As
scientists delve deeper and deeper into the unsolved mysteries of the
universe, they are discovering that a number of cosmological parameters
are excruciatingly specific. So specific, in fact, that any minor
alteration to key parameters would throw the entire universe off kilter
and result in a system completely unfriendly to life.
Consequently,
some have considered this as evidence for a designer, giving rise to
teleological arguments like intelligent design. Others claim that the
universe is spontaneously finely tuned.*
There are several
theories that try to explain why the universe is so finely tuned: 1)
anthropic observation in consideration of an ensemble of universes
[Carter, Leslie], 2) the "participatory anthropic principle" which
implies that observers force the universe into existence [Wheeler], and
3) that natural selection has endowed the universe with its particular
characteristics [Smolin, Smart].
On the last point, that of
natural selection, the obvious question is, if the universe is a
replicating entity, and if its attributes are the result of natural
selection, why must the universe also be so biophilic? In other words,
couldn't the physics of the universe develop such that it was merely a
replicating entity that didn't necessarily have to support life?
One
possible answer is that there are many types of spontaneously
replicating universes, some of which support life, and some of which do
not. If this is the case, we happen to observe one such universe that
supports life, and our existence is irrelevant to our universe's life
cycle.
However, if we find that the universe we live in is the
only feasible type of universe possible, and that it is a replicative
system prone to selectional processes, then we might have to conclude
that intelligent life plays a crucial role in the universe's life
cycle. In other words, advanced intelligences help the universe to
replicate.
As
Freeman Dyson
once wrote, "The more I examine the universe and study the details of
its architecture, the more evidence I find that the universe in some
sense must have known that we were coming. There are some striking
examples in the laws of nuclear physics of numerical accidents that
seem to conspire to make the universe habitable."
I first encountered this argument via John Smart's
developmental singularity
hypothesis, where he suggests that advanced intelligences may spawn new
baby universes soon after the technological singularity event. More
recently, I discovered an article on
KurzweilAI by James N. Gardner in which he argues for the
selfish biocosm hypothesis.
Gardner's
argument is quite interesting. He writes that two recent discoveries
have imparted a renewed sense of urgency to investigations of the
anthropic qualities of our cosmos, specifically 1) the value of dark
energy density is exceedingly small but not quite zero, and 2) the
number of different solutions permitted by M-theory is astronomical --
measured not in millions or billions but in googles or googleplexes.
Again, what he's suggesting is that the universe is finely tuned to the
point of absurdity.
According to Gardner's theory, "the laws and
constants of physics function as the cosmic equivalent of DNA, guiding
a cosmologically extended evolutionary process and providing a
blueprint for the replication of new life-friendly progeny universes."
As
Gardner notes, theories of cosmological eschatology have previously
been articulated by Kurzweil, Wheeler and Dyson, all of whom have
essentially predicted that, in Gardner's words, "the ongoing process of
biological and technological evolution is sufficiently robust and
unbounded that, in the far distant future, a cosmologically extended
biosphere could conceivably exert a global influence on the physical
state of the cosmos." Some cosmologists, like Milan Cirkovic, have
argued that the universe's life cycle should not be studied without
referrence to the influence of intelligent life.
Specifically,
it is thought that intelligences, in conjunction with advancing
technologies, will act as "von Neumann controllers" within a
cosmologically extended biosphere and function as a "von Neumann
duplicator" in a hypothesized process of cosmological replication.
I
find this topic to be exceptionally interesting, and I hope that more
consideration is given to it in the coming years, particularly the
issue of cosmological eschatology and the role that intelligences may
have in the life cycle of the universe.
*Browsing through Wikipedia, I found some examples of 'fine tuning':
-
The nuclear strong force holds together the particles in the nucleus of
an atom. If the strong nuclear force were slightly weaker, by as little
as 2%, multi-proton nuclei would not hold together and hydrogen would
be the only element in the universe. If the strong force were slightly
stronger, by as little as 1%, hydrogen would be rare in the universe
and elements heavier than iron (elements resulting from fusion during
the explosion of supernovae) would also be rare.
- The nuclear
weak force affects the behavior of leptons (e.g. neutrinos, electrons,
and muons) that do not participate in strong nuclear reactions. If the
weak force were slightly larger, neutrons would decay more readily, and
therefore would be less available, and little or no helium would be
produced from the big bang. Without the necessary helium, heavy
elements sufficient for the constructing of life as we know it would
not be made by the nuclear furnaces inside stars. If the weak force
were slightly smaller, the big bang would burn most or all of the
hydrogen into helium, with a subsequent over-abundance of heavy
elements made by stars, and life as we know it would not be possible.
-
The electromagnetic coupling constant binds electrons to protons in
atoms. The characteristics of the orbits of electrons about atoms
determines to what degree atoms will bond together to form molecules.
If the electromagnetic coupling constant were different atoms and
molecules would be different; maybe not even exist.
- The ratio
of electron to proton mass also determines the characteristics of the
orbits of electrons about nuclei. A proton is 1836 times more massive
than an electron. If the electron to proton mass ratio were different,
atoms and molecules would be different — or maybe not even exist.
-
The entropy level of the universe affects the condensation of massive
systems. The universe contains about one billion photons for every
baryon. This makes the universe extremely entropic, i.e. a very
efficient radiator and a very poor engine. If the entropy level for the
universe were slightly larger, no galactic systems would form (and
therefore no stars). If the entropy level were slightly smaller, the
galactic systems that formed would effectively trap radiation and
prevent any fragmentation of the systems into stars. In either case,
the universe would be devoid of stars and solar systems.
- The
force of gravity affects the interaction of particles. In order for
life as we know it to form, the force of gravity must be 1040 (10 to
the 40th power) times weaker than the force of electromagnetism. The
relationship of gravity to electromagnetism as it currently exists is
this: The positively charged particles must equal in charge the numbers
negatively charged particles or else electromagnetism will dominate
gravity, and stars, galaxies and planets will not form. The numbers of
electrons must equal the numbers of protons to better than one part of
1037 (10 to the 37th power).
Cross-posted from Sentient Developments.