This is something thats bugged me for years. I've heard some of the most brilliant minds on the planet talking about all these multiple univeres. All the theorys talk about blackholes and superstrings and all kinds of other stuff that's unimportant to what I'm going to talk about.

Here is the dictionarys deffinition of the word 'Universe'

universe
n 1: everything that exists anywhere

Ok, so if this is true, how the heck are there 'multiple universes'? It's not possible! Now, I'm not saying that when blackholes collapse in on themselves they don't create a whole other section of space inaccessible to us and devoid of anything we consider to be normal physical laws. What I AM saying is that it wouldn't be a different universe! It would just be a part of the universe we are already in.

Hasn't Stephen Hawkings ever taken English? lol

I'm not saying that I'm some kind of brilliant guy here but this seems to me to be a HUGE oversite on the part of modern scientists. They need to come up with some new word to define these ideas.

• good point... - slamhound - October 18, 2002 - 00:41 UTC
  • The dictionary is wrong - yaniru - October 18, 2002 - 10:51 UTC
    • Omniverse - mgutchess - October 19, 2002 - 01:03 UTC
    • That was entirely unnecessary - cosmotiger - October 31, 2002 - 04:16 UTC
      • Are you a scientist? - yaniru - October 31, 2002 - 16:44 UTC
        • Yes... - cosmotiger - October 31, 2002 - 18:06 UTC
• A better definition of "universe"... - nwaphotographer - October 18, 2002 - 11:12 UTC
  • Nice.... - cosmotiger - October 31, 2002 - 04:11 UTC