Thread by @inftoe

In this thread, we will finally answer the meaningless question that has been tormenting cohorts of thinkers and dreamers for centuries, and which surprisingly finds people willing to ask it (and even answer it) among seemingly quite respectable researchers.
1 ➟

So, are there other universes?

This is a very funny question.

First, it is a classic antinomy, no less dead-end than the famous "I lie." If something has multiple instances, then don't call it a universe.
2 ➟

Secondly, the answer to this question does not solve any practical problems: since the person asking it does not understand how one universe works, one should not hope that he will understand how work many universes.
3 ➟

Third, this question is an open denial of Occam's principle: the adherents of the multiverse idea postulate plurality not on the basis of knowledge, but because ignorance allows them to do it.
4 ➟

Fourthly, acquaintance with practical attempts to answer this question amazes with some kind of childish everyday concept of the universe.
Guys, they really imagine the universes as balls in space!
google.com/search?q=multi…
5 ➟

Thus, the very fact of asking this question is evidence of the questioner's finding in a desperate cognitive impasse: he deviates not even from the scientific thinking, but from banal logic so there is no hope to get not only the correct, but at least an intelligible answer.
6 ➟

However, the bearers of the idea of the multiverse do not particularly ask this question. They simply recognize the multiverse as existing by default, and then build their theories on it as a fact.
7 ➟

Despite the glaring absurdities, the multiverse is recognized as a quite scientific physical and cosmological idea, which is being investigated in all seriousness. That once again testifies that in the last years of the existence mankind is on a dead-end path of knowledge.
8 ➟

On this statement, this thread could be completed.
However, InfToE would not be a theory of everything if it did not answer all questions, even meaningless ones.
9 ➟

For example, the aforementioned paradox of a liar in InfToE is resolved quite well. Since information has a minimum value of quantity, represented by the elements S and O, in reality the liar is never in a state that contradicts itself.
10 ➟

Instead, a liar can only be observed in one of two states, each of which denies the previous one: either he is lying that in the past state he spoke the truth, or he is telling the truth that in the past state he lied. He never lies and speaks the truth in the same state.
11 ➟

So after all, there are other universes or not?
It is already clear that the answer, of course, is unambiguous: no, no "other universes" exist.
12 ➟

Formally speaking, the universe is one by definition: it is all that exists. Even if there were some funny "balls in space", it would be like this one universe, not a multiverse.
13 ➟

But let's move on to the essential side of the issue. And it, of course, starts with a definition of the concept of "existence".
In InfToE this concept is basic, it is defined at the first level of S/O-combining:

https://twitter.com/inftoe/status/1218826938573344769

14 ➟

The physical meaning of the concept of "existence" in InfToE is simple and natural when we talk about information: only that which is observed exists. If something is not observed (that is, there is no information about it), then it does not exist.
15 ➟

"Observation" here means in terms of InfToE: the information of the observable is part of the observer, that is, it is contained in its observation cone (more about this:

https://twitter.com/inftoe/status/1420208483228606465

)
16 ➟

Those readers who are not learned with InfToE, of course, will kindly joke in this place: it turns out that the Moon does not exist if the mouse is not looking at it?
17 ➟

Guys, this argument of Einstein just testifies to his complete lack of understanding of the informational nature of the universe. This was normal for those times.
18 ➟

The mouse observes the Moon not because it looks at it, but because information about the Moon is contained in the mouse by the very fact of the existence of the mouse. The Moon is one of the reasons for the emergence of life on Earth (including mouse and Einstein).
19 ➟

If the balls-"universes" in the "multiverse" observe each other (e.g., collide, traces of which the enthusiasts are looking for in the CMB), then it makes no sense to find out the nature of "our universe" in isolation from "other universes".
20 ➟

The nature of these "universes" is common, their existence is justified only jointly.
But if the "balls" do not observe each other in any way, then we can safely fantasize about them in the same way as about goblins, elves and werewolves. They don't exist.
21 ➟

Once again: only that which is observed exists. The observer is a consequence of its observations. All of them are contained in its observation cone.
The observation cone is the universe from the point of view of the observer. From its point of view, only this exists.
22 ➟

