Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x24gv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-21T05:27:35.849Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

7 - The multiverse hierarchy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2014

Max Tegmark
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Bernard Carr
Affiliation:
Queen Mary University of London
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Parallel universes are now all the rage, cropping up in books, movies and even jokes: ‘You passed your exam in many parallel universes — but not this one.’ However, they are as controversial as they are popular, so it is important to ask whether they are within the purview of science or merely silly speculation. They are also a source of confusion, since many people fail to distinguish between the different types of parallel universes proposed.

In the big bang model, the farthest one can observe is the distance that light has travelled during the 14 billion years since the expansion began. The most distant visible objects are now about 4 χ 1026 m away. A sphere of this radius defines our observable universe or our horizon volume. We will sometimes loosely refer to this as ‘our universe’, although this may be part of a region which extends much further. In this article, I will survey theories of physics involving what are termed ‘parallel universes’ or ‘multiverses’. These form a four-level hierarchy, allowing progressively greater diversity.

  1. Level I A generic prediction of cosmological inflation is an infinite ‘ergodic’ space, which contains Hubble volumes realizing all initial conditions — including one with an identical copy of you about 101029 m away.

  2. Level II Given the fundamental laws of physics that physicists one day hope to capture with equations on a T-shirt, different regions of space can exhibit different effective laws of physics (physical constants, dimensionality, particle content, etc.), corresponding to different local minima in a landscape of possibilities.

  3. Level III In unitary quantum mechanics, other branches of the wave-function add nothing qualitatively new, which is ironic given that this level has historically been the most controversial.

  4. Level IV Other mathematical structures give different fundamental equations of physics for that T-shirt.

Type
Chapter
Information
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.)

