ePUB freepe.co Î The Hidden Reality Parallel Universes and the Search for

قام بتحويل الكتاب الي نسخة نصية كلٌ من«زينه»، «د طارق التميمي»«محمد العليان »، «معالي»«محمد مصطفي كمال»، «عبدالله الحبابي»«عزيز ابن ابو عزيز»، «أريج محمد»«هشام حسني»، «awakeel»«سماهر»، «رشا الظاهري»«رنا وليد»، «ماجد حنّا»«علي الشمري»، «تامر السلاموني»«بندر الحربي»، «شمس الحياة»«مروة جمال»، «تركي العبود»«الياس سعدي»، «ماجدة علي علي»«هادي ابراهيم»، «سامي اكايا»«ماجد حنّا»، «أحمد»« محمد زهرة»، «منصور التميمي»اخراج فني وصور فوتنوت وفهرسة« ماجدة علي علي »في هذا الكتاب يتناول برايان جرين، صاحب الكتابين الأكثر مبيعًا ” الكون الأنيق ” و”نسيج الكون”، سؤالًا يمكن اعتباره أكثر أسئلة الفيزياء الحديثة وعلم الكونيات إثارة للعقل، وهو هل كوننا هو الكون الوحيد الذي له وجود؟


10 thoughts on “The Hidden Reality Parallel Universes and the Search for the Deep Laws of the Cosmos

  1. says:

    So my buddy Ryan introduced me and Jo to his new girlfriend this past weekend and she's a mathematician who is clearly not very good at it because Ryan with a girlfriend doesn't add up ZING so I was like Do you think we're all avatars in a big futuristic game of The Sims? and her face just lit up like I've been waiting for someone to ask me this all my life She is adorable and we geeked out about parallel universes for like half an hour while Ryan and Jo made big exaggerated sighing noises Hey just let us know when you want to talk about something that's not the nerdiest bullshit ever Okay that will be never because we're best friends now I said that Ryan's girlfriend probably thinks I'm just okayAnd that's why this is a great book because it's wicked fun to talk about all this shit Whee multiverse says my avatar You ever hear that theory that once computers get to the same complexity as human brains they'll sortof automatically develop consciousness? Scientists think that because otherwise there's something we totally don't get about consciousness and who needs that? Lame So here's the thinking if that's true then we'll probably have it by around 2020 And once we have artificial intelligence what are we going to do with it? Put it in video games obviously We know this because we are people and that's the kind of shit people do So we're going to have these virtual worlds just like The Sims except the people in it will actually be aware and we'll all play these virtual world games on our Playstations And that means there'll be like thousands of virtual worlds with conscious inventions in them interacting with each other And that means that only one of all the worlds featuring conscious beings is the real one; the rest are video games And that means that odds are the world you're reading this in isn't the real one Just statistically it's likely that you're a collection of sprites that some pimply teenager created near arbitrary rules forThat's nuts right? Crazy nuts Batty Among other things it means that there's a God after all because whatever pimply teenager is playing this particular game that I'm in can delete this game whenever he wants or make an asteroid hit Brazil or make Kate Middleton show her boobs For most intents and purposes that is GodAlso it raises this uestion is Pimply God doing a good job? Is this particular world a good one? Or is he an asshole? If all the sim worlds were ranked from most pleasant to least where would this one fall? If you set a bunch of AIs up in a fairly nice place will they probably fight? Is there like an Aggression Slider so you can make us or less likely to fight? What would this world be like if Pimply God was deep in the throes of puberty? Or is this it?Ryan's girlfriend thinks we are most likely virtual seriously serious people think this whole thing makes perfect sense but I think I lost her with the puberty bitThis is the craziest and last theory in Hidden Reality There are eight others and they're not mutually exclusive The least crazy theory is that space is infinite and infinite is a lot so somewhere beyond what we can ever see given the speed of light there will be a world just like ours and infinite worlds just like ours because infinite means everything including a world where everything happens and will happen exactly like it has and will in this world you're in now with the sole exception that instead of reading this review you personally decided to make a sandwich Infinite is a lotEverything in Hidden Reality is theoretical so there's no pressing reason for you to read this book Or any of the rest of the books while we're on the subject Pimply God read Shakespeare and was like Ha that's cool it rhymes and everything sometimes I mean it's terrible compared to real life literature but not bad for artificial intelligence But whee multiverse Four stars says my avatar as Pimply God happens to narrow his focus on my apartment just to see what's going on near Boston and says That sim there just called me pimply Here's a random asteroid how ya like me n


