quasi- infinite amount of time. A multiverse (simply different universes) is something else, I don't have a problem with that, but that as well is purely theoretical (if you can somehow observe it or interact with it, it isn't a distinct universe anymore).

beskeptical
2005-Jun-06, 08:55 PM
Don't we all have a slightly different reality from eachother?

Lurker
2005-Jun-06, 10:18 PM
I know that when I was young, I lived in a reality in which intelligent life evolved on this planet. So, it would seem that somewhere along the line, I left that reality behind and ended up in this one. 8-[


So I guess I'm now forced to believe... #-o

mickal555
2005-Jun-08, 01:38 AM
THe idea is (to get around the uncertanty priciple or something) that every time a decision has to be made a new reality is formed. Since it is impossible to dectect these by definiton. So you can belive it or not, for all intents and purpoises it doesn't matter anyway...

Isn't the uncertainty principle that until the decision is made, the two (or more) realities exist, but that once the decision is made, the other realities collapse again?


I think that was what it was meant to refute...

PS my 3000 post :D

worzel
2005-Jun-10, 02:06 PM
THe idea is (to get around the uncertanty priciple or something) that every time a decision has to be made a new reality is formed. Since it is impossible to dectect these by definiton. So you can belive it or not, for all intents and purpoises it doesn't matter anyway...
Isn't the uncertainty principle that until the decision is made, the two (or more) realities exist, but that once the decision is made, the other realities collapse again?

I think that was what it was meant to refute...

The uncertainty principle it that there is a limit on the accuracy to which you can measure both the momentum and velocity of a particle. The more accurately you measure one, the less accurately you can measure the other, or something like that.

The many worlds interpretation of quatum state reductions is just that, an interpretation, just like the half dead cat nonsense. The theory is a bunch of maths that happens to work. The interpretations are attempts to make some sort of intuitive physical sense of the theory.

Fram
2005-Jun-10, 02:14 PM
THe idea is (to get around the uncertanty priciple or something) that every time a decision has to be made a new reality is formed. Since it is impossible to dectect these by definiton. So you can belive it or not, for all intents and purpoises it doesn't matter anyway...
Isn't the uncertainty principle that until the decision is made, the two (or more) realities exist, but that once the decision is made, the other realities collapse again?

I think that was what it was meant to refute...

The uncertainty principle it that there is a limit on the accuracy to which you can measure both the momentum and velocity of a particle. The more accurately you measure one, the less accurately you can measure the other, or something like that.

The many worlds interpretation of quatum state reductions is just that, an interpretation, just like the half dead cat nonsense. The theory is a bunch of maths that happens to work. The interpretations are attempts to make some sort of intuitive physical sense of the theory.

Yep, I was mixing Heisenberg and Schrödinger there. #-o Thanks for the explanation. Still, I have to say that for me, it's rather counterintuitive.

farmerjumperdon
2005-Jun-10, 03:08 PM
I voted yes because I think that all the future possible states of the Universe can be thought of as alternate realities. As I think it through though, I'd have to say alternate would not be an accurate description.

It would be more accurate to say all possible future states represent all the possible future realities, of which only a single one can exist at any one time. There can not be one reality, and an alternate one existing at the same time.

If we do observe things differently, you might be tempted to say we have separate realities; but I think it is more accurate to say we have different perspectives on the same reality. (The 3 factors of perspective being location, scale, and past experience).

Perspective is a lot like feelings. They are real, but they are very personal, and largely generated from within. Reality is that which doesn't change based on opinion, feelings, or perspective. Perhaps the only ultimate reality, and therefore the only Absolute Truth, is the set of Natural Laws, for which we are still searching for The Bottom Line. (I'm in a capital mood).

mutant
2005-Jun-10, 03:51 PM
I am still trying to figure out if the reality I am in right now exists.

farmerjumperdon
2005-Jun-10, 04:04 PM
I am still trying to figure out if the reality I am in right now exists.

Doesn't "I think, therefore I am" get us at least that far?

:-?

mickal555
2005-Jun-10, 04:09 PM
Does anyone everthink in 4-d?

You think of exsisting in 10mins(day whatever) time you think of 10mins ago and you think of the present..... all at the same time....

YOu think very clearly onwhat you will be doing at a particular time in the future that you are certain about I.e getting off a bus. You forget about but when the time comes you think about thinking about the moment earlyer.

YOu suddenly think of every possibe outcome of a random in a split future sitution and you mind go;s eugh and you get spinny....

All happened to me today.... URGH

Too much (D.A)

Edit:

I am still trying to figure out if the reality I am in right now exists.
Ditto that

mickal555
2005-Jun-10, 04:12 PM
I am still trying to figure out if the reality I am in right now exists.

Doesn't "I think, therefore I am" get us at least that far?

:-?

I post therefore I am.

Candy
2005-Jun-10, 04:13 PM
Does anyone everthink in 4-d?
My former Manager always told everyone and myself that I am thinking 4 times faster than my mouth is talking. I'm not quite sure what he meant by this. :-?

mickal555
2005-Jun-10, 04:15 PM
4-d= Four dimentions

It's better than having a faster mounth than brain 'and...and.... um...," ...." "...." er'

Candy
2005-Jun-10, 04:21 PM
4-d= Four dimentions

It's better than having a faster mounth than brain 'and...and.... um...," ...." "...." er'
I still get in trouble all the time. :lol:

I'm surprised I haven't been fired, yet. :o

Lurker
2005-Jun-10, 04:42 PM
I am still trying to figure out if the reality I am in right now exists.

Doesn't "I think, therefore I am" get us at least that far?

:-?

I post therefore I am.
So if I stop posting, I cease to exist?? :o

Candy
2005-Jun-10, 04:49 PM
I am still trying to figure out if the reality I am in right now exists.

Doesn't "I think, therefore I am" get us at least that far?

:-?

I post therefore I am.
So if I stop posting, I cease to exist?? :o
As a person, no, but as a BABBer, yes. 8-[

SeanF
2005-Jun-10, 06:15 PM
Does anyone everthink in 4-d?
R.A.F. does (http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=6082&start=5003).