If there are infinite universes, covering all permutations of all properties (i asume thats what they mean by omniverse), then there will be exactly as many universes with a certain property then there are without it. So it is actually 50/50.
In the “multiverse of all possibilities” there will be 50% without a multiverse
We’re getting into hierarchies of infinities here, look up cardinality. You can have infinities that can’t map to every possibility of a higher infinity
I know. But I case of the multiverse that many people think about, the one where there is a universe for EVERYTHING, there will be exactly as many universes where triangles exist as there are universes where triangles dont exist. And the same is true for everything else.
And it is exactly the same number, not just the same type of infinity. Because for every universe with triangles there must also exist the exact same universe without triangles (and vice versa), otherwise the multiverse wouldn’t contain all possible universes.
What if there are more ways to not have triangles than to have triangles? If every possibility is represented equally, that would mean there are more universes without triangles. The possibility of triangles isn’t the variables that’s changing, it’s a side effect of other variables.
I just rolled two six-sided dice. If we take that action as truely random and that every possibility is represented in some universe, then there are universes were I rolled 2 and universes where I rolled 7. However, there are more universes where I rolled 7, simply because there are more ways to roll 7 (1&6, 2&5, 3&4, 4&3, 5&2, 6&1).
And that’s assuming that my roll was truely random, and not significantly biased by how I threw the dice. It’s also completely impossible that I rolled a 13, and universes where triangles are impossible might not exist. Every possible universe still exists, but there are more universes where I rolled 7, and none where I can’t draw a triangle. Infinite improbability doesn’t make the impossible possible.
Under quantum mechanics this can’t explain non-even distributions. With no effects making high probability events more prevalent than others you can not (reliably) observe differentiated probabilities.
And once again, cardinalites appears. A thing whose possible variations correspond to infinite integers can’t match that with have variations matching the real numbers. An infinite line won’t correspond to an infinite hypercube in infinite dimensions. Gotta consider combinatorics from statistics too, as well as entropy. The number of normal states simply has to far exceed the strange states for us to observe a normal universe.
Omniverse is what you get when you sort multiple multiverses, that’s all. It’s a way of categorizing multiverses sharing some common element. Because infinity is so vast that it’s basically meaningless to us humans, so organizing it at least makes it vaguely easier to understand.
The dumbest and easiest way to understand it is with media franchises as an and analogy. All of Marvel is one multiverse, all of DC is one multiverse, all of Terminator are another, all of Star Trek another, etc. it’s sloppy but here’s my point across.
In reality it’s more like; this multiverse has universes with identical physical parameters, that multiverse has a slightly higher amount of gravity, that multiverse has a slightly different amount of weak magnetic force, that multiverse has a different speed of light, etc.
groet@infosec.pub 5 days ago
If there are infinite universes, covering all permutations of all properties (i asume thats what they mean by omniverse), then there will be exactly as many universes with a certain property then there are without it. So it is actually 50/50.
In the “multiverse of all possibilities” there will be 50% without a multiverse
Natanael@slrpnk.net 5 days ago
We’re getting into hierarchies of infinities here, look up cardinality. You can have infinities that can’t map to every possibility of a higher infinity
groet@infosec.pub 5 days ago
I know. But I case of the multiverse that many people think about, the one where there is a universe for EVERYTHING, there will be exactly as many universes where triangles exist as there are universes where triangles dont exist. And the same is true for everything else.
And it is exactly the same number, not just the same type of infinity. Because for every universe with triangles there must also exist the exact same universe without triangles (and vice versa), otherwise the multiverse wouldn’t contain all possible universes.
Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca 5 days ago
What if there are more ways to not have triangles than to have triangles? If every possibility is represented equally, that would mean there are more universes without triangles. The possibility of triangles isn’t the variables that’s changing, it’s a side effect of other variables.
I just rolled two six-sided dice. If we take that action as truely random and that every possibility is represented in some universe, then there are universes were I rolled 2 and universes where I rolled 7. However, there are more universes where I rolled 7, simply because there are more ways to roll 7 (1&6, 2&5, 3&4, 4&3, 5&2, 6&1).
And that’s assuming that my roll was truely random, and not significantly biased by how I threw the dice. It’s also completely impossible that I rolled a 13, and universes where triangles are impossible might not exist. Every possible universe still exists, but there are more universes where I rolled 7, and none where I can’t draw a triangle. Infinite improbability doesn’t make the impossible possible.
Natanael@slrpnk.net 4 days ago
Under quantum mechanics this can’t explain non-even distributions. With no effects making high probability events more prevalent than others you can not (reliably) observe differentiated probabilities.
And once again, cardinalites appears. A thing whose possible variations correspond to infinite integers can’t match that with have variations matching the real numbers. An infinite line won’t correspond to an infinite hypercube in infinite dimensions. Gotta consider combinatorics from statistics too, as well as entropy. The number of normal states simply has to far exceed the strange states for us to observe a normal universe.
Etterra@discuss.online 4 days ago
Omniverse is what you get when you sort multiple multiverses, that’s all. It’s a way of categorizing multiverses sharing some common element. Because infinity is so vast that it’s basically meaningless to us humans, so organizing it at least makes it vaguely easier to understand.
The dumbest and easiest way to understand it is with media franchises as an and analogy. All of Marvel is one multiverse, all of DC is one multiverse, all of Terminator are another, all of Star Trek another, etc. it’s sloppy but here’s my point across.
In reality it’s more like; this multiverse has universes with identical physical parameters, that multiverse has a slightly higher amount of gravity, that multiverse has a slightly different amount of weak magnetic force, that multiverse has a different speed of light, etc.