Let's begin with some guidelines so we can stay oriented.
Opinions: Things someone believes to be true or have value but that may or may not be rooted in observation, logic, thoughtfulness or experience.
Common sense: The collective "wisdom" of a cultural group that is often accepted as true.
Logic: a set of rules for thinking through problems after one has agreed upon some basic axioms
I would like you to post your pathway to logical conclusions and the axioms that are its foundations. Thanks.
It doesn't matter if it makes sense to you; what matters is your logic is flawed - and logic speaks for itself.
Since my only statement so far in this thread was "Our single universe seems like a definition of originality." that is what you must be calling flawed logic. The logical thinking behind that statement was not revealed, so I find it unlikely that you have any logical basis to find my thinking flawed. If you are going to claim that your logic is somehow superior or better or more thoughtful than that of others, please explain to me and the rest of us what you mean by logic and the pathways you follow to conclude what you claim as truth.
What's original about 'one universe' in the context of formats of existence?
There are many possible formats of existence that are, to you, void.
What are "formats of existence"? The term is new to me. How do you know what I think or what I find to be "void"?
There is nothing original about one universe, in that context.
What context? Do you mean that in our 21st C world the idea of a single universe is not original because in the past the idea has been put forth? I certainly do claim to be the first person to espouse such an idea, but from a universal perspective an infinite, expanding, physical universe of discrete evolving things is pretty unique and creative.
Is the universe is packed with enough content to preserve originality?
We know very little about the full content of the universe and we do keep getting surprised.
That's a different context - but yes - preserved within the atomic universe is lots of originality.
Does this contradict some of what you said above?
I know the multi-verse exists, because it's the scientific progression that resulted in the creation of our universe.
And what is the source of that knowledge? Typically, human knowledge comes from things we learn from others; observation and experimentation; and experience. Where does your come from and is it something other than those three?
If you knuckle it down to the very first existence, is likely not the big bang; ye of little faith might think otherwise existing in such a place with such a highly illogical image of the past; then you can predict that there is progression of simulation, evolution, it currently produces universe's like this one and that's all we know unless some of us have deeper connections with 'up there'.
I am curious about what you replace the Big bang with and how you know that your thoughts are the true ones. Again, I do not know what a "progression of simulation" is. Please explain.
Do you think that this universe is for the pleasure of the species that exist within it, and it 'popped up randomly'?
No and likely.
It's not - species external to our universe may exploit this for science, or other.
Imagine all the scientific data that can be gained by creating such a universe - to you is null - but to me is real.
Obviously it was created to discover new ways to improve simulation as a whole.
Species external to our universe? Please explain how you have reached the conclusion that this is true or even possibly true. First, I don't think you know my opinion and second, lots of sci fi writers have tackled this question and found many different answers. Obvious? To whom based on what.
Species has never been about one, and our universe is more likely one of many, and that is logic.
There is not logic or logical progression to this or anything else in your post. Please read my statement above.
If we are to have an actual discussion about this interesting topic, you will have to do better at explaining what you mean and how you arrived at your conclusions. I look forward to more of your posts.
