Worlds Without End: The Many Lives of the Multiverse

by Mary-Jane Rubenstein

"Multiverse" cosmologies imagine our universe as just one of a vast number of others. While this idea has captivated philosophy, religion, and literature for millennia, it is now being considered as a scientific hypothesis―with different models emerging from cosmology, quantum mechanics, and string theory.

Beginning with ancient Atomist and Stoic philosophies, Mary-Jane Rubenstein links contemporary models of the multiverse to their forerunners and explores the reasons for their recent appearance. One concerns the so-called fine-tuning of the nature's constants are so delicately calibrated that it seems they have been set just right to allow life to emerge. For some thinkers, these "fine-tunings" are evidence of the existence of God; for others, however, and for most physicists, "God" is an insufficient scientific explanation.

Hence the allure of the if all possible worlds exist somewhere, then like monkeys hammering out Shakespeare, one universe is bound to be suitable for life. Of course, this hypothesis replaces God with an equally baffling article of the existence of universes beyond, before, or after our own, eternally generated yet forever inaccessible to observation or experiment. In their very efforts to sidestep metaphysics, theoretical physicists propose multiverse scenarios that collide with it and even produce counter-theological narratives. Far from invalidating multiverse hypotheses, Rubenstein argues, this interdisciplinary collision actually secures their scientific viability. We may therefore be witnessing a radical reconfiguration of physics, philosophy, and religion in the modern turn to the multiverse.

Genres: Philosophy, Science, Nonfiction, Physics, Religion, Theology, History

360 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2014

Reviews

[J.D. · Rating 5 out of 5]

Physics is seriously considering that ours is only one of many universes, and this is the first comprehensive account of the whole story, all the way to the present. There are so many extraordinary (truly awe-some) ideas in this book that I feel compelled to write a longer review to praise it.

We start quite early with the Greek Atomists, cruising over Aristoteles, and discussing at length how Giordano Bruno and Nicholas of Cusa—two of the gutsiest thinkers ever to live—thought of a universe with many stars and (possibly) inhabited worlds. This was a bit too much for the Catholic Church, and Bruno was burned for his ideas (sorry, spoiler).

Having many universes solves some nagging problems in Cosmology (such as the strange fine-tuning of our universe for the existence of galaxies and watchers of Netflix). In the random lottery of physical laws, if there many universes, we’re just lucky to be living in the right one for us, rather than (the old view) one made-to-order for humans. This has been a long-standing fight between thinkers and believers, and Bruno was burned for believing in countless worlds and stars like our Sun. Nowadays, the fight has focused on the multi-universe (or multiverse), since it makes God irrelevant by introducing a Cosmic evolution that gets rid of the creating hand.

I can’t make justice here to the variety of scientific and philosophical discussions that grace this book; although it is in the serious corner of academic treatises, you can find here extraordinary, truly mind-shattering ideas. An example is that we might be seeing now, in the part of the cosmos that’s available to our instruments, voids and star “flows” that are consistent with the birth of other parallel universe and (perhaps) suggest that some (of these universes) are nearby, in a manner of speaking. If that doesn’t startle your mind, I’m sorry.

A well-developed part of this book is the description of Level I (infinite) multiverses (copies of you are just far away); Level II (string of bubble universes) multiverses (your copy leaves in another bubble); and Level III (there’s a whole lot of you and everything), where there are more universes than grains of sand in all the beaches of Earth. There may be also manufactured universes (a recipe is given for beings much more advanced than us) and, oddly very likely, some simulated ones (perhaps by an app on the Almighty IPhone of a teenage deity). This, all of this we see, according to some calculations—and I swear I’ve read of those elsewhere—may very well be an illusion.

The idea of a multiverse is so corrosive for believers that Bernard Carr had said that “if you don’t want God, you’d better have a multiuniverse.” Even many moons ago, David Hume said that the whole of creation might be “only the first rude essay of some infant deity.” (Hume apparently knew about the godly IPhone and homework for deities)

And also universes within black holes. And also universes that exist as holograms, projected in a screen beyond space and time. Many, many possible universes, enough to make your head spin.