  2. says:

    I've now read three books about the multiverse in rapid succession the first two were Rees's Before The Beginning 1996 and Davies's The Goldilocks Enigma 2007 This one came out just a few months ago so I'm hopefully up to date for the momentWell I'm starting to feel uite familiar with the arguments but each book has an interestingly different slant Rees concentrates on presenting the experimental evidence for the existence of other universes basically the physical constants of our own universe appear to be tuned exactly right for life to be possible it's unlikely that this is just chance so we're probably one of many universes and explicitly avoids philosophical speculation Davies recapitulates Rees's arguments but then goes overboard on philosophy; whatever he says it's clear that he very much wants there to be a spiritual dimension to the story Greene is similar to Davies but his obsession is with string theory He's spent his life working on it and he desperately wants it to be part of the final explanation Despite Greene's exaggerated love for all things stringy I liked this book and found it well worth reading The author presents nine different theories which in one way or another involve multiple versions of the universe Most of these I had already seen in Davies but I found Greene's exposition clearer and detailed In particular I thought his chapter on inflation was the best account I had read of this mysterious process which got our universe started by exponentially blowing it up in a minute fraction of a second from the size of a proton to a macroscopic scale People now seem to understand inflation moderately well and there are mathematical models which can be checked against the detailed maps of the cosmic background radiation which have been constructed over the last 10 years I also thought the chapter on the Many Worlds interpretation of uantum mechanics was excellent; I hadn't understood that it's just a historical accident that the Copenhagen interpretation is the mainstream one As Greene points out it's actually conservative to think of uantum processes as continually splitting off new universes each of which is eually real The Copenhagen interpretation with its notion of the collapse of the wavefunction is the one which involves hand waving and mystical invocations of the privileged role of the observer If you just look at the underlying mathematics the Schrödinger euation the Many Worlds interpretation is the straightforward way to translate the numbers into wordsAs already noted Greene wants string theory to be in there so there are chapters on brane worlds our universe is floating in a higher dimensional space the Cosmic Landscape there is a multitude of universes reflecting different flavors of string theory and the Holographic Universe we are the projection of a lower dimensional process on a distant boundary surface Like Davies he also speculates about the possibility that our universe is a simulation running in some gigantic computer or that we live in a Platonic Universe where mathematical theories exist simply by virtue of being consistent and there is no other reality All of these ideas were fun to read about but I felt they were somewhat beside the point; I was surprised not to see him focussing on what at least to me seems like the obvious account As he says the Many Worlds interpretation of uantum mechanics is perfectly respectable and inflation has accumulated a great deal of credibility as a theory of how the universe got started Inflation starts at a scale where uantum processes are all important We can actually see the fossils of those uantum processes in the unevenness of the background radiationPutting those two things together we already have a multiverse theory that's mainstream to the point of being conservative The uantum realities which split off during the very early history of the universe will be substantially different from each other The uestion is whether they're going to be different enough since we want them to differ with respect to things including settings of the physical constants This part is still speculative But you need it anyway in order to make most of the other theories work and there seem to be moderately well worked out accounts of how it could happen I am sure people must be exploring in this direction It sounds incredible when you write it down but we appear to be on the edge of constructing a coherent scientific theory of Life The Universe and Everything I'm really curious to see what happens next


  3. says:

    If you're into stuff like this you can read the full reviewBlood Farts The Hidden Reality Parallel Universes and the Deep Laws of the Cosmos by Brian GreeneOriginal review 2011The Multiverse is awesomeWe all look we find what we may but we all have to choose what we look at deeply than we will look at the rest of what there is Yes I refuse to spend much time on multiverse hypotheses; I used to spend a lot of time looking at uantum field theory instead and doing FT thinking about it developing a feel for and making choices about what I think is important or not and changing my mind endlessly and becoming intimate with it as much as my abilities will let me all of which takes time than anyone has


  4. says:

