Universe as a Living Entity?

[EWright]

It has energy, elements, water, systems, it's growing... What are the chances that the universe is a living entity and may even have a conciousness of its own? Just a fun thought :surprise:

[Tormod]

Fun question but wrong forum...moving this to the cosmology forum. :surprise:

[Boerseun]

The Gaia-theory, inflated by several orders of magnitude...!

[CraigD]

… What are the chances that the universe is a living entity and may even have a conciousness of its own?

Not very good, I think.

 

Problems of a rigorous definition of “consciousness” aside (and there are huge problems with this, spanning half a century of modern mathematical formalism alone), if the human brain is any guide, the universe has serious connection problems with signal speed. The time it takes a signal to traverse an astronomical structure, such as a galaxy, is measure in tens of thousands of years, while the apparent age of the universe, even according to unconventional theories, is only tens of billions of years, so, at most, theses structures could have had only a few million “thoughts”, not nearly enough by human standards.

 

The chance that the universe may, in the very distant future, become conscious, is significantly better. Many 20th century scientists have harbored private, religious-like beliefs that the purpose of the universe is to become conscious, in a way analogous to how successively larger biological organism have evolved on earth. Eugene Wigner is rumored to have spoken seriously along these lines, and Frank Tippler has written a (long and somewhat bizarre, even for Frank Tippler) book expounding of it, under the name “omega point theory”, titled “The Physics of Imortality”.

[Boerseun]

Hmmm... connection speed, interesting.

Obvious, in hindsight, but interesting, nonetheless.

Imagine:

In the beginning, God created the world. Fifteen billion years later, the Universe says (in a loud, slow, booming voice): "What the hell was that?!"

[damocles]

Here is a crazy thought. What if WE are the seeds for the future Universe's consciousness?

 

After all, even the most optimistic of us, know just how incredibly long the odds were that humanity would pop up precisely at this moment in the Universe's history when it appears on the cusp of transition to a dark energy influenced driven spatial inflation as the primary driver in the universe.

 

I know we are a statistical fluke, but it seems kind of odd that we haven't had a violation of the Neils Bohr observation, that if there were intelligent life ahead of us in the que; they would have at least checked up on us to see what foolishness we were planning....

 

How Anthropic Principle can you get?

 

Best wishes;

[Qfwfq]

Here is a crazy thought. What if WE are the seeds for the future Universe's consciousness?

That reminds me of a short story by Arthur C. Clarke.

 

:surprise:

[UncleAl]

What are the chances that the universe is a living entity and may even have a conciousness of its own?

Exactly zero. Compare its visible size to the maximum speed at which information can propagate - lightspeed. Did you ever pith a frog?

[CraigD]

Here is a crazy thought. What if WE are the seeds for the future Universe's consciousness?

Your crazy thought summarizes Tippler and others “omega point” theories exactly, assuming we go on to technological greatness and cultural near-immortality, rather than just dieing out without amounting to much. Where they get complicated enough to justify whole books is in speculation how this is to happen.

 

An even crazier thought, which has appeared at scienceforums at least once before, is that this consiciousness is responsible for initiating the process that lead to its emergence (eg: the Big Bang), via something like crazy, god-like end-of-time time travel.

[DietAnthrax]

It has energy, elements, water, systems, it's growing... What are the chances that the universe is a living entity and may even have a conciousness of its own? Just a fun thought :surprise:

 

It can't reproduce, there's no known mechanism for thought processes to occur, it cannot adjust to changing conditions (because it itself is all there is). Therefore it can't fall under any half-decent definition of life.

[Tormod]

It can't reproduce, there's no known mechanism for thought processes to occur, it cannot adjust to changing conditions (because it itself is all there is). Therefore it can't fall under any half-decent definition of life.

 

Actually...there are theories for how a universe might reproduce through for example black holes. The brane theory opens up for a universe that is affected by conditions (gravity leaking from a different brane, for example). We can't rule out that there are thought processes simply because we don't know how they would work - but thought processes are not a requirement for life.

 

So I'd say it's a real possibility that the universe is alive. As for whether this could be proven scientifically I'm more pessimistic.

