Today, Novemeber 23th, 2021, CERN (European Organization for Nuclear Research) announced the creation of a project for search for multiverses and the development of the "Einstein Machine".

This is a satirical website. Don't take it Seriously. It's a joke.

2059 26116 Shares

Today, Novemeber 23th, 2021, CERN (European Organization for Nuclear Research) announced the creation of a project for search for multiverses and the development of the "Einstein Machine". However, this is the first serious step in the search for Multiverse, since in the past they did not take into account the possibility of multiverses.

The announcement is the first of many, according to this plan, all the particles that have been created in the big-bang explosion will be analyzed and, if found, they will give information about the existence of other universes.

To clarify more, a multiverse, like every big body has an environment, in this case, the big-bang universe, has an environment in the form of the electromagnetic field. The problem with any body is that when it changes, the field that surrounds the body changes, and as a consequence any particles that are attracted by that field will be trapped in it.

Because of that, if you travel in a spaceship and you want to see any star in the universe you must first detect any changes in the gravitational field of the environment.

If they find changes in the magnetic field, then there will be a universe in which the electron, proton and so on will have different masses, for example, in the case of the electron if they are in a universe where all the matter was on the upper side of the potential, they would be lighter and if they were in a universe where matter is concentrated at the bottom of the potential the particle would have different mass.

By the same logic, the particle of the Big-Bang will be trapped in the potential of the electromagnetic field, changing their mass, according to this theory. But here is where things get interesting.

If you look at the table of the standard model, where the mass of the electron is only a billionth of the mass of a proton, for example. This means that in a multiverse with a different potential, with the field of a different energy, with different masses, and the particle can be trapped in it.

As a consequence, there will be two universes in which the particle that was created in the explosion of the big bang will have different masses, since they are trapped in two different universes.

In other words, the multiverse is like a big zoo. Some universe is a tiger universe, but inside there are lions, cheetahs, pandas and kangaroos. If you open your eyes and see the zoo, you can also see the tiger that belongs to the lion, but you have to look closely because you cannot see the lion if you do not see the tiger.

The Multiverse Is Not the End of Science

I do not want to say that it is an end to science because I do not think it is true.

The multiverse theory is not something new, and it was developed about three or four decades ago by an American physicist.

If you can not tell me that there is not a multiverse, I would like you to explain to me what makes you an expert in this field, but I do not believe in it.

It is not a great theory, I do not think it is a very good explanation of the cosmos, but not a crazy idea. Many scientists are working on it.

It is not a theory which is beyond the capabilities of science, but if you read their work you will see that they are scientists who work with great skill, competence and intelligence. They are not crazy, but they also know what they are doing.

There are many theories and ideas which have been discussed and debated, so if you want to say that the multiverse is the end of science, you are a fool. I know that we have science and science works. If we were to deny science today, we would be in trouble.

There are many people who deny that science works. I will tell you that I believe in science, but I also believe in science and know that science works. It does not just work, but it also has to do with what I call "a scientific approach to life."

The theory of evolution is based on science. Even God knows that science works and science is in no way inconsistent with the idea of God. God made science. God made the creation and science and mathematics and everything that works. He is using them in the study of life.

If you think that science is just a technique, a magic formula and that it is something that I use to be consistent and explain everything, that is not a consistent or honest position. I may be using science, but I also believe in science.

You cannot deny the scientific approach to life. You cannot just deny science. You have to think. You have to analyze. It is as simple as that. You cannot be a scientist and at the same time deny science.

Why are you not consistent and honest? Why do you say that science works and you know that it is not consistent? What science has been done is to develop a scientific method for the life of the Earth. That does not mean that the multiverse is true. You can take that any way you want to.

All of science and all of life is based on the scientific approach to life. Any explanation must be based on the scientific approach. There is no room for the concept of a creator. Any explanation based on the creator is an explanation without any scientific value.

No one can believe in a creator because that is a person. That is not science. There are no measurements. There are no standards. There are no measurements. There is no such thing as a measurement.

When you say there is a creator, you are talking about a non-scientific concept. You are a mythological person and you cannot be a scientist. You are not consistent and honest. You are hiding something.

You say, “No one can believe in a creator because that is a person.”

The idea of a creator is not a person. That is like saying that God is an invention of man. Why do you say that the concept of a creator is a person? It is not. God is not a person. God is not a creator. God is the creator.

God did create everything and the universe. God is using science in his creation. There is no need to believe in an anthropomorphic god.

The idea that God is a person and God is a human person who will judge the world is not consistent. We need to understand the concept of God. We need to find out what God means.

What is God?

Who is God?

How do we know God is who he says he is?

Is God real or not?

Can we know the truth about God?

Why are you against the idea of God?

Why do you support the idea of science without God?

Why do you oppose the idea that God is real?

Why do you support the idea that God is a myth?

Is there a creator? Is there a designer? Is there a God?

Who is the designer?

What is the designer doing?

Does God want people to live in a certain way?

Why do you want to know what God thinks?

What does God want?

Why do we need God to explain the origin of the universe?

Why do you want to know if there is a God?

What is the difference between theist and atheist?

Theism is one of two major beliefs in religion. Atheism, however, is not a religion. It is a lack of belief in God. Some atheists also say God is a mythical person. It is not very clear what the difference is between atheist and theism. Theism is the belief in God, an afterlife, heaven, hell, sin and salvation. Atheists also believe that God is a myth.

Is there a difference between religious and atheistic ideas?

Do you think that there is life after death?

What does it mean to die?

What is death?

Do animals experience death?

Can we really understand what is meant by the afterlife?