Is Time consistant across the Multiverse?


Off-Topic Discussions


For the sake of this question, let's assume that the Multiverse theory is true, that there are infinite number of possibilities, and that there are many different versions of "you".
But is "time" consistent across all these different universes? Is it 2014 "everywhere"?
And if time is NOT consistent, then would it be theoretically easier to visit "an age of dinosaurs" in another universe instead of traveling back through time in our own? And if we were to do that, what are the ramifications of purposely creating another universe by simply traveling to an alternate one?


Well, it is the primary idea behind the Infinite Worlds setting of GURPS - there exist infinite numbers of worlds with some being ahead of others while others having time passing slower in comparison to main timelines and acting as a sort of echoes to the main timelines.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber

Ignoring any science fiction concepts of the idea for the moment, the short answer is that time is consistent across a multiverse.

The reason would be a divergence is created at the point of any decision to allow all options to exist and continue forward to develop.

I am basing this on Hugh Everett's Many-worlds Interpretation (which was originally called the relative state formulation), which is usually where most pop-culture ideas of the concept originated.

Mind you, this theory - which was developed as part of quantum physics - has nothing to do with time travel. That's a misconception that comes about - I think - because of the habit of mixing quantum mechanics and relativity (which does have elements of time travel) together.


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber

No, time is not consistent across the universe.

Basic Relativity Theory states that as one approaches the speed of light, time slows and if one could attain the speed of light (considered impossible to achieve under the current theory), time would stand still.

There are some galaxies moving away from us that are so red shifted that astronomers state that these galaxies are moving away at a percentage of light speed. The fastest galaxy currently know has a Z value of 8.6, meaning that for us, it is roughly 13.8 billion years after the Big Bang (Time Zero) but that galaxy is only 600 million years after the Big Bang as we see it now.

Meaning, relative to to each other objects in the inflationary universe, each galaxy will have a different Z value which means time related to 'time zero' will be different throughout the universe and hence, the multiverse.

A theory is that black holes are points where universes touch and another companion theory to that is black holes are the birth points of other universes on the other side of the singularity.

Current theory on time travel is that is possible but the conditions and energy to achieve is impossible with out current technology. Likewise, traveling from one verse to another may be possible but no one has come up with a plausible theory of how it would be possible but in the context of your question, I would think that travelling from one universe to another would require as much energy if not more than it would require to time travel within the local universe.

All theoretical stuff and all but fun to ponder.

All of the above is real world considerations.

Now, getting to Golarion, current year is 4714 AR. We know from Rasputin Must Die that current Earth year is 1914. Hence time is different relative to Earth and Golarion. Magic allows travel between dimensions and planes making it more likely than real world theory but I would expect that time will differ between dimensions and universes and time will differ within universes.


Backfromthedeadguy wrote:

For the sake of this question, let's assume that the Multiverse theory is true, that there are infinite number of possibilities, and that there are many different versions of "you".

But is "time" consistent across all these different universes?

Time is not consistent across any single universe, therefore there is no reason to believe it's consistent across multiverses. That's basically special and general relativity in a nutshell.

That said, there's no reason that another planet somewhere might not be in the age of the dinosaurs, or for that matter, the age of the trilobites. Or the age of the xyzzys, which we never saw on Earth but are the dominant life form on the planet Xyzzy.


Orfamay Quest wrote:
Xyzzy
Zork wrote:
A hollow voice says "Fool."


I'm not certain time is consistent in our universe.


Orfamay Quest wrote:
Time is not consistent across any single universe, therefore there is no reason to believe it's consistent across multiverses. That's basically special and general relativity in a nutshell.

Subjective time is relative. that doesn't mean that the universe (or the multiverses) doesn't have a fixed, consistent time.

Orfamay Quest wrote:
That said, there's no reason that another planet somewhere might not be in the age of the dinosaurs, or for that matter, the age of the trilobites. Or the age of the xyzzys, which we never saw on Earth but are the dominant life form on the planet Xyzzy.

And this is just different speeds or paths of evolution and has nothing to do with different time frames or flows.


I would say it would depend on how far afield in the Multiverse you are looking, but for the most part time would be consistent. I would think Universal rules such as the rate time moves forward at would set themselves in stone right around the Big Bang.

