[1+1=2]

OneAndOneIs2

« Thank God for dual-bootingAdvertising »

Sat, Nov 22, 2008

[Icon][Icon]Intelligent design

• Post categories: Omni, Technology

I mentioned a while ago that I was reading "The God Delusion"

I can't say I've been hugely impressed with it. Obviously, not being religious, I'm not really the target audience. And I already agree with the fundamental points of the book: That "God" is not a useful answer to any question; and that there is no evidence of an intelligent designer to be found in evolutionary evidence on Earth.

But on thinking over the whole matter, on a purely scientific basis, I've come to the conclusion that the odds are in favour of our universe having been created by an intelligence.

Not quite the point the book was aiming for, I know :o)

The logic runs like this:

Clarke's Third Law states that "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

Magic is, generally, just a way of saying "I don't know" - how does a stage magician saw a woman in half and put her back together again? Magic!

(Actually, I do know the answer to that one, but anyway...)

By extension, any inhabitant of a sufficiently advanced society is indistinguishable from a magician.

And by further extension, any sufficiently powerful magician is indistinguishable from a god.

So any really, really advanced civilization would be a race of godlike beings. What stops us being able to create personal worlds, travel to other galaxies, turn water into wine, etc? Only the fact that we don't know how. Any godlike ability will eventually be reproducable by science.

So, my chain of logic was, essentially: Any universe which is so structured that life-capable planets can come into being in, will eventually form life-capable planets (LCPs)

Because of the size of a universe, even if LCPs are very uncommon, there will still be billions of them.

If there are billions of LCPs, then life will arise within the universe. Even if life is a very rare thing to evolve, there are billions of worlds and billions of years in which it can happen. Some proportion of worlds will become life-bearing.

Some proportion of those life-bearing worlds will give rise to intelligence.

Some proportion of intelligent species will survive famine, pestilence, wars, natural disasters and so on, and go on to become a godlike race as mentioned above.

So far, though, we've got a deity as a product of a natural universe, not as a creator of one.

However.

Many current theories for the universe call for it to not be the only universe in existence.

There are many universes with different physical laws in them, so the theory goes.

So here's where things get interesting: If universes come into being naturally and without intervention, and any natural event can be duplicated by sufficiently advanced technology, then sooner or later, one or more of our godlike races, that evolved through natural selection and purely non-interventional scientific process, will discover how to manufacture universes to order.

Here we must diverge to an "As above, so below" chain of reasoning. Take a look at our society right now, and look at how many "artificial universes" we make ourselves.

Books create imaginary worlds. Science creates self-contained biospheres. Computer simulations are the most common: Sim City today, Sim Universe tomorrow!

Intelligences like to create. And they like to create sophisticated things. Some day, if we last that long, we'll learn how to create universes. And we'll create LOTS of them, just like we create lots of artificial worlds right now.

But since there's not much to get out of a universe that just sits there, we'll selectively create universes that can create life.

So what this means is: Any universe that is capable of producing life will, inescapably, lead to the creation of a plethora of new, life-creating universes.

And all of THOSE universes will lead to lots more life-filled universes. And so on, and so on.

No call for a supernatural deity at any point: Life evolves purely by natural selection and chance at all stages. But still, considering the vast number of intelligently-created universes that even a single naturally-occurring universe would result in, intelligently-crated universes would hugely outnumber natural ones.

And so, statistically, our universe is most likely one of those created by one of those super-advanced intelligences from some other universe.

Not supernatural, maybe not even worthy of being called "God". But an intelligent creator nonetheless.

Of course, such a creator wouldn't care in the slightest about being believed in or worshipped, any more that we want computer-generated characters to pray to us. And he wouldn't intervene to make evolution "work right" because an intelligent creator would be intelligent enough not to need to intervene - a clock that needs to be constantly adjusted by its manufacturer is a lousy, in fact downright defective, clock; A 'god' that needs to keep fiddling with a universe after it was created is not worthy of the name "supreme being"

You can draw a lot of other conclusions if you decide that you're living in a universe that did in fact have an intelligent creator, but none of them can ever have any evidence to back them up. So it's only really useful as a thought experiment. But I thought it was interesting...

2 comments

Hari
Comment from: Hari [Member] · http://harishankar.org/blog/
I think a huge logical fallacy is the assumption that an imaginary universe created out of intelligence is the same as the real thing.

To me, the whole concept of "parallel universes" or multiverses seem to be wrong completely.

The very definition of a universe is something that encompasses everything out there and by that definition, it would be impossible to have more than one.

You cannot multiple infinity by any number and arrive at anything other than infinity.
08/12/08 @ 16:31
oneandoneis2
Comment from: oneandoneis2 [Member] · http://geekblog.oneandoneis2.org/
I would define it rather as *a* definition of the universe is something that contains everything.

Also, the universe isn't actually infinite: It's currently estimated at being under 100 billion light years across.

My person favourite theory is the Brane Cosmology, which (to drastically simplify) posits that if space-time is curved, as it apparently is, then the universe must be a sphere: Uniformly curve a two-dimensional surface and you get a three-dimensional sphere. Scale this up to our universe, and you have a hypersphere floating in hyper-dimensional space.

Neither string nor quantum theory have a problem with multiple universes. And as stated in the post above, multiple universes is a very effective answer to the question of why our universe has just the right properties for life to be able to evolve.
08/12/08 @ 18:11

Leave a comment


Your email address will not be revealed on this site.

