Multimultiverse

[anderscolingustafson]

I know that in string theory it is believed that our universe is basically just a bubble in a sea of universes with parallel universes in other dimensions. Is it possible as well that even the Multiverse is just a bubble that curves back in on itself in a vast see of other Multiverses with parallel multiverses existing in other other dimensions. Could the Multiverse be part of a Multimultiverse.

[PWrong]

Sure it's possible, but it would probably just be called the multiverse, with an interesting structure. We might call it a multimultiverse if it gets discovered long after the multiverse is proven and becomes common knowledge.

[gunnar98]

So your saying that there may be many multiverses and possibly many, not many infinity, multimultiverses? It's possibble knowing that space can be expanded/stretched and so multimultiverses can be pulled closer in a matter of seconds creating planetary crashes etc. And is it possible for the sun to be pulled closer caused by a rip in space? By the way I'm 13 so if you want to explain then make it pretty simple but I know some things about 4d and beyond

[hosj]

I've heard about this. It's called Hilbert space, and it's infinite-dimensional.
The idea is that our universe is curved into a hypersphere, which is one of many floating in 4-D space, and that is curved into the hyperhypersurface of a hyperhypersphere, which is one of many in 5-D space, and so on and on and on...

[DMattMooney]

I've heard about this. It's called Hilbert space, and it's infinite-dimensional.
The idea is that our universe is curved into a hypersphere, which is one of many floating in 4-D space, and that is curved into the hyperhypersurface of a hyperhypersphere, which is one of many in 5-D space, and so on and on and on...

I've pondered this model myself, and it appears that everything in it is a surface. Pardon the concrete thinking, but it seems the surfaces of objects we are familiar with need a bulk to define them. Following this Chain of Being upward, we never reach the bulk until we reach infinite dimensionality, which sounds like saying we never reach it. I call this the Problem of the Fugitive Bulk. But if you're like me, you are visualizing smooth hypersurfaces, except for tiny wrinkles that represent higher-dimensional matter and energy analogues. Maybe this smoothness doesn't happen by accident, and needs a definite smoothing process, perhaps some higher-dimensional Hawking radiation process to rapidly and selectively evaporate the little kinks that would otherwise make the structure a fractal. Anything too big to evaporate grows by accretion until its surface forms the next lower multiverse. If the big objects form catastrophically, like black holes, the formation event would look like an inflationary era of the big bang to creatures with astronomical proclivities that evolve within the surface.
Here's my solution to the bulk problem: above some critical point in the Chain of Being the smoothing process stops working, which stops the chain. Above that there is Hilbert space, the bulk, the content of which is a fractal. If this fractal is changing randomly, there might originally have been a diffusion of fractal dimension down to the threshold for smoothing, which would have triggered the evolution of nested multiverses in tiny subsets of the fractal.

[Klitzing]

From a purely geometrical viewpoint you would not need to curve your spaces to become "spherical":

Consider that euclidean tesselations can be used as horotopes in non-compact hyperbolic space tesselations. That is, not to apply some positive curvature onto your smaller components to multi-embed it into some higher-dimensional zero curvature space, but rather to let remain your zero curvature space be like that and multi-embed it into an according negatively curved space instead.

And with respect to sequencing: you even can multi-embed hyperbolic, i.e. negatively curved tesselations within hyperbolic spaces of 1 dimension plus in the sense of laminat layers.

--- rk