Has the Multiverse Finally Become Necessary?

[austintorn@aol.com]

Has the Multiverse Finally Become Necessary?

Long ago, the protons had formed a massive star via gravity, and for quite a while it had fused hydrogen into helium, living a long and healthy life, but its death would be even more spectacular.

In its death throes, this massive star goes out with a bang—first collapsing, then triggering a supernova explosion bright enough to drown out the light of an entire galaxy. A shock wave of precious stellar debris hurtles outward into space at tens of millions of miles per hour, containing the heavier elements that wall make up planets, create more stars, and even create life.

Well, here we are, being made of the atomic elements—stardust, or chemicals, if you will, and to this dust we’ll one day return, like it or not.

Suppose some of those protons had been just 0.2 percent larger; they’d have been unstable and would have decayed. No atoms would have existed, ever.

Suppose gravity had been slightly more; then he stars would have been smaller, being more compressed, and they would have sputtered out long before they had a chance to evolve. No life.

Suppose the electron had been twice as large; no life.

Suppose that, when two hydrogen atoms were fused into helium in a star, 0.006 or 0.008 of the mass was turned into energy (E=MCC) instead of 0.007; the universe would then have been filled only with hydrogen, if it had been 0.006, or their would have been a universe with no hydrogen, if it had been 0.008. This is a very small tolerance.

Suppose the early universe had not a delicate balance, but had headed into runaway expansion, too quick for galaxies to form, or had headed the other direction into implosion. No life.

Suppose matter had been more evenly distributed; it would not have formed galaxies. If matter had been clumpier, it would have all condensed into black holes. No life.

What if the strong force were slightly more powerful? Then all protons in the early universe would have paired off and there would have been no hydrogen to fuel long-lived stars. No life.

It is because we are here that we can now look back to see that the universe was made for us. We had to be in a universe that had reached a certain age, a certain stage of evolution after stars had formed, so that life could arise. It is that in our universe the odds for life were just right, as they had to be,or we would not have been here to marvel about it.

Inflation might be an ongoing process throughout the universe, where even now some different regions of the cosmos are budding off, undergoing inflation, and evolving into essentially separate universes, then doing the same again, eternally.

The expansion of the universe is even accelerating; something is pushing everything apart. Yet, it’s not too fast and not too slow. Too much [dark energy] and gravity would have been overwhelmed. This particular fine-tuning seems to be extreme luck.

Our universe may have been one of perhaps infinite universes, each with their own laws of physics…

Now, while string theory is useless in the way that it cannot prove anything, it does have 10**1000 solutions of unique ways to produce a universe, meaning that a multiverse might spawn real universes, in all those possible ways.

Our universe could be just one of a multitude, one that just happened to have the right kind of physics for life.

It seems that the “All” has always gotten bigger and that this is the next step for our realizations—and so our universe may not be all that important in the scheme of all things, it being but a tiny spec in the overall multiverse.

Once we thought that the Earth was the center of all, then the sun, the the galaxy, then the universe, but now…the multiverse! We are so small. So tiny—a spec on a spec on a mote of dust.

Did the multiverse come into being so that our one flower could bloom and blossom for just a moment?

Are all the universes real or does this all happen in “Potential/Possibility form”?

Also, how is it that the many universes can have different physical laws?

Did something have to be? Yes. Why? Otherwise, nonexistence would have [been all around], but it could not. Thus things forming is the natural way.

Could all have been forever? No. Why? Forever could not have already happened. All would be worn out. Most importantly, how could something be without it being made? What would have determined its amount, where it was, why it was, how it was, its nature, and so forth.

What then? The potential and possibility of stuff was around forever, being outside of time, and needing no regress of the even smaller to be made of. It even evolved all possible universes, the only way to get some of them to work. Why? Natural law—the natural extension of “physical” dimension beyond the actual 3-D. Never heard of it? Kind of like the everywhere of superposition in the quantum realm.

[everymansmedium]

Hello:
Why is it that profound thoughts and thinking generate only the sound of thinking. Silence!
John EMM

[austintorn@aol.com]

Hi John,

Someone may respond eventually; it's a brand new thread that's not even a day old…

How's the world where you are?

[dleviwing]

All but the impossible is possible; I suppose!

[Mikal]

Our universe may have been one of perhaps infinite universes, each with their own laws of physics…Austin

I rather believe this is true Austin because there are too many people including myself who have experienced interractions with what we call higher interdimensional beings.
While the Toe was down, I studied the work of a well-known Remote Influencer and he feels those beings are in a parallel universe and that their dimension is pure sound and light vibration. He said that explains why when people experience the bi-location of their consciousness...there is the experience of a soft buzzing vibration deep in the ear and experienced on the skin...and forehead..As I have had these experiences it certainly made sense to me.....


Mikal

[austintorn@aol.com]

I hear what you're saying, Mikal, about the ET beings. I'm not sure if that would mean they are in our universe or just from some overlap from their own universe, but their presence really has to become better known for us to be sure.

So, I'm sure science will be able to detect them eventually if they are really around. For now, it's not clear enough how this phenomena operates, so I'm leaving it open…

[Mikal]

Gerald O'Donnell said that this earth is a very high school of learning for the mind to desire to evolve itself into higher expressions of itself.

Evolution as a word, is an anagram holding the meaning of evolution which is for the mind and thought. (Evolution backwards is no-itu-love) meaning we contain the evolutionary thrust to evolve back to original awareness or God which is intuitive love which is higher universal love. This I knew from my own experience of life.

However, Gerald said that the thrust to evolve back to original awareness is about "unplugging" from humanities' mass consciousness. He stated when a person experiences this evolution, there are higher spiritual beings which come to enable and help the person unplugging. Now this may sound strange to you Austin, but not to me, I completely understand it and feel very secure with the fact that somebody else understands their experience of life in the same sense I also understand my own experience....

Will science discover the beings?? Yes, Derrel Sims is working presently with numerous scientists attempting to understand the outcome of his flourescent testing with these beings. You see, they sweat too and leave their DNA markings behind....it is just a matter of time....



Mikal

[austintorn@aol.com]

Well, Mikal, I was never "plugged", but feel ultimately well, so there must be other roads, too, to these greater states of being.

As for the ETs, this world needs their help, so… here's hoping for that chance before lower consciousness dooms humankind.

ETs: if you are reading this, please help humankind (seriously), for God, Adam/Eve, prophets, Moses, Jesus, Gandhi, and many more all tried but failed miserably…

[Mikal]

You know Austin...the names you list above, I would not say they failed. Evolution to "unplug" from mass consciousness which is mankinds lower consciousness is up to us not to those who came and spoke of higher possibilities. It would be "us" who failed not them.....


Mikal

[austintorn@aol.com]

I'm really half joking because it's not really that God designed human nature but that evolution did…

…Nor did humans "fail", for they are exactly as they are 'made' to be. Can't argue with what works. If we took out something that we thought was "bad", like, dare I say, ego, we'd probably see umpteen unforeseen terrible side effects, even the death of the species. All is interwoven, a seeming Rube Goldberg contraption of primitive stuff, old stuff, new layers, newer layers, etc, but, again, hey, it works.

It's like this is the best of all possible worlds.

Now it we took away worms, would all fail? Yes, for they aerate 400 tons of soil a day.

But what if we took away mosquitoes?

Nah, best not to fiddle with Mother Nature.