An introduction to the COSMOLOGICAL NATURAL SELECTION with Intelligence (CNSI) theory
It could look obvious, but it’s not…
Understanding the meaning of this question, means you are actually retroactively questioning yourself on it. This superpower says : “I am a living biological entity capable of asking myself on : why can I be I a biological entity capable of this ?”.
“How”, “when”, “where” are questions that can find explanations. Even if it is sometimes hard to demonstrate and sometimes we miss scientific results to fully explain it. But WHY is the last fundamental question that remains…
Is “WHY” a human problem or the true question ?
Asking “why” automatically means that there is something behind. In this case, repeating “WHY” , like a child can lead to :
- because I learned to read, WHY ?
- because I went to school, WHY ?
- because I am a human, WHY ?
- because I was selected by natural selection, WHY ?
- because life is made of interacting cells with DNA, WHY ?
- because earth permitted life to appear, WHY ?
- because earth has the right position in our solar system and other atomic parameters were good, WHY ?
- because since big bang physics parameters apply like this, WHY ?
“Why” not only is a question, it suggests there’s a will, could be rational or religious. “Why” sounds like a bad program with an infinite loop, every answer even observable would lead to another “Why”. Our capacity of asking “why” may be the reason we are wired to believe in god : when all rational answers are exhausted, god allows us to escape from this infinite loop. It gives us a definitive “end of story”, helping us not to fall into schizophrenia. Would that mean that scientific minds are resistant to schizophrenia ? how do they manage to not have such crucial answers to WHY questions ?
At the end and constantly, all ancient and actual civilizations try to solve theses major questions.
Most of time cosmogonies are maid with any of these explanation :
1 / God
From believer point of view, intelligent life isn’t made of any kind of chance. We were designed by a creator that made us to fullfil a great destiny. It totally emphasizes with the strong anthropic principle. Scientific results permanently postpones the starting point of God but the remaining unknown is understandable as a divine will.
God is where science actually does not have any sufficiently strong explanation. What’s interesting is, God for almost, is made of a different substance from what is inside the universe. It’s not part of the universe, it’s another entity apart and above it.
2 / Chance
What we see, complexity and beauty of the universe is just a secondary consequence of physics parameters and initial conditions of the universe. That means there is absolutely no aim, but an extraordinary chance. Intelligent life would only be a very lucky combination of bricks and energy built in a very old stellar forge helped by natural selection.
Looking at disturbing experience like Conway’s Game of Life seems to permit this idea.
Some choosen simple principles applied to as simple entities could astonishingly create biologic-like complexity (and even reproduction). Slightly changing any parameter would destroy everything.
Intelligent life appearance could be a sequel of this principle : a lucky history in a lucky place (our position in the galaxy, on earth…) with lucky universal parameters. One insignificant small parameter change from our own universe birth (example : atomistic parameters, initial inflation rate…) or position or history would automatically have led our galaxy, solar system, earth, biology, species, intelligence, society, knowledge… not to exist.
3/ Anthropic principle (from scientific point of view)
In this theory, there should be a reason why we are here, meaning we are about to do something with it, even if we don’t know it actually. Forgeting God is not easy then. How can be there any will without any divine entity ? How can science explain any direction in this universe ?
Lots of hypothesis exists but let’s introduce one that comes from one of the famous theoretical physicist Lee SMOLIN (who rejects anthropic principle !).
A new type of explanatory mechanism is proposed to account for the fact that many of the dimensionless numbers which characterize particle physics and cosmology take unnatural values. It is proposed that all final singularities ‘bounce’ or tunnel to initial singularities of new universes at which point the dimensionless parameters of the standard models of particle physics and cosmology undergo small random changes. This speculative hypothesis, plus the conventional physics of gravitational collapse, together comprise a mechanism for natural selection, in which those choices of parameters that lead to universes that produce the most black holes during their lifetime are selected for.
Lee SMOLIN
Smolin imagine there are numerous reproducting universe in an ensemble of multiverse. In his theory, the way universe reproduces is made through black holes.
The more the universe contains black holes, the more chance it has to reproduce. That is why we can now see black holes.
In its theory, life is an artefact not desired, but consequent of the maximization of the formation of black holes. This is clearly an anti anthropic principle position.
Starting from this hypothesis, sociologist Michael PRICE developped another surprising idea introducing another concept : complexity.
PRICE noticed that “complexity” in biology never comes by chance. It doesn’t appear without any goal even if it is only a consequence of Darwinism. As natural selection always occurs, it creates highly unlikely adaptations like cells, multicellular organisms, eyes, social behaviors…
Then PRICE criticizes that black holes could be the reproductive system because they are not complex objects in the universe’s fauna. They can be defined by some elementary parameters.
On the contrary, life and and especially smart life is an unlikely creation full of complexity. That lead to the concept that intelligent life (like us) could be a result of natural selection in the whole system. That, we already know it. But thinking wider, could it have been selected because it has a definite function on our level or could it be at a larger scale an adaption for the whole universe ?
Because, if the universe’s will, as any other natural entity, is to reproduce (in the Smolin multiverse theory), could intelligent life be an adaptation ? Intelligent life could it be the best chance not only for us to reproduce but too for the universe to maximize reproductive ability ?
How ?
We easily can say that our actual knowledge, culture, organization, technologies are not capable of doing such miracle to help a whole universe to reproduce… But, what would be in 100 years, 1000 years or even 1 million years ? Scientific developments and discoveries made in centuries before, reach today a very different rate in quantum physics, Biology, Health, Cosmology…
Who can say that in 10.000 years we won’t be able to manage universe reproduction by for example, manipulating black holes ?
Yes that looks more like a science fiction scenario and goes out of science. But admitting our superpowers could lead us to not only modify earth but our whole solar system or galaxy in some centuries. That could lead to the point we could interact with the foundations of our whole universe, finding its ultimate weakness : how can we help it … to reproduce.
This would help explain why we are here… because other did it before with other universes in which they lived.
All missing intelligence universes would have collapse, letting only those capable of it live.
PRICE lets us with an optimistic finishing idea. Humanity could be the key waited by the entire universe to help it. It only depends on our capacity not to exterminate ourselves, then finding the right way socially and environmentally develop… in order to continue our scientific research.
References
Dennett, D. (1995). Darwin’s Dangerous Idea. Schuster. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin%27s_Dangerous_Idea?oldformat=true
Conway’s game of life. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_Game_of_Life?oldformat=true
PRICE, M. (1998). Cosmological Evolution and the Future of Life. Psychology today : https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/darwin-eternity/201802/cosmological-evolution-and-the-future-life
SMOLIN, L. (1992) Did the universe evolve. Class. Quantum Grav. 9 173 : https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0264-9381/9/1/016/pdf