    Brian Greene really is one of the best popular science writers His books give you a real sense of being guided by someone who genuinely knows what they're talking about who uses metaphors effectively and who effectively weaves the traditional material in with the new points he is making He also approaches science with curiosity untainted by dogmatism He is very much open to speculation but eually open to the speculation not panning outThis book is about different concepts of the Multiverse Greene devotes a chapter to each of what he defines as the major types and then has one or two additional chapters on uestions like whether these theories are testable and broader implicationsThe multiverse's he consider include the uilted multiverse which is just our universe extending out infinitely leaving the possibility of endless accidental repetition which follows from some cosmological theories that follow the big bang the inflationary multiverse a product of repeated episodes of inflationary expansion which follows from the addition of inflation to the previous theories three multiverses that come from different versions of string theory brane cyclic and landscape a uantum multiverse which is Everett's Many Worlds interpretation and is conceptual a holographic multiverse which comes from the study of black holes and string theory and simulated and ultimate multiverses the last two coming from computer simulations and a deeper mathematical worldIn every case Greene does a good job of describing the physical theories that lead usually by accident to the implication that there is a particular type of multiverse discusses the scientific status of those theories and addresses issues around testing them In the end Greene has some sympathy with Steven Weinberg's adage that the problem with physics is that we do not take our theorieseuations seriously enough as a real description of the world The example he cites is the Positron which was a byproduct of Dirac's solution of a math problem that turned out to be real Greene clearly leans towards the view that the same is true of the multiverse but he doesn't do much to tip his hand about which one


  5. says:

    Outstanding update of the current status of modern physics and the projections of parallel universes from various advances I would have loved to have Greene for a teacher in college The tour is suitable for laymen with some understanding of physics as he provides plenty of concrete examples to explain challenging concepts and gives an opportunity to skip technical sections For the knowledgeable reader a copious appendix is available replete with the relevant math euations Greene works his way through the history and logic behind eight different models of parallel universes and their status in terms of development and progress toward potential verifiability The only one that I was really familiar with from a college course on uantum physics 40 years ago Everett’s 1956 Many Worlds Hypothesis is the only one that really bothers me with its continual “splitting” off of parallel realities at every point where uncertain outcomes like the position of an object is resolved Greene makes it clear how the interpretation is simpler and elegant than Bohr’s interpretation The latter calls for the probability wave of a particle to mysteriously collapses when it is detected or interacted with effectively throwing out Schroedinger’s euations out whenever a “measurement” is made and restricting their applicability only to very small objects Despite Occam’s Razor favoring Everett’s hypothesis the uantum mechanics euations apply deterministically at all times the interpretation of possible alternative states as each being somehow “real” has always been too absurd to be true to me It’s a relief then that there is still scientific resistance to the notion and demonstrations of problems with the theory Greene notes “I don't expect theoretical or experimental consensus to come in my lifetime concerning which version of reality a single universe a multiverse something else entirely—uantum mechanics embodies”The other theories are fascinating and do not call for my alternative choices to have an existence in parallel universes It was great to get a perspective on the excitement and challenges with string theory and its promise for helping unify the gravitational force with the other forces already in the fold of uantum field theory The discovery that our universe is undergoing an acceleration in its expansion and the need for some kind of anti gravity force “dark energy” was a shock to me so the recent successes of the theory of empty space having an “inflaton” field was satisfying to read about Greene’s coverage of recent work on the meaning of entropy and information in physical systems was also a pleasure for meFor a sense of the content of this book here is a thumbnail sketch of the seven other parallel universe theories covered as laid out in Greene’s summary chapter uilted Multiverse Conditions in an infinite universe necessarily repeat across space yielding parallel worlds Inflationary Multiverse Eternal cosmological inflation yields an enormous network of bubble universes of which our universe would be one Brane Multiverse In stringM theory’s braneworld scenario our universe exists on one three dimensional “brane” which floats in a higher dimensional expanse potentially populated by other branes—other parallel universes Landscape Multiverse By combining cosmology and string theory the many different shapes for string theory’s extra dimensions give rise to many different bubble universes Holographic Multiverse The holographic principle asserts that our universe is exactly mirrored by phenomena taking place on a distant boundary surface a physically euivalent parallel universe Simulated Multiverse Technological leaps suggest that simulated universes may one day be possible Ultimate Multiverse The principle of fecundity asserts that every possible universe is a real universeThese universes instantiate all possible mathematical euationsThe summary chapter was also satisfying to me in attempting to address the following uestions Is the Copernican pattern fundamental? Following the 500 year trend that ”the we understand the less central we appear” we now approach the perspective that “our universe itself may not be central to any cosmic order” Can scientific theories that invoke a multiverse be tested? The worry is that ”by invoking a multiverse we enter the domain of theories that can’t be tested” He argues that well founded multiverse theories should be able to make predictions which are likely to be testable in our own universe and hence falsifiable How does the multiverse affect the nature of scientific explanation? Traditional approaches for physics aims to use mathematical expressions of physical laws and a set of constants and initial conditions to project what measurable things will be like at a subseuent time Multiverse theories usefully explore variability in these conditions and laws which must be accepted as a given in a single universe theory Should we believe mathematics? Based on past progress mathematical theories have had a huge impact on guiding science toward hidden truth Despite problems in testing the multiverse theories pushing on them is likely to lead to progress


