<p>We don't know. The Multiverse Theory is really just a hypothethis; sure, it makes sense, but it cannot be scientifically proven. We really have no reason to doubt that this is our only universe. Wormholes are just as hypothetical, since they would require infinite energy or negative energy to be created, neither of which we can get. Also, keep in mind that String Theory is, for the most part, <strong>unprovable</strong>. It cannot be confirmed through scientific experiments and is mostly guesswork.</p>

<p>Also, it will take trillions of years before the Universe gets too cold for life, and we will be long gone by then. However way you put it, it's unlikely that humans will ever reach other habitable planets before we go extinct, should our planet be destroyed. The closest potentially-habitable planet is nearly 480 lightyears from us – as in, it would take us 480 years to get there, if we travelled at the fastest speed in the Universe. We surely won't live to see the end of the Universe.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-10-09T09:36:00.997Z
Cosmology professor [Sean Carroll](http://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2015/02/19/the-wrong-objections-to-the-many-worlds-interpretation-of-quantum-mechanics/) disagrees with the *"not testable"* argument. Most accepted theories make some untestable predictions.
LocalFluff
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-10-09T13:40:41.750Z
If multiverse is the logical conclusion drawn from premises which are proven, then we know that it is true that multiversa exist even if they are unobservable. For example, the Pythagorean theorem proves something exact about the properties of triangles, even if we cannot measure any triangle with infinite precision.
LocalFluff
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-10-10T07:15:45.980Z
@LocalFluff  While this is related to Astrology, I think this line of questions would get better answers on the Physics board.   I'm also not sure I agree with Prof. Sean Carroll, though, I might be asking for trouble by disagreeing with a cal-tech physics professor, but, if nothing about string theory can be tested, and my understanding is that this is so, then it's a great big grey area.   He's right that you should attack the theory and not what the theory deduces, but if every aspect of the theory isn't testable, to me is a large strike against the theory.
userLTK
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-10-10T11:21:56.577Z
@userLTK Multiverse as such strikes against science. There is a part of the universe where every dice rolled shows six eyes every time. Maybe we live in that place? Isn't that common mainstream cosmology, that space is infinite and expands faster than the speed of light? Is there something wrong?
LocalFluff
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-10-10T11:59:09.650Z
@LocalFluff  It makes good science fiction though.   :-)      Now, more serious answer.  I have a problem with string theory in general for that reason, though, mathematically there are ways to do it.  If our universe is infinite in 3 dimensions, an infinite number similar but separate universes could still exist in 4 dimensions.   Now, I'm not saying I buy it, only that it can be explained.
userLTK
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-10-09T05:58:07.793Z
2015-10-10T11:55:23.393Z
2015-10-10T11:55:23.393Z
Sir Cumference
<p>In this <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYAdwS5MFjQ" rel="nofollow">youtube video</a>, Prof. Michio Kaku mentions there could be multiple universes and <strong>if</strong> there are, then there could be a <strong>worm hole</strong> to some other universe.</p>

<p>My question is: We are not sure if the Multiverse exists, so how can we believe or have imagined that worm holes could exist and create a path to another universe?</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-10-09T05:40:03.657Z
The minute you conceive of the Multiverse the next thought is naturally and how can we get to another universe in the Multiverse if such exists (or maybe this would be the question after: How would you go about investigating the existence of a Multiverse experimentally)
Conrad Turner
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-10-09T13:35:16.543Z
@ConradTurner If one could get to it, then it wouldn't truly be a multiverse, would it? Since expansion of space accelerates faster than the speed of light over long enough distances, there are true multiverses all around us according to mainstream cosmology. Level I multiverse according to professor [Max Tegmark](http://space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/crazy.html) who has written and talked alot about it. *(He's a bit sharper than Michio Kaku).*
LocalFluff
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-10-10T07:35:00.327Z
I think this is closer to Physics than Astronomy as it's entirely theoretical.   That said, I think your question is fundamentally correct.   Because we don't know that the Multiverse is an accurate description of reality at all, discussing wormholes within the multiverse is pretty silly.  But I suspect this is part of a TV show and not part of a real physics lecture which perhaps raises the "entertainment" aspect and makes the legit physics aspects less important.
userLTK
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-10-10T21:50:37.440Z
Questions about multiple universes are, by definition unanswerable. If the "other universes" have any observable effect on us they they are part of out universe. If not then they are part of faith not science.
James K
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-10-11T08:11:23.627Z
Almost all astronomers, cosmologists, and physicists agree that there is more to the universe than that which we can possibly sense; the universe is larger than is the observable universe. What lies beyond or parallel to the universe is not physics or astronomy, at least not yet.
David Hammen
<multiverse><wormhole>
Existence of multiple universe?
rajuGT
# Existence of multiple universe?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2015-10-08)

In this [youtube video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYAdwS5MFjQ), Prof. Michio Kaku mentions there could be multiple universes and **if** there are, then there could be a **worm hole** to some other universe.

