Love this post. Science is not just a tool for answers, it is fundamentally our way of asking the universe where we belong. That’s why science has never been just rational; it’s a sacred kind of wonder.
But we ARE just incidental bystanders. The universe would have evolved, and will evolve, in exactly the same way as if humans never existed.
And in any case it has been evolving for approximately 13,799, 999, 900 years without us even being aware of it, and it's only in tbe last 100 years or so that we have started to get some idea of what's been going on.
And it will continue to evolve in exactly the same way after we cease to exist.
Let's not get too carried away by grandiose dreams of our own importance.
Now there's an interesting idea. So it must be only at most a few hundred thousand years old, depening on how you define 'observing'. And if we all stop observing it, then it will disappear. Isn't it fantastic to have such power!
But you seem to be ignoring the 'chicken and egg paradox' - The Cosmos had to exist first, to create us, before we could observe it.....
Terry, Of real impact is that the mindless universe "out there" has become a perspective that modern physics has outgrown. I recommend the works of Dr. Robert Lanza (three books) as a great way to explore the current discoveries and implications of quantum physics.
Quantum weirdness is a whole new ballgame! But those strange phenomena and laws were happening and operating long long before we became able to study them and try to explain them. And they will continue to do so long after we cease to exist. And, I would suggest, even if there is no other intelligent species in the universe to 'open the box, and see if the cat is alive or dead'!
Trouble is, N universae mite open same box or N boxes, finding 2 'plus-katz' or 3 'minus katz'. Riemann cant help, maybe 'purified' P vs. non-P. We'll never make sense of any Reality we're ensconced in. Best to focus on defenestration of Trumprague.
In a quantiverse like ours, all times--past, present & future--are simultaneous, rendering causation nugatory, but the illusion of entropy is so powerful all embrace it. Time to drop meta-balonium.
I like this article. We need something that can serve the purpose of traditional religions without ignoring or denying what science teaches us. Unfortunately, participation requires a knowledge of science beyond that of most people today. But perhaps this could motivate more people to gain that knowledge through study. (Analogous to Bible study.)
Yes Paul, I agree. I would say that there are authors that make science understandable to the lay person. I've mentioned Robert Lanza earlier. His work compiles current physics in an approachable way. It does require study though, mostly because the concepts are so involving that you will want to return to the books regularly.
Alas, there is a strong push right now to diminish the value of science, but that’s another topic..
All due respect to Dr. Tubali, what I think he has presented here is a view of the universe as a projection of evolved homo sapiens - Anthropocentrism.
The time humans will have spent in the life of the universe will be a tiny fraction of a nanosecond. When it’s all said and done, our influence on it, along with our spirituality and self-awareness, will amount to zero, none, nada, nothing. The universe will go on without us for trillions of years.
And spirituality and philosophy are not science Contemplating the universe requires physics and chemistry along with math. Biology is not necessary because life is the ultimate product of both physics and chemistry. It’s because of physics that we know we are not the center of the universe and that the universe is expanding, not static. And we struggle with quantum mechanics.
Likewise, spirituality, when used as religion, asks us the suspend our understanding of science. They ask us to believe there is more to nature - the supernatural. But what exactly the supernatural is has many lives and they are expressed in the various religions around the world. No one religion can claim that its supernatural world is the right one.
All that said, I think Dr. Tubali makes a good case for finding meaning in the universe. But it is limited to those believe in a spiritual world.
Good analysis. Also consider that Meaning is not a thing that can be found out there anywhere but is readily made by any being that has preferences. As in, all living things. Anything that draws the attention of a living being must be meaningful because it is found to be so. To be a mortal living thing in a universe like this is no small feat. Overcoming the second law and the principle of locality? And doing that successfully for 4.2 billion years? You should be proud of that heritage! And have deep respect for it in these fellow mortals.
"We may be witnessing a historic confluence between space science and contemplative traditions — a meeting point that holds the potential to unite rather than divide. At a time when a shared vision is crucial for the survival and flourishing of our species, this merging of outer exploration and inner reflection could offer not only meaning, but direction." Ana Arrabé
Thank you for your letter of July 9th. The question should rather be: How far is it reasonable and justifiable to assume the existence of an un-perceivable being? I see no justification for the introduction of such a concept. In any case, it does not facilitate the understanding of the orderliness we find in the perceivable world.
The stars didn’t actually make our minds. The stars made the elements of the periodic table and gravity placed them nicely into isolated gravitational wells where they aggregated in close proximity under conditions of maximal rotational freedoms in the presence of available incident photons and millions of years of shuffling and production of ever more complex products that were durable in that gentle environment and lead inevitably to higher and higher levels of complexity with each iteration. That sustained interactivity along with the quantum potential configurations of each of the participants is what eventually after 4.2 billion years of continuous interactivity resulted in the evolution of our conscious “minds” that then ride the apex of that emergent heritage and go on to insist that the universe generates from some top-down source as opposed to embracing the uncomfortable possibility that nature is indeed natural and not a synthetic product. That is the one taboo that is seldom breached in the arena of philosophy of science and religion.
Love this post. Science is not just a tool for answers, it is fundamentally our way of asking the universe where we belong. That’s why science has never been just rational; it’s a sacred kind of wonder.
"a sacred kind of wonder". Couldn't love this more!
But we ARE just incidental bystanders. The universe would have evolved, and will evolve, in exactly the same way as if humans never existed.
And in any case it has been evolving for approximately 13,799, 999, 900 years without us even being aware of it, and it's only in tbe last 100 years or so that we have started to get some idea of what's been going on.
And it will continue to evolve in exactly the same way after we cease to exist.
Let's not get too carried away by grandiose dreams of our own importance.
Quant tells us we create the kosmos by observing it...