  6. says:

    Brian bae Definitely one of the accessible cosmology writers of today Any book discussing uantum field theory and string theory is going to reuire your undivided attention of course but it’s much readable than many others especially if you’re fond of analogies Turns out there’s lots of theories that give rise to the possibility of alternate realitiesTheory 1 aka uilted Multiverse If the universe is infinite it might not be but if it is then at some point in the distant distant universe there are worlds where there is a human named Annie just like me typing on Goodreads except she typed “GR” instead of “Goodreads” And there’s another world with an Annie whose life is exactly like mine except she’s allergic to red wine I would have to kill myself because there would be no point in living In some the worst things I’ve ever imagined happening have happened In others my wildest dreams have been fulfilled Somewhere there is an Annie who can write like Kafka DH Lawrence and Kundera combined Theory 2 aka Swiss Cheese If the universe is expanding hint it almost definitely is then there would be places which expansion would create which would have to have lowered rates of expansion and those are like holes in Swiss cheese The number of cheese holes as the cosmos continues to expand continues to increase and each one of those is adorably termed a bubble universe or pocket universe Including our own This also brings in the uilted Multiverse idea from inside a bubble universe the bubble’s space is infinite but from outside the bubble universe it’s finite What appears as endless time to an outsider appears as endless space at each moment of time to an insider And if it’s infinite to an insider then there have to be infinite worlds with infinite repetitions and variations as in Theory 1 Theory 3 aka String Theory aka Bread Loaf aka Cyclic Multiverse Strictly speaking there are five types of string theory no one Type I Type IIA Type IIB Heterotic O and Heterotic E which all sound like sexually transmitted diseases to me and anyway they all get subsumed into the grander M theory String theory particles are vibrating loops of filaments and the way it vibrates determines what particle it ishow it behaves and corresponding M theory predict that there are ten dimensions of space and the eleventh dimension of time Seven than the ones we’re aware of length width height and time But maybe that’s not an issue because the four dimensions we’re used to extend over massive maybe infinite distances but maybe the other seven are curled up at the other end of the cosmos and we can’t find them and they don’t extend far enough to reach into our reality For analogy Greene gives the example of a straw normal sized except it’s as tall as the Empire State building It’s three dimensional up close but from the other side of the river it would just look like a vertical line two dimensional Here comes the multiverse idea pretend the world has just two dimensions it’s a flat plane called a two braneworld Line up a couple of these flat planes slices of bread and you can add on other parallel universes other braneworlds as many as you like “just add slices to the cosmic loaf” as Greene memorably says Of course we have three spatial dimensions but looking at 2 dimensions makes it easier to wrap our 3D heads around It’s also possible that different braneworlds would bounce into each other and restart the cosmological clock so that rather than one big bang things are a gigantic bumper car game and universes are constantly though very slowly from our perspectives getting remade and unmade and remade Theory 4 aka Landscape Multiverse pretty much the idea that the cosmological constant density of energy in space creating certain gravitational values might be necessary for life and so what are the odds it happened to happen? Well you’d need an infinite number of universes to make it likely that at least one of them just happened to have the exact necessary cosmological constant to make life happenTheory 5 aka the uantum Multiverse all the possibilities of our reality are realized in another reality another multiverse All possible histories and all possible futures are real One of them is the reality we live in; the basically infinite rest exist in some way True reality is like a tree than a line Theory 6 aka Everything is a Hologram The event horizon of a black hole point of no return is the surface of a black hole in some ways and fluctuations in the surface of the event horizon contains all the information the black hole sucks in Similarly our 3D world may be a rendering of 2D encoded information on some cosmological event horizon type thing which creates reality as we know itTheory 7 aka Virtual Reality we can create other universes virtually and someday could probably create reactions in the potentially sentient actors in those universes which could make it feel like reality every bit as much as it does to us If everything’s infinite see theory 1 with infinite numbers of beings creating infinite numbers of virtual universes whose inhabitants can also create infinite numbers of infinite universes and so forth doesn’t it seem like odds are good that we’re just one of those games? Could we even tell if we were in a simulation? Depends on your Simulator and if they want to reveal themselves are you there God? It's me Annie Other interesting thingsDark energy might be the answer to Einstein’s unproven cosmological constant that he retracted after he suggested it because he couldn’t account for it There’s some some shit out there and we can’t see it describe it or know of its existence other than through a few methods of measurement The mind boggling idea that if the universe is infinite and you shrunk infinity everything would be closer together but the universe would still be infinite Rationally I understand that you can’t reduce infinity infinity divided by two is still infinity but my brain doesn’t want this to be a thing About 1 percent of the snow on a television that’s tuned to a non working channel is due to reception of the big bang’s photons aka background radiation


