An inadequate explanation on why I hate the multiverse theory.

[Grim_Ether]

I hate the multiverse theory. Correction, I hate the interpretation I find everywhere in popular media and the various story sites I have accounts on.
This is for a perfectly sane reason. No one seems to get the theory right, from my recollection.
To explain, picture a book. This book contains a story, well written, enough words per page to adequately get its point across. This is a universe.
Multiverse theory posits that this book is contained with a library, which contains every possible iteration of this book.
This is easily understood, so most fiction follows it. the characters go from on book to another, from the first fiction, about kings and castles, to another faction about pirates, to an encyclopedia about auqatic animal habits. Easily explained.

Except it's not. Because these are not simple iterations. The simplest iteration of that original work is a single character.
the period at the end becomes a question mark. Or an exclamation mark. Or the letter q.
Now to equate that to our universe.
Faction of a nanosecond before the heat death of the universe, an atom slows.
Except that is wrong too. There was no heat death, everything ended with a sudden cruch as reality collapsed in on itself in a reverse of the big bang.

And that is the first change.

 

[Enkiari]

Hmm, I disagree. You see, I-

Edit:
Welp. The original post got edited. Now this makes no sense.

 

[Cipiteca396]

The little changes exist, they're just boring, so nobody (intentionally) goes to those universes.

TikTok - Make Your Day

 

[Grim_Ether]

That last character of the story of the universe could be any one of the possible characters that exist in the english language. Or any language. Or any nonsense scribbles possible with the ability to stain a medium of physical communication.
And it scales. Because we do not know the state of reality at the end of existence, we have a near infinite possible number of inputs to define that final change.

Then we get to move the the next character.
Because before that last period, was a d. the final character of "End". So let's change that too.
It's now a q. Because I like q. And untimately, neither of these changes matter. A book that ends with "The Enqq" is just a weird typo, nothing more.
But we can keep going.

Unfortunately, I an unable write out a whole however many pages of iterations to represent this, but luckily I don't have too.
It exists. On some server somewhere it a really interesting website named after the library of Babel. If you have yet to visit it, I highly recommend it.
As the name implies, almost none of it makes any sense. It turns out when a library contains an absurd number of books, filled with an even more absurd number of pages, filled with every possible iteration of 3200 characters, is somewhat difficult to find anything of sense.

But it makes a decent analogy for multiverse theory. A horribly, horribly, inadequate explanation, but workable.

Because every one of those pages is a universe.

 

[TheKillingAlice]

This is a bit of a bigger topic to tackle, but I feel like I have to say something, because I use that trope in at least three of my stories - and that is, of I don't count the volumes.
Anyway, I don't like the name "Multiverse", I wouldn't use it, and I hate what popular media has done with it. But not for the reasons you gave, but for the fact that they open plot hole after plot hole and constantly come up with bigger and more serious story beats that will always endanger the entire MUlTivErSE. In the end, the audience will care less and less. With it comes all the cheat codes, dead people just coming back - but wait, one movie said that would cause an incursion and kill everyone! But, but, then nothing happens! ...oh yeah, right, because the writers don't give a shit. I forgot for a second.
They just use the "Multiverse" to make everything sound more grand and as if there was more at stake, they also use it as a convenient tool to undo the things they did, because they want to have their cake and eat it too.
I'm not saying I'm doing the grandest things with the fact that my mentioned stories have more than one universe incorporated into their Lore. But ultimately, I need it for one thing or another and the fact that there's more worlds is treated similarly to the vastness of space. You just can't tell how much is truly out there, because even the furthest things you can name by now are so far away that travelling there is still impossible.
I always try to make everything make sense. But my way of using multiple universes never includes creating the very same universe, with the same people in it. They are similar, sure, but always definitely different places, with completely different people.
For something that does not exist in reality, or at least not that it could be proven to exist, there's never just one strict way of doing it, because there's no rules besides the ones you are putting in as its creator. Just ... Make it make sense, that's all I'm asking for. And don't overuse it, because it's hard to do a story focused on this type of trope, as I said, because it's hard to maintain stakes if you drive it too far.

 

[Grim_Ether]

I have now spent so long on this I have forgotten why I started... But on to the theory anyways.