If you started looking for universes with an Earth still covered in the similar dinosaurs as from our fossil records, you would need to go back 1 billion years at most to look at divergent Earth's where life simply developed at a different rate with the end result being that genetically identical dinosaurs are currently on this parallel Earth.

If you were looking for universes where an Earth that would otherwise end up identical to ours was simply 65-110 million years behind us chronologically, then you would need to start looking at divergent universes from pretty much the Big Bang.

The chances of finding either Earth are probably the same as finding or making a device to travel between divergent timelines, so plot.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
Black Moria wrote:

No, time is not consistent across the universe.

The question is how would time behave across a multi-verse of dimensions - not across a singular universe and traveling in it. To use Schrodinger's Cat paradox (yes - that chestnut) as an analog - the two versions of the cat (alive and dead) both exist in their separate universes and continue to be alive and dead. There's nothing in the Multi-verse theory (as it applies to this paradox) that implies at the point of seeing that cat that you will see it alive, dead, as a kitten, and a dinosaur cat simultaneously.

What you are mentioning is relativity - especially as applied on a macro scale of universal behavior. If there are different dimensions of universe, there's no reason that relativity (and time travel) wouldn't apply equally there as well.

But my point is the multi-verse concept as developed and used is a theory based in quantum mechanics, not relativity. That the two share some mutual applications is beside the point.


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
Cpt. Caboodle wrote:
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Time is not consistent across any single universe, therefore there is no reason to believe it's consistent across multiverses. That's basically special and general relativity in a nutshell.

Subjective time is relative. that doesn't mean that the universe (or the multiverses) doesn't have a fixed, consistent time.

Orfamay Quest wrote:
That said, there's no reason that another planet somewhere might not be in the age of the dinosaurs, or for that matter, the age of the trilobites. Or the age of the xyzzys, which we never saw on Earth but are the dominant life form on the planet Xyzzy.
And this is just different speeds or paths of evolution and has nothing to do with different time frames or flows.

Time is not subjective. In real life, the universe was synced up at the big bang (called time zero when discussing time). The universe is inflationary and galaxies have been moving since time zero at different speeds relative to each other. Therefore time in Galaxy 'A' will differ to time in Galaxy 'B' and so forth. The universe has desynced time relative to objects within it since the big bang and will continue to do so.


Black Moria wrote:
Now, getting to Golarion, current year is 4714 AR. We know from Rasputin Must Die that current Earth year is 1914. Hence time is different relative to Earth and Golarion.

How does the year count in any way prove that time flows differently between Golarion and Earth? Was Jesus born on Golarion 4714 years ago?


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
Alex Martin wrote:
Black Moria wrote:

No, time is not consistent across the universe.

The question is how would time behave across a multi-verse of dimensions - not across a singular universe and traveling in it. To use Schrodinger's Cat paradox (yes - that chestnut) as an analog - the two versions of the cat (alive and dead) both exist in their separate universes and continue to be alive and dead. There's nothing in the Multi-verse theory (as it applies to this paradox) that implies at the point of seeing that cat that you will see it alive, dead, as a kitten, and a dinosaur cat simultaneously.

What you are mentioning is relativity - especially as applied on a macro scale of universal behavior. If there are different dimensions of universe, there's no reason that relativity (and time travel) wouldn't apply equally there as well.

But my point is the multi-verse concept as developed and used is a theory based in quantum mechanics, not relativity. That the two share some mutual applications is beside the point.

Your argument assumes that two things - that the multiverse creation is simultaneous so all verses have a time zero relative to each other and that the laws of physics, time, gravity, etc are consistent between verses.

Theory on multiverses right now don't assume either condition right now. Some theories on the multiverse postulate that universes are being created all the time. Other theories state that the 'laws of nature' are different between universes and have to be, as the differential between this universe and others.


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
Cpt. Caboodle wrote:
Black Moria wrote:
Now, getting to Golarion, current year is 4714 AR. We know from Rasputin Must Die that current Earth year is 1914. Hence time is different relative to Earth and Golarion.
How does the year count in any way prove that time flows differently between Golarion and Earth? Was Jesus born on Golarion 4714 years ago?

Time flows the same in our universe.

