Whether alternate universes have the right to exist? In Hollywood they have become a favorite tool of cinematographers; as an example we can cite the episode of "Star trek" called "Mirror, mirror". Captain kirk accidentally gets into a strange parallel universe, where the Federation of planets is a sinister Empire, the unity of which is provided by brutal conquest, greed and robbery. In this universe Spock is terrible beard, and the captain kirk is the leader of the gang greedy pirates, always ready to turn your opponents into slavery and kill their own commanders.

Alternate universes allow us plenty to explore the world by the name of "what if..." and his wonderful, mysterious opportunities. In the comic book series about Superman, for example, was attended by several alternate universes, one of them with Superman's home planet, krypton, not explode; another Superman finally reveals his secret, and admits that he and modest Clark Kent - one person; in the third he marries Guislain and they give birth to superduty. But can we consider parallel worlds exclusively the preserve of the series "the twilight zone", or they are in modern physics serious prerequisites?

Throughout human history, including almost all of the ancient society, people believed that there are other areas inhabited by gods and spirits. The Church believes in the existence of heaven, hell and purgatory. Buddhists have Nirvana and different planes of consciousness. The Hindus - thousand worlds.

Christian theologians, unable to explain where the can be heaven, often arguing that God may live somewhere in the other, the higher dimensions. Ironically, if higher dimension did exist, many of the qualities we ascribe to the gods, could become a reality. Being in a higher dimension acquires the ability to appear and disappear anywhere on their own, and to walk through walls - abilities, which in the view of the person usually possess deity.

Recently, the concept of parallel universes is one of the most hotly debated topics in theoretical physics. In General, it is possible to speak about several types of parallel universes that cause us to rethink our ideas about "reality". Moreover rate in the theoretical debate about the different parallel universes is as much the nature of reality itself.

In the scientific literature is being actively discussed at least three types of parallel universes:

a) hyperspace, or higher dimension;

b) multiverse;

in) quantum parallel universes.
Hyperspace

The long history of scientific discussions of all types of parallel universes boasts a parallel universe higher dimensions. Common sense and senses tell us that we live in three dimensions (length, width and height). No matter how we move the object in space, his position is always possible to describe these three coordinates. In General, these three numbers, one can determine the exact position of any object in the Universe, from the tip of its nose to the most remote galaxies.

At first glance the fourth spatial dimension is contrary to common sense. For example, when the smoke fills the entire room, we don't see that it disappeared in another dimension. Nowhere in our Universe, we do not see objects that suddenly disappeared or was drifting in a different universe. This means that a higher dimension, where applicable, the size should be smaller than an atom.

Three spatial dimensions form a Foundation, the Foundation of Greek geometry. For example, Aristotle in his treatise On the sky" wrote: "the Size, several in one dimension, there is a line in the two - surface in a three - body, and in addition to them, there is no other value as three [measure] is the [measure]". V g, h, E. Ptolemy of Alexandria offered the first "proof" that a higher dimension "impossible". In the treatise the distance," he says as follows. Draw three mutually perpendicular straight lines (the lines that form the corner of the room). Obviously, to hold the fourth line, perpendicular to the first three, it is impossible, therefore, the fourth dimension is impossible. (Actually, he was able to prove this way only one thing: our brain is not capable to visualize the fourth dimension. On the other hand, computers are constantly engaged settlements in hyperspace.)

For two millennia any mathematician who dared to speak about the fourth dimension, risked be ridiculed. In 1685 mathematician John Wallis in debate about the fourth dimension called him a "monster in nature, could not be more than a Chimera or a centaur." In the XIX century "king of mathematicians Carl Gauss developed mathematics fourth dimension largely, but was afraid to publish the results, fearing a negative reaction. He himself, however, conducted experiments and tried to determine whether or not the three-dimensional purely Greek geometry correctly describes the Universe. In one of the experiments he put three assistant at the tops of three neighboring hills. Each assistant was the light; the light of all three lights formed in the space of a giant triangle. The very same Gauss carefully measured all the angles of this triangle and, to his dismay, found that the sum of the interior angles of a triangle is really 180 degrees. From this, the scientist concluded that if deviations from the standard Greek geometry and exist, they are so small that it is impossible to find such ways.

In the honor to describe and publish the foundations of mathematics higher dimensions had Georg Bernhard to Reiman, the student of Gauss. (In a few decades, the math was included in full in the General theory of relativity.) In a famous lecture in 1854 Riemann one fell swoop knocked over 2000 years of rule, the Greek geometry and established the foundations of mathematics of the highest, curvilinear measurements; and today we are using the math.

At the end of the XIX century remarkable discovery Riemann thundered throughout Europe and caused the broadest interest of the public; the fourth dimension caused a sensation among artists, musicians, writers, philosophers and artists. For example, art historian Linda Dalrymple Henderson believes that the cubism of Picasso arose partly under the impression from the fourth dimension. (Portraits of women by Picasso, on which the eyes look forward, and the nose is sideways, are an attempt to present a four-dimensional perspective, because at the sight of the fourth dimension you can see the face, nose and neck women) Henderson writes: "Like a black hole, the fourth dimension possessed a mysterious properties that are not able to understand even by scientists. And yet a fourth dimension was much more understandable and representable than black holes, or any other scientific hypothesis, after 1919, with the exception of relativity theory".

