Can Something Both Exist and Not Exist? Mathematical Models of Reality.

.

The question posed in the title of this commentary may seem absurd at first, but keep reading.

Most scientific discoveries begin by trying to explain something that was physically seen, or observed.  For example, lightning, was seen long before it was explained as an electrical phenomenon.  But not every scientific discovery begins with an observation.  For example, black holes, collapsed stars that do not emit light, but swallow it, were supposed to exist long before their presence was ever confirmed by seeing their effects.  They were inferred, so to speak, by physicists devising mathematical models.  They used the law of gravity, expressed in formulas, and extrapolated, or extended, the numbers, to predict the existence of black holes.

Subsequent observations confirmed the mathematical prediction.  Black holes do indeed exist.

However, there are mathematical predictions that turn out to be incorrect in physical fact.  We know this because some of these theories contradict each other; therefore, one or both of them must be wrong.

Finally, there are mathematical predictions that have never been verified.  Indeed, some of them may forever remain unverifiable.  This will bring us to our opening question.

One of the predictions is the hypothesis called the many universes theory.  This theory arises from quantum mechanics, an established science that has resulted in technologies that we use commonly, and upon which we depend for such things as computers and cell phones.

More to the point, quantum theory depends heavily on the mathematical expressions of probability and the inherent uncertainty involved in the measurement of quantum effects.  It is beyond the scope of this commentary to explain the many and varied interpretations of quantum theory, but we will focus on the part that is relevant to this discussion.  (Since I am not a physicist, I am not qualified to delve into that realm.)

Physical theories describe the universe as being an unintended structure brought about by physical laws of nature.  Observation, however, strongly suggests that the universe is intentionally designed to host life.  It seems plausibly designed to support not merely life, but life that gave rise to conscious, intelligent creatures.  Those creatures produced civilization, and its associated activities of science, technology, philosophy, art, and much more.  All of these are extraordinarily unlikely, to the extreme, characteristics of an unintended universe.

Intelligent design theory enjoys support from mathematics.  This is because the universe has many and precise mathematical properties which, if they were to be changed even slightly, would result in a universe that does not support life.  Indeed, such a universe might collapse into a fireball, or else, spray into a mist.

Many scientists cannot accept the idea of Intelligent Design (of the universe).  They turned to quantum mathematical models for alternate theories.  They reasoned that, while the chances of our universe producing life and civilization are vanishingly small, this minuscule chance could be overcome if there were enough universes, enough so-called rolls of the dice, to make it more likely, even probable, that our universe could exist by chance alone.

The result is the Many Universes model of physical reality.  While it is derived from accepted science (quantum physics), there is no direct physical evidence that there are other universes.  Moreover, even if there are other universes, their existence would not disprove Intelligent Design, but in fact, bolster it.  Why?  Because if science cannot explain our one universe in terms of probability, it has even greater difficulty in explaining why a multi-universe could produce our universe without itself having the intended capacity to do so.  If universes are produced by so-called rolls of dice, then we are forced to ask, what produces the dice?

The central question being addressed here is whether mathematical models can explain reality without physical corroboration.  Must something exist if it fits a mathematical theory?  Can something exist only mathematically?  Can something exist that we can surmise, but never prove?

This is what is meant by the rhetorical question, can something both exist (in mathematics), but not exist in physical reality?

.