[damocles]

Hmmm... connection speed, interesting.

Obvious, in hindsight, but interesting, nonetheless.

Imagine:

In the beginning, God created the world. Fifteen billion years later, the Universe says (in a loud, slow, booming voice): "What the hell was that?!"

 

Another crazy thought.(Speculating)

 

This illustrates the possible dumblife universe argument perfectly. It, the universe, might say, "What was that?" It could just as easily take fifteen billion years to feel "OUCH!" and react. It would just take a few billion years for us to see it.(Grinning)

 

Best wishes.

[Boerseun]

In a very real sense, the Universe is alive and conscious.

 

We are largely the accidental and statistical result of billions of years of consecutive chemical accidents, yet we think and believe that we are alive and conscious.

 

The carbon and other atoms we're made of, was cooked in a stellar crucible from much simpler elements. We are made of the same stuff the universe is made of. We're part of it. If consciousness can be ascribed to the universe, it's us. We (and similar brainy alien species) can be regarded as the brains of the universe. We are inseperable from it.

Imagine a pile of carbon wondering about its origins?

 

Your liver isn't conscious. Neither are your feet, your toenails or your appendix. Every single bit of your body can be amputated until only your brain is left over, without you suffering a loss of your sense of 'self'. Same with the universe. The part that is conscious, is also limited - and lives on Earth and probably similar planets.

 

Now for a really mind-bending 'what if':

 

In all the universe, a single technological species must be 'first'. Who's to say it's not us? Granted, the chances of us being the very first, truly technological, space-faring species in the vastness of the universe is truly remote - yet people do tend to win the lotto every now and then! And the lotto being the tax that people pay who can't do math, imagine the odds of somebody winning it twice! Yet it's happened! So, maybe, until we do meet a more advanced species, we should take our role as the first advanced civilization serious, and stop buggering up the planet that gave rise to us in the first place.

[emessay]

Suddenly.....................we're conscious................just 10,000 yrs civilization......... :shrug: .

 

Perhaps suddenly...........we're unconscious ...........for next 13,700,000,000 yrs...... :frown:

 

Never the day after.........never judgement day........No Paradise......No Hell............ :surprise:

 

Suddenly we meet again here ......learn again from a stone in darkness a cave....... :surprise:

 

Suddenly..........................Suddenly.........................Suddenly.............................. :confused:

[Qfwfq]

Every single bit of your body can be amputated until only your brain is left over, without you suffering a loss of your sense of 'self'.

Cool! I think I'll try that, as soon as I have a bit of spare time...

 

:surprise:

[DietAnthrax]

Actually...there are theories for how a universe might reproduce through for example black holes. The brane theory opens up for a universe that is affected by conditions (gravity leaking from a different brane, for example). We can't rule out that there are thought processes simply because we don't know how they would work - but thought processes are not a requirement for life.

 

So I'd say it's a real possibility that the universe is alive. As for whether this could be proven scientifically I'm more pessimistic.

 

Perhaps, but what kind of reproduction? Forest fire reproduce. Sparks are lifted up by convection, and can land and start new fires quite far from the "parent" fire. Fire isn't alive, though - no information about the parent fire is contained within the new fires. Inheritance is a strong component in any good definition of life. Even if black holes really spawn new universes, can any pseudo-genetic information about our universe by given to the "new" one?

 

With regards to possible thought processes in the universe, the finite speed of light and the universe's accelerating expansion should be borne in mind. If there is a consciousness, it will be getting stupider and stupider all the time. Not that I think there is even a remote possibility of such a mind actually existing. BTW, I didn't suggest that thought processes should be included in a definition of the term "life".

[Turtle]

___I missed this thread earlier but as the topic came up off-topic in another thread, here is my thought. We say the Universe is born with the Big Bang, but what if the Big Bang is fertilization & the Universe is not even born yet? A newly fertilized human egg - Bang; Big Bang ;) :) - is living but not yet concious in the way we refer here; no conversations. Of course we still may argue over who or if parents or siblings as we already do. The Unborn Universe theory? :)