Multi Universe Theory

[Hiketes]

Hi All

I have started reading Timaeus by Plato, there is a description of the universe that I wanted to ask people's opinion on.

The part in the translation that I am reading states that there is only one universe and not two or an infinite number.

Now this goes against the multi universe theory (which could obviously be wrong), that states that there are an infinite number of parrell universes.

My question is, is this another example of a translation not fully expressing the original or are they mutually exclusive theories?

I hope that this makes sense.

On a side note this thought came to me while I was walking home from work, it's strange how ideas some time just pop into your head

[ΕΜΠΕΔΟΤΙΜΟΣ]

The part in the translation that I am reading states that there is only one universe and not two or an infinite number

.

This is correct.

Now this goes against the multi universe theory (which could obviously be wrong), that states that there are an infinite number of parrell universes.

No it doesn't. On the contrary it verifies it.

Let me try to explain the whole setup a bit. I hope I will manage to give the general idea.

The gods are all equal to each other, they are all in each.
( Isuggest a very good paper to consult : http://henadology.files.wordpress.com/2 ... nifold.pdf
It is titled "Polytheism and Individuality in the Henadic Manifold" by Edward Butler )

*** I copy from one of my posts in a related debate in another forum (adjusted) *****

As we said all Gods are equal to each other, so there’s no concept of a God being superior than another, otherwise, if one God is considered as the head of all the others, there would be no difference than monotheism. This is the cornerstone of Polytheism.

Also all the Gods are Good as they all comprise the One. Plato calls the One also “Agathon” which means Good. A God cannot be evil by default, I hope that no one would ever consider Apollo evil for instance.

The Gods being Good, they want and are capable by their nature to create. “How could Divine be sterile ? “ says Proclus.

Since all Gods want and are capable by their nature to create, being all equal means that they will all create.

What happens then ? As we said every God who starts to create, he/she doesn’t create EX NIHILO ( out of nothing ). So he just uses whatever is available. Well, what is available is the other Gods and their essences. So he/she “looks” to the paradigm ( Phanes ) or, in Orphic terms, he swallows Phanes, and begins the creation of the sensible world.

The God who plays the role of Demiurge is called Zeus and the other Gods play their role in the creation of the World. “Each God is the world in his own way” says Proclus.

( In the same way Indra assembles the other Gods in order to create the world in Hinduism )

As we know, the names of the Gods have special meanings, they contain the meaning of God’s properties and functions.

That’s why we say that the Demiurge acts like a head of an orchestra who looks at the music score (paradigm, Phanes) and just guides the other musicians ( Gods ) to perform the concert ( Sensible World ). The concert ( Sensible World ) is an outcome of collective action.

Now, everything we said about this specific God who plays the role of the Demiurge and to whom the theologians gave the name Zeus, applies also for every other God.

That means that every other God can use the other Gods and their essences to create a world. So while this God in our sensible world played the role of Aphrodite let’s say, in his/her own world he will be known as Zeus.

Technically, there will be AT LEAST so many worlds, as many Gods there are. The number of Gods is INEFFABLE but it is FINITE.

I will give an example. Let’s say we are 10 friends who are all wise and who all can be very good technicians .

Now, I decide to built a house and hence be the civil engineer. So I look at the design who is provided by the architect , and I will guide all the other guys so that the house is built. So John plays the role of the plumber, Jack the role of the electrician, Lisa the role of the building worker, Helen the role of the painter and so on. Just for having a reference, this is where the “Big Bang” is.

In the same way John can play the role of the civil engineer and guide all the others, so now I play the role of the plumber, Helen the role of the building worker, Lisa the role of the electrician and so on.

This can happen for every one of the 10 friends, each one of them would play the role of the civil engineer ( creator/demiurge ) while the others would play the role of each technician.

If you replace the techinicans by the Gods, the civil engineer by the demiurge, the architect by Phanes and the house by the Sensible world, you get the picture I gave you previously.