However, our universe is inflationary. Galaxies are moving at tremendous speed within it. Since moving very fast cause time to slow, all galaxies are at different times relative to their Z value and to each other.

The IIS orbits the earth roughly every 90 minutes. Clocks capable of measuring time in thousands of a second on the ISS move slower than clocks on earth. Meaning, due to the speed of the ISS, time on Earth and on the ISS differ. Stay on the ISS long enough and you would lose seconds, then minutes and then hours assuming the ISS could orbit forever and you lived long enough (thousands of years).

The speed of the ISS is nothing to the speed galaxies are moving. Time will differ as a consequence.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cpt. Caboodle wrote:
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Time is not consistent across any single universe, therefore there is no reason to believe it's consistent across multiverses. That's basically special and general relativity in a nutshell.
Subjective time is relative. that doesn't mean that the universe (or the multiverses) doesn't have a fixed, consistent time.

Actually, it does.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
Black Moria wrote:


Theory on multiverses right now don't assume either condition right now. Some theories on the multiverse postulate that universes are being created all the time. Other theories state that the 'laws of nature' are different between universes and have to be, as the differential between this universe and others.

My assumption - as based on Everett - is that divergence is created for any decision from the observer's perspective - which I will agree may imply single start time each effect and conclusion. Multi-dimensional is a theory to allow for all observable effects without paradox, especially as it applies to particle behavior. That it is spun-off into macro level cosmology and time is something different.

The concept of naturalistic changes across different dimension on a macro scale would be something I need more details on. Can you cite a source or sources, please?


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
Alex Martin wrote:
Black Moria wrote:


Theory on multiverses right now don't assume either condition right now. Some theories on the multiverse postulate that universes are being created all the time. Other theories state that the 'laws of nature' are different between universes and have to be, as the differential between this universe and others.

My assumption - as based on Everett - is that divergence is created for any decision from the observer's perspective - which I will agree may imply single start time each effect and conclusion. Multi-dimensional is a theory to allow for all observable effects without paradox, especially as it applies to particle behavior. That it is spun-off into macro level cosmology and time is something different.

The concept of naturalistic changes across different dimension on a macro scale would be something I need more details on. Can you cite a source or sources, please?

From Wikipedia:

Level II: Universes with different physical constants

"Bubble universes": every disk is a bubble universe (Universe 1 to Universe 6 are different bubbles; they have physical constants that are different from our universe); our universe is just one of the bubbles.

In the chaotic inflation theory, a variant of the cosmic inflation theory, the multiverse as a whole is stretching and will continue doing so forever, but some regions of space stop stretching and form distinct bubbles, like gas pockets in a loaf of rising bread. Such bubbles are embryonic level I multiverses. Linde and Vanchurin calculated the number of these universes to be on the scale of 101010,000,000.

Different bubbles may experience different spontaneous symmetry breaking resulting in different properties such as different physical constants.
(Source: Parallel universes. Not just a staple of science fiction, other universes are a direct implication of cosmological observations.", Tegmark M., Sci Am. 2003 May;288(5):40–51.)

This level also includes John Archibald Wheeler's oscillatory universe theory and Lee Smolin's fecund universes theory.


Black Moria wrote:
Cpt. Caboodle wrote:
Black Moria wrote:
Now, getting to Golarion, current year is 4714 AR. We know from Rasputin Must Die that current Earth year is 1914. Hence time is different relative to Earth and Golarion.
How does the year count in any way prove that time flows differently between Golarion and Earth? Was Jesus born on Golarion 4714 years ago?

Time flows the same in our universe.

However, our universe is inflationary. Galaxies are moving at tremendous speed within it. Since moving very fast cause time to slow, all galaxies are at different times relative to their Z value and to each other.

The IIS orbits the earth roughly every 90 minutes. Clocks capable of measuring time in thousands of a second on the ISS move slower than clocks on earth. Meaning, due to the speed of the ISS, time on Earth and on the ISS differ. Stay on the ISS long enough and you would lose seconds, then minutes and then hours assuming the ISS could orbit forever and you lived long enough (thousands of years).

The speed of the ISS is nothing to the speed galaxies are moving. Time will differ as a consequence.

And how is that connected to an arbitrary numbering of the years?


