I was thinking, the other day, about parallel universes. In a multiverse, anything is possible ( if physical laws also change with universes) . Maybe, in another universe, I would be reading this, and you would have written it. But would consciousness be preserved. That is, would I be "I" , or you? Would I have the same personality?

I don't think. But then, wouldn't I be you and you be I? Then what's the difference? If I am to remain myself, I must have the same genes. That means, my parents must be the same. Their parents must be the same. Then, the entire history would be in a different place. Or is it possible at all? For me to be in your place in another universe? What would happen to consciousness?

__________________
Limericks, written by me: http://limericker.blogspot.com

You are better served to put off considering parallel sections of an infinitely branching universe until observations force it upon you; otherwise conditions can be whatever you choose to imagine. How frequently would branching occur--each planck time since the big bang? Would that impose a level of synchronicity on branching for which the likelyhood approaches zero?

There must be a more productive way to exercise the mind.

__________________
For those inclined to oppose human meddling with the structure of the universe or the composition and configuration of objects and groups of objects within the universe, consider:
Whether there is a limit to the magnitude of a modulation of chaos below which order remains invariant? Or, is order but a fiction invented by perspectives applied over finite, however large, time intervals?

It's also sometimes called an "alternate universe". This hypothetical universe I think should exist seperately from our own. Various theories of physics postulate the existence of lots of parallel universes - a great, almost infinite number. Depending on specific details of the theory, all of these universes (multiverses) can interact with each other. But, whether it's involved with fine-tuning - an explinatino of intellegent life is a different matter. All the information can be combined in a certain way, can be thought of to have some sort of correlation, but, whether you believe it or not is again a completely different relevance.

That's an interesting thought. If the universes are all parallell, you would naturally asume that everything would be the same only mirrored - but is this the case? Just because they are parallell doesn't necesserily mean that everything is exactly, despite emulated, the same. It's interesting to ask, if everything is mirrored, are our personalities etc also mirrored.

Something interesting: for all UK users, there is a BBC programme that has been stationed on BBC Two 9.00pm Thursday 14 February 2002 - there is a slight chance that it'll be shown again sometime.......

__________________
Science is wonderfully equipped to answer the question "How?" but it gets terribly confused when you ask the question "Why?"
Erwin Chargaff

I must agree with Gourdhead, conditions are whatever you can imagine.

The idea of parallel universes sounds a bit like science fiction since it can be equally right or wrong. No evidence to build up conclusions upon, so you can think of countless probablities.

I see I need to clarify. The conclusion I was trying to promote was that of not allowing your imagination to run amuck and dwell on conditions for which there are no observational supports and where the theoretical supports are vanishingly weak. I avoid using the term "multiverse" as much as I can substituting the phrase "mutually isolated branches of sections of the universe" when challenging what others prefer to call multiverses. The concept seems way too anti-Occam for my tastes. Most advocates avoid defining the maximum branching frequency and how the causal energy is generated or apportioned. In general I subscribe to the axiom that "whatever the universe does not prohibit will happen". However, in this case, multibranching is so unlikely that I toss it into the "pragmatically prohibited" bin until I am dragged kicking and screaming to accepting it due to hard evidence.


Here is a thread containing my take on a related concept.

__________________
For those inclined to oppose human meddling with the structure of the universe or the composition and configuration of objects and groups of objects within the universe, consider:
Whether there is a limit to the magnitude of a modulation of chaos below which order remains invariant? Or, is order but a fiction invented by perspectives applied over finite, however large, time intervals?

Parallel universes may, or may not, exist. To put oneself into these hypothetical situations is usually an excercise in escaspism, and bad philosophy. Whatever the "other" yous are doing doesn't mean didly here, and vice versa. Let's concentrate on making this universe the best we can by acting locally.
Thank you for letting me spout off for a moment. B)

__________________
<span style='color:purple'>&quot;To Infinity and Beyond&quot; - Buzz Lightyear</span>

<span style='color:green'>http://www.mi-geocaching.org</span>