Multiverses: description, uniqueness and testing

doi:10.1017/CBO9781107050990.024

22 - Multiverses: description, uniqueness and testing

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 July 2014

George Ellis

Edited by

Bernard Carr

Show author details

George Ellis: Affiliation:
University of Cape Town
Bernard Carr: Affiliation:
Queen Mary University of London

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Introduction

The idea of a multiverse – an ensemble of universes or expanding domains like the one we see around us – has recently received increasing attention in cosmology. It has been conceived of as occurring either in separate places or times in the same overall encompassing universe (as in chaotic inflation) or through splitting of the quantum wave-function (as in the Everett interpretation of quantum mechanics) or as a set of totally disjoint universes, with no causal connection whatsoever. Physical properties may be different in the different universes or in different expanding domains within a single universe.

In this context, definitions are important. Some workers refer to the separate expanding regions in chaotic inflation as ‘universes’, even though they have a common causal origin and are all part of the same single spacetime. In keeping with long established use, I prefer to use the word ‘universe’ to refer to the single unique connected spacetime of which our observed region (centred on our galaxy and bounded by our visual horizon in the past) is a part. I will describe situations such as chaotic inflation — with many expanding domains — as a ‘multi-domain universe’. Then we can reserve the term ‘multiverse’ for a collection of genuinely disconnected spacetimes, which are not causally related. When the discussion pertains to both disjoint collections of universes and different domains of a multi-domain universe, I will refer to an ‘ensemble of universe domains’ or ‘ensemble’ for short.

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: Universe or Multiverse? , pp. 387 - 410

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107050990.024 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

[1] A., Vilenkin. The birth of inflationary universes. Phys. Rev. D 27 (1983), 2848.Google Scholar

[2] A. D., Linde. Chaotic inflation. Phys. Lett. B129 (1983), 177.Google Scholar

[3] A. D., Linde. Particle Physics and Inflationary Cosmology (Chur: Harwood Academic Publishers, 1990).Google Scholar

[4] D. W., Sciama. Is the universe unique? In Die Kosmologie der Gegenwart, eds. G, Borner and J., Ehlers (Munich: Serie Piper, 1993).Google Scholar

[5] J., Leslie. Universes (London: Routledge, 1996).Google Scholar

[6] D., Deutsch. The Fabric of Reality. The Science of Parallel Universes (London: Penguin 1997).Google Scholar

[7] M., Tegmark. Is the Theory of Everything merely the ultimate ensemble theory?Ann. Phys. 270 (1998), 1.Google Scholar

[8] M., Tegmark. Parallel universes. In Science and Ultimate Reality, eds. J. D., Barrow, P. C. W., Davies and C. L., Harper (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004) p. 459.Google Scholar

[9] L., Smolin. The Life of the Cosmos (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997).Google Scholar

[10] D. K., Lewis. On the Plurality of Worlds (Oxford: Blackwell, 2000).Google Scholar

[11] S. W., Weinberg. The cosmological constant problems. In Sources and Detection of Dark Matter and Dark Energy in the Universe, ed. D., Cline (Berlin, New York: Springer-Verlag, 2001) [astro-ph/0005265].Google Scholar

[12] M. J., Rees. Our Cosmic Habitat (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001).Google Scholar

[13] M. J., Rees. Numerical coincidences and ‘tuning’ in cosmology. In Fred Hoyle's Universe, eds. C., Wickramasinghe, G. R., Burbidge and J. V., Narlikar (Dordrecht: Kluwer, 2003), p. 95.Google Scholar

[14] P. C. W., Davies. Multiverse cosmological models. Mod. Phys. Lett., A19 (2004), 727.Google Scholar

[15] M., Tegmark. Parallel universes. Sci. Am. 288(5) (2003), 41.Google Scholar

[16] J. D., Barrow and F. J., Tipler. The Anthropic Cosmological Principle (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986).Google Scholar

[17] Y. Y., Balashov. Resource Letter AP-1. The Anthropic Principle. Am. J. Phys. 54 (1991), 1069.Google Scholar

[18] M. J., Rees. Just Six Numbers, The Deep Forces that Shape the Universe (London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson, 1999).Google Scholar

[19] J. D., Bjorken. This volume (2007) [astro-ph/0404233].