Other artists also tried to draw from the fourth dimension. The picture of Salvador Dali "Crucifixion" Christ crucified before the strange floating in the space of three-dimensional cross, which actually is a scan of a four-dimensional cube. In his famous painting "the Persistence of memory" he tried to present time as a fourth dimension - hence metaform spread hours. Picture of Nude woman figure, down the stairs" of Marcel Duchamp attempts to represent time as the fourth dimension through the image several stages of the movement. The fourth dimension appears even from Oscar Wilde in the story "Canterville Ghost", as a Ghost lives there in the fourth dimension.

The fourth dimension is mentioned in several works H.G. wells, including "the invisible Man", "the History of Plattner" and "Wonderful visit. (In the last story, which has since become the basis for dozens of Hollywood movies and science fiction novels, our universe somehow encounters a parallel universe. Poor angel from neighboring universe falls under random shot of the hunter and falls in our Universe. In the end, he, overwhelmed by greed, meanness and selfishness prevails in our Universe, commits suicide.)

Robert Heinlein's novel "the number of the beast" explores the idea of parallel universes with irony. In this novel, four brave earthlings are worn in parallel universes sports car, mad Professor, who can move between measurements.

In the TV series "Moving" the boy under the influence of one book decides to build a machine that would allow him to "slide" between parallel universes. (You can add that the hero of the series have read my book "Hyperspace".)

But historically that physicists considered the fourth dimension just as funny unusual. No evidence of the existence of higher dimensions were not. The situation began to change in 1919, when physicist Theodor Kaluza wrote a controversial article in which hinted at the existence of higher dimensions. Starting with the General theory of relativity, he placed it in five-dimensional space (four spatial dimensions and pATOA - time; because the time has established itself as the fourth dimension of space-time, physicists now call the fourth dimension of space fifth). If you take the size of the Universe along fifth dimension less and less, equations magically fall into two parts. One part describes the standard theory of relativity, but the other turns into Maxwell's theory of light!

It was a stunning revelation. Perhaps the mystery of light is hidden in the fifth dimension! This decision was shocked even Einstein; it seemed, it provides an elegant Association of light and gravity. (Einstein was so shocked by the idea of Kaluza that two years had thought about before has agreed to the publication of his article.) Einstein wrote Kaluza: "the Idea is to get the [unified theory], through the five-dimensional cylinder never would have crossed my mind at first sight... me your idea very much... Formal unity of your theory is striking".

Many years of physics wondered if light is a wave, what, in fact, varies? Light can overcome billions of light years of empty space, but the empty space is a vacuum, it has no substance. So what varies in a vacuum? Theory Kaluza allowed to nominate about this particular assumption: the light is real waves in the fifth dimension. Maxwell's equations that describes all the properties of light, get to it just as equations waves that move in the fifth dimension.

Imagine a fish in the small pond. Perhaps they are not even aware of the existence of the third dimension, because their eyes are watching in hand, and to swim, they can only forward or backward, left or right. Perhaps the third dimension even seems to them to be impossible. But now imagine the rain on the surface of the pond. Fish can't see the third dimension, but they see the shadows and the ripples on the surface of the pond. Similarly, the theory Kaluza explains light like ripples moving on to the fifth dimension.

Kaluza gave the answer to the question, where is the fifth dimension. Since we do not see any signs of its existence, it must be "rolled up" to such a small size that notice is not possible. (Take a two-dimensional sheet of paper and tightly roll it into a cylinder. From afar, the cylinder will seem one-dimensional line. It turns out that you turned two-dimensional object, and made it a one-dimensional.)

At first the work Kaluza made a sensation. But in the following years there were serious objections against the theory. What are the dimensions of this new fifth dimension? How it curled up? The answer was not.

For several decades, Einstein was taken from time to time to work on this theory. But after his death in 1955, the theory was quickly forgotten, it turned into a funny note on the pages of the history of physics.
String theory

This all changed with the advent of startling new theory, called superstring theory. By the early 1980s physics literally drowned in the sea of elementary particles. Each time, splitting the atom in part through a powerful particle accelerator, they, to the great surprise, found that out of the split atom fly dozens of new particles. This state of Affairs so Bessarabia that Robert Oppenheimer said: Nobel prize for physics should be given to physics, which for the year will not open any new particles! (Enrico Fermi, horrified by how rampant the fruit of elementary particles with the Greek letters in the names, said, "If I was able to remember the names of all these particles, I would botanist".) Only after decades of hard work this densely populated zoo managed to organize at least in some system called Standard model. Billions of dollars, the hard work of thousands of engineers and physicists and 20 Nobel prizes allowed to climb the Standard model literally piece by piece. This is truly a wonderful theory, relevant, as far as can be judged, all experimental data subatomic physics.

But the Standard model, despite experimental success, has one very serious drawback. Says Stephen Hawking, "she's ugly and rather arbitrary". It at least 19 of free parameters (including the mass of the particles and the strength of its interaction with other particles), 36 quarks and antiquarks, three more important subatomic particles and their antiparticles, and many other subatomic particles with strange names such as gluons Yang-mills, Higgs bosons, the W and Z bosons-particles. Worse, the Standard model says nothing about gravity. It is hard to believe that nature in primary, basic level can be so confusing and highly relevantnoj. This theory would be able to love only the people who have invested in her soul. The lack of beauty in the Standard model was enough to physics wanted to challenge their view of the nature. Something here was not so.

