The True Science of Parallel Universes

1 Watch the video   and put the words into the gaps in the text.

Everyone loves the idea of parallel universes - maybe it’s the appeal of an ideal 1____ where you have second chances and things turn out differently - an alternate reality where you do get into Hogwarts and the Star Wars prequels aren’t made and you finally plug in your asymmetric computer cord correctly on the first try... But is there really a place in science for such wistful speculation? I mean, if «the universe» is everything that there is, you can’t have two 2____ of it, right? Otherwise the pair would really be everything and what you started off calling the universe, wouldn’t it? The problem here is terminology: 3_____ speaking informally often say «universe» when they really mean «4_____ universe» - that is, the part of the whole universe that we’ve so far been able to see. And it’s perfectly fine to talk about multiple different observable universes. For example, an 5____ near the edge of OUR observable universe will see parts of the Whole Universe that we cannot yet see. But that’s a well-understood question and not what physicists normally talk about when they discuss 6____ observable universes, or «multi-verses».      So let’s cut to the chase: in physics, the word «multiverse» normally refers to one of three distinct and largely unrelated proposed physical models for the universe - none of which has been tested or confirmed by experiment, by the way. The three «multiverse» models are:       Type 1: bubble universes or baby 7____ hole universes. This is the most 8_____ kind of multiverse. The basic idea is that perhaps there are other parts of the universe which are so far away that we will never see them (or are inside black holes so similarly we will never see them). This kind of model was created as an attempt to explain why our universe is so good at making stars and 9_____ and black holes and life. As the argument goes, if each of these separate mutually un-seeable «bubbles» in the universe had slightly different 10____ of physics, then by definition we could only exist in one that had the right physical laws to allow us to 11____. If you’re not convinced by this logic, don’t worry too much: there’s not yet any experimental 12_____ for this kind of multiverse.       Multiverse type 2: membranes and extra dimensions. Inspired in part by the inability of the 13_____ of string theory to 14_____ the right number of dimensions for the universe in which we live, string theorists proposed the idea that perhaps what we think of as our universe is actually just a 15______ surface embedded within a larger super-universe with 9 spatial dimensions. Kind of like how each page of a newspaper is its own two-dimensional surface 16_____ within our three-dimensional world. And of course, if space had 9 dimensions rather than three, there’d be plenty of space for other three-dimensional 17_____ that appeared, like ours, to be universes in their own right, but, like the pages of a newspaper, were actually part of a bigger whole. These kinds of surfaces are called «18_____» or «branes» for short. And as a reminder, there is not yet any experimental evidence for this kind of multiverse.     Multiverse type 3: the many-worlds picture of 19_____ mechanics. Surprisingly, physicists still don’t fully understand how the collapse of the wavefunction in quantum mechanics happens, and the many-worlds 20_____ makes an attempt at explanation by proposing that every possible alternate 21_____ for the universe is real and they all happen in an ever-larger, ever-branching way. Like, a universal choose-your-own-adventure where every possible story happens! If this were the case, we might not realize it because we’d be stuck living out just one of the infinitely many possible lives available to us. In some ways, “many-worlds” is similar to the “bubble multiverse” model by proposing «maybe anything that can happen, does. And we just happen to exist in the series of happenings that were necessary for us to exist». If you’re still not convinced by this 22____, don’t worry: there is not yet any experimental evidence for this kind of multiverse.      Of course if you want to get imaginative, you could also combine several of these models together into a multi-multiverse. A new super-23_____ model based, itself, on speculative and experimentally unconfirmed models. But that’s not to say we couldn’t test these multiverse 24_____. For example, if our observable universe were really just one of many disconnected bubbles or membranes and if it happened to 25____ with another bubble or membrane some time in the past, then that collision would certainly have had some sort of 26_____ on what we see when we look up at the night sky. On the other hand, the many-worlds interpretation might be 27_____ fairly soon since experimentalists are becoming increasingly able to 28______ and control ever-larger quantum mechanical systems in their labs - systems that 29_____ the line between the quantum realm and our everyday experience. So as always, we must remember that 30_____ is science, not philosophy; and in our attempts to explain the universe that we observe, we have to make 31_____ that can in principle be tested - and then test them!
	multiple
	observable
	versions
	physicists
	alien
	world
	straightforward
	laws
	exist
	galaxies
	black
	evidence
	membranes
	surfaces
	predict
	embedded
	three-dimensional
	mathematics
	hypothesis
	quantum
	logic
	timeline
	collide
	hypotheses
	tested
	effect
	speculative
	approach
	claims
	manipulate
	physics