This is a book that should make us all feel humble, small, and in awe over the extent of Creation, whether or not you add a God to the mix.

[Paige McLoughlin · Rating 5 out of 5]

The multiverse is an idea as current as cutting edge cosmology and as old as Plato. Frankly, it is a metaphysical idea disguised as physics. It may be very real but we may never know kind of like God. Scientists use it to avoid the G-word but it is dangerously close to sounding like speculative theology. "Dragons be here" on the edge of the map only now the map's edge now extends to the cosmic microwave background. Mary-Jane Rubenstein is funny and charming and says it better and I will leave a link to an audio talk she gave at the Hartford Library in my home state.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRPAj...

[Laura · Rating 5 out of 5]

In Worlds Without End: The Many Lives of the Multiverse, Rubenstein traces theories of multiple worlds from ancient philosophy to modern physics. I found the text thought-provoking; as someone with a background in philosophy, I found it highly readable though admittedly, some parts were easier to follow for me than others (ie. I very much appreciated Nietszche's appearance toward the end but don't know that I can say I really grasp the cosmic microwave background). Perhaps most important, the book left me with more questions to ponder than I had when I started - for this, I'm appreciative.

[Old Man JP · Rating 5 out of 5]

An extremely well written and researched discussion of the scientific and philosophical topics that have led to the modern development of the multiverse theory. She began her discussion by talking about the earliest philosophers such as the Greek atomists, Stoics, Plato, Aristotle and on through Bruno, who was burned at the stack by the Church for his ideas, and Nicholas of Cusa continuing through history up to todays modern cosmologists. Inserted in her discussion were occasional references to God whenever she could find the opportunity but, overall, it was a fairly even discussion that didn't really push the idea. She did talk about the incredible research that Laura Mersini-Houghton has done on multiverse theory. She's a brilliant cosmologist whose book After the Big Bang I read last year.

[Paige McLoughlin · Rating 5 out of 5]

The multiverse is an idea as current as cutting edge cosmology and as old as Plato. Frankly, it is a metaphysical idea disguised as physics. It may be very real but we may never know kind of like God. Scientists use it to avoid the G-word but it is dangerously close to sounding like speculative theology. "Dragons be here" on the edge of the map only now the map's edge now extends to the cosmic microwave background. Mary-Jane Rubenstein is funny and charming and says it better and I will leave a link to an audio talk she gave at the Hartford Library in my home state.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRPAj...

Update 5/5/2021 Rubenstein is one of the more interesting nonfiction academics I have come across and takes on topics I have an interest in. Multiverse metaphysics is old it has been around as long as people speculated on things not seen. Good stuff.
https://youtu.be/hCG42Gu3Ciw


READING PROGRESS
April 30, 2020 – Started Reading
May 1, 2020 – Finished Reading
January 18, 2021 – Shelved
January 18, 2021 – Shelved as: american-history
January 18, 2021 – Shelved as: astronomy-and-cosmology
January 18, 2021 – Shelved as: ancient-history
January 18, 2021 – Shelved as: early-modern
January 18, 2021 – Shelved as: early-twentieth-century
January 18, 2021 – Shelved as: early-twenty-first-century
January 18, 2021 – Shelved as: eighteenth-century
January 18, 2021 – Shelved as: european-history
January 18, 2021 – Shelved as: feminisms
January 18, 2021 – Shelved as: general-science
January 18, 2021 – Shelved as: late-twentieth-century
January 18, 2021 – Shelved as: mid-twentieth-century
January 18, 2021 – Shelved as: middle-ages
January 18, 2021 – Shelved as: middle-east
January 18, 2021 – Shelved as: nineteenth-century
January 18, 2021 – Shelved as: physics
January 18, 2021 – Shelved as: religion-or-not

[Bardon Kaldian · Rating 4 out of 5]

Mary Jane Rubenstein is a professor of philosophy and religion at Wesleyan University (and, oddly enough, women’s and gender studies). She knows the her stuff, is articulate, and understands the popular depiction of modern fundamental physics. The first, slightly larger part of the book is about traditional Western cosmologies (atomists, Epicureans, Stoics, Plato, Aristotle, Christianity ... and something about the beginning of modern science of Galileo and Newton, with the excursus on Giordano Bruno). Then there is a great presentation of fashionable multiverse theories, 6-8 of them, as well as the reasons for their postulation (for example, she presents the reasons for their formulation & the very existence extremely well on only three to seven pages, describing some models). Understandably, the reasons are physical in nature — how to explain that the universe is expanding, and at an ever-increasing rate the farther away it is; how is it that all visible matter makes up only 4% of the matter that we can calculate to exist, according to the consequences of observation (the rest is dark energy and dark matter that not only we have not observed so far; even in principle we cannot observe them directly).