If you examine the development of physics in the last few centuries, we will see that one of the major achievements of the last of them was aware of all of the fundamental laws in the two great theories: quantum theory (represented by the Standard model and General theory of relativity (which describes gravity). It is remarkable that together these two theories are the full amount of physical knowledge on a fundamental level. The first theory describes the world of the very small - subatomic quantum world where the particles do their fantastic dance, come out of nowhere and they disappear again and also manage to be in two places at once. The second theory describes the world is very large; it is interested in such objects as black holes and the Big Bang; it uses the language of smooth surfaces, stretched canvases and the distorted space. These theories all over the opposite to each other, they use different mathematics, different axioms and different physical picture of the world. When you look at them the impression that nature has two hands, absolutely not connected with each other. Moreover, all attempts to combine both theory did not lead to any reasonable result. For half a century every physicist, who tried at gunpoint to marry quantum theory and General relativity, unexpectedly found that any attempt to get their theory crumbles and responds infinity, devoid of any meaning.

Everything changed with the appearance on the stage of the theory of superstrings, which States that the electron and other subatomic particles are not that other, as the various vibrations of the strings, working like a tiny rubber band. If you pull a stretched rubber band, it will vibrate in various ways - each note has a specific sub-atomic particle. Thus, superstring theory explains the existence of hundreds of subatomic particles, discovered by scientists using accelerators. Moreover, Einstein's theory also fit into this theory as a manifestation of one of the most low-frequency vibrations.

String theory even extolled as the notorious "theory of everything", uskolzauschuu from Einstein last 30 years of his life. Einstein needed a comprehensible theory that would unite in itself all the laws of physics and allowed him "to know what God thinks". If string theory is right combined gravitation and quantum theory, it probably represents the greatest achievement of science in the last 2000 years - from the time when the Greeks first pondered the question: what is the matter?

But the theory of superstrings is a very strange feature: these strings can vibrate only in space-time of a certain dimension, namely in destinaron. If you try to formulate a theory of strings for a different number of dimensions, nothing will come of it; the mathematical apparatus will simply collapse.

Of course, our four-dimensional universe with three spatial dimensions and one time). This means that the other six dimensions must be some way hlopoty, or collapsed, like the fifth dimension, Kaluza.

Recently, physicists have begun to think seriously about how to prove or to disprove the existence of these higher dimensions. Perhaps the simplest way to verify their existence is to find deviations from Newton's law of universal gravitation. From school we know that the force of Earth's gravity decreases with distance. More specifically, the force of mutual attraction decreases proportionally to the square of the distance between the objects. But this is true only because we live in a three-dimensional world. (Imagine a sphere around the Earth. The force of Earth's gravity is evenly distributed on the area of the sphere, so the larger the area, the weaker gravity. But the surface area of a sphere is proportional to the square of its radius, and therefore the force of gravity, distributed on the surface of a sphere, must decrease proportionally to the square of the radius.)

But if the Universe were four spatial dimensions, the force of gravity would have to decrease in proportion to the cube of the distance. In General, if the universe had n spatial dimensions, gravity in it decreased would be proportional to (n-1)th degree of distance. The famous Newton's law that the force of gravity is inversely proportional to the square of the distance, checked for astronomical distances with great accuracy; that is why we can send space probes with amazing accuracy through cracks in the rings of Saturn. But until recently, no one has tested this law in the laboratory, at very small distances.

The first experiment designed to test the law of the inverse gravity the square of the distance, was held in 2003 at the University of Colorado. The result of the experiment was negativesory: apparently, parallel universe does not exist, at least in Colorado it is not. But a negative result only whetted the appetite of other physicists, who now hope to repeat this experiment with even greater precision.

The large hadron Collider, which in 2008 was put into operation near Geneva, will participate in search of particles of a new type - the so-called superparticle, which represent the highest fashion fluctuations of superstrings (everything you see around is just low frequency fluctuations of superstrings). If the TANK is really find superparticles, it may mean the beginning of this revolution in our Outlook on the Universe. In a new picture of the Universe, the Standard model is simply to provide low-frequency oscillations of superstrings.

Kip Thorne says: "By 2020, physics will have to understand the laws of quantum gravity, and find that they are variants of string theory".

Besides the higher dimensions, string theory predicts the existence and another version of parallel universes; it is about the Multiverse.
Multiverse

One question about string theory still haunts: why this theory there is nothing more nor less than five versions? Indeed, string theory can unite quantum theory and gravity, but to do so, as it turns out, can in five ways. This is quite frustrating, because physics is mostly dreamed about the one and only "theory of everything". Einstein, for example, wanted to know, "was God's choice for the creation of the Universe". He was convinced that the unified field theory, or the theory of everything must be unique. So why today we see five versions of string theory?

In 1994, in the scientific world exploded another bomb. Edward Witten of the Institute for advanced study in Princeton and Paul Townsend from Cambridge University have suggested that all five theories of strings actually represent one theory - but only if you add the eleventh dimension. At the sight of the eleventh dimension all five theories will merge into one! It turns out that the theory is really unique, but only if the Supervisory select the top of the eleventh dimension.