References

[1] G. B., Brundrit. Life in the infinite universe. Quart. J. Roy. Astron. Soc. 20 (1979), 37.Google Scholar
[2] J., Garriga and A., Vilenkin. A prescription for probabilities in eternal inflation. Phys. Rev. D 64 (2001), 023507.Google Scholar
[3] G. F. R., Ellis. Are We Alone? (New York: Perseus, 1995).Google Scholar
[4] A., de Oliveira-Costa, M., Tegmark, M., Zadamiaga and A., Hamilton. Significance of the largest scale CMB fluctuations in WMAP. Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004), 063516.Google Scholar
[5] N. J., Cornish, D. N., Spergel, G. D., Starkman and E., Kometsu. Constraining the topology of the universe. Phys. Rev. Lett. 92 (2004), 201302.Google Scholar
[6] A., Linde. The self-reproducing inflationary universe. Sci. Am. 271 (1994), 32.Google Scholar
[7] A. H., Guth and D. I., Kaiser. Inflationary cosmology: Exploring the universe from the smallest to the largest scales. Science, 307 (2005), 884.Google Scholar
[8] M. A., Bucher and D. N., Spergel. Inflation in a low-density universe. Sci. Am. 280 (1999), 62.Google Scholar
[9] R., Bousso and J., Polchinski. Quantization of four-form fluxes and dynamical neutralization of the cosmological constant. JHEP, 0006 (2000), 006.Google Scholar
[10] L., Susskind. This volume (2007) [hep-th/0302219].
[11] R. C., Tolman. Relativity, Thermodynamics, and Cosmology (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1934).Google Scholar
[12] J. A., Wheeler. Beyond the end of time. In Black Holes, Gravitational Waves and Cosmology: An Introduction to Current Research, eds. M., Rees, R., Ruffini and J. A., Wheeler (New York: Gordon and Breach, 1974).Google Scholar
[13] P. J., Steinhardt and N., Turok. A cyclic model of the universe. Science, 296 (2002), 1436.Google Scholar
[14] L., Smolin. The Life of the Cosmos (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997).Google Scholar
[15] B., Carter. Number coincidences and the anthropic principle in cosmology. In Confrontation of Cosmological Theory with Observational Data, ed. M. S., Longair (Dordrecht: Reidel, 1974), p. 291.Google Scholar
[16] M., Tegmark. On the dimensionality of spacetime. Class. Quant. Grav. 14 (1997), L69.Google Scholar
[17] J. D., Barrow and F. J., Tipler. The Anthropic Cosmological Principle (Oxford: Clarendon, 1986).Google Scholar
[18] M., Tegmark. Is ‘the theory of everything’ merely the ultimate ensemble theory?Ann. Phys. 270 (1998), 1.Google Scholar
[19] C. J., Hogan. Why the Universe is Just So. Rev. Mod. Phys. 72 (2000), 1149.Google Scholar
[20] H., Everett. Relative state formulations of quantum theory. Rev. Mod. Phys. 29 (1957), 454.Google Scholar
[21] H., Everett. In The Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, eds. B. S., DeWitt and N., Graham (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1973).Google Scholar
[22] B., DeWitt. The Everett interpretation of quantum mechanics. In Science and Ultimate Reality: From Quantum to Cosmos, eds. J. D., Barrow, P. C. W., Davies and C. L., Harper (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), pp. 167–98.Google Scholar
[23] H. D., Zeh. On the interpretation of measurement in quantum theory. Found. Phys. 1 (1970), 69.Google Scholar
[24] D., Giulini, E., Joos, C., Kiefer, J., Kupsch, I. O., Stamatescu and H. D., Zeh. Decoherence and the Appearance of a Classical World in Quantum Theory (Berlin: Springer, 1996).Google Scholar
[25] M., Tegmark and J. A., Wheeler. 100 years of quantum mysteries. Sci. Am. 284 (2001), 68.Google Scholar
[26] G., Egan. Permutation City (New York: Harper, 1995).Google Scholar
[27] D., Deutsch. The Fabric of Reality (New York: Allen Lane, 1997).Google Scholar
[28] J. B., Barbour. The End of Time (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001).Google Scholar
[29] R., Nozick. Philosophical Explanations (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1981).Google Scholar
[30] M., Tegmark. The importance of quantum decoherence in brain processes. Phys. Rev. E 61 (2000), 4194.Google Scholar
[31] R., Rucker. Infinity and the Mind (Boston: Birkhauser, 1982).Google Scholar
[32] P. C. W., Davies. The Mind of God (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1992).Google Scholar
[33] D., Lewis. On the Plurality of Worlds (Oxford: Blackwell, 1986).Google Scholar
[34] J. D., Barrow. Theories of Everything (New York: Ballantine, 1991).Google Scholar
[35] J. D., Barrow. Pi in the Sky (Oxford: Clarendon, 1992).Google Scholar
[36] E. P., Wigner. Symmetries and Reflections (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1967).Google Scholar
[37] J., Schmidthuber. A computer scientist's view of life, the universe, and everything. In Foundations of Computer Science: Potential Theory Cognition, ed. C., Freksa. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Berlin: Springer, 1997).Google Scholar
[38] S., Wolfram. A New Kind of Science (New York: Wolfram Media, 2002).Google Scholar
[39] M., Cohen. Master's thesis, Department of Philosophy, Ben Gurion University of the Negev (2003).
[40] S., Hawking. A Brief History of Time (New York: Touchstone, 1993).Google Scholar
[41] M., Tegmark. What does inflation really predict?J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 0504 (2004), 001.Google Scholar
[42] V. F., Mukhanov. This volume (2007).
[43] M., Tegmark. Does the universe in fact contain almost no information?Found. Phys. Lett. 9 (1996), 25.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • The multiverse hierarchy
    • By Max Tegmark, Department of Physics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
  • Edited by Bernard Carr, Queen Mary University of London
  • Book: Universe or Multiverse?
  • Online publication: 05 July 2014
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107050990.009
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • The multiverse hierarchy
    • By Max Tegmark, Department of Physics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
  • Edited by Bernard Carr, Queen Mary University of London
  • Book: Universe or Multiverse?
  • Online publication: 05 July 2014
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107050990.009
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • The multiverse hierarchy
    • By Max Tegmark, Department of Physics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
  • Edited by Bernard Carr, Queen Mary University of London
  • Book: Universe or Multiverse?
  • Online publication: 05 July 2014
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107050990.009
Available formats
×