Now, there’s a question for which I cannot give a straight answer. Would there be 10 houses(worlds) as there will be 10 techinicians(Gods) who can play the role of civil engineer (demiurge) or would they be all the possible combinations between technicians(Gods) and roles in the construction of the house(Sensible Wolrd) ?

There’s no indication in the texts but here we can ask help from the Scientists. My personal opinion is that there will be as many worlds as the possible combinations of Gods/roles are.

Modern Science introduces the concept of Multiverse, meaning that there must be more than one universes. The question is why ? Is nature mad to create universes without a purpose, or is there any reason for that ?

The reason is the following :

In the WHOLE there is a certain number of physical constants ( speed of light, the electron charge etc ). Each of these constants can take a number of quanted amounts. In our universe these constants have certain values, which make the Universe friendly for the human race to live in. Scientists say that if there was a slight change in one of the constants ( e.g. the speed of light ) then humans would be impossible to live in.

So when there was the so-called “Big Bang, there must have been created many universes based on the previous reasoning, that is as many as the possible combinations of the pysical constants. One of these Universes is ours.

So FOR US HUMANS, the Universe is ONE, exactly as Plato says.( Plato has hidden in Timaeus very cleverly this concept ). And FOR OUR UNIVERSE'S ASPECT OF THE HELLENIC PANTHEON, the Demiurge is Zeus, father of Gods and Humans.
But there are more other Universes of which we do not know the status.

Statistically, the Physicists say that there must be 10 at the power of 100 Universes, if I am not mistaken.

A rough sketch may be of help :

------------

HENADS ALL IN ALL AND ALL IN EACH ( CONTINUUM )

.(Noetic) + BEING

.(Noetic-Noeric) + BEING

.(Noeric) + BEING

ZEUS ( ONE OF THE HENADS PLAYS THE ROLE OF DEMIURGE) => here starts the Big Bang

--------

MULTIVERSE – AS MANY SENSIBLE WORLDS AS THE COMBINATIONS OF GODS/ROLES

Hope it helps.


Empedotimos

[Mano Madytinos]

Or another way of looking at it is as follows:

The Universe is ONE which contains the multiverse within it. String Theory which is the theory that supports the existence of multi-dimensions, stipulates that these dimensions are folded or 'curled' up in to very small spaces inside this Universe. This is consistent with what the ancient philosophers maintained.

According to the ancients the SYMPAN (Universe) consisted of the PAN which was the KOSMOS inclusive of HYLE (matter), the forces and KHRONOS (time) and the SYN which means to add and refers to the 'additional' part of the SYMPAN which is the spaces in-between.

It is within these 'spaces' which the word alludes to, that the multiverse or multi-dimensions exist and where the Gods 'live' i.e. OLYMPOS. Thus the Gods been out of the influence of the things which corrupt and destroy such as KHRONOS (time) and opposing forces, remain eternal, immortal and unchanging.

[Hiketes]

Hope it helps.


Empedotimos

It really does, thank you
I will go and ponder this now.

By the way I hope no one minds me asking all these questions, I'm keen to understand.

[Therapon]

...there is only one universe and not two or an infinite number.

The clue's in the word really:

universe
1589, "the whole world, cosmos," from O.Fr. univers (12c.), from L. universum "the universe," noun use of neut. of adj. universus "all together," lit. "turned into one," from unus "one" (see one) + versus, pp. of vertere "to turn" (see versus). Properly a loan-translation of Gk. to holon "the universe," noun use of neut. of adj. holos "whole" (see safe (adj.)).
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=universe.

The word universe means everything, logically there can't be more than one everything.

These days when scientists talk about the universe they actually mean the big-bang continuum.

[Wilfred Hather]

Hi. This is my first post after registering, and I have a few questions regarding what has been said in this thread. I am pretty new to Hellenismos and to the subject of this philosophy so please excuse me if my questions seem stupid or ignorant.