In the eleventh dimension could be a new mathematical object called "membrane" (for example, it can be like the surface of a sphere). But - striking observation is the transition from 11 dimensions to 10 of a single membrane appear all five string theories - and it turns out that they are just different ways of translation membrane of odinnadtsatimetrovy world in desyatiletnij.

(As illustrate imagine inflatable ball Park and ride it along the equator gum. Imagine that you take the scissors and cut the whole of the ball on both sides of the gum. Will remain only the rubber band, or string. Similarly, if you minimize the eleventh dimension, from the membrane will only "equator", he's a string. Mathematically, there are five ways to remove a ball, or membrane, when you minimize the "extra" dimensions and accordingly in destinaron space we have five different string theories.)

Eleventh dimension has allowed us to look at the whole picture. There is also the assumption that the universe is too membrane floating in odinnadtsatimetrovy space-time. Moreover, not all measurements should be minimized to the infinitely small quantities. On the contrary, some of them can be endless.

What if our universe, together with other universes, there is a single Multiverse? Imagine the many floating in the air bubbles, or membranes. Each bubble represents the whole universe, floating in odinnadtsatimetrovy the hyperspace of a larger size. Bubbles can unite with each other or separated into several bubbles, they can even appear and disappear. It is not excluded that we all live on the shell of one such bubble universe.

Max Tegmark MIT believes that in 50 years ' existence of these "parallel universes" will cause no more doubts than the existence of other galaxies, which was then called "island universes", was little doubt about 100 years ago."

How many universes predicted by string theory? Rather unpleasant feature of string theory is the fact that the universes can be many - many trillions of universes, each of which is fully consistent with the theory of relativity and quantum theory. According to one estimate, there may be a googol of such universes. (The word is a unit with a hundred zeros.]

Under normal conditions, the relationship between universes impossible. The atoms in our bodies are like flies on the sticky paper. We can freely move in three dimensions of our universe is a membrane, but not able to "jump" from it in hyperspace, because glued to our Universe. But gravity, which is a distortion of space-time, is free to swim in the space between universes.

There is a theory that hidden mass, or dark matter is an invisible substance surrounding our Galaxy, perhaps, is a common substance in a parallel universe. As they say in the novel by H.G. wells ' invisible Man", the observer is invisible to us, if we will be right over us in the fourth dimension. Imagine two parallel sheets of paper and observer, which is located on the second sheet, and seeth under the first one.

There are other assumptions - for example, that hidden mass can be a normal galaxy, hovering just above us in the other universe-the membrane. We feel the gravity of the galaxy because gravity is able to penetrate everywhere, even between universes - but the galaxy is left for us invisible, because any light trapped in his universe. Thus, we have an invisible galaxy, with nevertheless a lot of that is hidden mass. (Another possibility is that the hidden mass is the following oscillation mode of superstring. All that we see around is not that other, as the lower fashion these fluctuations. It is not excluded that dark matter - set of the following frequency oscillations superstring.)

Of course, most of parallel universes, most likely dead and are formless accumulation of subatomic particles such as electrons and neutrinos. In these universes proton can be unstable, so all the substance in the form in which we know it, will gradually decompose and disappear into space. Likely, over many universes complex substance composed of atoms and molecules, simply cannot exist.

In other parallel universes, on the contrary, complex form of the matter is far more than we can imagine. Instead of one type of atoms, which are constructed out of protons, neutrons and electrons, stable substance there can exist in a striking diversity of forms and types.

Membrane universes are also able to confront each other, giving rise to cosmic fireworks. Some of physics at Princeton believe that our universe was born, probably, at collision of two huge membranes, which occurred 13.7 billion years ago. They believe toodelda wave from the collision and was the cause of our Universe. Interestingly, when considering experimentally testable implication of this unusual ideas produces results that are quite consistent with the results of the WMAP satellite, currently in earth orbit. (This theory is known as the theory of the "Big splash".)

In favor of the theory of the Multiverse says at least one fact. If we analyze the main physical constants, you can easily find that they are just "tuned" so that these conditions can be life. It is necessary to enlarge nuclear power - and the stars will burn out too quickly to life he managed to emerge and develop. Should they be reduced - and the stars will not ignite at all; of course, life in this case, too, will not be able to exist. If you increase the force of gravity, our universe will quickly die in Large compression; if it is a little down, she quickly expand to freeze. In General, in order in our Universe came suitable for living conditions, were required dozens of "accidents", in relation to global constants. Obviously, our universe on many parameters is in the "zone of life"; a lot of it "is exactly tailored" to the life could originate and exist. So we have to make a conclusion either about the existence of a God who deliberately took care of that, so that our universe has turned out so, what is necessary, or else about the existence of billions of parallel universes, many of whom are dead. As said Freeman Dyson, "the universe, it seems, knew in advance that we will appear".

Sir Martin Rees from Cambridge University believes that this precise adjustment of all parameters reliable evidence in favor of the Multiverse. All five main physical constants (such as the strength of fundamental interactions in our Universe are chosen very precisely and fit to live, and he is convinced that in addition to our exists an infinite number of universes in which the physical constants are not compatible with life.

This so-called anthropic principle, In a weak version of this principle simply States that the parameters of our Universe is fine-tuned for life (and first of all because we exist and can make such a conclusion).

