View Single Post
  #29  
Old 03-04-2016, 07:31 PM
griffin1977 griffin1977 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,726
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irishman View Post
The universe came first, and it meant everything. And then we described things like universal laws, laws that describe the behavior of the universe.

Then we posited other things like our universe that had different laws. They are not within our universe, but are analogous to it. Thus, they are other universes. Therefore, the collective set of universes is the multiverse.

We could have extended the word "universe" and tried to create a new word for the local bubble in which we live versus the other bubbles that might have different laws. Call it the sub-verse or something. But that's not what happened.
But the universe means literally the thing there is only one of. So by definition if there is more than one of it, it's not a universe. That's why the term multiverse originally coined, to describe these other things that look like universes, but aren't (as there are more than one of them, that collectively make up the universe). But over time the term was use incorrectly (to describe the collective thing, not the individual facets) and that incorrect use stuck.

Can't find a cite, or remember who the scientist was who coined the term, but I believe it's covered in one of the popular books on the subject (Maybe In Search of the Multiverse ?)

Last edited by griffin1977; 03-04-2016 at 07:32 PM.