The simplest explanation I have heard is gravity effects time like a bowling ball on a trampoline. The larger the gravity the object possess the slower the object moves through time.

So time where there is zero gravity time would be faster and therefore not constant through the universe.

In an infinite multiverse there would be infinite possibilities.


Cpt. Caboodle wrote:
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Time is not consistent across any single universe, therefore there is no reason to believe it's consistent across multiverses. That's basically special and general relativity in a nutshell.

Subjective time is relative. that doesn't mean that the universe (or the multiverses) doesn't have a fixed, consistent time.

Please continue, I am not seeing how yru assertion could be true.


Alexandros Satorum wrote:
Cpt. Caboodle wrote:
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Time is not consistent across any single universe, therefore there is no reason to believe it's consistent across multiverses. That's basically special and general relativity in a nutshell.

Subjective time is relative. that doesn't mean that the universe (or the multiverses) doesn't have a fixed, consistent time.

Please continue, I am not seeing how yru assertion could be true.

Errr... no.

The more I think about it, and the more entries this thread has, the clearer I see that my statement was wrong.
I read something different into the first statement and replied a little too hastily. (If it's any excuse, I'm not a native english speaker.)

But I still think the argument with the different dates on Golarion and Earth is ridiculous...


Cpt. Caboodle wrote:


But I still think the argument with the different dates on Golarion and Earth is ridiculous...

It is. Time on Earth is consistent to within a few zillionths of a percent (yes, time technically passes differently in Kenya than Finland due to rotational speed), but the current year is 2014 CE, Jewish year 5774, 2767 AUC, and AH 1425 in the Islamic calendar.

Different start dates, celebrating different events. The AUC calendar dates from the founding of Rome. I don't imagine that Marc Antony knew he was born in 83 BCE, do you?


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
Cpt. Caboodle wrote:


But I still think the argument with the different dates on Golarion and Earth is ridiculous...

My bad. It wasn't trying to make it part of my argument - it was a throwaway statement to this in the OP "But is "time" consistent across all these different universes? Is it 2014 "everywhere"? "

Obvious, it isn't 2014 everywhere as you and others have alluded to. I was making a point of Earth and Golarion dates being different and framed my response poorly. It is a complete non sequitur to the discussion about time and I apologize for the poor wording and context to lead people to think otherwise.

The date is an number of relevance only to that specific culture and as Orfamay Quest pointed out, even on real life earth, there is multiple calendars so the date will vary on the culture and the acceptance of that calendar.


Starfinder Superscriber

I have to go with the not consistent across the multiverse, as it wouldn't be a big leap to imagine a universe with a heavier gravity constant where time would move slower, so while say a few billion years have passed here, maybe a few trillion have passed there.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cpt. Caboodle wrote:

Errr... no.

The more I think about it, and the more entries this thread has, the clearer I see that my statement was wrong.
.

No, dude, no. You can not just admit you were wrong, it seems tha tnobody understand the internet in these days.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Backfromthedeadguy wrote:

For the sake of this question, let's assume that the Multiverse theory is true, that there are infinite number of possibilities, and that there are many different versions of "you".

But is "time" consistent across all these different universes? Is it 2014 "everywhere"?

If you're talking about real world physics, the answer is no. As you look deeper into the universe, you're looking further in the past. Look at the Moon, that's 1.5 seconds ago. Look at the Sun, that's 8 minutes in the past. Our nearest star, 4.3 years, the center of our galaxy, 55,000 years in the past. Andromeda? before Man's ancestors left the trees, Information on their present, hasn't had time to reach us, and when it does it will be in our future. Information coming to us is limited by the speed of light. Space and Time are thus irretrievably locked together. Far enough away, space is receding faster than the speed of light, and it's information will never get to us... it's a universal event horizon. Eventually in the far far future, our universe will consist only of the aged, dimming, merged galaxy the Andromeda and Milky Way have become. Time isn't even consistent in the Universe, let alone the Multiverse which is defined outside of our conventional dimensions of space and time. After all the Multiverse could contain universes with multiple time dimensions as opposed to the single one we observe.

As far as other universes, we can't say anything scientific about them, as we don't have, and never will have, knowledge on how their physical laws work.

If you're talking about game world time, the answer is yes, unless the GM says otherwise.