In the strong version of the anthropic principle States that our existence is probably a side effect of someone's purposeful actions. PLstvo cosmologists are ready to agree with a weak version of the anthropic principle, but the question of what constitutes the very principle - a new word in science, opening the way to new discoveries and developments, or simply a statement of the obvious.
Quantum theory

In addition to higher dimensions and the Multiverse, there is another parallel universe - the one that gave a headache to Einstein and that continues to torment physicists today. This is a quantum universe, which predicts ordinary quantum mechanics. Paradoxes of quantum physics are very stubborn, and Nobel laureate Robert Feynman used to say that no one really understands quantum theory.

Yes, the quantum theory is the most successful theory ever developed by the human mind; Yes, the accuracy of its predictions often comes to one ten-billionth. However, this theory is built on sand and fully depends on the case, good luck and probability. Unlike Newton's theory, which gives exact and clear answers to questions about the movement of objects, quantum theory able to name only a probability. Wonders of the modern world - lasers, Internet, computers, television, cell phones, radar, microwave ovens, etc., - based upon the shifting Sands of probabilities.

Perhaps the most obvious example of this can serve as the famous problem "Schrodinger cat" (formulated one of the founders of quantum theory, which, ironically, has proposed the problem in the hope to defeat its probabilistic interpretation). Schroedinger was really angry with that interpretation of his theory; he said, "If you really have to take seriously that damned quantum transitions, I will regret that at all participated in this matter".

The paradox of Schrodinger cat is as follows: place a cat in a sealed box. Let's mailbox has loaded weapon aimed at the cat (and the trigger of the gun is associated with a Geiger counter, next to which is a piece of uranium). In normal circumstances, if the uranium atom will decay, Geiger trigger, the gun fired, and the cat will be killed. An atom of uranium will either collapse or not. The cat will live or die. This corresponds to common sense.

But in quantum theory, we can't know for sure, split the uranium atom or not. So we have to combine these two features, i.e. to lay down the wave function of the collapsed atom wave function of the whole atom. But this means that for the description of the cats we have to add two of its state. So the cat we will be neither alive nor dead. It will be presented as the sum of the living dead cats and cats!

Feynman once wrote that the quantum-mechanical description of nature "is absurd from the point of view of common sense, and it is fully in agreement with experiment, so, I hope you can take this nature at it's absurd the way."

Einstein and Schroedinger this view seemed ridiculous. Einstein believed in "objective reality", common sense, Newtonian view of the world, where objects existed in one particular state, and not as the sum of many possible States. However, the basis of modern civilization is such an unusual interpretation. Without it could not exist modern electronics (and the atoms of our body, too). (In the ordinary world we sometimes joke that cannot be "a little pregnant". But in the quantum world, the situation is even worse. The woman in it would exist as the sum of all possible States of her body: she was both non-pregnant, pregnant, girl, woman, girl, businesswoman and so on)

There are several ways to solve this unpleasant paradox. The founders of quantum theory believed in the so-called Copenhagen interpretation and believed that, as soon as you open the mailbox, you can take measurements to determine a live cat or dead. After that is all. The wave function is "fixed" in one of the States; after that common sense prevails. Waves disappear, leaving the particles. This means that the cat finally comes to a defined state (or live or dead), and it cannot be described by wave functions.

Thus, there is an invisible barrier that separates the whimsical world of atoms and the macroscopic world of people, In the nuclear world, everything is described through waves of probability, and atoms can be in several places at the same time. The bigger the wave function of a particle at a given point, the higher is the probability to find a particle of it is here. But in the world of large objects of the wave function is already fixed and objects exist in a particular state. In the macrocosm common sense prevails.

(When Einstein came to visit, he was pointing to the moon and asked: "Did the Moon exists because it looks a mouse?" In a sense, the Copenhagen school gave to this question is positive answer.)

In the most serious textbooks on physics with religious accuracy presents the point of view of the Copenhagen school, but many physicists-researchers from it has refused. Now we have nanotechnology, we can manipulate individual atoms - and it turns out that atoms that appear, disappear, too, can be manipulated, at least using a scanning tunneling microscope. Thus, the invisible wall"separating the microcosm and macrocosm, does not exist. The world is United.

Now physicists there is no consensus about how to solve this problem lying at the heart of modern physics. At conferences happen heated debate, faced numerous theories. Some people thought that there must be a "cosmic consciousness"which permeates the Universe. Objects occur begin to exist when the measurements are made, as measurement is carried out beings with consciousness. Therefore, there must be a single cosmic consciousness that permeates the entire Universe and determines what state we're in. Some, like the Nobel prize winner Eugene Wigner claim that it proves the existence of God or, at least, a kind of cosmic consciousness. (Wigner wrote: "it was Impossible to formulate laws [quantum theory] absolutely consistently without reference to consciousness." He even showed interest in the Vedic philosophy of Hinduism, according to which pervades our Universe a single, comprehensive consciousness.)

Another look at the paradox cats - the idea of a "plurality of worlds"[30], the proposed Hugh Everett in 1957, This theory States that the universe just split in two, with one half of the cat is alive, the other dead. This means that every time there is a quantum event, parallel universes reproduce or branched. There are any universe, what it can be. Than prichudlivee the universe, so it is less likely but still such universes exist. This means that there is a parallel world, where the Nazis had won the Second world war, and peace, where the Great Spanish Armada was not broken and now all speak Spanish. In other words, the wave function never collapse and are not fixed to a particular state. They continue to live their life, and the universe cheerful branched out and split into infinite number of parallel universes.

