Multiverse (split from Discussable Topics)

[beecee]

28 minutes ago, MigL said:

I find it interesting that on a science site, we are allowed to discuss alternate/parallel universes which are not in causal contact, and as such unfalsifiable. Or whether reality is a simulation ( the N DG Tyson thread that was recently closed ) which is also unfalsifiable.
Yet if someone mentions the concept of a God, everyone loses their mind.

I'm not religious, but I'm not that insecure or thin-skinned about my science either.

I'm neither thin skinned or religious despite being an ex Catholic Altar Boy! 

But while parallel universes and simulations etc may be unfalsifiable at this time, they are still scientific speculations...and as far as my knowledge goes, falls into the same category as Hawking Radiation. It has been speculated that various anomalies in spacetime, are evidence for other universes.https://www.space.com/32728-parallel-universes.html

 

Whereas any concept of god or other divine deity, falls under the banner of the supernatural and/or paranormal which is unscientific.

But hey, my thinking on the matter could be wrong, so I'm open for correction/s.

And of course as is the case mostly observed, when these types come here, they invariably hop on their soap boxes and start conducting anti science crusades. And afterall, it is a science forum and the scientific methodology must prevail. 

Edited June 22, 2019 by beecee

[Sensei]

Just now, beecee said:

But while parallel universes and simulations etc may be unfalsifiable at this time, they are still scientific speculations...

..tell me how to falsify, and will fix the code..

 

[beecee]

2 minutes ago, Sensei said:

..tell me how to falsify, and will fix the code..

 

https://www.space.com/18811-multiple-universes-5-theories.html

5 Reasons We May Live in a Multiverse:

 

The thing is, multiverses and such are put as speculation and accepted as speculation at this time. When the question of some deity is raised, it is raised and fanatically in most cases argued for as a 100% certainty.