2 Vocabulary focus. Study the words and  word combinations, practise their translation, spelling. Check your knowledge in the test. Play vocabulary game and set your own vocabulary game record.

3 Mark the following statements as True or False.

1 String theorists proposed the idea that our universe is a three-dimensional surface.

2 Baby black holes and bubble universe models have been proved using scientific evidence.

3 Physics can describe how the collapse of wave function in quantum mechanics happens.

4 There are four models of multiverse.

5 In physics the term “force” means the same as “observable force”.

 4 Answer the Questions.

1 How many universes exist?

2 What is the most straightforward kind of multiverse?

3 What cannot physicists understand?

4 What is the second type of multiverse?

5 What would happen if our universe collided with another universe? 

6 What evidence proves the multiverse theory?

Science Research Methods - The Scientific Method

 

1 Watch the video  and put the words into the gaps in the text.

In this video I’ll look onto import parts of chapter 2 in the text. First, we’ll explore the characteristics of scientific knowledge. Second, we’ll identify common structures and the scientific method. We will not, however, debate the objections to applying this process to political science. Instead we’ll save that for in-class discussion.  In life we know things in a (1)___ of ways. In science, however, we are only interested in knowledge (2)___ from the scientific method, i.e. we (3)____ objectivity, observation-based methods including (4)____ and logical (5)____. The reason for this is that our ultimate goal is to make verifiable knowledge claims that are also (6)____, i.e. we want to be able to explain general phenomena and have these explanations subject to others’ (7)___.  If our conclusions are reached based on intuition, feeling, emotion or any other individual method, and cannot be seen by others, knowledge claims cannot be verified. Science is a social activity, it is important to place findings and conclusions in public view so that they are (8)____ and so that others can challenge, modify and build on them. It is important to recognize that I’ve not used the word ‘prove’. Science does not prove anything, instead, using a systematic process as it now appears, (9)____ conclusions can be reached.  On the slide and in the recording so far there are a number of concepts you should be able to identify including (10)___, generalizable and a few others. These are components of the scientific method and it is to them we now turn.  There are several important components to scientific knowledge. The results should be subject to (11)____ verification and falsifiable, i.e. to (12)____ the previous slide, science should be observable and have some kind of conclusive answer. We need to have a way to know if we’re right or wrong. That’s not to say that we will know if we’re right or wrong, but we need to be able to reach a conclusion. Second, we’re concerned with non-normative (13)____; there are several kinds of research and the statements that can be made.  In keeping with the first component we are not interested in assertions that cannot be tested as is the case with normative claims. Third, recognize that science is a cumulative enterprise. Each piece of research, each conclusion is just part of a wider whole. It’s good at this term to remember Isaac Newton’s modest claim that he was able to make such progress in science only because of others that came before him. Newton was ‘standing on the shoulders of giants’ and paid homage to those scientists that came before him. The fourth component is empirical generalization or generalizability. Science aims to extend explanation to a class or phenomena rather than just a single (14)____. So we want to know how gravity works, not why this apple falls from this tree. In our field we want to know why people vote the way they do, not why John happens to vote for a democratic candidate. If, I relate it to the former, you seek explanation, description is a necessary part of scientific knowledge if we want to understand (15)____, i.e. when one in that always or often brings about another condition. Another component of science is that it is predictive. If we have a generalizable explanation, then we can predict future (16)____. If we believe X leads to Y and we have X, than we can (17)____ Y.  