That means that every other God can use the other Gods and their essences to create a world. So while this God in our sensible world played the role of Aphrodite let’s say, in his/her own world he will be known as Zeus.

I don't really understand this. How can aphrodite be Zeus? Surely it is not possible for a god to change thier nature so they will become another in another world?

It is within these 'spaces' which the word alludes to, that the multiverse or multi-dimensions exist and where the Gods 'live' i.e. OLYMPOS. Thus the Gods been out of the influence of the things which corrupt and destroy such as KHRONOS (time) and opposing forces, remain eternal, immortal and unchanging.

I understand that living "between the worlds" or outside of our universe would allow the gods to be unchanging and immortal, but how can they therefore influence and dictate what happens in our world if they are outside it?

[Timothy]

I don't really understand this. How can aphrodite be Zeus? Surely it is not possible for a god to change their nature so they will become another in another world?

the idea runs along the same lines as you being wealthy in one universe, but poor in another... or in one universe, dinosaurs did not die out and continued to evolve... or in another universe, electromagnetism and gravity never split into separate forces, causing a different set of natural laws from ours.

[ΕΜΠΕΔΟΤΙΜΟΣ]

That means that every other God can use the other Gods and their essences to create a world. So while this God in our sensible world played the role of Aphrodite let’s say, in his/her own world he will be known as Zeus.

I don't really understand this. How can aphrodite be Zeus? Surely it is not possible for a god to change thier nature so they will become another in another world?

The names of the gods represent their functions in the universe.

Hence a god that plays the role of demiurge is called Zeus. Assume that another god plays the role of Aphrodite.
At the same time, the god that played the role of Aphrodite can play the role of demiurge in another universe(world to be exact) and hence this god will be called Zeus in THAT universe.

Take for example you playing footbal. In a match you play the role of goalkeeper let's say but in another you play the role of forward.
Or consider the gods a being actors and each world is a theatrical play. An actor would play a role in one theatrical play and another in another play.

Hope it helps.

[Therapon]

This is all highly speculative and lacks empirical testability, besides even if there are many universes, there is only one Omniverse and Zeus is it's king!

[Wilfred Hather]

the idea runs along the same lines as you being wealthy in one universe, but poor in another... or in one universe, dinosaurs did not die out and continued to evolve... or in another universe, electromagnetism and gravity never split into separate forces, causing a different set of natural laws from ours.

Hence a god that plays the role of demiurge is called Zeus. Assume that another god plays the role of Aphrodite.
At the same time, the god that played the role of Aphrodite can play the role of demiurge in another universe(world to be exact) and hence this god will be called Zeus in THAT universe.

Take for example you playing footbal. In a match you play the role of goalkeeper let's say but in another you play the role of forward.
Or consider the gods a being actors and each world is a theatrical play. An actor would play a role in one theatrical play and another in another play.

I think I understand now. I think it is quite hard for me to understand this because I have always seen them as more like archetypes, with thier function being inherently part of them, and not as beings.

[ΕΜΠΕΔΟΤΙΜΟΣ]

This is all highly speculative and lacks empirical testability, besides even if there are many universes, there is only one Omniverse and Zeus is it's king!

If this is the case it is purely monotheistic.

[ΕΜΠΕΔΟΤΙΜΟΣ]

I think I understand now. I think it is quite hard for me to understand this because I have always seen them as more like archetypes, with thier function being inherently part of them, and not as beings.

Actually the gods are not beings with the strict meaning of the word as they are supra-essential.
I think that you are correct in saying this.

The gods manifestation is completely different from the ontic manifestation which is the Being.

In addition all gods are in each god because otherwise some gods would be imperfect. The gods form a supra-essential hologram, while the Being forms a network of ontic holograms.

[Therapon]

If this is the case it is purely monotheistic.

It most certainly is not, Zeus is the king and father of the Gods, many Gods = polytheism.