IP: Spock was right

[David Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>]

> From: "Grant Manheim" <gmanheim () attglobal net>
> To: <Undisclosed.Recipients () out4 prserv net>
> Subject: Spock was right
> Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 10:55:49 -0700
> X-Priority: 3
>
> October 3 1999
>
> ANSWER TO THE MEANING OF THE UNIVERSE IS: SIX
>
> Jonathan Leake
>
> Science Editor
>
> THE astronomer royal has boldly gone where few astrophysicists have 
> dared to go before. Sir Martin Rees has unveiled a new theory that 
> we live in a Star Trek-style cosmos in which our universe is just 
> one of millions existing in parallel - many of which could harbour 
> other forms of life.
>
> In a new book, which has caused controversy even before publication, 
> he has also suggested that there is no such thing as empty space; 
> that our universe could exist in a bubble destined to be crushed by 
> the implosion of a much larger universe surrounding it; and that 
> future civilisations could find a way of creating miniature black 
> holes, within which entirely new universes could grow. He also hints 
> at universes populated only by insects.
>
> Rees, professor of astronomy at Cambridge University, is 
> internationally renowned, but is generally seen as conservative. His 
> book shows this is a mistake. "I know not everyone will agree with 
> my ideas," he said this weekend, "but a lot of people will talk 
> about them."
>
> Even the title of his book, Just Six Numbers, is provocative. It 
> claims the essence of the universe is determined by six constants - 
> all of which have to be right to allow a universe in which life was 
> possible.
>
> The numbers include the relative strength of the forces binding 
> atoms compared to that of gravity. If gravity had been even a 
> fraction stronger, he argues, our universe would probably have 
> lasted a short time before imploding. If life had evolved in that 
> time, it would have been restricted to the size and shape of 
> insects, the only organisms able to withstand high gravity.
>
> In a profession in which suggestions that the universe may owe its 
> existence to a benign creator are often treated with derision, Rees 
> also notes that the fact that all six numbers
>
> are so "finely tuned" may be the first real evidence collected by 
> astronomers for the existence of God.
>
> He is, however, careful not to go too far down that road, preferring 
> an alternative, but equally controversial, suggestion that there is 
> an infinity of other universes, most of which are sterile. More are 
> being continually created, he suggests.
>
> According to this theory, the huge number of universes created meant 
> that sooner or later one of them would have the "six numbers" at 
> exactly the right values. He calls his new vision of the cosmos the 
> "multiverse".
>
> He argues: "Our big bang may not have been the only one. Separate 
> universes may have cooled down differently, ending up governed by 
> different laws. This is a natural deduction for some (albeit 
> speculative) theories and opens up a new vision of the universe as 
> just one 'atom' among an infinite multiverse."
>
> Dr Victor Clube, an astrophysicist at Oxford University, said Rees's 
> theories were merely a fashionable construct that would not stand 
> the test of time. "There is no evidence for other universes. He is 
> just using the theory as a way to explain our existence without 
> recourse to religion. But, without evidence, believing in other 
> universes is just as unscientific as believing in God."