This book is better for laymen who are interested in this issue than a number of popular books authored by physicists themselves (Greene, Hawking, Susskind, Penrose, Kaku, Randall, Tegmark , Deutsch..). Also, the author is superior in presenting the very core ideas of various multiverse models, their strengths and weaknesses. And her conclusion is correct, that in the end these models, although their proponents are, generally, hard-core atheists and anti-metaphysicians, whether they want to or not, have stepped into an area which, although not a confirmation of old religious- metaphysical speculations, is by its very nature a kind of metaphysics based on interpretations of mathematical and physical models & structures (of course, limited in range).

It is evident that physicists abhor the Christian myth of creation, and that they can be lenient with the Hindu-Buddhist belief in cosmic cycles (albeit without God or gods), considering that none of the previous cosmoses had survived.

Again, I see that the weak side of the otherwise very erudite & clear book is the neglect or ignorance of high religious metaphysical doctrines, or more ambitious metaphysical philosophies not necessarily ensconced within orthodox religions (Plotinus, Erigena, Hegel, Kashmir Shaivism, Corpus Hermeticum, Neo-Confucianism, ..). These old esoteric-philosophical cosmologies are derived from the classical, frequently heterodox thinkers - especially the Greeks & Indian- Chinese Weltanschauungen.

For instance, dogmatic, orthodox theists insist on creation, but in quarrels with multiverse physicists they waste unnecessary energy since the multiverse bunch of cosmologists don't even understand what the fuss is all about; "God" is just a name, a metaphor; we know nothing about him; he has nothing to do with people; they are not talking about life forms that could be like angels; they are not talking about God who is also immanent, ... nothing. For theists, it's just a waste of time. They're trying to appropriate & "devour" modern fundamental physics & cosmology, which is futile.

In short, my criticism is that multiverse models from the last 20-30 years are handsome; that they necessarily lead to a wobbly area which, although not religious, is not strictly scientific since it does not bring verifiable results, does not predict anything observable, nor explains anything important (only some non-fundamental elements of the observable universe); brings some good things in metaphors of existence that did not exist before (e.g. holomovement & the implicate order, but this is not discussed here since David Bohm's ideas are not seriously analyzed, and the real holographic principle in the physical sense, for black holes, does not give us anything essentially new, at least cognitively) - but again, it is not something important since it is technically related to the mathematical instruments of quantum mechanics (wave function and its collapse, plus some other technical stuff). The only conceptually new in these models is Everett's interpretation of quantum mechanics, the multiplicity of worlds or universal wave function, which, based on the idea of the splitting of the universe in every act of perception, has no analogy among the old concepts. But this idea, in its strong formulation, is insane, even in the semi-acceptable garb of popular imagining that the world trajectories go in different directions depending on how, for example, the dice fall when you roll it - from 1 to 6, the various world trajectories depending on what you get, a kind of actualized potentiality in the newly generated worlds.

The book could have been way more intellectually thrilling had real high-powered metaphysicians (Neo-Platonism, Sufism, mature Taoism, Neo-Confucianism, various high Hindu and Buddhist doctrines, transcendence of Christian and German high Panentheism, ..) had been given speakers' platform; they could have easily dismissed the obsolete parts of cosmological doctrines like geocentrism, outdated physics; also, they could have allegorized cosmographic metaphors and affirmed the higher layers of their doctrines (suprasensory worlds, transcendent and immanent God, angelology, transfiguration of people and beings post mortem, transhuman entities, ..).