Physicist Alan Guth from the Massachusetts Institute of technology says, "the universe Exists, where Elvis is still alive, and albert Gore become President". Nobel laureate Frank Wilczek says: "We are tormented by the knowledge that a countless number of our almost exact copies lives his parallel lives and that every moment occurs more of our doubles to share with us many options for our future".

Currently, among physicists is gaining popularity, the concept of the so-called decoherence. This theory States that all possible parallel universes, but our wave function is lost coherence with them (i.e. not already varies in unison with other universes) and therefore is not able to communicate with them. This means that you in your own living room coexist with the wave functions of the dinosaurs, the alien invaders, pirates, unicorns and each of inhabitants believes that his universe is "this"; but all these coexisting universes no longer are in tune" with each other.

Nobel laureate Steven Weinberg compares the situation with the configuration of the radio. You know perfectly well that your living room is literally flooded signals dozens of radio stations from all over the country and world. But your radio will be configured to only one frequency and, consequently, only one station. However, she "loses coherence" with the rest of transmitting stations. (Summing up, Weinberg says that the concept of plurality of the worlds - "a poor idea, but all the others worse.")

To summarize. Is there a sinister Federation of planets, which robs the weaker of the planet and kills indiscriminately their enemies? Perhaps there is, but, if so, we lost coherence with this universe.
Quantum universes

Hugh Everett, of course, tried to discuss his theory of "plurality of worlds" with other physicists, but received only surprise or indifference. One of the physicists, Bryce DeWitt from the University of Texas, and even acted against the theory of Everett, saying: "I'm just not able to feel the split". But Everett such reaction reminded reaction of critics Galilee, saying, that they do not feel the motion of the Earth. (Over time, DeWitt moved to the side of Everett and became one of the leading supporters of this theory.)

For several decades the theory of plurality of the worlds were very obscurity. It just seemed too fantastic to be true. D.Jons Wheeler, Princeton consultant Everett, eventually came to the conclusion that this concept pulls too many "extra baggage". But at some point theory Everett suddenly in Vogue and now she is in the world of physics serious interest. The fact that physicists are now trying to apply quantum theory to the final area that still remained "aquantance": to the Universe itself. And the attempt to apply the principle of uncertainty to the entire Universe as a whole naturally brings to life the idea of a Multiverse.

The concept of "quantum cosmology" at first seem to be the terminology is controversial because of the quantum theory has to do with the tiny world of atoms, and in cosmology are you talking about the Universe in General. But think about it: at the moment of the Big Bang the universe was much smaller than the electron. Any physicist will agree that the electron should be considered from the point of view of quantum theory; this means that the electron probabilistically wave equation (the Dirac equation) and can exist in multiple States. But if the electron should quantize, and the universe was once less than the electron, then the universe must also quantize and exist in parallel States. Therefore, this theory naturally leads to the idea of the plurality of the worlds.

However, the Copenhagen interpretation of Niels Bohr in the Annex to the whole Universe is faced with serious difficulties. In General, the Copenhagen interpretation, while studying in each course of quantum mechanics for graduate students, needs "the observer", the observation of which, in fact, cause the collapse of the wave function. It turns out that to commit the macrocosm of a particular state of the monitoring process is absolutely necessary. But how can you be "outside" the Universe and observe the Universe? If the Universe describes some of the wave function, how can the "exterior" observer to determine the specific state of the Universe and make this function shlopnutsya? Moreover, some scientists believe the failure to observe the Universe from "outside" critical, even fatal flaw of the Copenhagen interpretation.

In the concept of "multiple worlds" this problem is solved very simply: the universe just exists simultaneously in multiple parallel States, which are the main wave function, known as the wave function of the Universe. According to quantum cosmology, the universe originated as a quantum fluctuation of the vacuum, i.e. as a tiny bubble of space-time foam. Most newborns universes of space-time foam is going through a big Bang, and then at once - great compression. This means that even in the "emptiness" boils ongoing activity, arise and they disappear tiny universes, but the scale of these events is too small for our rough devices. One day for some reason one bubble of space-time foam not schopnost back and disappeared into its own Large compression, and continued to expand.

This was our universe. If you listen to Alan Guth, it will turn out that our entire universe is one big freebie.

In quantum cosmology, physics take to start the analog of Schrodinger equation, describing the wave functions of electrons and atoms. They also use the equation of DeWitt-Wheeler, acting on "the wave function of the Universe". Usually the wave function of the Schrodinger defined in each point of space and time, so we can calculate the probability of finding an electron at any given point of space and time. But "the wave function of the Universe" is defined on the set of all possible universes. If you find that this wave function for a particular universe is large, it would mean that the universe is very likely is in this state.

Hawking supports this point of view. He argues that our universe is special, it is unique and different from all the other universes. If the wave function of our Universe is large, for most of the rest it is almost zero. It turns out that there is non-zero, but a very small probability that in the Multiverse may be other universes other than ours, but our universe exists with maximum probability. In General, Hawking tries so logically explain the phenomenon of inflation. In this picture of the world, the universe in which begins the process of inflation, just more likely than the universe where nothing of the kind, so in our Universe, such process took place.

