Abstract
It is shown that the hypothesis of Monoverse relevant to the existing version of the special relativity theory is incorrect. Incorrect is also the existing version of the special relativity theory itself. Its revised version, the relativistic formula of which allows to propose the hypothesis of hidden Multiverse is presented. The hypothesis of hidden Multiverse is based on a proof by the author general scientific principle of physical reality of imaginary numbers. It is shown that this hypothesis, unlike many other hypotheses of Multiverse and the hypothesis of Monoverse, is already verifiable. And the experimental proof of the reality of the hidden Multiverse existence is a phenomenon of dark matter and dark energy. Other possible experimental proof of that is proposed as well. As a result, the data processing is obtained by WMAP and Planck spacecrafts, and the structure of hidden Multiverse is determined, which has proved to be a quaternion, and its parameters are defined. According to these calculations, the hidden Multiverse contains from twenty to twenty-two parallel universes, five-six neighboring universes of which constitute dark matter, and the rest parallel universes constitute dark energy. Moreover, it is shown that our hidden Multiverse neighbors with other hidden Multiverses, inaccessible to our observations not only by electromagnetic but also by gravitational manifestations, which together form a Supermultiverse.
Highlights
Let us recall the opinion on this issue prevailing in modern science
The hypothesis of hidden Multiverse is based on a proof by the author general scientific principle of physical reality of imaginary numbers
The experimental proof of the reality of the hidden Multiverse existence is a phenomenon of dark matter and dark energy
Summary
Let us recall the opinion on this issue prevailing in modern science. It is as follows. Among two currently recognized basic physical theories, such as the theory of relativity and the quantum physics, only special theory of relativity (STR) is relevant to this issue [1] [2] Over time some controversial or even wrong provisions, which have become the subject of such criticism, have been revealed in STR, as well as in any other scientific theory They should be discussed, since, according to Karl Raimund Popper [7], the author of the “open society” concept, the conflict of opinions in scientific theories is inevitable and is a prerequisite for science development. Nobel Prize winner Max Planck wrote: “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it”
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
