Brian Greene: Why is our universe fine-tuned for life?

page: 1
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 23 2012 @ 02:27 PM
link   
First off, I used the search function and didn't see this latest video anywhere and mods if this is in the wrong forum please feel free to move it to the appropriate one.

I'm aware that Brian Greene has been discussed previously on ATS (see thread at bottom) and for those familiar with his work, consider this an update, for those not familiar here's his background;


Greene, a professor of physics and mathematics at Columbia University, has focused on unified theories for more than 25 years, and has written several best-selling and non-technical books on the subject including The Elegant Universe, a Pulitzer finalist, and The Fabric of the Cosmos—each of which has been adapted into a NOVA mini-series. His latest book, The Hidden Reality, explores the possibility that our universe is not the only universe.

Greene believes science must be brought to general audiences in new and compelling ways, such as his live stage odyssey, Icarus at the Edge of Time, with original orchestral score by Philip Glass, and the annual World Science Festival, which he co-founded in 2008 with journalist Tracy Day.


Brian Greene: Why is our universe fine-tuned for life?


At the heart of modern cosmology is a mystery: Why does our universe appear so exquisitely tuned to create the conditions necessary for life? In this tour de force tour of some of science's biggest new discoveries, Brian Greene shows how the mind-boggling idea of a multiverse may hold the answer to the riddle.


Here's his latest TEDTalks video;



Here's his previous TEDTalks video from 2008;


Physicist Brian Greene explains superstring theory, the idea that minscule strands of energy vibrating in 11 dimensions create every particle and force in the universe.




Source

Additional information;
BlackPoison94's thread:The Weird and Wacky World of Physics: Strings, Calabi-Yau and Massless Blackholes




edit on 23-4-2012 by Ericthenewbie because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 23 2012 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Ericthenewbie
 


I will definitely be watching this video! S&F

Honestly though, does anyone think the ~13.7 billion years it took for this universe to form resulted in the emergence of only 1 planet with life on it? C'mon now....REALLY?



posted on Apr, 23 2012 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Ericthenewbie
 

If he's referring to the multi-worlds theory of QM, the only problem is that whatever ISN'T chosen, always happens AND always causes the entire universe to split, which is utterly absurd. If he means parallel universes, then maybe.. the result being the paradox of the stong anthopic principal.



posted on Apr, 23 2012 @ 03:16 PM
link   
This argument always struck me a sa bit of a non-sequitur. How can you be sure the universe is so exquisitely tailored for life? Why can't life be tailored for the universe?



posted on Apr, 23 2012 @ 03:18 PM
link   
"Why does our universe appear so exquisitely tuned to create the conditions necessary for life"

Maybe it is the other way around.

Life is tuned to exist within the conditions of the universe.



posted on Apr, 23 2012 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by roadgravel
 

well then one would still have to ask the question, "tuned by what?" how could "life" tune itself before it existed?



posted on Apr, 23 2012 @ 03:29 PM
link   
Life would form from, and be based on, what is available. As time goes by it would make better use of the universe which would make the universe appear tuned to life.



posted on Apr, 23 2012 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 


I should preface that I'm not a scientist and that my knowledge is limited compared to others here on ATS. However I will attempt to answer you question; He touches on both but expands from the latter into a new realm of questions and what future research could be like. You should probably check it out for yourself and draw your own interpretation.



posted on Apr, 23 2012 @ 04:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Orwells Ghost
This argument always struck me a sa bit of a non-sequitur. How can you be sure the universe is so exquisitely tailored for life? Why can't life be tailored for the universe?


LOL I was just thinking the same thing the other day.
Age old example, if a tree falls-----
Isn't that like saying Earth is truly the center of the universe.
Just for a moment think. Where there is no life there is no thought. Without thought there is no universe or universes for that matter.
There is zero proof (yeah real bonified) that life exist elsewhere.
Sure a lot of wishful thinking but----- ta la la
Another age old example--- If a man speaks on the planet FARAWAY where no woman can here him. Is he still wrong??
the best ljb



posted on Apr, 23 2012 @ 04:53 PM
link   
if there is any "tailoring" involved, there must be a tailor. some will say "ahh, but the laws of nature tailored it" but where did the inherent order in the universe originate from? entropy tells us that a system moves from a state of order to chaos over time.

it just was...?

sounds like an argument for god to me.



posted on Apr, 23 2012 @ 04:56 PM
link   
If any of you have played with the interactive scale of the universe tool, you will know that we, just like bacteria and smaller stuff, are invisible to anything that could be considered life.

Maybe on IC 1101 there exists some civilization of people that are measured in yottameters or something.

We are invisible air to anyone who is so big that we might as well be living inside of them. I reckon it's the same for other places that DO have life, whether intelligent or not, that is infinitely small.

Goddammit. I really just hope one day we can figure this stuff out.
edit on 4/23/12 by Extremador because: grammar error




posted on Apr, 23 2012 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by IEtherianSoul9
 

YES!!! We've only been able to look for life on one other planet (mars), but even then the experiment is filled with controversy. When you consider there could be two billion other earth-analogs in our galaxy and tens of billions of other (larger) earth-like planets in the same galaxy, and then you account for billions of years of time and billions of other galaxies, then it makes perfect sense that until we find life on another planet we should assume earth is the only planet that has it.

Did you know our galaxy along with (many!) others is headed towards a region of space some 250 million light years away that has 10 quadrillion times more mass than our sun?

