I will be on vacation for a week starting Thursday. Therefore I am going to leave you with this topic.
Does the universe need life to "exist"?
If there was no universe, then there would be no life. The universe sets the stage for life to live. That's quite clear. Life does not occur in nothing. There must be something for life to live in, and that happens to be our universe.
But does the universe need us? Does the universe need life to actually exist?
Don't answer this question too quickly. Right now you are probably thinking, "No, why would the universe need us? We will probably cause more damage to it than help!"
But really, why does the universe exist? You may say, "It just does" but really, why would the universe need to exist? What difference does it make if the universe is around or not?
Think again. Why does it exist?
To support life.
That is probably the only thing that the universe accomplishes by existing, is supporting life like us. That is its only purpose. It only exists for us. The universe as far as we know does nothing else with any direction.
The big bang. Massive explosion of "stuff" into the vast nothingness that surrounds it. The forming of nonliving material. It cools, and things align into systems. Galaxies full of solar systems that are full of planets. Planets that contain material required to support life. It all exists for life! Why else would it even happen?
We go back to the original question: Does the universe need life to "exist"? I say it does! Without life, there is no purpose of the universe! It would accomplish nothing in it's being, so it wouldn't "exist". Think of it this way:
What does it mean to exist? To exist means to have animation or life. If the universe does not "live", then it doesn't exist. It's not really... there.
It's a tough thought, isn't it? That something really doesn't exist if there is no life to witness it. Think of it a different way.
On a distant planet named Distant Planet (how imaginative I am today) a rock tumbles down a cliff. This rock causes a massive chain reaction which causes many major cliffs on the planet to crumble to dust. There is no life on Distant Planet. After millions of years Distant Planet is finally swallowed up by Distant Star, never to be seen again. Did anything happen?
Technically, stuff happened, but since no life saw it, there was absolutely no significance to the event. Did Distant Planet ever exist at all? Not really. The fact is that there probably was a Distant Planet out there somewhere in the universe, but it never existed because there was no life to witness it.
I am quite positive that the story above did not help anyone. I am sure it only further confused your train of thought. You were once sure that the universe didn't need us, but now you are hopefully starting to think that maybe it does.
Here's a better example. Does Santa Claus exist?
You might say he doesn't. Can you prove it? Not really, but you might say that we haven't seen or heard him, so he doesn't exist. You have basically just proven my point by saying that, then. Santa Claus doesn't exist because we did not witness it.
Does the Tooth Fairy exist? Never saw it, so it doesn't exist. Proves my point.
Does another universe exist? Not to us it doesn't. Now you might say "It's possible for there to be another universe! Don't rule that option out!". Guess what? It is also possible for there to be a Santa Claus and a tooth fairy. Don't rule it out.
I think that clears things up. Nothing exists to us unless we see it. Or unless we truly believe in it, in the case of Santa Claus. It may "exist" to us, even though it may not exist to others. However, without life, nothing would exist. Enjoy that thought.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
WTF
ReplyDeleteOk I see what you are getting at and I suggest you change the tital of the blog if we are going to talk about the phisiological part of topics. it goes eather way in my opinion it can exist phisically but not mentally there fore it all depends on who you are
it can also exist mentally but not phisically or both phisically and mentally.
ReplyDeletementally being in your head, figment of your consince or subconscense mind, phisiologically,midconscensly,historically, emmotionally (limmeted to humans and some inter- solar creatures),and etc
Hmmm. Interesting. I see what you mean about Santa Claus and all, that really helped clarify it for me. But if one said that yes, the universe and the things in it would and can exist even if we did not, that would mean that an infinite number of things exist solely because we don't see them. That's weird. We can assume that because we don't see everything, in the space that we don't see, there are an infinite number of things possibly strange and beautiful.
ReplyDeleteLet's try some logical reasoning (Mr. Papcun always said this would come in handy!) Here is my true statement: If we see things, then they exist. Thus, this is true: If things do not exist then we do not see them. (duh)
But that means that these things (the converse and inverse statements respectively)must be false:
If things exist, then we see them. If we do not see things, then they do not exist.
Focus on the second line which we said is false. "If we do not see things, then they do not exist." That means that if we do not see things (ie the universe), it can still exist. I rest my case.
there is a problem with the logical reasoning in the fast that if you see something it might not be real. ex. seeing bird flying over you head or seing stars or halucinating. we know they arn't real but according to stait logic they exist. in this case we have to resort to hypathetical logic to formilate a situation that is true without haveing a mixed result. unfortunatly there are infinite factors.
ReplyDeleteDorothea, consider this example.
ReplyDeleteStatement: If a number is divisible by two, it's even. (true)
Inverse: If a number is not divisible by two, it is not even. (true)
Converse: If a number is even, then it is divisible by two. (true)
Contra-positive: If a number is not even, then it is not divisible by two. (true)
If a statement is true, it's contra-positive must be true, but the inverse and converse DO NOT HAVE TO BE FALSE. The converse must be the same as the inverse, so both must be true OR false. You can't tell me that the above example is incorrect. All statements are quite clearly true.
Let's look at our case.
Statement: If some form of life senses (see, hear, smell, taste, touch) it, it exists. (True)
Inverse: If no form of life senses it, it does not exist. (In question)
Converse: If it exists, some form of life senses it. (In question)
Contra-positive: If it doesn't exist, no form of life senses it. (Obviously true)
According to this, the logic does not work because we do not have enough information.
What this is saying is if something does not exist when no life form senses it, then if it exists, some form of life must sense it. That is the question, and unfortunately we do not know either of these for sure. Therefore, the in questions will probably always be in question.
