“There is a place like no place on Earth—a land full of wonder, mystery, and danger.”
Last night, a group of us journeyed into the strange and whimsical realm that is Alice in Wonderland.
Director Tim Burton’s work has been described as intensely original, and his latest film—an epic 3D fantasy adventure—certainly meets that description. And, as scientific evidence indicates, so, too, does our galaxy.
In fact, the case for cosmic fine-tuning (see here, here, and here) is so strong, astronomers and philosophers who hold a strictly naturalistic worldview are now proposing the existence of a multiverse.
The term “multiverse” can mean a variety of things, but generally speaking it requires the existence of other regions beyond our own. Basically, multiple universes. Curiouser and curiouser.
Some, as RTB astrophysicist Jeff Zweerink points out, propose regions with different laws of physics while others posit that the physical laws match our own. Multiverse advocates propose a number of different models, the most popular being categorized as Levels I, II, III, and IV.
But a multiverse doesn’t provide the instant escape hatch naturalists may be looking for. A multiverse model would still need to meet a number of requirements in order to “provide an adequate explanation for this universe and our existence.”
The multiverse model must be self-contained (without having any aspect of the model reflect fine-tuning).
It must account for all observations and data and make predictions about what scientists will detect in our observable universe. Otherwise, no scientific tests can verify or falsify the model because, by definition, the proposed multiverse forever lies beyond the reach of observations.
It must provide a mechanism that produces a sufficient variety of universes.
Our universe must be one possible outcome in the multiverse model.
Most importantly, life must be completely—and solely—physical.
So how do believers in supernatural creation respond to the multiverse? Jeff offers his perspective: “As with any other perceived challenge to Christianity, the multiverse should direct us to search out what both the Bible and science really say about creation.” In fact, he adds, “the whole issue provides a tremendous opportunity to engage science-minded people and draw them into discussion of the Gospel.”
Research continues on this mind-boggling topic, and the findings thus far “greatly strengthen the cosmological case for the universe having a beginning.” Further, as the cosmological argument articulates, whatever begins to exist has a cause; the universe began to exist, therefore, the universe had a cause—an argument that Jeff has demonstrated applies to the multiverse as well.
To this, those with a naturalistic worldview might say, “This is impossible!” To which one could respond, just as the Mad Hatter does, “Only if you believe it is.”
– Sandra
For more on the multiverse, check out the following:
Two related studies recently reported by an international team from Stanford University, University of California at Berkeley, and Oxford University add to the growing...