Your URL will be displayed.
(Line breaks become <br />)
(Name, email & website)
(Allow users to contact you through a message form (your email will not be revealed.)
This is a captcha-picture. It is used to prevent mass-access by robots.
Please enter the characters from the image above. (case insensitive)
 

[icon] Blogroll

[icon] Creative Hedgehog
La parte A se refiere solamente a las dos novelas estudiadas. La parte A debe ser preparada después de leer la primera mitad de la novela y contestar las siguientes preguntas: ¿te está gustando la novela/película o no, y por qué? No me gusta la novela. Las personajes que puedes gustar son superficiales, o hacen [...][Link to post]06/08/10 - SPN3730 diario: Pascual Duarte parte A

[icon] Hari's corner
Why being bi-lingual has its advantages[Link to post]10/08/10 - Being bi-lingual has its advantages

[icon] Place of Stuff
Isn't this exciting? We're out of the tedium of Genesis (world created, man falls, many people live and die. Oh, and attempted forced buggery and a spot of incest). We're into Exodus now; the Bible has got going, that tricky first chapter is out of the way and the real action can start! When the [...]

[Link to post]
03/08/10 - The Bible ? On The Waterfront

[icon] Advice From a Single Girl

I was giddy and hopeful when I first met Cary and spent a brief amount of time with him.

The week after that I was happily high on the idea of what could be, the possibility of getting to know someone interesting and intriguing, the wide open potential of what could be.

And I wanted to tell my friends all about him and what had, and hadn't happened, but I also wanted to keep it to myself, sealed safely in the happy bubble that was floating inside me. So I talked to some close friends about him, told them he lived in Vancouver and they, meaning well, told me quite firmly that they would not allow me to go through another long distance relationship. That I shouldn't even consider it.

My bubble had been burst.

I was completely deflated. Hurt. Let down.

I talked to C-Dawg, a sad tinge to the story now that I'd been told it could. . . should never work out.

"Vancouver?" she said, her voice somewhere between amused and incredulous. "That's not long distance! Get serious. Go for it."

And I let my bubble maybe start to re-inflate. Cautiously. Maybe just a little.

Then I talked to my friend about Cary. She said good things.

Maybe there was reason to be hopefully optimistic. Maybe it was ok to be a little girly and dreamy over what-ifs.

I went for a walk with S. We had life to catch up on.

Life including Cary and the story that still makes me smile.

She encouraged me to get his email, which I did, and then she went home and tried to find out what she could about him.

See, I'm not on Facebook. (No, really.) But S is, and in the small world way that Facebook seems to work, she found that Cary and she had a mutual friend and so she looked him up for me. (The modern background check.)

You can sometimes tell a lot about a person by what they put on their Facebook, she cautioned me. Sometimes.

How old is he?

Me: I don't know.

Is he a smoker?

Me: Um, I don't know? (God, I hope not)

Could he maybe be a little bit immature?

Me: I don't know. I suppose.

Well, he seems like a good guy. Cute. Interesting. I'd say he was my type, you know. (We laugh, we already know we share similar excellent taste in men.)

"I say go for it." She says, "just be aware that he's human. Not perfect."

I don't want to hear it.

Don't want to know the reality of him.

Find myself running away from all the what might have been's towards it'll never work what what I thinking's.

It's all or nothing. Perfect or awful. It'll work or it'll be a disaster.

And I realize that my bubble, the one that's been growing and floating inside me will burst on its own, without anyone's help if I get too far into imagining just how great Cary is, how great we'd be together, how perfectly perfect it all will be.

I'm Icarus. My friends don't want me flying too close to the sun.

But I like the feeling.

I like the soaring giddiness of how utterly fantastic this thing I've found will be.

Every single time I meet someone I like that feeling.

And I ride it higher and higher until I'm flapping my bare arms, feathers fallen into the sea and the crash is coming, the relationship splintering and I'm left staring at the brokenness wondering how on earth I could have been so wrong again.

The extremes are familiar. Addictive perhaps.

But I'm trying to learn to ride in the middle.

Safer. A shorter distance to fall.

A smaller bubble to burst.

Expectations that can be met and exceeded.

A safe, yet joyful and giddy flight. Wings intact.
[Link to post]
03/09/10 - Icarus

[icon] Nation
&#160; This was possibly the most ridiculous show I have seen in a long time and I can get Sky 1 I know ridiculous. It could be summed up in three sentences Do you know what's in your cereal? Want to? Read the label. Instead it went on for a hour about how evil the [...][Link to post]27/10/09 - Dispatches ? do you know what?s in your breakfast? (warning...

Blogroll generated by MagpieRSS

[Links][icon] My links

[Icon][Icon] Strange, how the only people who ever seem to complain that Linux sucks or doesn't work well are people who don't like using the CLI...
03/09/10

[Icon][Icon] Dominic tried to explain how circular references can cause a memory leak to a colleague this morning, and got told off for not working. Apparently, the analogy of a madman shooting anybody who isn't being pointed at by somebody else was NOT the boss-safe way to go..
01/09/10

[Icon][Icon] I last listened to:
The Offspring - She's Got Issues

[Icon][Icon] Most recent photo:
Submersible houseboat

[Icon][Icon]About Me

[Icon][Icon]About this blog

[Icon][Icon]My LQ profile

[Icon][Icon]My /. profile

[Icon][Icon]My Wishlist

[Icon]MyCommerce

[FSF Associate Member]


September 2010
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
 << <   > >>
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30      

Search

User tools

XML Feeds

eXTReMe Tracker

Valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional

Valid CSS!

[Valid RSS feed]

blog engine