Does this even make sense? It's a paradox, but I feel like it's refutable

w8t4u
w8t4u

Does this even make sense? It's a paradox, but I feel like it's refutable.

But how?

All urls found in this thread:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_paradox
likme
likme

@w8t4u
It would just be the only dead end to exist among countless straight unending roads.

Playboyize
Playboyize

@w8t4u
There is no proof that we're in the one that has no parallels.

Skullbone
Skullbone

@likme
But wouldn't that violate the characteristic of it being the only one that exists?

Emberfire
Emberfire

@Skullbone
Why would it? This universe exists within this universe alone and as far as we know every universe can be self sufficient.

Flameblow
Flameblow

Infinity is a Jewish meme.

SniperGod
SniperGod

@w8t4u
Assume there are an infinite number of "possible universes". A solitary universe contradicts this assumption, therefore, assuming that contradictions aren't possible, this universe so described is also not possible. (of course i don't believe in more than one universe anyway, but that doesn't prevent us from having discussions about possibilities.) Is that a good enough refutation for you?

TurtleCat
TurtleCat

@w8t4u
This is pretty simple to refute with a better conception of infinity. It's important to understand that if we assume an infinite number of possible universes, this does not entail that all conceivable universes are a part of that set. Take the set of natural numbers [math]\mathbb{N}[/math]. While [math]\mathbb{N}[/math] contains infinite members, it does not contain a number x where 11 < x < 12 as there is no such natural number. Likewise, it does not contain a number y such that y > 2, even and prime. This should make clear that an infinite set does not mean a set containing every conceivable possibility. In your example, it is clear that an infinite set of possible universes would not contain a universe which is the only existing universe, as this would be contradictory. Yet, despite lacking such a member, the set can still very well be infinite.

Fried_Sushi
Fried_Sushi

@w8t4u
Parallel universes don't break phsyics. They only exist because of different decisions and outcomes that could have been. So, you could have a parallel universe where everyone thinks that there's only one universe, but it wouldn't be true.

Spamalot
Spamalot

@w8t4u
This shit is getting annoying. You can have infinite something and still have constraints. Something something infinite numbers between 1 and 2 and non of them are equal to 3, simple shit like this is easy to understand boyo. Besides, "infinite number of blank" is honestly a nonsensical phrase in he context of real life things and it's something that people should not take seriously. Infinity isn't a value of a number, any infinite number of things is by definition an undefined number of things.

askme
askme

@w8t4u
"parallel universes" are constrained by the laws of physics, even if its their local laws of physics.

There must be a "multiversal" set of laws that prevent it...

But this truly is pop-sci.

BunnyJinx
BunnyJinx

@SniperGod
@TurtleCat

Ahh, I understand now.
Thanks all!

Fuzzy_Logic
Fuzzy_Logic

@w8t4u
Among all the universes, there isn't one where OP is not a faggot. Just because there's an infinite non-repeating amount of something, doesn't mean they contain everything you can imagine.

kizzmybutt
kizzmybutt

@w8t4u
1st point is the parallel universes are only possible, not actual, so the possible universe that is the only one to exist doesn't have to exist.
2nd point is an infinite number of things doesn't have to include any with a specific property. There are an infinite number of numbers between 0 and 1, that doesn't mean there's a number in there bigger than 1.
3rd point is if any number of parallel universes existed they would all have the property that they weren't the only universe. An infinite number of primes exist, that doesn't mean there's one out there that's a factor of all other primes.

Evil_kitten
Evil_kitten

@w8t4u
Infinite universes ≠ infinite possibilities

askme
askme

@Flameblow
Infinity is a classical greek and Indian meme

Flameblow
Flameblow

@w8t4u
Paralel implies something is next to it. A paralel universe then by definition cannot exist alone.

DeathDog
DeathDog

@w8t4u
Chane the world universe to multiverse to transcend to your next hyperverse

TechHater
TechHater

@w8t4u
If
Well that premise fell apart fast.

eGremlin
eGremlin

@Emberfire
That means there is an infinite collection of universes that aren't.

AwesomeTucker
AwesomeTucker

@w8t4u
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_paradox

MPmaster
MPmaster

@w8t4u
universes aren't supposed to interact with each other, so every one is the only one.

RavySnake
RavySnake

@MPmaster
Well, we should still keep trying to see if their is a way for parrell universes to interact, if they do exist.