It's called The Great Attractor. Maybe we'll find life there, if we're lucky.

New research says there're bigger things 250 million light years beyond The Great Attractor.

So maybe whatever it's that's beyond The Great Attractor will have life. We'll keep looking.
edit on 23-4-2012 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 23 2012 @ 05:25 PM
link   
I personally like to believe in m-theory over string theory.

I explained it in another thread:

"For M-theory, it's not that the membranes are tiny, but rather, they are INVISIBLY huge, if that makes any sense. Like, we exist inside it and it exists all around us.

How would we ever be able to zoom in on an area of space? Like, if you hold your hand in a ball, inside that area could exist extra dimensions, membranes, strings, whatever. Now, what if you could somehow be able to zoom in to a specific area inside the "ball" in your hands and see this stuff? Crazy, I know. You would need a magical type camera or something. Like a two-way mirror ball with cameras at both ends with some crazy sensor."

Should we be developing microscopes that can zoom infinitely small instead of telescopes that can zoom really far?



posted on Apr, 23 2012 @ 05:28 PM
link   
If you ask me life just adapts to fit the conditions of the universe rather than the other way around.



posted on Apr, 23 2012 @ 05:32 PM
link   
the 'Life' in the cosmos is there to assist in changing the nature of Dead worlds....
see, we consume and modify nutrition/minerals/plant life --- all of which transforms matter on many levels


men, plants, animals... all help the weather & elements to evolve into a higher potential substance


rocks are transformed into fertile soil for example

this keep the entire cosmos/universe in a constant state of transformation,,,which might be equated with a form of evolution

so, life is a one-fourth component of a creation-life-death-rebirth model



posted on Apr, 23 2012 @ 06:09 PM
link   
I could be wrong.. but I can't help but wonder if any of you actually watched his presentation



posted on Apr, 23 2012 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by jonnywhite
reply to post by IEtherianSoul9
 

YES!!! We've only been able to look for life on one other planet (mars), but even then the experiment is filled with controversy. When you consider there could be two billion other earth-analogs in our galaxy and tens of billions of other (larger) earth-like planets in the same galaxy, and then you account for billions of years of time and billions of other galaxies, then it makes perfect sense that until we find life on another planet we should assume earth is the only planet that has it.

Did you know our galaxy along with (many!) others is headed towards a region of space some 250 million light years away that has 10 quadrillion times more mass than our sun?

It's called The Great Attractor. Maybe we'll find life there, if we're lucky.

New research says there're bigger things 250 million light years beyond The Great Attractor.

So maybe whatever it's that's beyond The Great Attractor will have life. We'll keep looking.
edit on 23-4-2012 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)


Hi jon,
No need to go to far.
The universes are actually within you! You are within them.
Infinity is all there is. It is all COSMIC.
I used to think the sun was cooling and life from Mars bailed out to Earth.
I looked long and hard at Venus. I wondered when the sun cooled a little more,
could we all bail out to Venus?
Would the toxic gasses of Venus finally culminated into an Earth like biosphere??
I thought why not devise a way to take some of the gasses from Venus and siphon them to Mars.
Then we would have THREE PLANETARY INHABITAL land masses in a neat little row.
Do you know why that hasn't happened???
yeah me neither, nasa mumble na mumble
cheers ljb

From wikipedia

The atmosphere of Venus is much denser and hotter than that of Earth. The temperature at the surface is 740 K (467 °C, 872 °F), while the pressure is 93 bar.[1] The Venusian atmosphere supports opaque clouds made of sulfuric acid, making optical Earth-based and orbital observation of the surface impossible. Information about the topography has been obtained exclusively by radar imaging.[1] The main atmospheric gases are carbon dioxide and nitrogen. Other chemical compounds are present only in trace amounts.[1]



posted on Apr, 23 2012 @ 08:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Orwells Ghost
 


reply to post by roadgravel
 


Because its not just life we are talking about, but existence. There are 100's of factors that could make our universe "unlivable". These factors are things like, the specific weight of electrons and protons, the strength of their charges, the strength of gravity, ect. If i remember correctly, the weight of a proton if it was even .0000001% smaller or bigger would have very dramatic effects on a universe. So its not necessarily just life we are talking about, but even the ability of the universe to exist. if you google this stuff you will find hundreds of these little tidbits that are essential for a universe to survive and not collapse or expand to quickly.



posted on Apr, 23 2012 @ 09:19 PM
link   
Our universe is fine tuned for life precisely like ours because if it weren't, we wouldn't be here to ask the question.

The key understanding is not about the universe. It is about the observer.



posted on Apr, 23 2012 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by VonDoomen
reply to post by Orwells Ghost
 


reply to post by roadgravel
 


Because its not just life we are talking about, but existence. There are 100's of factors that could make our universe "unlivable". These factors are things like, the specific weight of electrons and protons, the strength of their charges, the strength of gravity, ect. If i remember correctly, the weight of a proton if it was even .0000001% smaller or bigger would have very dramatic effects on a universe. So its not necessarily just life we are talking about, but even the ability of the universe to exist. if you google this stuff you will find hundreds of these little tidbits that are essential for a universe to survive and not collapse or expand to quickly.


A different universe would not necessarily preclude life, only life as we know it. A dramatically different universe might just contain dramatically different life. If the universe itself did not or could not exist, then the discussion of life within (or anything else for that matter) is moot. It's an interesting discussion, but it's philosophy not science.





new topics
top topics
 
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join