Every one of those pages is a universe. Now scale that to our own.

The first character is the genesis of reality, be it by the hand of an almighty being of by a really big bang. And the last character is the closure of everything. Seem simple?

It's not.

Mathematically, infinity represents an unending number. A possbility that goes on and on for eternity. That is the closest measurement I can thing to represent the number of possible inputs present in any given nanosecond of our universe.

And the number goes up. Because I have just learned there are at least 10 units of measurement smaller that a nanosecond. And at the smallest of those measurements, every single atom in our universe has at minimum one possible variation.

Almost certainly more.
And I am lost again... So I think I will just toss out some more thoughts.

Back at the utter nightmare that is math, I have concluded that I can just use infinity -1.

A single point away from nonexistence, representing the highest possible real number. This is the possible number of variations in the universe.

And it would be wonderful to stop here. I have a pseudo-number, and my head hurts already.

But pop culture (and my pitiful understanding of math) will not let me.

Because what happens when we add in the idea of a multiverse travelling protagonist?
The moment we travel between universes, we have fundementally changed a variable.

That number? Infinity -1? That was based on every possible outcome that could possibly exist. No higher number is possible.

And that is no longer true.

Because something now exists that did not before.

The In Between.

The universe, under the standard theory, is a single self-contained area. There are a finite number of possible outputs, based on a finite number of possible inputs.

What universe travel does is take that input, and output it somewhere else entirely. To use my book in a library analogy... Well, I have yet to figure it out, so I am unfortunately unable to share it.

 

[AYM]

Do you dislike steins;gate

 

[Grim_Ether]

Do you dislike steins;gate

No. I never properly finished the anime.

 

[Deleted member 19066]

I hate the multiverse theory. Correction, I hate the interpretation I find everywhere in popular media and the various story sites I have accounts on.
This is for a perfectly sane reason. No one seems to get the theory right, from my recollection.
To explain, picture a book. This book contains a story, well written, enough words per page to adequately get its point across. This is a universe.
Multiverse theory posits that this book is contained with a library, which contains every possible iteration of this book.
This is easily understood, so most fiction follows it. the characters go from on book to another, from the first fiction, about kings and castles, to another faction about pirates, to an encyclopedia about auqatic animal habits. Easily explained.

Except it's not. Because these are not simple iterations. The simplest iteration of that original work is a single character.
the period at the end becomes a question mark. Or an exclamation mark. Or the letter q.
Now to equate that to our universe.
Faction of a nanosecond before the heat death of the universe, an atom slows.
Except that is wrong too. There was no heat death, everything ended with a sudden cruch as reality collapsed in on itself in a reverse of the big bang.

And that is the first change.

That last character of the story of the universe could be any one of the possible characters that exist in the english language. Or any language. Or any nonsense scribbles possible with the ability to stain a medium of physical communication.
And it scales. Because we do not know the state of reality at the end of existence, we have a near infinite possible number of inputs to define that final change.

Then we get to move the the next character.
Because before that last period, was a d. the final character of "End". So let's change that too.
It's now a q. Because I like q. And untimately, neither of these changes matter. A book that ends with "The Enqq" is just a weird typo, nothing more.
But we can keep going.

Unfortunately, I an unable write out a whole however many pages of iterations to represent this, but luckily I don't have too.
It exists. On some server somewhere it a really interesting website named after the library of Babel. If you have yet to visit it, I highly recommend it.
As the name implies, almost none of it makes any sense. It turns out when a library contains an absurd number of books, filled with an even more absurd number of pages, filled with every possible iteration of 3200 characters, is somewhat difficult to find anything of sense.

But it makes a decent analogy for multiverse theory. A horribly, horribly, inadequate explanation, but workable.

Because every one of those pages is a universe.

I have now spent so long on this I have forgotten why I started... But on to the theory anyways.

Every one of those pages is a universe. Now scale that to our own.

The first character is the genesis of reality, be it by the hand of an almighty being of by a really big bang. And the last character is the closure of everything. Seem simple?

It's not.

Mathematically, infinity represents an unending number. A possbility that goes on and on for eternity. That is the closest measurement I can thing to represent the number of possible inputs present in any given nanosecond of our universe.