The strength of the book: thanks to her philosophical education, Rubenstein has presented modern physical cosmological doctrines very clearly & adequately, better than most physicists who seem to be lacking in wider knowledge & erudition re philosophical fields touching their research programs & areas of interest, and which had been articulated long since; also, she knows her philosophical sources (Plato, Aristotle, Epicureans, Stoics, Biblical myths,...)

And somehow, this book is vulnerable to critique about what is missing, and this is philosophia perennis.

[Bonnie_blu · Rating 3 out of 5]

If you are looking for a book that explains current theories of the multiverse, this is not it. Rubenstein's book reviews the history of the "many-worlds" philosophies and theories from ancient Greece to modern times. In addition, since she is a professor of religion, she is more focused on theological and philosophical history / effects of a many-worlds view than a purely scientific book would be. I have no problem with her doing so, but readers need to be aware of the focus of the book.

As far as content, I was surprised by some of her choices of historical figures and current scientists. I feel she left out important viewpoints and the most recent findings in multiverse theories. Also, I feel that she focused too much on little known, or fringe theories. For example, Hugh Everett III's work and its analysis should have been included. She is a gifted writer and the book is easy to read. As a result, the reader does not need a background in history or physics to understand the contents, but even so, at least some exposure to physics would be helpful.

[B. Rule · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is a delight and one of the best I've read this year. Rubenstein offers a lucid and entertaining tour of the history of thinking about our cosmos and the possibility of others. While many authors are conversant in the philosophical tradition or modern physics, it's rare to find one adept at both. Rubenstein is a rara avis indeed.

She lays out the positions of the Stoics, the Epicureans/Atomists, Plato, and Aristotle with pithy verve and impressive clarity. Her critical readings of these thinkers show just how hard it is for advocates for a unitary metaphysical ground to escape multiplicity (her version of Plato is especially rich in that regard). In Rubenstein's telling, efforts to describe a Prime Mover inevitably get tripped up in mixtures and manyness, just as singularity lurks behind plurality in turn. Further, multiplicity is itself a complicated enfolding, where reality presents not just as a mixture, but as a mixture of mixtures. She hints at the gendered nature of these antinomies in Western thought, although it doesn't take up much space in her swiftly-moving account. Rubenstein astutely sets the spatial infinity of the Atomists against the temporal infinity of the Stoics.

Rubenstein then demonstrates how the viewpoints of classical thinkers recur zombielike over millennia of metaphysical and cosmological speculation and science, through varied Christian cosmogonies that eventually ossify into a singular Aristotelian dogma (with its greatest champion, Thomas Aquinas), to outliers like Nicholas of Cusa, and then on to early modern thinkers like Bruno, Kepler, and Descartes. She gives a fascinating account of Kant's evolution on cosmology, which leads into the modern era of Enlightenment and scientific thinking on cosmoi, from Newton up to the wildest multiverses of modern cosmology and quantum theory. She offers excellent layman's descriptions of some of the baroque progeny of modern physics, focusing on the Many Worlds Interpretation vs. the Copenhagen Interpretation, with detours to superstring theory, inflationary cosmology, "multiverse baths", black hole baby universes, multidimensional membranes colliding down the throats of Calabi-Yau manifolds, simulated universes, and Level I through IV multiverses. You can sense her delight as infinities multiply upon infinities, absurdities upon absurdities.

Rubenstein shows how modern science strives mightily to escape metaphysics and the need for god, only to trip over the anthropic principle, a stumbling block to cosmologists and foolishness from the Greeks. In an effort at scientific parsimony, somehow modern physics has gone from the guiding hand of one deity to a bewildering infinity of infinities in the most extravagant multiversal theories, none of which can be observed or falsified (at least to date, although Rubenstein notes some tantalizing leads on this front). She shows the impossibility of escaping metaphysical thinking and how the dichotomy of theism/atheism or secular/sacred obscures a deeper entanglement between science and metaphysics. While Rubenstein is guarded about (or agnostic regarding) her own views on the existence of a multiverse, she ultimately ends with a return to Nietzsche and the "self-overcoming" of Christian metaphysics in science, which itself may be overcome by the return of metaphysics in the multiverse. At the very least, an uncomplicated picture of science rescuing us from the darkness of faith obscures thornier philosophical issues at the heart of what thinking about being and creation means.