The Exchange

Depends. Time is a consequence of change in possibility. The moment of change in possibility is the singularity. At superposition time is consistent where all time is the same time. Down here where jfk was never assassinated, it is likely different to the part of the universe where jfk was assassinated.


I think that the OP's question is better phrased as:

"Is the passage of time constant across the multiverse?"

First, whether or not the passage of time is constant may have little bearing on the state of biological development in any single universe so there may very well be dinosaurs existing in one universe and not in others.

Second, if we follow Everett;s multiverse idea, then we must posit a single creation event and a branching from that event, in which case the "time" in each universe would be the same as the physics would be the same.

Third, and most importantly, what exactly is "time"? Julian Barbour has a few things to say of interest about this topic.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Pink Dragon wrote:


Second, if we follow Everett;s multiverse idea, then we must posit a single creation event and a branching from that event, in which case the "time" in each universe would be the same as the physics would be the same.

Third, and most importantly, what exactly is "time"? Julian Barbour has a few things to say of interest about this topic.

2:Everett's model does not require a singular creation event, any more than than the cosmological model requires an actual center to creation. the source branching is infinite in both directions. As those "choices" include different Big Bangs that generate entirely different universes from our own. all of them floating in the bubble field that we call the "multiverse".

3:Mathematically speaking, Time is one of the 4 or 11 dimensional elements in which we describe point or collection of points in spacetime. Time and Space are not considered separate elements. If we were to describe you in spacetime it would be as a worm like graph spannig a collection of spacetime coordinates from your birth to your death, any particular moment is a 3 dimensional slice of that 4d worm structure.

The Exchange

LazarX wrote:
Pink Dragon wrote:


Second, if we follow Everett;s multiverse idea, then we must posit a single creation event and a branching from that event, in which case the "time" in each universe would be the same as the physics would be the same.

Third, and most importantly, what exactly is "time"? Julian Barbour has a few things to say of interest about this topic.

2:Everett's model does not require a singular creation event, any more than than the cosmological model requires an actual center to creation. the source branching is infinite in both directions. As those "choices" include different Big Bangs that generate entirely different universes from our own. all of them floating in the bubble field that we call the "multiverse".

3:Mathematically speaking, Time is one of the 4 or 11 dimensional elements in which we describe point or collection of points in spacetime. Time and Space are not considered separate elements. If we were to describe you in spacetime it would be as a worm like graph spannig a collection of spacetime coordinates from your birth to your death, any particular moment is a 3 dimensional slice of that 4d worm structure.

Not wormlike if you divide down all the possibility branches, but if those branches are tied off with string entanglements then the past and future are tied off with strings otherwise peeing in the pool means you pee in the pool from superposition. So you create a past and future where the pool is peed in.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
yellowdingo wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Pink Dragon wrote:


Second, if we follow Everett;s multiverse idea, then we must posit a single creation event and a branching from that event, in which case the "time" in each universe would be the same as the physics would be the same.

Third, and most importantly, what exactly is "time"? Julian Barbour has a few things to say of interest about this topic.

2:Everett's model does not require a singular creation event, any more than than the cosmological model requires an actual center to creation. the source branching is infinite in both directions. As those "choices" include different Big Bangs that generate entirely different universes from our own. all of them floating in the bubble field that we call the "multiverse".

3:Mathematically speaking, Time is one of the 4 or 11 dimensional elements in which we describe point or collection of points in spacetime. Time and Space are not considered separate elements. If we were to describe you in spacetime it would be as a worm like graph spannig a collection of spacetime coordinates from your birth to your death, any particular moment is a 3 dimensional slice of that 4d worm structure.

Not wormlike if you divide down all the possibility branches, but if those branches are tied off with string entanglements then the past and future are tied off with strings otherwise peeing in the pool means you pee in the pool from superposition. So you create a past and future where the pool is peed in.

I have a major issue with the Everett's model because it's inherently inelegant, A universe created with every niggling decision? I've been working on a thought model which pretty much takes Everett's from the reverse. and ties the multiverse concept into one universe formed from a convergence of subjective histories. I call it the "Kinetic Sculpture Model" because it was inspired by two pieces of kinetic sculpture that were on the display in the New York Port Authority.