And the number goes up. Because I have just learned there are at least 10 units of measurement smaller that a nanosecond. And at the smallest of those measurements, every single atom in our universe has at minimum one possible variation.

Almost certainly more.
And I am lost again... So I think I will just toss out some more thoughts.

Back at the utter nightmare that is math, I have concluded that I can just use infinity -1.

A single point away from nonexistence, representing the highest possible real number. This is the possible number of variations in the universe.

And it would be wonderful to stop here. I have a pseudo-number, and my head hurts already.

But pop culture (and my pitiful understanding of math) will not let me.

Because what happens when we add in the idea of a multiverse travelling protagonist?
The moment we travel between universes, we have fundementally changed a variable.

That number? Infinity -1? That was based on every possible outcome that could possibly exist. No higher number is possible.

And that is no longer true.

Because something now exists that did not before.

The In Between.

The universe, under the standard theory, is a single self-contained area. There are a finite number of possible outputs, based on a finite number of possible inputs.

What universe travel does is take that input, and output it somewhere else entirely. To use my book in a library analogy... Well, I have yet to figure it out, so I am unfortunately unable to share it.

I dun know sounds kinda boring.

 

[Grim_Ether]

I dun know sounds kinda boring.

It is. Stay far away in the hopes it never becomes interesting.

 

[Deleted member 19066]

It is. Stay far away in the hopes it never becomes interesting.

Will do
*Dropped, unfollow, unsubscribe from this thread*

 

[TheKillingAlice]

I have now spent so long on this I have forgotten why I started... But on to the theory anyways.

Every one of those pages is a universe. Now scale that to our own.

The first character is the genesis of reality, be it by the hand of an almighty being of by a really big bang. And the last character is the closure of everything. Seem simple?

It's not.

Mathematically, infinity represents an unending number. A possbility that goes on and on for eternity. That is the closest measurement I can thing to represent the number of possible inputs present in any given nanosecond of our universe.

And the number goes up. Because I have just learned there are at least 10 units of measurement smaller that a nanosecond. And at the smallest of those measurements, every single atom in our universe has at minimum one possible variation.

Almost certainly more.
And I am lost again... So I think I will just toss out some more thoughts.

Back at the utter nightmare that is math, I have concluded that I can just use infinity -1.

A single point away from nonexistence, representing the highest possible real number. This is the possible number of variations in the universe.

And it would be wonderful to stop here. I have a pseudo-number, and my head hurts already.

But pop culture (and my pitiful understanding of math) will not let me.

Because what happens when we add in the idea of a multiverse travelling protagonist?

Let me stop you there then. As I've already said, no rules to something that is mere theory without base in reality.
You just used a lot of pretty words that aren't actually as intelligent as you seem to think they are. That isn't meant as mean as it may sound, I just don't see the point of you rambling about in such an incoherent way if it's so simple: "Infinite", in other words, "Limitless."
It means nothing but the fact that you could have and endless amount of universes and nobody knows how many there already exist, for all we know there might be ten, but there could be a million and there will never be an end to it.
It they actually depict the same people with just miniscule changes, excluding some with bigger changes due to butterfly effect, or if every universe is seen as a different one altogether, that depends on the individual story's lore. Would also just be extremely boring to see just tiny changes while hopping through numerous worlds, wouldn't it?
But anyway, no matter what you do as an author, nobody can just say it's done the wrong way. Unless there's glaringly offensive plot holes to be seen. *caugh* Marvel *caugh*

 

[Tsuru]

I hate the multiverse theory. Correction, I hate the interpretation I find everywhere in popular media and the various story sites I have accounts on.
This is for a perfectly sane reason. No one seems to get the theory right, from my recollection.
To explain, picture a book. This book contains a story, well written, enough words per page to adequately get its point across. This is a universe.
Multiverse theory posits that this book is contained with a library, which contains every possible iteration of this book.
This is easily understood, so most fiction follows it. the characters go from on book to another, from the first fiction, about kings and castles, to another faction about pirates, to an encyclopedia about auqatic animal habits. Easily explained.

