Horizon - Which Universe are we in

[Gordon]

On BBC this evening at 8pm, and will probably be on iPlayer afterwards.

Bearing in mind how often the 'multiverse' crops up in threads this might we worth watching.

[wigginhall]

Very enjoyable, and fun to see Tegmark riffing on it all.   Not sure how much evidence is really being presented, and of course, the maths is beyond me.   you never know with these programmes how much is presentational glamour, and how much serious stuff.

[Harrowby Hall]

I watched it, too. And my feelings were pretty much the same as your's, Wiggs.

Horizon isn't what it used to be. Is its emphasis on presentation rather than information to ensure sales to the US market?

[Dicky Underpants]

I watched it, too. And my feelings were pretty much the same as your's, Wiggs.

Horizon isn't what it used to be. Is its emphasis on presentation rather than information to ensure sales to the US market?

I think there was a very similar programme on the 'multiverse' a year or so back. Seemed very much like mathematical physicists enjoying themselves spinning yarns. No, I'm no mathematician, but if in order to 'get the equations right' to reconcile relativity and quantum theory you have to suggest a new universe coming into existence at every fall of the dice, then my intuition suggests that there must be a simpler way to resolve the problem. You might just as well say "God resolves the problem". Such an infinity of universes could never be visited, or their existence proved (okay in 5 million years when the human race has become superhuman, maybe) so for now it's just mathematicians playing games of no consequence whatsoever. Harmless, I suppose.
 A simpler solution to Fermat's Last Theorem anybody?

[Udayana]

I found it dire. Probably too much bubbly and no maths.

I can't see what use something that dumbed down would be even in the States.

Sorry, furthermore .. the BBC is funded by us to make programmes for us and our children, not people in other countries, this style of programme could only put off children from science.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Very enjoyable, and fun to see Tegmark riffing on it all.   Not sure how much evidence is really being presented, and of course, the maths is beyond me.   you never know with these programmes how much is presentational glamour, and how much serious stuff.

I don't think it's the maths so much as what Tegmark suggests about maths.

Namely that the only properties the basic fundamental particles have may only be mathematical and universes are based on maths as opposed to the popular view of maths (on this site at least) that maths has no meaning aside from the physical as we kwno it. That is the thrust and power of his argument.

[SweetPea]

Quite enjoyable..... I wasn't sure about the 'whispering woman' commentator, though.

Does anyone know why I can't find this programme on iPlayer? I wanted to post a link for Sriram because I know he'd be interested.

[Shaker]

No, I'm no mathematician, but if in order to 'get the equations right' to reconcile relativity and quantum theory you have to suggest a new universe coming into existence at every fall of the dice

It's not 100% clear so accept my apologies if I'm wrong but what you seem to be describing here is the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics rather than the multiverse hypothesis - not the same thing at all.

[splashscuba]

No, I'm no mathematician, but if in order to 'get the equations right' to reconcile relativity and quantum theory you have to suggest a new universe coming into existence at every fall of the dice

It's not 100% clear so accept my apologies if I'm wrong but what you seem to be describing here is the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics rather than the multiverse hypothesis - not the same thing at all.

They showed both in the Horizon episode and suggested that both / all are possible.

Of course, these aren't theories as suggested in the programme but hypotheses. There's no actual evidence, apart from complex maths, to back them up.

[Harrowby Hall]

Does anyone know why I can't find this programme on iPlayer? I wanted to post a link for Sriram because I know he'd be interested.

There would be little point. iPlayer television is only available in the British Isles. I can't get it here in France (but I'm returning next week and shall be able to do some catching up). iPlayer radio should be available worldwide, however.

[Udayana]

...
They showed both in the Horizon episode and suggested that both / all are possible.

Of course, these aren't theories as suggested in the programme but hypotheses. There's no actual evidence, apart from complex maths, to back them up.

Complex maths is not evidence, and anyway they didn't bother with showing any. It would have been so very very complex... though I expect we can rely on the narrator having checked it all out personally?

For all intents and purposes those scientists may have been using magic crystal balls kept up their bottoms.

The only point properly explained was the double slit experiment, already done to death over the years and not particularly relevant to the specific topic.

The search for cold spots in th CMB failed to find any any, but they didn't bother explaining this, despite at least 45 minutes of a one hour programme slow panning over beaches, rocks, scientists fiddling with lego and plastic blow up balls instead of explaining any ideas.

[splashscuba]

Does anyone know why I can't find this programme on iPlayer? I wanted to post a link for Sriram because I know he'd be interested.

There would be little point. iPlayer television is only available in the British Isles. I can't get it here in France (but I'm returning next week and shall be able to do some catching up). iPlayer radio should be available worldwide, however.

You could try a proxy server

[splashscuba]

...
They showed both in the Horizon episode and suggested that both / all are possible.

Of course, these aren't theories as suggested in the programme but hypotheses. There's no actual evidence, apart from complex maths, to back them up.

Complex maths is not evidence, and anyway they didn't bother with showing any. It would have been so very very complex... though I expect we can rely on the narrator having checked it all out personally?

For all intents and purposes those scientists may have been using magic crystal balls kept up their bottoms.

The only point properly explained was the double slit experiment, already done to death over the years and not particularly relevant to the specific topic.

The search for cold spots in th CMB failed to find any any, but they didn't bother explaining this, despite at least 45 minutes of a one hour programme slow panning over beaches, rocks, scientists fiddling with lego and plastic blow up balls instead of explaining any ideas.

Indeed. They quoted "theory" quite a lot which was annoying.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Does anyone know why I can't find this programme on iPlayer? I wanted to post a link for Sriram because I know he'd be interested.

