Earth’s Organisms Developed Via Evolution. Some Theorists Wonder: What if the Entire Cosmos Did, Too?

21 hours ago by Delta_V to c/space

The idea that universes evolve like organisms sat on the fringes of theoretical physics for decades. Then, a Substack post and a 2022 find by the James Webb Space Telescope boosted the concept

...Historically, scientists have viewed the cosmos as akin to a rock—complex, perhaps even beautiful, but formed through arbitrary events. Evolutionary cosmologists instead argue that universes, like living organisms, grow and reproduce, spinning off new universes with small variations from their progenitors. In doing so, these cosmic offspring are refined across generations into forms that maximize the number of universes yet to be born. Since the Big Bang, our universe, like any developing child, has been unfurling into an optimal shape.

Under this view, the universe is not a rock. It is an egg...

Smolin’s work was, in turn, inspired by physicists Bryce DeWitt and John Wheeler, who proposed that singularities inside black holes, the places where matter is crushed into a point of infinite density, might expand to produce new universes that follow different physics from the universes that produced them. Every universe—including our own—would, under this logic, have emerged from a Big Bang within a black hole.

Smolin realized that this hypothetical process would allow universes to reproduce, in a way, by making more black holes. And if those new universes could inherit the physics of their parents with small differences—just as new organisms inherit the genes of their parents with small differences—then universes could also evolve with each generation. Specifically, a form of cosmic natural selection would favor universes that make as many black holes as possible. Less fertile universes could persist, but they would produce far fewer offspring. So over time, an increasingly high proportion of universes would be optimized for black hole production—which would imply that our universe, given the odds, is one of those...

load all comments
m_f 14 points 21 hours ago

This is cool, but until we can probe further into black holes, seems unfalsifiable

path: 0 25375161, hotness: undefined, score: 14, children: 6
deadcream 1 point 20 hours ago

This is more of a metaphysical theory than a physical one

path: 0 25375161 25376034, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 5
SarahValentine 3 points 20 hours ago

No, it's a hypothesis, and if it can't be disproven then it's not science.

path: 0 25375161 25376034 25376209, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 4
Cocodapuf 1 point 6 hours ago

I think you just defined metaphysics. It's really more philosophy than science.

path: 0 25375161 25376034 25376209 25387503, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 3
SarahValentine -1 points 4 hours ago

That's a cop-out. Metaphysics is literally meta-physics, not talking about the meaning behind physics or what it means that something can or can't be known. I don't think you understand what philosophy is.

path: 0 25375161 25376034 25376209 25387503 25388289, hotness: undefined, score: -1, children: 2
Cocodapuf 1 point 4 hours ago

I think you don't know what metaphysics is.

From Wikipedia:

Metaphysics is the branch of philosophy that examines the basic nature or most fundamental structure of reality. It is traditionally seen as the study of mind-independent features of the world, but some theorists view it as an inquiry into the conceptual framework of human understanding.

It's literally more philosophy than science. It's philosophy of the physical world.

path: 0 25375161 25376034 25376209 25387503 25388289 25388384, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 1
SarahValentine 0 points 3 hours ago

That's piddly philosophical metaphysics, not actual meta-physics. Don't know how to be any clearer about this or what your actual point is.

path: 0 25375161 25376034 25376209 25387503 25388289 25388384 25388783, hotness: undefined, score: 0, children: 0
space
space

@mander.xyz

login for more options
2586
764
621

A community to discuss space & astronomy through a STEM lens

Rules

  1. Be respectful and inclusive. This means no harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
  2. Engage in constructive discussions by discussing in good faith.
  3. Foster a continuous learning environment.
Also keep in mind, mander.xyz's rules on politics

Please keep politics to a minimum. When science is the focus, intersection with politics may be tolerated as long as the discussion is constructive and science remains the focus. As a general rule, political content posted directly to the instance’s local communities is discouraged and may be removed. You can of course engage in political discussions in non-local communities.


Related Communities

🔭 Science
🚀 Engineering
🌌 Art and Photography

Other Cool Links


go to feed...