Is Multiverse proven by Plank data?

In summary, the conversation discusses two articles found on Wikipedia and New Scientist regarding anomalies in the universe that could potentially be caused by other universes. However, there is debate and skepticism surrounding these claims, with some labeling it as wild speculation and others questioning the validity of the sources. The conversation also highlights the importance of reliable sources in discussing scientific findings.
  • #1
Alexis1304
18
0
Hi guys,
On Wikipedia I found this article:

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/planck-univ...-holman-468831

The map showed anomalies that cosmologists believe could only have been caused by the gravitational pull of other universes outside our own.

"These anomalies were caused by other universes pulling on our universe as it formed during the Big Bang," said Laura Mersini-Houghton, of the University of North Carolina.

But on the same page I found this:
https://www.newscientist.com/article...-of-the-cosmos

What do You guys think?
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #2
Alexis1304 said:
What do You guys think?
Wild and irresponsible speculation. If the anomalies even exist, and there is now a challenge to this claim, they certainly do not constitute "the first hard evidence for the existence of other universes that we have seen." If the dark flow is "hard evidence" of the multiverse, then the big bang is "hard evidence" of God with easily the same confidence.
 
  • #3
Thanks,bapowell.I paid attention that the news about it didn't come from solid newspapers.An my second link also deals with Plank data but is of opposite conclusions
 
  • #4
Alexis1304 said:
Thanks,bapowell.I paid attention that the news about it didn't come from solid newspapers.An my second link also deals with Plank data but is of opposite conclusions
This isn't quite a case of the media running overzealous, inaccurate, and sensationalist stories about a scientific finding; it's more a case of actual cosmologists making overzealous, inaccurate, and sensationalist claims about a scientific finding.
 
  • #5
Alexis1304 said:
What do You guys think?
We think that stuff like this is the reason PhysicsForums has its rule about acceptable sources.

We can close this thread; there's not much to add to what bapowell has said.
 
  • Like
Likes Alexis1304

FAQ: Is Multiverse proven by Plank data?

What is the Plank data and how does it relate to the Multiverse theory?

The Plank data is a set of measurements and observations gathered by the European Space Agency's Planck satellite, which studied the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB) - the leftover radiation from the Big Bang. The Multiverse theory suggests that there are multiple universes beyond our own, and the Plank data provides evidence for the existence of these other universes.

How does the Plank data support the Multiverse theory?

The Plank data shows slight irregularities in the CMB that cannot be explained by the standard model of cosmology. These irregularities, also known as "anomalies," suggest that our universe may have collided or interacted with other universes in the past, providing evidence for the Multiverse theory.

Is the Multiverse theory widely accepted by the scientific community?

The Multiverse theory is still a topic of debate among scientists. While the Plank data provides some evidence for its existence, it is not yet widely accepted by the scientific community. Many scientists argue that the anomalies in the CMB could be explained by other factors, and more research is needed to fully support the Multiverse theory.

Can we ever prove the existence of the Multiverse?

It is currently impossible to prove the existence of the Multiverse definitively. Even with the evidence provided by the Plank data, there is still much that we do not know about the other universes, and it may be impossible for us to observe or interact with them in any way.

What implications does the Multiverse theory have for our understanding of the universe?

If the Multiverse theory is proven to be true, it would have significant implications for our understanding of the universe. It would mean that our universe is just one of many, potentially infinite, and that the laws of physics and the conditions of our universe may not be unique. This would require a major shift in our current understanding of the universe and could lead to new discoveries and advancements in the field of cosmology.

Back
Top