Except it's not. Because these are not simple iterations. The simplest iteration of that original work is a single character.
the period at the end becomes a question mark. Or an exclamation mark. Or the letter q.
Now to equate that to our universe.
Faction of a nanosecond before the heat death of the universe, an atom slows.
Except that is wrong too. There was no heat death, everything ended with a sudden cruch as reality collapsed in on itself in a reverse of the big bang.

And that is the first change.

I see what you mean and i agree. (also i dislike that they created this slang "multiverse", its cringe-edgy. I prefered when everyone said "multiple universes LIKE GROWN UPS/SCIENTISTS)

For other that dont understand, and if i'm not wrong,

basically tldr :

"multiverse" = everything, anything, got a different version of themselves in other universes. WRONG


true correct definition previously of "multiple universes" = anything happens in OTHER UNIVERSES. That means, if there is a spiderman in universe A, there ARE 100% CHANCE, some universes DOESNT HAVE SPIDERMAN EXISTING. Heck even some universes WITHOUT MARVEL. CORRECT

Spoiler: Bonus

(his book example meant : why should the book have multiverse version, when the MC in first book is erased ? what about the "dot" in sentence 2 of the book ? etc etc. Meaning its contradictory to have everything survive in different form. It CANT. Even in time travel logic, it was better before the bs "Terminator" that there is always a john connor or a similar version of them. Logically Skynet CAN or Connor CAN WIN in some universes, but nope. They created this bs and everyone like it)

Spoiler: Bonus 2

Some universes have aliens only. Some have only plants. Some doesnt have life. Some universe the laws of physics are crazy. There is pokemon universe. There is xianxia universe and nothing exist outside the sky of the xianxia "planet". Some universes have nothing. Some universes are full of blackhole. Some universes are normal earths. Some universes are marvel universes. Some universes turned into a giant black hole. Some universes are whatever you want. Just like a universe can have time travel where killing the ancestor kill the present enemy when coming back, LIKE THE PREVIOUS COMMON LOGIC OF GOOD OLD MOVIES before internet !

This is a bit of a bigger topic to tackle, but I feel like I have to say something, because I use that trope in at least three of my stories - and that is, of I don't count the volumes.
Anyway, I don't like the name "Multiverse", I wouldn't use it, and I hate what popular media has done with it. But not for the reasons you gave, but for the fact that they open plot hole after plot hole and constantly come up with bigger and more serious story beats that will always endanger the entire MUlTivErSE. In the end, the audience will care less and less. With it comes all the cheat codes, dead people just coming back - but wait, one movie said that would cause an incursion and kill everyone! But, but, then nothing happens! ...oh yeah, right, because the writers don't give a shit. I forgot for a second.
They just use the "Multiverse" to make everything sound more grand and as if there was more at stake, they also use it as a convenient tool to undo the things they did, because they want to have their cake and eat it too.
I'm not saying I'm doing the grandest things with the fact that my mentioned stories have more than one universe incorporated into their Lore. But ultimately, I need it for one thing or another and the fact that there's more worlds is treated similarly to the vastness of space. You just can't tell how much is truly out there, because even the furthest things you can name by now are so far away that travelling there is still impossible.
I always try to make everything make sense. But my way of using multiple universes never includes creating the very same universe, with the same people in it. They are similar, sure, but always definitely different places, with completely different people.
For something that does not exist in reality, or at least not that it could be proven to exist, there's never just one strict way of doing it, because there's no rules besides the ones you are putting in as its creator. Just ... Make it make sense, that's all I'm asking for. And don't overuse it, because it's hard to do a story focused on this type of trope, as I said, because it's hard to maintain stakes if you drive it too far.

As expected from the person having this image of a CHAD manga (Chadder than Death Note) as a pfp, you got good tastes.
+10000 thumbs-up
Ageeing with everything you said. And some things are basically confirmed FACTS

Lazy so will make it short.
1) Yes, with proofs existing that writers created multiverse for "utility". Both movies and games. Shitty move against consumers. Shitty shortcut.
2) Movies after End game proved they indeed dont give a shit. Especially all proofs they DONT EVEN READ THE SOURCE MATERIAL BEFORE DOING MOVIES. Not once, not twice, not 3, not 4, but far more and the list keep growing.
3) Starwars movies and recent acolyte (She ded, She alive. Ok i believe you) (Light saber wound = always survive)
4) Xianxia. Why they are fun early but bad later and/or often rushed ending.
Because when your MC can crush mountains or planets. The scale is too much to give a f.
Gurren Lagan did become crazy at very end. But at least its ONLY AT THE END and FUNNY.
DBZ Super doesnt exist. A cat god that sneeze and explode universes doesnt exist. What was talking about again?

