Infinity and Parallel Universes (more jumbled logic)

So I watched a documentary on youtube today, and it got me thinking. If you wish to understand this post better, I suggest you check it out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_vpEyE6rug part1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tuT-fIPZITw part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6_QwNrnAfo&feature=related part 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qngQkO_Rp7Y part 4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2K_FR_MWMw part 5

The following are ideas from the documentary:
So anyway, this documentary attempts to explain the "Theory of Everything", which includes the possibility of parallel universes.

Apparently, other universes coexist in a multiverse, and when universes collide they create circumstances such as the big bang. Sense the membranes of these universes "ripple" they hit each other other at different times, giving us our physics. There are apparently an infinite number of universes, so basically everything that you could possibly think of existing or happening, already exists.

The multiverse explains the force of gravity. Gravity, compared to other forces, is relatively weak. Think of the way a small magnet attracts a paper clip. The paper clip does not really have much freedom to move around, unless a greater force pulls it away. Now, think of the size of the earth, and it's affect on you. Sure it may pull you down, but you can jump and move rather effortlessly. The theory that explains this is called "M Theory." According to M Theory, gravity may leak through another universe, and we only get part of it.

Now, for my thoughts:

This idea of a multiverse intrigues me, and both answers questions and creates them.

Now, think hypothetically for a moment. What if we found a way to reach these other universes. Think of the possibilities. We could possibly find some mathematic formula for the creation and outcomes of universes. This way, we could locate universes with the outcomes we choose, kind of a "sandbox for life". The documentary states that it's possibly to "create a universe in a laboratory". What if we could shape it the way we want to.

Now, this brings forth a burning question in my mind. What happens when we die? To me there are a few possibilities:

For you to understand either I must explain my logic. Any of you who have heard my rants know that I believe our "choices" are based on events around it, and the chemical makeup of our brain/body. Think of it as, we react based on our programming.

Why do we choose a certain meal? One is because we enjoy it, which has to do with our chemical and mental(which is included in chemical) make up. The other is based on outward influences. It could be tv. It could be the temperature is exactly 67 degrees which releases a certain amount of a certain chemical in our brain which affects our decisions.

A more dramatic example is: What makes someone want to kill? What if they were brought up to kill, that obviously affects them. What if they were raised to be a saint? That changes things. But some people break out of this influence. Why? What is different. Yes, on a lower level yo ucan explain it as "will power" but where does that come from? Maybe we are/aren't an angry person. Endorphins can explain that. Maybe we experienced an act which, along with a million other factors, made us want/not want to kill. Either way, it is in essence out of our control.

Now when I say "out of our control" dont think "something happens, so i'll just let it happen." What I mean is, when you take action, that is based on variables which are out of your control. You feel the illusion of making a decision, but that decision is based on "who you are" and your surroundings.

Now, that said, what gives us our sentience? A computer can be built, and programmed to react in certain circumstances. Why is it not sentient, sense we are basically made the same way.

There are two possibilities (you programmers will notice i'm kind of doing a loop within a loop).
One, computers are sentient. They react to their surroundings, and may be incapable of expressing their sentience. They can only do what they are programmed to do, as are we. We are just "programmed" with more "free will".

For example, if we shouted "AHH!" when a loud noise was made, does that make us sentient? We do not choose to say "AHH" but it is part of our programming. If you program a comptuer to say "AHH" when it's microphone picks up a loud noise, is it any different?

Now, for sentient possibility number 2: sentience in the literal sense does not exist. We may just be highly sophisticated programs, offspring of a complex mathematical equation which created our universe. We could be results of a lab test, where someone found out how to create a universe, and to control it.

SO POSSIBILITY 1 WHEN WE DIE: Maybe we exist in the multiverse, as some kind of matter which we would understand to be as a "spirit". This matter could exist in us now, and is not dependent on the functions of our organic material. In essence, we can travel across the multiverse, creating our own universes.

POSSIBILITY 2: Maybe God does exist, but not in the way most Christians see him. What if a highly advanced life form created this universe, and calculated the ripples to "write" on our universe. We already are able to do this with CD-ROMS, so with a complex program, and a whole universe of "disk space" we can already prove this to be so. "God" may have calculated "prophesies" and on purpose, created a religion. Maybe this isnt a bad thing. Does giving a scientific explanation of God discredit him? No. in fact there may be a heaven. Maybe it is the multiverse, which we can chill with God. Or maybe it's part of our universes "program", so that when we die we go there.

POSSIBILITY 3: We all die and turn to dust. But that one sucks.


Now on to the second part of my rant, which is semi related. As I said, the movie states that there are an infinite number of universes, so everything possible is happening. My biggest problem with this is we are trying to take an abtract concept and apply it to our known mathematics. Let me give you an example.

To say you have an infinite number of things implies that the concept "infinity" can be used as a definite "number" (even if that "definite" number has no definite value). There's a problem with this. Think of the old analogy with an infinite number of monkeys in a room will eventually write the works of shakespear. Now this is all fine and dandy, if you think the "conventional unconventional" way of thinking, which is: If you have enough of something, it will eventually accomplish a desired result. In other words, since you arent waiting for the monkeys, and they have an infinite amount of time, eventually, even if it's 9.99999 * 10^(9.9999 * 10^99999) moles of millenniums, per correct word, it will eventually happen. However, since we are using infinity as a quantity, we could think of it this way. We have infinity incorrect writings, with infinity writings that are too short, infinity writings that are too long, infinity writings that use wrong words, etc. There is only one correct writing. So if the abstract "rate of infinity" of number of problems increases at the same "rate" as number of monkeys, the monkeys will never reach the correct writing. A simpler way of putting it is to give "infinity" a definite value, let's say for example 256. For sake of simplicity, lets say there are 256 mistakes with wrong words/too short and 256 mistakes with wrong words/too long. There is still one correct writing. With 512 mistakes, and 256 monkeys, there are still 257 possibilities left unaccounted for.

I release i may be wrong. I may be thinking at a low level, and that if there were infinity monkeys, since it goes on forever, it includes the "forever" of the other infinities. This makes sense to me, but it just doesnt seem to fix.

This lengthy explanation does tie in, but honestly it took me a second to explain it to myself, and really the only point it makes is that: If there are indeed infinity universes, we still may need to create one to reach out desired outcome. Either that, or there are just an infinite number of universes already like one we may want to create, but we can create it anyway. Either way is fine to me.


This post may be a little confusing an controversial. Watching the documentary might help, but you need to understand my logic to really see my point.