I found Rubenstein a gracious, charming, and incisive guide to these ultimate questions. Her sympathies are with the manifold, the strange, and the open-ended over the totalizing certitude of metaphysical dogmatics. She is neither anti-science nor a religious partisan. This book hit on pretty much every topic that itches in my brain, and in her hands, the history of Western metaphysics becomes a true story, with narrative momentum, twists, turns and humor. It's a story I delighted in hearing. Urgently recommended.

[Hannah · Rating 5 out of 5]

Really incredible work, tracing the history of cosmologies and conceptions of the multiverse (largely in the European context), from Plato to modern physicists. Rubinstein has done close, close reading of a number of complex and sometimes internally contradictory works, and has a real gift for communicating their visions clearly and concisely without sacrificing any of the universe-sized philosophical questions they are dealing with. She shows commonalities across generations of cosmologists who might not name one another as kin, without over-simplifying the differences in thought and framework over time. Provocative for scientists, theologians, anyone in the universe working through what it means to determine “what is” and how we know, and what different conceptions of the size and shape and duration of “is-ness” mean for what we can know, who we can be, and how all things started (or repeated).

[Mark · Rating 2 out of 5]

Oh my. I did not read the fine print and missed that the author is NOT a scientist. This is a work of philosophy and religion, not science, although it did contain a history of sorts of the idea of the multiverse. More concretely, I found it to be 150 pages of nonsense, 90 pages of rehashing mostly well-known science and views of scientists (although Mersini-Houghton stuff was weird and inappropriate), and an absurd number of footnotes, which made it feel like an overeager research paper. Not completely devoid of interest, but one of the most annoying books I have ever read. Readability 4. Rating 4.

[Rong Wu · Rating 5 out of 5]

A "helpful"book

Philosophy asks the question, science seeks truth, and "religion possesses it"? And the truth which religion possesses is God? (a slight misquote). Just as Cusa proclaimed "I am unable to grasp how an end without an end is an end.”, the same with "the beginning". This book helps.

[Ricky Kimsey · Rating 5 out of 5]

Multiverse Philosophy

This does cover the science behind the notion of a multverse but it's really about the philosophy behind the idea. If you're interested in philosophy this might be worth reading.

[Derrick · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fascinating theological and philosophical history of the discussion regarding the existence and nature of a plurality of worlds. Beginning with the Greeks and heading on a journey up through the current discussion of Multiverse theory and its various competitors (like Smolin's Black-hole's create new universes theory to the "cyclical ekpyrotic" neo-stoic model of Steinhardt and Turok. While this is not necessarily the book you should get if you want a really in-depth look at current multiverse theory, Rubenstein is nonetheless a fantastic and very clear writer, who picks up on the intellectual history of the idea with uncanny ability, and also elaborates quite well where current theories are beginning to blur the line between physics and theology.

[Michael Cabus · Rating 5 out of 5]

I stumbled across this book at a local bookstore. I had heard about the topic of the multiverse, but knew very little of the origins.

This book is decidedly philosophical in its basis; it is rooted in the examination of the universe, and the deeper meaning this has for questions of God, physics and the natural world. What is beautiful about this is the early writing that is attempting to understand the universe results in beautiful language and complex philosophical algorithms.

I found this book to be very readable, though the logic can be fun or boring, depending on your mindset. A very important book...

[Heather Bennett · Rating 4 out of 5]

Does Quantum Physics or overlapping, multi-dimensional universes interest you? Do you watch the Discovery or History Channels? Then this book is for you. Mary-Jane Rubenstein brings us new theories about the universe. This book will question what people think they know. I loved this book and I wish there were more out there.

[Wm. · Rating 3 out of 5]

Over all a good book, but I am not sure I was the target audience. I would have liked less details but better explanation. I get that seems contradictory but if you read the book you might understand.

[Doni · Rating 2 out of 5]

The only thing I got out of this book is that black holes might be the birth of other universes which is a really cool idea. The rest of it was pretty boring.

[Mills College Library]

523.1 R895 2014