The observation cones of all observers existing in the universe enter the only observation cone of the superperson in its finite state, when the internal model of the universe created by the superperson becomes identical with the reality of the universe.
23 ➟

This single cone of observations is the universe for everything that exists in it at all times. Nothing, except for being included in this cone of observations, has not been and will not be.
24 ➟

So, the universe from the point of view of all the beings included in it, including the future superperson, is the only one, there are no "other universes" and cannot be.
25 ➟

But now let's remember the size of the structure of the combinations of elements S and O that make up the universe:

https://twitter.com/inftoe/status/1420208493991272454

26 ➟

As we can see, already at the fifth level of combining, the number of possible combinations becomes shockingly large. At higher levels we cannot imagine the number of combinations at all.
27 ➟

And in this unimaginable sea of combinations, there is the observation cone of the superperson, which is the result of the evolution of the universe in which we exist.
28 ➟

This observation cone is the reality of the universe: it contains everything that exists in the universe at all times, from the beginning of time to the final moment, when the internal model of the universe, created by the superperson, will become identical with reality.
29 ➟

But no matter how complex the universe with its trillions of galaxies is, its reality takes up a very small part of the huge number of combinations that are possible as a result of the combining of the elements S and O.
30 ➟

And what about the rest of the combinations? Of course, the overwhelming majority of them are not good for anything, and do not take part in the existence of the universe, that is, they do not exist.
31 ➟

But nothing prohibits some of the combinations from forming into their own realities, with their own fine tuning, of course, different from the fine tuning of our reality (if it were not different, then it would be our reality, see

https://twitter.com/inftoe/status/1419944916302577666

).
32 ➟

There are, of course, many such other realities. Not infinitely, because the number of combinations at the lower levels of combination, on which all realities are based, is not infinite. But there are a lot of them. Our reality is just one of them.
33 ➟

What can you say about all these realities (including ours)?
All of them are based on the same fundamental concepts of the lower levels of combination:
• (1) "being",
• (2) "observable" and "observer",
• (3) metric of the universe.
34 ➟

For all of them, the structure of combinations represents causal relations (what we perceive here as time) and non-causal (what we perceive as space). That is, they certainly have a paired basis, similar to our physical time and physical space:

https://twitter.com/inftoe/status/1427703588831236096

35 ➟

All these realities are based on the metric, which contains 10 concepts, which means that what they have as an analogue of our physical space is also 3d, and in their other derivatives (like our Standard Model or a set of fundamental interactions) 3d-decalism appears.
36 ➟

This is where the coincidences end. Already at the fourth level of combination, containing 6128 combinations, it is obvious that the distribution of the semantics of these combinations becomes different, which determines the own fine tunings and cones of the realities.
37 ➟

It is clear that reality exists only if its fine tuning is so successful that it provide evolution far enough so that as a result a superperson is created so complex that it able to create an internal model of the universe, identical to reality.
38 ➟

In some realities, the resulting complexity of the universe is higher than in ours, in some it is lower. Their final observation cones are correspondingly longer and shorter than ours. Very conditionally, we can illustrate the information universe with the picture:
39 ➟

But let's immediately and forever clearly and unequivocally record: each of these realities exists only for itself. They don't exist for each other.
40 ➟

It would be wrong to say that other realities are "inaccessible." The use of this term would indicate a deep misunderstanding of the informational nature of the universe. All of them simply do not exist for us, except for the one that is ours.
41 ➟

So, please, no fantasies about inter-reality travel, no matter how physically and technically these "travels" are arranged. There is simply nowhere to travel. For us, our reality is the only one that exists.
42 ➟

Summary:
• the universe is unique, no "other universes" exist,
• in the universe there is only one reality for us, the one in which we exist,
• in the universe there are a finite number of other realities, each for itself, for each of them no other realities exist,
43 ➟

• the most fundamental basis of all realities of the universe is common (at the level of basic concepts), but their fine tuning is so different that it should be said that each of them has a special physics, with its own set of laws.
44.

@threadreaderapp unroll