  7. says:

    It took me 8 months to read this book My system is to read until my head is ready to explode then stop for a month then restart at the beginning On the 4th attempt I made it to the last page or rather Kindle location no guarantee of how much was actually understood This is a book that pried open my mind The brain is sore and ecstatic from the experienceFrom the last chapterTable 111 Summary of Various Versions of Parallel Universes1 uilted Multiverse Conditions in an infinite universe necessarily repeat across space yielding parallel worlds2 Inflationary Multiverse Eternal cosmological inflation yields an enormous network of bubble universes of which our universe would be one3 Brane Multiverse In stringM theory's braneworld scenario our universe exists on one three dimensional brane which floats in a higher dimensional expanse potentially populated by other branes other parallel universes4 Cyclic Multiverse Collisions between braneworlds can manifest as big bang like beginnings yielding universes that are parallel in time5 Landscape Multiverse By combing inflationary cosmology and string theory the many different shapes for string theory's extra dimensions give rise to many different bubble universes6 uantum Multiverse uantum mechanics suggests that every possibility embodied in its probability waves is realized in one of a vast ensemble of parallel universes7 Holographic Multiverse The holographic principle asserts that our universe is exactly mirrored by phenomena taking place on a distant bounding surface a physically euivalent parallel universe8 Simulated Multiverse Technological leaps suggest that simulated universes may one day be possible9 Ultimate Multiverse The principle of fecundity asserts that every possible universe is a real universe thereby obviating the uestion of why one possibility ours is special These universes instantiate all possible mathematical euationsKindle location 6079 6106scientific discovery has shifted humankind's perspective on its place in the cosmic order Over the course of nearly five centuries the Copernican progression has been a dominant theme experience abounds with clues suggesting that we're a central hub around which the cosmos revolves But the objective methods of scientific discovery have steadily corrected this perspective At nearly every turn we've found that were we not here the cosmic order would hardly differ We've had to give up our belief in earth's centrality among our cosmic neighbors the sun's centrality in the galaxy the Milky Way's centrality among the galaxies and even the centrality of protons neutrons and electrons the stuff of which we're made in the cosmic recipe There was a time when evidence contrary to long held collective delusions of grandeur was viewed as a frontal assault on human worth With practice we've gotten better at valuing enlightenmentThe trek in this book has been toward what may be the capstone Copernican correction Our universe itself may not be central to any cosmic order The idea that reality based on a multiverse extends the Copernican pattern and perhaps completes it is cause for curiosity But what elevates the multiverse concept above idle speculation is a key fact that we've now repeatedly encountered Scientists have not been on a hunt for ways to extend the Copernican revolution Instead scientists have been doing what they always do using data and observations as a guide they've been formulating mathematical theories to describe the fundamental constituents of matter and the forces that govern how those constituents behave interact and evolve Remarkably when diligently following the trail these theories blaze scientists have run smack into one potential multiverse after anotherKindle location 6109 6128