Now there's an interesting idea. So it must be only at most a few hundred thousand years old, depening on how you define 'observing'. And if we all stop observing it, then it will disappear. Isn't it fantastic to have such power!
But you seem to be ignoring the 'chicken and egg paradox' - The Cosmos had to exist first, to create us, before we could observe it.....
Correct...but plausible in Hugh Everett's kosmos of infinite wave kolapses...admittedly, Reality is so bizarre as to render Borsch Belt gagless.
Terry, Of real impact is that the mindless universe "out there" has become a perspective that modern physics has outgrown. I recommend the works of Dr. Robert Lanza (three books) as a great way to explore the current discoveries and implications of quantum physics.
Quantum weirdness is a whole new ballgame! But those strange phenomena and laws were happening and operating long long before we became able to study them and try to explain them. And they will continue to do so long after we cease to exist. And, I would suggest, even if there is no other intelligent species in the universe to 'open the box, and see if the cat is alive or dead'!
Trouble is, N universae mite open same box or N boxes, finding 2 'plus-katz' or 3 'minus katz'. Riemann cant help, maybe 'purified' P vs. non-P. We'll never make sense of any Reality we're ensconced in. Best to focus on defenestration of Trumprague.
But then maybe because we are now able to observe it?
I’ve been trying to get exactly this across, with little success. Anthropocentrism is the height of unreasoning hubris. It’s ridiculous!
In a quantiverse like ours, all times--past, present & future--are simultaneous, rendering causation nugatory, but the illusion of entropy is so powerful all embrace it. Time to drop meta-balonium.
Brilliant and beautiful! Thank you SO much, I'm in awe.
Amazing article and I had read over to grasp the underlying concept and its meaning.
K I’m kidding k WMImk
I like this article. We need something that can serve the purpose of traditional religions without ignoring or denying what science teaches us. Unfortunately, participation requires a knowledge of science beyond that of most people today. But perhaps this could motivate more people to gain that knowledge through study. (Analogous to Bible study.)
Yes Paul, I agree. I would say that there are authors that make science understandable to the lay person. I've mentioned Robert Lanza earlier. His work compiles current physics in an approachable way. It does require study though, mostly because the concepts are so involving that you will want to return to the books regularly.
Alas, there is a strong push right now to diminish the value of science, but that’s another topic..
Across 95 years have never said it better.
All due respect to Dr. Tubali, what I think he has presented here is a view of the universe as a projection of evolved homo sapiens - Anthropocentrism.
The time humans will have spent in the life of the universe will be a tiny fraction of a nanosecond. When it’s all said and done, our influence on it, along with our spirituality and self-awareness, will amount to zero, none, nada, nothing. The universe will go on without us for trillions of years.
And spirituality and philosophy are not science Contemplating the universe requires physics and chemistry along with math. Biology is not necessary because life is the ultimate product of both physics and chemistry. It’s because of physics that we know we are not the center of the universe and that the universe is expanding, not static. And we struggle with quantum mechanics.
Likewise, spirituality, when used as religion, asks us the suspend our understanding of science. They ask us to believe there is more to nature - the supernatural. But what exactly the supernatural is has many lives and they are expressed in the various religions around the world. No one religion can claim that its supernatural world is the right one.
All that said, I think Dr. Tubali makes a good case for finding meaning in the universe. But it is limited to those believe in a spiritual world.
Good analysis. Also consider that Meaning is not a thing that can be found out there anywhere but is readily made by any being that has preferences. As in, all living things. Anything that draws the attention of a living being must be meaningful because it is found to be so. To be a mortal living thing in a universe like this is no small feat. Overcoming the second law and the principle of locality? And doing that successfully for 4.2 billion years? You should be proud of that heritage! And have deep respect for it in these fellow mortals.
Another home run….out of the park….am humbled…..
“From stardust to self awareness”, beautiful article!
"We may be witnessing a historic confluence between space science and contemplative traditions — a meeting point that holds the potential to unite rather than divide. At a time when a shared vision is crucial for the survival and flourishing of our species, this merging of outer exploration and inner reflection could offer not only meaning, but direction." Ana Arrabé
Beautiful! This synchronizes so well with so much of my current reading.
Elegant! Inspiring! Yes, LIFE is cosmically sacred, if anything is! Thank you, and everyone noted for sharing.
July 21, 1953
Mr. David H. Albaugh
1712 So. Central
Burlington, Iowa
Dear Sir:
Thank you for your letter of July 9th. The question should rather be: How far is it reasonable and justifiable to assume the existence of an un-perceivable being? I see no justification for the introduction of such a concept. In any case, it does not facilitate the understanding of the orderliness we find in the perceivable world.
Sincerely yours,
[signed] A. Einstein
Albert Einstein.
“Two cheers for uncertainty.” 🧐
Yeah, that!
The stars didn’t actually make our minds. The stars made the elements of the periodic table and gravity placed them nicely into isolated gravitational wells where they aggregated in close proximity under conditions of maximal rotational freedoms in the presence of available incident photons and millions of years of shuffling and production of ever more complex products that were durable in that gentle environment and lead inevitably to higher and higher levels of complexity with each iteration. That sustained interactivity along with the quantum potential configurations of each of the participants is what eventually after 4.2 billion years of continuous interactivity resulted in the evolution of our conscious “minds” that then ride the apex of that emergent heritage and go on to insist that the universe generates from some top-down source as opposed to embracing the uncomfortable possibility that nature is indeed natural and not a synthetic product. That is the one taboo that is seldom breached in the arena of philosophy of science and religion.
I revel in the freedom
from endless pursuits of meaning and purpose
from familiar insistence that there should be/must be a reason.
The universe is
and I am.
Awe is enough and requires no divining.