The Exchange

LazarX wrote:
yellowdingo wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Pink Dragon wrote:


Second, if we follow Everett;s multiverse idea, then we must posit a single creation event and a branching from that event, in which case the "time" in each universe would be the same as the physics would be the same.

Third, and most importantly, what exactly is "time"? Julian Barbour has a few things to say of interest about this topic.

2:Everett's model does not require a singular creation event, any more than than the cosmological model requires an actual center to creation. the source branching is infinite in both directions. As those "choices" include different Big Bangs that generate entirely different universes from our own. all of them floating in the bubble field that we call the "multiverse".

3:Mathematically speaking, Time is one of the 4 or 11 dimensional elements in which we describe point or collection of points in spacetime. Time and Space are not considered separate elements. If we were to describe you in spacetime it would be as a worm like graph spannig a collection of spacetime coordinates from your birth to your death, any particular moment is a 3 dimensional slice of that 4d worm structure.

Not wormlike if you divide down all the possibility branches, but if those branches are tied off with string entanglements then the past and future are tied off with strings otherwise peeing in the pool means you pee in the pool from superposition. So you create a past and future where the pool is peed in.
I have a major issue with the Everett's model because it's inherently inelegant, A universe created with every niggling decision? I've been working on a thought model which pretty much takes Everett's from the reverse. and ties the multiverse concept into one universe formed from a convergence of subjective histories. I call it the "Kinetic Sculpture Model" because it was inspired by two pieces of kinetic sculpture that were on the display in the New York Port Authority.

I'm working on the idea that all the possibilities pre existing, we are tossing cargo overboard to lighten the load.


Rephrasing the question: Are all multiverses the same AGE. I'm not sure if there is a real difference but consider that universe A is simply a billion years older than universe B. BUT it's still a reflection of our own, just a billion years off. This was the basic gist of my original question in regards to "going sideways" into a parallel universe that simply started before or after ours but still followed the same basic course. But considering that a universe that was a billion years ahead or behind would still result in a ME that was confronted with the same basic life choices, does that lend weight to the concept of "predestiny"? I guess a lot of this depends on whether the big bang is the birth of only our universe or the multiverse in general.


Alexandros Satorum wrote:
Cpt. Caboodle wrote:

Errr... no.

The more I think about it, and the more entries this thread has, the clearer I see that my statement was wrong.
.
No, dude, no. You can not just admit you were wrong, it seems tha tnobody understand the internet in these days.

I'm sorry, I'm still learning this internet thing. I'll try to be more incompliant the next time...


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
Backfromthedeadguy wrote:
Rephrasing the question: Are all multiverses the same AGE. I'm not sure if there is a real difference but consider that universe A is simply a billion years older than universe B. BUT it's still a reflection of our own, just a billion years off. This was the basic gist of my original question in regards to "going sideways" into a parallel universe that simply started before or after ours but still followed the same basic course. But considering that a universe that was a billion years ahead or behind would still result in a ME that was confronted with the same basic life choices, does that lend weight to the concept of "predestiny"? I guess a lot of this depends on whether the big bang is the birth of only our universe or the multiverse in general.

There are theories to both for your last sentence. The weight of opinion is leaning to the big bang birthing our universe only and that universes are in a constant state of being birthed as the multiverse 'ages'.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Backfromthedeadguy wrote:
Rephrasing the question: Are all multiverses the same AGE. I'm not sure if there is a real difference but consider that universe A is simply a billion years older than universe B. BUT it's still a reflection of our own, just a billion years off. This was the basic gist of my original question in regards to "going sideways" into a parallel universe that simply started before or after ours but still followed the same basic course. But considering that a universe that was a billion years ahead or behind would still result in a ME that was confronted with the same basic life choices, does that lend weight to the concept of "predestiny"? I guess a lot of this depends on whether the big bang is the birth of only our universe or the multiverse in general.

Define Age. As a measure of time? the Multiverse is beyond Time as we graph it, being outside of our localised set of eleven dimensions, which include the dimension of Time. You're going to find that you're rapidly getting into something that can only be expressed in mathematics. How do you define age in a universe with multiple time dimensions?

Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / Is Time consistant across the Multiverse? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Off-Topic Discussions