This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
KelseyR · 26-30, F
It depends what you mean by that. Separated by distance or occupying the same space? The latter is an absurd concept.
PepperMint · 26-30, F
@KelseyR the absurd concept, that one.
KelseyR · 26-30, F
@PepperMint No. We'd need to conjecture a center for all of nature. Too extraordinary!
xmedleft · 51-55, M
OK, true I wasn't addressing this Center. But why would they have to share 1 center, or all the same center, or ANY center?
KelseyR · 26-30, F
@xmedleft Because we know our universe has a center: all galaxies sharing a common point of origin. Only when we stipulate the existence of many universes separated by distance does the idea of a single center dissipate.
The idea of universes sharing the same space would not be relieved of having a single center. They would simply be overlapping.
In fact, we can empirically and rationally attach improbability to the the proposition of extraordinary ideas like a single universe and multiple universes sharing the same space. That all things would share one focal point in infinite space is absurd.
The idea of universes sharing the same space would not be relieved of having a single center. They would simply be overlapping.
In fact, we can empirically and rationally attach improbability to the the proposition of extraordinary ideas like a single universe and multiple universes sharing the same space. That all things would share one focal point in infinite space is absurd.
xmedleft · 51-55, M
Is it possible that we could share space with something that is out of phase with our existence and THAT something has a center or focal point, but our space not. It could have a focal point IN OUR space, as long as there is some shared definition between the existences.