StonedTime
StonedTime

@RavySnake
keep trying
Who is trying? This isn't a real area of research. There isn't a single empirical aspect of the whole subject, and nobody has come up with a way to represent it mathematically, so really the question isn't even scientific.

Stark_Naked
Stark_Naked

@MPmaster
That does not follow, friend.

takes2long
takes2long

@w8t4u
Parallel universes only differ in their internal properties. This isn't a paradox, it's just what some idiot says after hitting the bong.

JunkTop
JunkTop

@w8t4u
An infinite number of things does not necessitate that every possible thing is contained within the set of things. For instance you can have an infinite set of numbers greater than 1. This set, while containing an infinite number of things, never contains the number 1.

An infinite set of universes may need meet certain criteria to actually qualify as universes. These criteria may allow for an infinite number of possibilities, but it does not necessitate that every possibility exists within them. Some possibilties may simply be impossible within the confines of what constitutes a universe. There could be occurrences so incomprehensible improbable that they could simply never occur.

Having infinite of something doesn't mean you have every possible thing.

Gigastrength
Gigastrength

@w8t4u
There are infinitely many possible conditions for a universe to exist in, therefore if you have infinite universes you can still not have a single universe in which in any given condition exists

Emberfire
Emberfire

@JunkTop
For instance you can have an infinite set of numbers greater than 1. This set, while containing an infinite number of things, never contains the number 1.

More specifically relevant to OPs post, you can have an infinite set of numbers greater than 1 that does not contain 2

CodeBuns
CodeBuns

@Playboyize
If it’s a different universe then that means this doesn’t exist brainlet

GoogleCat
GoogleCat

@likme
infinity is smooth, so there are no "dead end."

Nojokur
Nojokur

@eGremlin
And an infinite amount that are

Spazyfool
Spazyfool

The solution to this paradox is to stop reading the fucking pop science that made you believe that parallel universes = everything will happen even things that don't make sense.

Also stop believing that parallel universes imply everything possible happens in them.
It could be the case, but it is not necessarily the case. They could very well be limited in numbers, with entirely different physics and nothing viable in them.

Lord_Tryzalot
Lord_Tryzalot

if there's infinite primes eventually one of them will be composite

Your post makes a claim similar to this one here OP

likme
likme

@w8t4u
But how?
Easy. the conclusion (that only one universe exists) contradicts the supposition (that infinite parallel universes exist), which must mean the conclusion is false.

Emberfire
Emberfire

@w8t4u
How the hell does he come to such a conclusion? Obviously if he could provide a correct logical deduction of the conclusion from the premise that an infinite number of universe exist, he would refute every theory claiming that such is the case and no one would continue working on them. But he doesn't do that. This just sounds like popsci-tier nonsense and pseudophilosophy

StrangeWizard
StrangeWizard

@w8t4u
An infinite amount of parallel universes implies an infinite amount of possible universes, not an infinite amount of every conceivable universe.

Playboyize
Playboyize

if there are an infinite number of universes, then [some wacky bullshit claim that doesn't follow from the existence of multiple universes]

if there are an infinite number of universes, there is a universe where only even numbers are prime

if there are an infinite number of universes, there is a universe where i am happy

Deadlyinx
Deadlyinx

@w8t4u
The amount of other universes isn't a quality of a single universe. The only way this could be true is if the definition of universe changes in the given universe.

Snarelure
Snarelure

@w8t4u
This thread is fucking popsci

Harmless_Venom
Harmless_Venom

@w8t4u
If I have an infinite number of friends, do I have a friend with no friends?

Obviously not.

MPmaster
MPmaster

six sided die
roll forever
eventually roll a seven
???

w8t4u
w8t4u

just because there's an infinite number of universes doesn't imply that every single possibility will be realized

Skullbone
Skullbone

@w8t4u
Infinity must include all conceivable things

WebTool
WebTool

In the metaverse, there exist every possible universe
therefore there exists a universe that's the only member of the metaverse
Does not follow.

Deadlyinx
Deadlyinx

@w8t4u
No, it doesn't make sense, because "that is the only one" is a multiverse-level quality that wouldn't apply "within" the universe. It doesn't know what's out there.

Disable AdBlock to view this page

Disable AdBlock to view this page