Theory of the origin of our Universe from the "emptiness" of the space-time foam at first glance appears to be completely unverifiable; however, it is consistent with a few simple observations. First, many physicists have pointed to the remarkable fact that the sum of positive and negative electric charge in our Universe is zero - at least within the experimental error. It seems natural that the dominant force in space is gravity, but it happens only because of negative and positive charges exactly offset each other. If there was even the slightest imbalance between positive and negative charges, electric power, it is quite possible that he would overcome the forces of gravitational attraction linking Earth together, and just would blow our planet. The exact balance between the total of the positive and negative charges can easily be explained, in part, to the fact that the universe came from nothing, and nothing has zero electric charge.

Secondly, our universe has zero spin. Kurt g?del many years trying to prove that the universe revolves, by analysing and summarizing spins different galaxies, but to date, astronomers are convinced that the total spin of our Universe is zero. Again, this fact can easily be explained by the fact that the universe came from nothing, and nothing has zero spin.

Third, the emergence of the Universe out of nothing would help to explain why the total amount of matter-energy is so little, and possibly zero. If you add up the positive energy of matter and the negative energy associated with gravity, it seems, they will balance each other. According to the General theory of relativity that if the universe is closed and the end, the total amount of energy and substance in it should be exactly zero. (If the universe is open and endless, this is not necessarily true, but inflationary theory indicates that the total amount of matter-energy in our Universe is very small.)
Contact between universes

All this leaves an interesting question. If physics cannot exclude the possibility of the existence of several types of parallel universes, is it possible to enter into contact with them? To visit them? Or maybe beings from other universes have been in our world?

Contact with other quantum universes that have lost synchronicity with our own, it seems highly unlikely. The reason that our universe has lost synchronization with other universes, is that our atoms were constantly faced with other atoms of the surrounding world. Whenever a collision wave function of the atom slightly "shrinks", and therefore the number of parallel universes is reduced. Each encounter reduces the number of possible options. Trillions of such nuclear "mini collapses" create the illusion that all the atoms of our body completely glopolis and frozen in a particular state. "Objective reality" Einstein - just an illusion that occurs due to the fact that a huge number of atoms in our body constantly facing each other; and at each collision decreases the number of possible universes.

This situation can be compared with defocused images in the camera. Similarly, in microcosm, everything looks changeable and uncertain. But you need a little tweak focus of the camera and the image of new items; each amendment, the picture in General is becoming sharper and sharper. And trillions of tiny collisions with neighboring atoms repeatedly reduce the number of possible universes. Thus, we are gradually moving on changeable from microcosm to stable macrocosm.

Therefore, the probability of interaction with other like ours, the quantum universe and if not equal to zero, then rapidly decreases with the increase in the number of atoms in your body. But atoms in each of us trillions and trillions, so the chance to connect with one another universe populated by dinosaurs or aliens, infinitely small. You can find it, what to expect these events have a lot longer than would exist universe.

So, we cannot completely exclude contact with parallel quantum universes, but it is obvious that this event will be extremely rare because our universe has lost coherence with them. But in cosmology we see another parallel universe: this is a Multiverse, which consists of universes coexisting with one another like soap-bubbles in the foam bath. Contact with another universe inside the Multiverse is a whole other story. This, of course, a difficult problem, but it is possible that civilization III type will be able to solve it.

As we discussed, in order to open a hole in space or increase the space-time foam, requires energy, comparable in order of magnitude with the Planck energy, which are crumbling all known physical laws. Space and time when this energy is unstable, which opens the possibility to leave our Universe (assuming, of course, that other universes exist and we will not perish in the process pperehoda).

The question is, generally speaking, cannot be called a purely academic, because ever before intelligent life in the Universe will face the problem of death of the Universe. In the end, the Multiverse theory can be lifesaving for all intelligent life in our Universe, Recently received from the satellite WMAP data confirm the fact that the universe is expanding with acceleration, and it is possible that someday all of us will face a risk of death in the form of so-called Big Claus. Over time, the whole universe will turn black; all the stars in the heavens will disappear and the Universe will only dead stars, neutron stars and black holes. Even the atoms of our bodies, possibly, will start to disintegrate. The temperature will fall to almost absolute zero, and life will become impossible.

Approaching the Universe to this point advanced civilization, who were faced with the final destruction of his world, can start thinking about resettlement in another universe. The choice of these creatures will be small - to freeze to death or to leave this world. The laws of physics will be a death sentence for any intelligent life - but these laws may provide intelligent beings narrow loophole.

This civilization will have to curb energy giant accelerators and lasers, equal in power a solar system, or even star cluster, and focus on a single point, to get the legendary Planck energy. Perhaps this will be enough to open a wormhole or a path in a different universe. It is not excluded, that civilization III type uses her enormous energy to create wormholes and go through it in another universe, leaving own Universe to die and starting in a new home new life.
The baby universe in the laboratory?

Some ideas are presented practically impossible at first, but physics nevertheless consider them seriously. If, for example, we will try to understand the cause and course of the Big Bang, we will need to carefully analyse the conditions that could give this phenomenon initial push. In other words, we have to ask ourselves: "How to make a baby universe in the laboratory?" Andrei Linde from Stanford University, one of the creators of the concept of the inflationary universe, says that if we will learn to create newborn universes, then, "perhaps it is time for us will be to re-define God as being more complex than just the Creator of the Universe".

