It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Cosmological natural selection

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 5 2006 @ 07:04 PM
link   
This is a rather interesting theory. One meant to explain away the anthropic universe idea. Make's alot of sense too in a way. All the same laws of physics allowing for life are also needed to produce black hole's. In the theory, the universe exist's for the sole purpose of creating black hole's, and the implosions of black hole's in this universe are actually explosions i.e, big bangs in another universe. Or something along those line's... Found a couple site's on this.



en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...

Cosmological natural selection is a hypothesis proposed by Lee Smolin intended as a scientific alternative to the anthropic principle. It addresses the problem of complexity in our universe, which is largely unexplained. Just a few minor changes in the mass of certain elementary particles or in the strength of the forces of the universe would prevent atoms from forming, let alone galaxies. Being that natural selection has explained the complexity of life so well in biology, this concept is borrowed and applied to cosmology in an attempt to explain the complexity of the universe. Cosmological natural selection is also referred to as the theory of Fecund universes.




www.starlarvae.org...

The physical constants of nature appear to be tuned to ensure that black holes arise and proliferate. The constants appear to evince non-teleological Darwinian processes operating across an ensemble of universes.


Maybe we got it all wrong ... the designer (although highly improbable of existing) could be experimenting on the immense amount's of energy a black hole produces and we're just an interesting byproduct.



www.newscientist.com...
fusionanomaly.net...

[edit on 5-3-2006 by Produkt]




posted on Mar, 5 2006 @ 08:40 PM
link   
Found another good article for this theory.



spaz.ca...

The Weak Anthropic Principle is not very useful in itself since it merely states a fact about our universe without explaining anything. The Strong Anthropic Principle can be rejected for the reasons outlined above. What remaining options are there to explain the fine-tuning of the universe? What needs an explanation is the improbability of our universe being the way it is. The improbability rests on there being only one universe — ours. What if there were many universes? As the number of different universes which exist increases, the probability of at least one of those universes being able to support life increases as well. One could imagine the possibility of more than one universe existing just as easily as one could imagine just one existing. Since there are an infinite number of ways of imagining multiple universes and just one way of imagining only one universe, then it is more probable that there are many universes rather than only one. Perhaps every universe that could exist does exist. In any of these situations, the improbability of there being a universe just like ours is dissolved.

...

Lee Smolin, a theoretical physicist, has found a way in which a process similar to Darwinian evolution could occur with universes. When a black hole forms, it may be possible that it creates a brand new universe within itself — a whole new package of space and time equally impressive in scale to our own. The new universe would likely have similar properties to our own, but small mutations could occur. It would stand to reason that through this process, universes with physics that can create numerous black holes will have a proportionately higher amount of offspring. This means that most universes existing would tend to have physics which optimize the amount of black holes they can produce. It just so happens that the laws of physics in our universe are particularly good at forming black holes. If we experiment with physics differing from ours, we find that such universes would — more often than not — produce less black holes than ours. One of the requirements for abundant black holes is a carbon rich universe, which coincidentally is also what is needed for life. Smolin has found a possible way to have a type of natural selection occur on a universal scale. If Smolin is correct, it is no longer a big mystery as to why the universe we find ourselves in has such perfect physics — it would be the most probable type of universe that there is (Brockman p.287).


Checkmate.


[edit on 5-3-2006 by Produkt]



new topics
 
0

log in

join