[20] G. F. R., Ellis, U., Kirchner and W., R. Stoeger, Multiverses and physical cosmology. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 347 (2003), 921.Google Scholar

[21] W. R., Stoeger, G. F. R., Ellis and U., Kirchner. Multiverses and cosmology. Philosophical issues (2004) [astro-ph/0407329].Google Scholar

[22] J., Wainwright and G. F. R., Ellis (eds.). The Dynamical Systems Approach to Cosmology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996).Google Scholar

[23] G. F. R., Ellis and H., van Elst. Cosmological models. In Theoretical and Observational Cosmology, ed. M., Lachieze-Ray (Boston: Kluwer, 1999).Google Scholar

[24] C., Hogan. Why the universe is just so. Rev. Mod. Phys. 72 (2000), 1149.Google Scholar

[25] U., Kirchner and G. F. R., Ellis. A probability measure for FRW models. Class. Quant. Grav. 20 (2003), 1199.Google Scholar

[26] H., Bondi. Cosmology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1960).Google Scholar

[27] S. W., Weinberg. Gravitation and Cosmology (New York: Wiley, 1972).Google Scholar

[28] C. W., Misner. The isotropy of the Universe. Astrophys J. 151 (1968), 431.Google Scholar

[29] A. H., Guth. Inflationary universe. A possible solution to the horizon and flatness problems. Phys. Rev. D 23 (1981), 347.Google Scholar

[30] D., Hilbert. On the infinite. In Philosophy of Mathematics, eds. P., Benacerraf and H., Putnam (Englewood Cliff, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1964), p. 134.Google Scholar

[31] G. F. R., Ellis and G. B., Brundrit. Life in the infinite universe. Quart. J. Roy. Astron. Soc. 20 (1979), 37.Google Scholar

[32] J. A., Wheeler. Einstein's Vision (Berline: Springer Verlag, 1968).Google Scholar

[33] C. W., Misner, K. S., Thorne and J. A., Wheeler. Gravitation (San Francisco: Freeman, 1973).Google Scholar

[34] A. D., Linde. Inflation, quantum cosmology and the anthropic principle. In Science and Ultimate Reality, eds. J. D., Barrow, P. C. W., Davies and C. L., Harper. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), p. 426.Google Scholar

[35] A. H., Guth. Eternal inflation. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 321 (2001), 66 [astro-ph/0101507].Google Scholar

[36] A. A., Starobinsky. Current trends in field theory, quantum gravity and strings. In Lecture Notes in Physics, 246 (1986), 107.Google Scholar

[37] A. D., Linde, D. A., Linde and A., Mezhlumian. From the big bang theory to the theory of a stationary universe. Phys. Rev. D 49 (1994), 1783.Google Scholar

[38] L., Susskind. This volume (2007) [hep-th/0302219].

[39] G. F. R., Ellis. Cosmology and verifiability. Quart. J. Roy. Astron. Soc. 16 (1975), 245.Google Scholar

[40] J., Hartle. This volume (2007) [gr-qc/0406104].

[41] A., Vilenkin. Predictions from quantum cosmology. Phys. Rev. Lett. 74 (1995), 846.Google Scholar

[42] S. W., Weinberg. A priori probability distribution of the cosmological constant. Phys. Rev. D 61 (2000), 103505.Google Scholar

[43] H., Martel, P., Shapiro and S. W., Weinberg. Likely values of the cosmological constant. Astrophys. J. 482 (1998), 29.Google Scholar

[44] M. L., Graesser, S. D., Hsu, A., Jenkins and M. B., Wise. Anthropic distribution for cosmological constant and primordial density perturbations. Phys. Lett. B 600 (2004), 15 [hep-th/0407174].Google Scholar

[45] G. F. R., Ellis and G., Schreiber. Observational and dynamic properties of small universes. Phys. Lett. A 115 (1986), 97.Google Scholar

[46] M., Lachieze-Ray and J. P., Luminet. Cosmic topology. Phys. Rep. 254 (1995), 135.Google Scholar

[47] J. P., Luminet, J. R., Weeks, A., Riazuelo, R., Lehoucq and J., P. Uzan. Dodecahedral space topology as an explanation for weak wide-angle temperature correlations in the cosmic microwave background. Nature, 425 (2003), 593.Google Scholar

[48] B. F., Roukema, B., Lew, M., Cechowska, A., Masecki and S., Bajtlik. A hint of Poincaré dodecahedral topology in the WMAP First Year Sky Map. Astron. Astrophys. 423 (2004), 821 [astro-ph/0402608].Google Scholar

[49] G., Katz and J., Weeks, Polynomial interpretation of multipole vectors. Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004), 063527 [astro-ph/0405631].Google Scholar

[50] T., Rothman and G. F. R., Ellis. Smolin's natural selection hypothesis. Quart. J. Roy. Astron. Soc. 34 (1992), 201.Google Scholar

[51] M., Gardner. Are Universes Thicker than Blackberries? (New York: W. W. Norton, 2003).Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.