Who said anything at all about reality? I was talking about the definition of "universe", which is the totality of known or supposed objects and phenomena throughout space. By this definition, obviously it cannot be static but must be continuously dynamic. For instance, there are many new plant and animal species found every single week. That means that last week, those species were not known or supposed. Does that mean that they are NOT a part of our universe? Of course not. By definition, they wouldn't have been last week, but they are this week.

The word and the concept of "universe" is a man-made construct, and like most words in our language, it deals with our perceptions, usually at a given moment in time. But because it is a WORD that expresses a man conceived CONCEPT, which itself is too expansive for man to be able to totally grasp it, it is NOT precise. There are a lot of imprecise words in the language. Another is "God".

I think there is an unknown world out of universe,and “universe” is only a image that humanity can imagine.

__________________
If I were a tear in your eye,I would fall down to your lip, kiss you!
I f you were a tear in my eye, I would never cry,because I am afraid to lose you!

Rex, you have defined the universe as what is known. That is too restrictive. It only refers to the known universe. The true universe includes what has not yet been discovered.

What is known at any given moment. As I said, this changes. Also, the definition I used came from a dictionary.

However, perhaps we could mount a write in campaign to get all the dictionaries around the world to change their definitions to be all encompassing. Perhaps it could be something like this: Universe: Everything that exists or can be imagined.

I like that definition! It holds out hope for Hobbits, dragons and unicorns!

__________________
Self-reverence, self-knowledge, self-control;
these three alone lead one to sovereign power.
Tennyson

Why was the "multiverse" proposed when, even in theory, it is impossible to prove one way or the other? (Even if scientists were able to create another universe it would immediately split from ours and be undetectable and unproven.) If it is not "falsifiable" it is faith, not science.

I am of the opinion that this is simply a case of some scientists proposing an unprovable theory because they are uncomfortable with the improbability of our finely tuned universe and desperately want to find a way avoid the possibility of an intelligence at helm....and please, don't ask what I mean by a "finely tuned universe" or ask for evidence. I will not answer. If you are at all interested in science, you know what I mean.

Why would Man make a Universe with sun and planets ,a star .

Only one reason lol ,

That is because in the future which is happening right now way way out into infinity the Humans whatever ,out there are way way way advanced and actually use stars as a tranportation system and make Universes with the star \sun so they can use the energy in an advanced system to go from one point to another and each point being a different star .

The life like ours here are silmiliar to "space garbage" and we are just a bi-product of the making of the Universe to increase their travel dimensions .

They know we are here but think of us as we might think of a dead rat lol , sorry .

They have found a way to create a type of plasma liquid which can handle the demensions of the three spindle type sections of the craft which moves at light speed if it wants and has these stop-overs or stars they created to rest and re-fuel before they continue on their way .

So there it is ,, why Man will make a Universe lol.

Just kidding ofcourse but it is only a theory and l do not put any fact to it other than an out of body dream l had which showed all of that in it , execpt the us being space garbage part lol .

The multiverse, like many scientific theories, was proposed to explain observable phenomena that could not be explained in any other way. Two examples are:
Quantum particles that although they appear separate act as if they are direclty connected even if miles apart. If you do something to one, the other responds in the same way immediately. Any communication would need to be faster than the speed of light. This is impossible by today's theories.

Photons that although they travel independently respond as if they were travelling in a group and were affected by other photons that do not exist. A single photon (shot out many times) will create an intereference pattern as if there were multiple photons at one time all interfering with each other. This is impossible by today's theories.

Both of these suggest another dimension or universe or "field" that is currently unknown but that operates in our world when other forces are too small to make a difference. These tiny movements previously unknown can now be observed.

The multiverse as it is commonly used is a term to explain a whole new field of knowledge that has previously been undetectable becasue the influence is so tiny it could never be measured. It just so happens that at a similar time mathematicians were also finding proofs for additional dimensions and when you put the observations together with mathematics you get an even more "finely tuned universe" that would require even greater intelligence.

As for scientists wanting to create new universes - they all need grants to stay in a job and who knows what military uses a new universe could have.

There are several theories that could explain the actions of quantum particles. But that aside, there is nothing at all in science that says that something can't travel faster than light, only that nothing can be accelerated to the speed of light. To accelerate something to that speed would require infinite energy as the particle gained infinite mass. But if something was already traveling faster than light, the same restrictions wouldn't apply (though it is difficult to conceive.) Two years ago, too, a team of Japanese scientists discovered tachyons that did, in fact, appear to be traveling faster than light. It has been awhile, but I'll try to find the article.

The same equations that say that an object can't be accelerated to the speed of light, also predict multiple dimensions (or universes), indirectly. That is to say that it is likely, but not an absolute given.

How can there be more than 1 Universe? *confused* I was taught that the Universe consisted of everything that existed, even if it existed in other dimensions or parallel worlds.