The idea itself is not new. Many years ago, when physicists have calculated the energy required to run the Big Bang, "people immediately began to wonder what would happen if in the laboratory to focus a large amount of energy in one point - well, shoot simultaneously in many guns. Is it possible to concentrate enough energy to run a mini-versions of the Big Bang?" asked Linda.

If you would be able to concentrate enough energy at one point, the maximum you will get are the collapse of space-time and the black hole. But in 1981, Alan Guth from the Massachusetts Institute of technology and Andrei Linde proposed the theory of "inflationary universe", which since that time has attracted huge interest of cosmology. According to this theory, the Big Bang began with ultra-fast phase of expansion, much faster than previously thought. (The concept of the inflationary universe resolves many long-standing problems of cosmology explains, for example, why the universe is so homogeneous. Where, in what would be the point of the night sky we look everywhere we see exactly the same homogeneous Universe, although after the Big Bang has not been enough time to distant parts of it have already been in contact. The answer to this riddle, theory predicts, is that the entire visible universe was formed from a tiny and relatively homogeneous "bit" of space-time.) Trying to explain the initial impetus Gut suggested that in early times there was a tiny bubble of space-time, one of which badly swollen and turned into today's Universe.

The inflationary theory of the Universe in one fell swoop answered many cosmological questions. Furthermore, it is consistent with all the new data obtained from satellites OWL and WMAP. This is, undoubtedly, a leading candidate for the Big Bang theory.

But the inflationary theory of the Universe raises many inconvenient questions. Why the bubble began to swell? Why ultra-fast expansion ceased - that is, generally speaking, was the cause of the modern Universe? If inflation is started once, can they occur again? Ironically, although the inflationary scenario is a leading cosmological theory about the causes of the beginning and cessation of inflation almost nothing is known.

Trying to find answers to these painful questions, Alan Guth and Edward Farhi from MIT in 1987 asked another hypothetical question: "How could a highly developed civilization to cause bloat own Universe?" They believe that the answer to this question would probably answer, and on a deeper question: "Why is generally started inflation of the Universe?"

They found that, if the focus enough energy in one point, there will spontaneously occur tiny bubbles of space-time. But if these bubbles are too small, they disappear again and lost in space-time foam. To be able to swell to full universe, the vial should be large enough.

Outside the birth of a new universe would not look too impressive - may not terrible explosion 500-kilotonne nuclear bomb. Would look as if a small bottle disappeared from existing universe, leaving a small nuclear explosion. But inside the bubble could inflate an entirely new universe. Imagine a soap bubble, which is split into two or spawns near the tiny newborn child bubble. Sometimes this tiny soap bubble is rapidly inflates in a brand new full soap bubble. Similarly, being inside the newborn universe, you would see an incredible explosion of space-time and the emergence of a whole universe.

After 1987 was offered many theories that determine whether an energy supply to turn a large bubble in the whole universe. The most common is probably the theory that unknown until the particle named "inflation" destabilize the space-time and makes the bubbles to form and to swell.

Conflict is revealed in 2006, when physicists began seriously considering a new proposal to "run" the growth of the newborn universe using monopole. Although still Monopoli - particles with only one magnetic pole, the North or South, - no one has ever seen, is that the first time they prevailed in the young Universe. Monopoli is so massive that they are extremely difficult to create in a laboratory; but it is possible that the massiveness will allow them to download additional energy to drive the process of inflation newborn universe and its transformation into a full universe.

Why physicists need to create universes? Linda says, "In the future, each of us can become God." But aspiration is imperative to create a new universe is and the more the real reason: perhaps eventually it will help us to survive when the inevitable death of our Universe.
The evolution of the universes?

Some physicists tend to take this idea even further to the borders of science fiction; they wonder, not made if the mind "hand" to the creation of our Universe?

In the picture, the corresponding theory Guta-Fahri, highly developed civilization may well create new universes, but all physical constants (i.e. the mass of the electron and proton, and the intensity of the four fundamental interactions) will remain the same. What if an advanced civilization would be able to create new universes with little other than their own, the values of physical constants? After that newborns universes could evolve over time, with each generation of newborns universes slightly different from the previous one.

If we consider the set of fundamental constants a sort of DNA of the universe, and we will have a reasonable life, quite possibly, will learn to create newborn universes with slightly different DNA. Over time, created the universes will be developed; this breed will universes with the best of DNA, allowing the emergence and flourishing of intelligent life. Physicist Edward Harrison on the basis of previous ideas Lee Smolin put forward the idea of "natural selection" among universes. According to this idea, the Multiverse is dominated by exactly universes with the best DNA, which is consistent with the idea of occurrence of highly developed civilizations, and those, in turn, will create the following newborn universes. "Survival of the fittest" simply means the survival of those universes that best contribute to the emergence of highly developed civilizations.

This picture, if it is true, would explain why the fundamental constants of the Universe "tuned" for life. It would only mean that in the Multiverse thrive and multiply it universes with desirable (i.e. compatible with life) constants.

(This concept of "universe evolution" is very attractive, because it can solve the problem of the anthropic principle. The drawback is that such an idea is unverifiable and nepaliforum. Until there is a complete theory of everything, we will not be able to say about this idea anything reasonable.)