My question is: We are not sure if the Multiverse exists, so how can we believe or have imagined that worm holes could exist and create a path to another universe?

**Tags:** multiverse, wormhole

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: The minute you conceive of the Multiverse the next thought is naturally and how can we get to another universe in the Multiverse if such exists (or maybe this would be the question after: How would you go about investigating the existence of a Multiverse experimentally)  
> **username_2**: @username_1 If one could get to it, then it wouldn't truly be a multiverse, would it? Since expansion of space accelerates faster than the speed of light over long enough distances, there are true multiverses all around us according to mainstream cosmology. Level I multiverse according to professor [Max Tegmark](http://space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/crazy.html) who has written and talked alot about it. *(He's a bit sharper than Michio Kaku).*  
> **username_3**: I think this is closer to Physics than Astronomy as it's entirely theoretical.   That said, I think your question is fundamentally correct.   Because we don't know that the Multiverse is an accurate description of reality at all, discussing wormholes within the multiverse is pretty silly.  But I suspect this is part of a TV show and not part of a real physics lecture which perhaps raises the "entertainment" aspect and makes the legit physics aspects less important.  
> **username_4**: Questions about multiple universes are, by definition unanswerable. If the "other universes" have any observable effect on us they they are part of out universe. If not then they are part of faith not science.  
> **username_5**: Almost all astronomers, cosmologists, and physicists agree that there is more to the universe than that which we can possibly sense; the universe is larger than is the observable universe. What lies beyond or parallel to the universe is not physics or astronomy, at least not yet.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_6 on 2015-10-09. Score: 3

We don't know. The Multiverse Theory is really just a hypothethis; sure, it makes sense, but it cannot be scientifically proven. We really have no reason to doubt that this is our only universe. Wormholes are just as hypothetical, since they would require infinite energy or negative energy to be created, neither of which we can get. Also, keep in mind that String Theory is, for the most part, **unprovable**. It cannot be confirmed through scientific experiments and is mostly guesswork.

Also, it will take trillions of years before the Universe gets too cold for life, and we will be long gone by then. However way you put it, it's unlikely that humans will ever reach other habitable planets before we go extinct, should our planet be destroyed. The closest potentially-habitable planet is nearly 480 lightyears from us – as in, it would take us 480 years to get there, if we travelled at the fastest speed in the Universe. We surely won't live to see the end of the Universe.

> **Comments:**
> **username_2**: Cosmology professor [Sean Carroll](http://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2015/02/19/the-wrong-objections-to-the-many-worlds-interpretation-of-quantum-mechanics/) disagrees with the *"not testable"* argument. Most accepted theories make some untestable predictions.  
> **username_2**: If multiverse is the logical conclusion drawn from premises which are proven, then we know that it is true that multiversa exist even if they are unobservable. For example, the Pythagorean theorem proves something exact about the properties of triangles, even if we cannot measure any triangle with infinite precision.  
> **username_3**: @username_2  While this is related to Astrology, I think this line of questions would get better answers on the Physics board.   I'm also not sure I agree with Prof. Sean Carroll, though, I might be asking for trouble by disagreeing with a cal-tech physics professor, but, if nothing about string theory can be tested, and my understanding is that this is so, then it's a great big grey area.   He's right that you should attack the theory and not what the theory deduces, but if every aspect of the theory isn't testable, to me is a large strike against the theory.  
> **username_2**: @username_3 Multiverse as such strikes against science. There is a part of the universe where every dice rolled shows six eyes every time. Maybe we live in that place? Isn't that common mainstream cosmology, that space is infinite and expands faster than the speed of light? Is there something wrong?  
> **username_3**: @username_2  It makes good science fiction though.   :-)      Now, more serious answer.  I have a problem with string theory in general for that reason, though, mathematically there are ways to do it.  If our universe is infinite in 3 dimensions, an infinite number similar but separate universes could still exist in 4 dimensions.   Now, I'm not saying I buy it, only that it can be explained.  

---