Thanks for making everything more complicated, Aaron. If you are hallucinating or dreaming don't these things in your mind technically exist?
Don't thoughts exist, even though other people can't see them? If thoughts didn't exist, then there would be no thinking, which as retarded as people can be, clearly does occur.
Therefore dreams exist as well, as do hallucinations, because they are thoughts.
FOr a different take on the infromation, I watched a show (on the science channel) about the universe. It was very weird because it presented alternatives to the world. We might be virtual, atoms=pixals. There is no way to disprove this. In a few years, humans will be able to make virtual models that closely represent us. FOllowing that, what we don't see would exist to the person with the controller to our world (God/A higher fractal model of us), unless they see it from our point of view, and then, what we don't see really doesn't exist.
ReplyDeleteThat's... scary. Really scary. I might be on someone's TV or computer game? Or what if I am the avatar of the player in a video game, subject to their will and direction? And everyone else, everyone I have ever known and loved, is an NPC, not real? And I have no free will, but am privy to the thoughts of my player so I will believe that those thoughts are my own.
ReplyDeleteOh wow, that's scary. Now I'll second-guess myself the whole day. Great.
GOing back into the real world, I know that directly behind me is a sink. I can't prove it by sitting except for indirectly. SOmeone turns the water on. I don't know that the sink is really still there, but I assume it is becuase of the niose. I would like to support that everything always exists, but I don't know a good way, unless....
ReplyDeleteI just thought of what I said on the bus last year. I'm sure we've all heard "If a tree falls and noone is there to hear it, Does it make a sound?" my answer to that was YES. think of the vibrations, they travel and disperse, but I felt like the energy, however minute, would reach society, and though we can't detect it, it is still there. Also, in eighth grade science class with Mr. Rearick we learned about LoCoE, LoCoM and I later learned about LoCoI. If the information alone cannot be destroyed, then it does exist when we don't experience it, and just keeps existing in case anyone was ever to look. THey would see what happened being that everything has a space/time/lightspeed delay. ANother reason. We see it after it happens, so it had to happen first.
Unfortunately for all of that exciting thinking, I realized that my brother is going to the Eye doctor, and he sees and interprets things differently. WHich made me think that the universe/ Earth exists one way, but it exists differently for everyone. That is sort of upsetting to think that the grass might not be the same green for everyone, and then there is the problem of who is right. Does anything actually have color, or are we just making that up. It seems that the only thing that we know for certain is our thoughts. We control them, so they exist, but only for us.
Of course people don't see things the same way, especially colors. Perhaps when someone looks at a truly blue cup, he sees it in what I would recognize as red, but he calls it blue because that is what he was taught. Since the whole world has agreed to call a particular shade "blue", that is what I call it. But what I see is different from what you see. You still call it blue, but the shade is different.
ReplyDeleteIt's a weird thought, but it makes sense to me. I have heard that the color we agreed to call red is passionate, but I don't see it. It feels fake, gaudy, epic, and awkward to me. Chances are, you have a different feeling of it, because we are seeing completely different things.
A major point is that we all see things differently. The universe exists differently to everyone. It's hard to tell a blind person about anything doing with colors because they can't see! It would be extremely difficult to prove to a blind man that colors exist.
ReplyDeleteTherefore, something only truly exists if life senses it. Do colors exist to a blind man? Not really.
Does sound exist to a deaf man? It could, if they were to discover that there were sound waves causing vibrations. But sound would exist in a much different way. Nonetheless you could say that sound does exist in a deaf man's world.
Do other universes exist? In our thoughts, they do exist, but if nobody proposed the possibility would they exist? Not to us, they wouldn't.
Let's take a look at the tree falling in the forest. It only exists if it indirectly comes in contact with life. What if that tree fell on Distant Planet? It's vibrations were not felt by anyone, therefore that tree did not really exist because it had no effect on life.
Now, if it did have some minor effect then yes it would exist. However, something only exists if it somehow affects life. The tree falling in the forest on Earth could exist.
When we talk about Laws of Conservation of Energy (or mass) we do not know how much mass is in the universe. There does not necessarily have to be a certain amount of mass. That number is not specified. We know there is a number, but the universe is so vast that we will probably never know just how much energy or mass there is!
Virtual worlds is an entirely different story. Although we can't disprove that we are being controlled by something else, I would like to think that we have freewill. I hope that I make my own decisions based on my thoughts. I'll tell you what, this is a really advanced virtual world if you ask me.
But that's a different topic.
I still disagree about the correlation between an object's existance and its acknowledgement by life, but you're right that we all see things differently.
ReplyDeleteOh, and could I please take the topic on virtual worlds for the philosophy blog? It seems more philosophical than physics/quantum mechanics-y. Thanks.
Sure. It's not my idea, so I don't see why I would stop you. It's yours.
ReplyDeleteas long as you have enough rupies
ReplyDeleteWhat about "My Friend" you seem to have missed that part of the quote. Oh well.
ReplyDeleteWHat I was getting at with the LoCoM and such was that A fire hade to have existed even if noone whitnessed it If someone found the ashes. As we know it, piles of ash material don't grow like mushrooms. Actually they grow pretty good mushrooms, but that is off topic.
I understand what you are saying about existing and all, but I don't really want to accept that the world only "exists" in my head, and without heads to process it doesn't exist. Wow. That makes me think of all the subatomic particles and even (and odd) Heliocentric solar systems that didn't exist a few hundred years ago. I also think I need to go to bed, this is getting Corny, just what I ate for supper :P