However, our predictions need not be 100% accurate, we will accept statements of probability. As you’ll see later, we are perhaps most concerned with just improving our predictive power from the mean or average outcome. It is another way of saying we want to improve the accuracy of our predictions. Finally, we want our knowledge claims or explanations to be (18)___. Parsimony means (19)____; we want simple explanations rather than complex ones. That does not mean that we really focus solely on easy explanations, rather if we explain a similar amount of variation with an explanation that has only two moving parts or independent variables rather than many moving parts or independent variables, we prefer the simpler explanation. You should not think about these components as (20)____, rather they are features of science or the knowledge claims we want to make. This is part of the process of doing science.  Again there are many ways to know something using the scientific method, maintaining these (21)____ components is the best way to reach our goal of making knowledge claims that are observable and above all useful. Science (22)____ that ideas are transmissible; a prerequisite for this is some systematic way to verify these knowledge claims.  The scientific method is a way to do just that, it brings the steps of (23)____ out of the mind and into public view, in the text our authors tell us that scientists do not follow a specific recipe, but there is an underlying (24)___ for scientific research. First, we develop idea and form a research question, there’s no limit to the sources of such ideas. However, the research question does follow a specified form which we will talk about in the next lesson.  Second, we develop a theory or explanation. This theory answers the research question. From this theory we derive (25)___ or testable aspects of the theory that we should be able to see if our explanation is supported. Hypothesis should make a statement about relationship and be worded very clearly: X should lead to Y more than not-X, for example. Or if X than Y only when Z is present, it is another example. Third, we move on to research. In this stage we (26)____ in empirical analysis to either confirm or refuse the hypothesis. In this step we’re looking for verification of our hypothesis which would support our theory, which would answer our research question. An import component of this is judging whether or not the results actually do verify the hypothesis. This is sometimes an art more than a science, making decisions about what to observe and how to measure specific concept and finally how best to go about testing the relationship can be difficult. As part of the analysis we decide whether our hypothesis should be accepted, (27)____ or modified. This might begin the process anew or conclude and allow our findings to serve as inspiration for more research questions or for other researchers.
	scrutiny
	reasoning
	tentative
	variety
	generalizable
	replicable
	maintain
	experimentation
	derived
	instance
	research
	empirical
	causality
	verifiable
	reiterate
	outcomes
	predict
	parsimonious
	hierarchical
	principal
	simplicity
hypothesis
requires
abandoned
logic
engage
inquiry

2 Vocabulary focus. Sudy the words and  word combinations, practise their translation, spelling. Check your knowledge in the test. Play vocabulary game and set your own vocabulary game record.

3 Mark the following statements as True or False.

1.      Scientific methods include experimentation and logical reasoning.

2.     Scientific knowledge can be verified by other researchers.

3.     Science tries to find solutions and prove hypotheses.

4.     Scientific knowledge is verified with the help of empirical methods.

5.      Description is always part of scientific knowledge.

6.     Scientific explanations help to predict future.

7.     Scientific claims should be simple.

8.     Research question does not have a specified form there is no limits to the ways it can be formed.

9.     Empirical analysis is used only to confirm hypothesis.

10.  As a result of analysis new hypothesis is always formulated.

 4 Answer the Questions.

1. What are the characteristics of scientific knowledge?

2. What is scientific method? Can all methods of analysis be called scientific?

3 What is the aim of scientific method?

4 What are the components of scientific knowledge?

5 How do scientists make research statement and formulate research questions?

6 What is the role of hypothesis in scientific research?

7 Why is generalizatoion important for scientific knowledge?

8 What can scientists generalize in their research?

9 What is parsimony? What role does it play in research?

10 Why is it important for scientific ideas to be transmissible?