Gambling on the existence of other universes
Arturo Sangalli

TL;DR
This paper critically examines the scientific claims supporting the multiverse theory, highlighting questionable probability arguments involving infinity and questioning its credibility compared to philosophical counterarguments.
Contribution
It challenges the scientific basis of the multiverse hypothesis by analyzing the probability arguments used and contrasting them with philosophical considerations.
Findings
Questions the validity of probability arguments involving infinity in multiverse claims
Highlights the reliance on questionable assumptions in scientific multiverse arguments
Suggests philosophical considerations may be more credible than some scientific claims
Abstract
Speculations and theories about the existence of other worlds have a long history. In recent times, the arguments have shifted away from their typical philosophical and theological character to supposedly become more objective thanks to their scientific underpinnings. A prime example of this is the current parallel universes or multiverse theory, which has the support of a number of famous cosmologists. In this article, we contend that the claim for the existence of those parallel universes, as presented in Max Tegmark's book "Our Mathematical Universe", rests crucially on some questionable probability arguments involving infinity. As a result, a doubt is cast over the multiverse hypothesis: Is it more credible than the counterarguments based on philosophical and metaphysical considerations?
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsTheology and Philosophy of Evil
