Traversing the multiverse

(In response to Oday Shahin’s Sept. 29 column “The trial of atheism.”)

I would like to point out a couple of fallacies.

First, those things taken to be “universal in nature and constant in time” are not either of these. The Earth didn’t always have four layers, humans evolved from lesser organisms and the speed of light is not, in fact, constant. Physicists have shown that it can be slowed down, and more importantly, that it has significantly decreased even over the short period of time we have been able to measure it.

What the author has appealed to is known as the Anthropic Principle, specifically that “The universe must be exactly how it is, or else we wouldn’t be here to ask questions about it. Hence, God made it so.”

While I applaud the author for asking tough questions of science and faith, there are refutations available for the arguments set forth.

The multiverse theory suggests that we are here because there are infinite other universes, each with different “universal” constants. Ours just happened to have constants that facilitated our arrival.

Of course, the question is not lost, rather rephrased: Where did the multiverse come from?

I encourage students of all backgrounds to pursue these questions — it’s like the ultimate history class.

JJ Brown
Undergraduate

Carrying concerns

(In response to the Editorial Board’s Sept. 29 editorial “Reloading Debate.”)

In this article, you make an erroneous distinction. The proper distinction is between those who believe people have a right to defend themselves from violence, and those who believe people shouldn’t have the right to defend themselves.

Most people would most likely agree that in a perfect world, guns would not be needed or allowed on campus.  However, this is not a perfect world.

Do laws against carrying guns on campus or anywhere else deter people who actually want to do harm?  The answer is obviously “no.” As if there are people out there who want to shoot up schools and then kill themselves, but don’t do it because they are worried about bringing a gun onto campus. But there are regular people who would like to safely carry, but don’t because they are law-abiding citizens.

And then there is the incredibly dull argument that campuses would be like the “Wild West.” Please, if you are going to lecture people about giving consideration to your side of a story, don’t make it sound ridiculous. No one would advocate settling disputes with violence.

Bottom line: Do you really ever know if the person sitting next to you in class has a gun in his backpack? There is no way to tell unless he whips it out and starts slinging it around. Maybe we can have airport-style security checkpoints to make sure that people don’t have weapons. How great would that be?

Tristan Bigler
Graduate student
Ban of brothers

(In response to Emilie Eaton’s Sept. 29 column “Jump on the ‘ban’ wagon.”)

While I agree with some components of your article, most of it is childish and shows little reason. As a Republican, I am only against gay marriage. I don’t think homosexuality should be illegal, and what people do in the privacy of their home is up to them. So I, like you, disagree with the GOP in Montana in that aspect.

However, just because someone is against homosexuality, doesn’t mark him or her with severe homophobia and ignorance. It does, however, make you intolerant. Just because they don’t agree with you, doesn’t make them wrong and ignorant.

Lots of groups, particularly religious groups, feel that homosexuality is wrong. It is a moral issue, [and] one that you obviously see as black and white.

Furthermore, the majority of Americans identify with a religion, although not all believe this. Does that make them homophobic and ignorant? No.

You make it sound as though the evil GOP is trying to ban homosexuality for a fun laugh when, in reality, it has its own reason. You then go on a childish tantrum in explaining things you would like banned for fun for the majority of the article. Eight paragraphs were dedicated to random things you jokingly wanted banned.

Trying to parallel your horrible reason and logic with the Montana GOP’s failed massively. While you joked about banning “Twilight” and toilet paper because you simply don’t like them, the GOP has a moral way of thinking that you seem to be ignorant to.

Robert Celaya
Undergraduate

Categories: Letters Opinion