 

[TheKillingAlice]

3) Starwars movies and recent acolyte (She ded, She alive. Ok i believe you) (Light saber wound = always survive)

Yeah, but don't forget: A DAGGER is gonna roll ya.

As expected from the person having this image of a CHAD manga (Chadder than Death Note) as a pfp, you got good tastes.

Also, I see you are a man of taste.


All jokes aside though, yeah, all of that is basically the problem. In my eyes, as I've already said in two posts I guess, you can do it however you like, as long as it makes sense in the end. And please, don't call it a MuLTiVErSe.

 

[Grim_Ether]

Having returned from the madness that overtook me yesterday, I feel like I can put this to words better.

What I was trying to get across is the idea that there being a bunch of universes with various differences is INCREDIBLY understating the actual numbers, and the more you think about it the less the idea of multiversal interactions makes sense.

The multiverse theory posits that every possible outcome is accurate in some universe. Going by this, there is a near infinite number of universes EXACTLY like our own, where the only difference is the outcome of interactions between subatomic particles in the instant the universe ends. Or in every other instant up to the point the universe ends.

When you scale this, you start to realize just how absurd the idea becomes, since from the first possible variables, it is already imposible to quantify the number of possible universes.

 

[TheKillingAlice]

Having returned from the madness that overtook me yesterday, I feel like I can put this to words better.

What I was trying to get across is the idea that there being a bunch of universes with various differences is INCREDIBLY understating the actual numbers, and the more you think about it the less the idea of multiversal interactions makes sense.

The multiverse theory posits that every possible outcome is accurate in some universe. Going by this, there is a near infinite number of universes EXACTLY like our own, where the only difference is the outcome of interactions between subatomic particles in the instant the universe ends. Or in every other instant up to the point the universe ends.

When you scale this, you start to realize just how absurd the idea becomes, since from the first possible variables, it is already imposible to quantify the number of possible universes.

Again, that is one theory of something that doesn't exist, therefore, in literature, you always go in different ways and possibilities. Also, even that just means what everyone else was trying to tell you. In and of itself, it doesn't matter how many molecules dance in the wrong direction, because infinite means infinite. And again, there's differing understandings of a multiple universe, but most of them have in common that they are set to be infinite in number.
The reason? Because one universe would have to be quantifiable in order to set a distinct number of possible universes to exist. In other words: If you say that there can only be ten parallely existing universes, that would pose the question why that is the case. Is it the size? Then how large is a universe, in order to make up a number? Or does it not matter, as long as it's only ten?
It raises more question than it can answer. In this, funnily enough, my three stories that I mentioned have a lore that basically gives me the right to put a number on them for very specific reasons, but I still didn't do it, because it would end up limiting my worldbuilding in a weird way of perception.

 

[Assurbanipal_II]

I hate the multiverse theory. Correction, I hate the interpretation I find everywhere in popular media and the various story sites I have accounts on.
This is for a perfectly sane reason. No one seems to get the theory right, from my recollection.
To explain, picture a book. This book contains a story, well written, enough words per page to adequately get its point across. This is a universe.
Multiverse theory posits that this book is contained with a library, which contains every possible iteration of this book.
This is easily understood, so most fiction follows it. the characters go from on book to another, from the first fiction, about kings and castles, to another faction about pirates, to an encyclopedia about auqatic animal habits. Easily explained.

Except it's not. Because these are not simple iterations. The simplest iteration of that original work is a single character.
the period at the end becomes a question mark. Or an exclamation mark. Or the letter q.
Now to equate that to our universe.
Faction of a nanosecond before the heat death of the universe, an atom slows.
Except that is wrong too. There was no heat death, everything ended with a sudden cruch as reality collapsed in on itself in a reverse of the big bang.

And that is the first change.

Hypothesis. Not theory.