  8. says:

    This was a good book For a popularization this had some pretty heavy science in it I'm a pretty smart guy and will have to re read it to really have a better understanding Greene really is a good writer because even when you don't uite understand what he's talking about he gives you enough of the broad overview so that you can go to the next section and feel that you haven't missed anything criticalThe section on uilted multiverses was pretty straightforward and I can claim to have understood it The next few parallel universes were a bit trickier but I was with the program When I got to multiple dimensions and the landscape multiverse with so many possible shapes to the extra dimensions that kazillions doesn't even begin to cover the number this was something I wasn't uite so sure that I could explain to my wife I'm not sure I want to challenge Brian Greene on any scientific uestion but the one point I would have some uestions about were the simulated multiverses as in the movie The Matrix I think he may be shortchanging Goedel and Turing I'm not convinced that a simulated multiverse sufficient to model all the creatures on our planet would not consume so much energy that it would be in effect less probable than an actual universe My experience as a programmer is that the complexity of programs and the resources needed to design them go up exponentially with the size of the program If that is the case creating a universe might actually take less energy than modeling one We would need to automate the process of computer design but this essentially can't be done and that's the point of Turing's thesis There may be a practical upper limit on the size of simulated universes that we or future super intelligent beings in our universe could ever design This may be my confusion but I'd like just a little explanation here So this book is recommended and I hope to come back to it One final thing though the book never utters a word about it Brian Greene is a vegan That anybody this smart is a vegan says something I think about where we should be headed as a species


  9. says:

    The first book I had by Brian Greene was The Fabric of the Cosmos I got it not long after it was releases and a friend asked me if he could borrow it not long after I received it in the mail before I'd read it I said yesI didn't get the book back for several years Dr Greene had written by then Oh wellThis book as is Dr Greene's wont is an attempt to take highly technical and advanced ideas and make them understandable to us we the great unwashed the masses I suppose in all truthfulness it only succeeds to a pointI mean I know I don't have the math to grasp the heart of what he's talking about and even I can see the imprecision Still he does take the difficult sugar coats it and lays it out there I kept seeing that scene from Big Bang Theory where they have a cameo from Dr Greene and Sheldon's reaction to himIf you're a physicist theoretical or experimental I suspect this book will probably be hopelessly imprecise and simple if your like me it's fairly interesting Even though I know that what I'm getting is at best a broad outlined picture where the multiverse is compared to a large Swiss Cheese with the bubbles pictured as the universes The book is laid out largely in the format of here it is here's what we thinkknow and here's why It assumes that those reading it won't really be in a position to challenge it and tries to be as simple as possibleIn short not a bad book and manages to lay things out in a relatively get it relatively simple way when dealing with a difficult set of subjects or subject if it's unified Enjoy If it interests you I recommend it


  10. says:

    This is a pretty dense book Some of the footnotes have footnotes I'm sure it must be very difficult for an author of a popular science book to walk the line between on the one hand providing enough technical information to make the arguments cogent and on the other miring the reader in a bog of difficult concepts and facts My hat's off to Dr Greene for giving it a try on some of the most out there ideas that can be imagined Some very interesting ideas but ultimately for me this was all a little difficult to chew and swallowMy own theory unencumbered by fact or mathematics is that the universe is infinite in all directions Our atoms and subatomic particles are someone or something else's galaxies and universes and likewise that our galaxies are atoms and molecules to some other beings And boy are those beings bigFor some reason I also think that the hierarchy that I just described doesn't recurse infinitely in a fractal manner Instead it's all circular so that if you start here and go up to galaxies or down to atoms or down to gehanna or up to the throne or for that matter out to the edge of our universe and bringing it back to the topic of this book to other universes in the multiverse you would eventually end up here again WeirdNot light reading but recommended if you're interested in some of the current thinking in the fields of cosmology and physics