There would be little point. iPlayer television is only available in the British Isles. I can't get it here in France

But you can get TF1 you lucky man.

[SweetPea]

Ah, it's shown up! Can only be found under 'Horizon' but not under 'Horizon: Which Universe are we in'. Very strange.

Sriram, if you see this, give the link a try; Harrowby, says it won't work for you, but I guess there's no harm in giving it a go:

 http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0695t56/horizon-20142015-17-which-universe-are-we-in

If you don't have any luck, I can only say, it wasn't the best programme I've seen on multi universes.

[Harrowby Hall]

Does anyone know why I can't find this programme on iPlayer? I wanted to post a link for Sriram because I know he'd be interested.

There would be little point. iPlayer television is only available in the British Isles. I can't get it here in France

But you can get TF1 you lucky man.

You are absolutely right, Vlad. My luck overflows.

I can get TF1, France 2, Canal +. 

All of which remind me how fortunate I am to have the BBC in my native land.

[Sriram]

Ah, it's shown up! Can only be found under 'Horizon' but not under 'Horizon: Which Universe are we in'. Very strange.

Sriram, if you see this, give the link a try; Harrowby, says it won't work for you, but I guess there's no harm in giving it a go:

 http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0695t56/horizon-20142015-17-which-universe-are-we-in

If you don't have any luck, I can only say, it wasn't the best programme I've seen on multi universes.

Hi SweetPea,

Thanks for that. I tried it but it doesn't work. 

Never mind....I am reading on this stuff at some science sites.  Some of the TV programs can be more of showmanship than anything else. Scientists are now getting savvy about public opinion and they are increasing the glamour quotient.   

Dawkins probably started it....now Hawking, Tyson, Harris and others are following! 

Thanks once again.

Cheers.

Sriram   

[Jack Knave]

Yeah, I saw that, bloody rubbish!!! The woman's narrating voice nearly sent me to sleep it was so hammed up in the 'soft focus' voice.

[Harrowby Hall]

Sorry, furthermore .. the BBC is funded by us to make programmes for us and our children, not people in other countries, this style of programme could only put off children from science.

No doubt you have heard Tony Hall's statement about having to make £700million worth of cuts - was it?

In order to be able to afford to make programmes the BBC has to ensure there is a further market for them. The easiest market in which to sell is the USA. Unfortunately the USA is not the most sophisticated market (despite having some of the finest universities in the world).

[Rhiannon]

The BBC needs to rethink what it is for. It doesn't need to produce soaps and home makeover shows.

Sacking Gary Linekar will save them a few quid too.

[Udayana]

Sorry, furthermore .. the BBC is funded by us to make programmes for us and our children, not people in other countries, this style of programme could only put off children from science.

No doubt you have heard Tony Hall's statement about having to make £700million worth of cuts - was it?

In order to be able to afford to make programmes the BBC has to ensure there is a further market for them. The easiest market in which to sell is the USA. Unfortunately the USA is not the most sophisticated market (despite having some of the finest universities in the world).

Maybe they could make really good programmes for us, then have someone cut out all the difficult bits, leaving gaps where ads could be inserted, for the Americans?

[Jack Knave]

I didn't see it, but imagine it was like some of the others I have seen.

Multi universes and multiple worlds with each roll of the dice seems unlikely to me.

It looks just as weird as the concept of a creator.

It's where science meets woo.

The universe seems a very odd place IMO.

To the point where I don't think you can say for certainty that ghosts don't exist for example.

It might not be what we think it is, but science of quantum mechanics and time, who knows what could be possible.

Whatever it is, I suppose it doesn't have to make sense in our sense of reality.

Perhaps we don't know the "real" reality.

Perhaps that's why the maths at that level looks slightly skewed to the experts.

Some of the theories seem as barmy as anything dreamt up by religions.

It's exciting though, exploring different possibilities.

Although a million Roses all having made a different choice would be bizarre in the extreme.

I'm not sure the universe could cope with that 😄

One Rose is probably more than enough.

Judging by that, Rose, someone put a bit too much manure on you today! 

[Shaker]

Don't quibble; we've only just managed to get him to say manure.

[Jack Knave]

I didn't see it, but imagine it was like some of the others I have seen.

Multi universes and multiple worlds with each roll of the dice seems unlikely to me.

It looks just as weird as the concept of a creator.

It's where science meets woo.

The universe seems a very odd place IMO.

To the point where I don't think you can say for certainty that ghosts don't exist for example.

It might not be what we think it is, but science of quantum mechanics and time, who knows what could be possible.

Whatever it is, I suppose it doesn't have to make sense in our sense of reality.

Perhaps we don't know the "real" reality.

Perhaps that's why the maths at that level looks slightly skewed to the experts.

Some of the theories seem as barmy as anything dreamt up by religions.

It's exciting though, exploring different possibilities.

Although a million Roses all having made a different choice would be bizarre in the extreme.

I'm not sure the universe could cope with that 😄

One Rose is probably more than enough.

Judging by that, Rose, someone put a bit too much manure on you today! 

I prefer the term " fertiliser" 

It doesn't matter what term you use it is all the same shit!!!

Sorry, Shaker.    I have been trying really, really hard but it's not easy...

[Harrowby Hall]

Talking of the universe what is,  and  manure, I once read a book about a particular religion that reckoned our sole aim and purpose was to spread our manure over the planet to fertilise it and we all had to get back to nature, it was hilarious.

Apparently they didn't approve of using our present system, and thought we should be finding a bushy place.

I like bushy places.