Other universes … or how, with current methods, neither math nor multivrtds can explain physics and other sciences.
Keywords: Physics, Sciences, mathematics, universe.
The multiverse does not exist and would have been practical for all ideas and suppositions, to study our material universe, the one in which we live and that we try to know and understand.
In reply to
SL https:/ wp.me/p7SK6t-ed
For that, we, or rather you, the theoretical physicists, must try to know all the observable elements and events, close to us or very distant, on our Earth in the smallest piece of matter, manipulated by the scientific technicians or, in space, the « small » stars or large structures that astronomers observe and tell us using information that they are sure or that could be possible.
This is the interest of a general theory which would be established with your knowledge of all the specialists of the different branches of physics, including all the technicians.
This is the case for example for electrons, elementary particles, used everywhere probably because they are everywhere, and could thus create the space that can not be empty.
These electrons vibrate and the entropy of the space system keeps them at a distance from each other. Sometimes they contact each other and can relate to others. Since the Universe has no consciousness, they always react in the same way depending on the entropy.
But the results of operations are always different from each other, sometimes very difficult to understand and explain. These include, for example, light and colors of objects, gravity, rays, heat, atoms and matter, stars and their galaxies and very large structures, living things and climatic variations on Earth.
Scientists try to understand everything with their own logic and long thinking.
Some use mathematics as aude to human logic. It is very difficult and it has never been successful. We equate all the elements and events relating to the problems to be studied, and we calculate.
What happens if the elements used are false or non-existent?
We know, and you know, that all the numbers and other information to collect in space or materials are random. Can they be used for general studies of the universe or subjects?
There is no universal constant. The slightest change in number or situation should create new equations with results that the researcher can not judge. The « gravitational constant », G, has been measured on Earth. Can it be considered as a universal constant, valid for the whole universe?
Another example is the cosmological constant, without numerical value, that Einstein used, at the end of the study of his so-called theory of relativity, completely reversing the result of 15 years of work, it seems.
What does it need to understand?
A revision, without mathematics, with the current knowledge of all the research undertaken by physicists and the knowledge of other sciences could give surprising and very interesting results.
It would be a huge job that could be done with their teachers, the students in « Science without math ».
© Philippe Dardel, January 24, 2018