My Personal Ongoing Worldview: Part Two

Everybody has his or her own particular worldview, philosophy, a set of truisms, a concept of reality, and overall, a degree of certainty on just how the world works. Equally true, that worldview evolves as you grow older. Santa Clause was probably part of your worldview when you were five years old, but unlikely at fifty-five. I’m no exception to the rule, so here are my latest ‘set-in-cement’ thoughts on how the world operates.

Continued from yesterday’s blog…

HUMAN AFFAIRS

* There is no God or supernatural deity (or deities) of any kind. Religion can however serve useful purposes, not the least of which it keeps some percentage of the human population employed.

* As suggested earlier, in an infinite cosmos there is no need for a deity of any sort. Therefore it is rather improbable that there is no Heaven or Hell (or associated places) since these must represent actual physical geographies. That being the case, we would have probably discovered them by now.

* No deities, specifically no Christian God does mean that there ain’t no end times, no second coming, no apocalypse or Armageddon, no rapture, no end-of-days or end times. In fact, all religious texts, all those allegedly that are divinely inspired, are pure bovine fertilizer.

* There is no before-the-fact meaning or purpose to your existence other than what you yourself give it. There is nobody from ‘on high’ tapping you on the shoulder or whispering into your subconscious mind that the following (fill in the blank) is your destiny or ultimate fate. 

* There is no such thing as a separate-and-apart part of you termed a soul, spirit, or any other related concept associated with a soul.

* You have no free will. That follows on from my belief that causality (a predetermined clockwork universe) rules absolutely – yesterday, today, and tomorrow. However, free will, even if illusional, serves a useful social purpose forming the general foundation for humanity’s legal system – you are responsible for your actions.

* Death is not something to be afraid of. You experience dying, but not death since once dead, you have no existence and you need to have an existence, you have to be alive, in order to experience something, anything, even death. So you never experience death, only that which is up to but not including death.

* Death is final – there is no afterlife. Post-death is an identical state to pre-life or pre-conception. You get one go per universe between conception and death – make the best of it and enjoy. However, if there are an infinity of universes in space and/or in time, then you can expect to be reincarnated both as yourself and with variations on the theme of yourself (i.e. – you might marry someone else as an example). Perhaps, just perhaps, that’s the real meaning behind the phrases of life everlasting (or everlasting life) or eternal life (or life eternal).

* Given the wide range of highly improbable human characteristics – human uniqueness such as a bipedal gait and high IQ – and extremely rapid rise to a state of having culture and ‘civilization’, the odds are extremely high that human origins and evolution were all genetically engineered by outsiders – aliens for lack of a better word.

* It’s a sweeping generalization I know, but the philosophy of the average human is “it’s all about me. I and my needs come first.”

* If the human species was created, it was a very bad mistake on someone or something’s part. If the human species was an unplanned accident of evolution, Mother Nature screwed up big-time. If one is honest, one would be very hard pressed to name another terrestrial species that has caused more unwarranted death, destruction and overall suffering to all and sundry than Homo sapiens. To be honest, while I can’t speak for the rest of the cosmos, we are surely the scum of the earth and the cosmos should rejoice if we cause our own extinction. It would be well deserved.

* Behind every mountain of mythology lies a molehill of reality. So, as an example, there are mountains of mythological deities; there is a molehill that acquaints these deities as actual realities, the reality being flesh-and-blood extraterrestrials.

* Probability is a human concept with relevance to human worldviews but which has no relevance or application outside of the human experience, or perhaps that should be extended to any self-aware life forms. The real world that’s totally divorced from human affairs and the human species, deals with certainties, not probabilities. But what about quantum physics, surely that’s probability personified. But when you read all about quantum physics, sure you get probability this and probability that, but the references are all with respect to observers and measurements – in other words, with respect to human worldviews.

* Philosophy is like jazz – 95% of it is crap, but what’s good is very, very good. [At least jazz comes out vastly better percentage-wise than rap, hip-hop, heavy metal, ‘music’ which is 100% crap.]

* For obvious reasons, empty what’s full; fill what’s empty; scratch where it itches.

* Finally, you may have to grow old, but there’s no requirement to grow up!

My Personal Ongoing Worldview: Part One

Everybody has his or her own particular worldview, philosophy, a set of truisms, a concept of reality, and overall, a degree of certainty on just how the world works. Equally true, that worldview evolves as you grow older. Santa Clause was probably part of your worldview when you were five years old, but unlikely at fifty-five. I’m no exception to the rule, so here are my latest ‘set-in-cement’ thoughts on how the world operates.

After posting some 250-plus essays, it wouldn’t be surprising if I hadn’t solidified some sort of worldview. While not yet the be-all-and-end-all of my worldviews, it’s a good start, and a good exercise. When setting down all your fundamental beliefs, at least based on my doing so, I found out that I’ve sometimes ended up trapping myself into believing two entirely contradictory things. That in turn required a total re-examination of my overall set of worldviews. As I said, it’s a useful exercise and an ever ongoing one (#).   

Normally one has certain fundamental principles that form the bedrock foundation of their worldview on life, the universe and everything. I’ve boiled my fundamental principles down to two absolutes.

ABSOLUTE BEDROCK FOUNDATIONS

* Something cannot be created from absolutely nothing. Conservation laws rule.

* Something cannot happen without any reason at all. Causality rules too.

THE COSMIC CONNECTION

* Why is there something rather than nothing? Let’s say there’s a 50-50 probability between a universe that contains nothing and one that contains something. Or even make the ratio 60-40 or 99-1 or even odds of a billion to one, as long as the probability of a something universe isn’t zero. Then, well that’s something to be said for a something universe. Now a nothing universe isn’t bio-friendly and a something universe can be, so since we’re a friendly bio-entity that must mean we live in a something universe. So, as far as we are concerned, that’s what there is something rather than nothing, because if there was nothing we wouldn’t be here to ponder the issue.

                              

* Since I have shown (to my satisfaction anyway) that space, time and matter/energy cannot have been created by a Big Bang event (or by any other means), then of necessity the Big Bang event happened in existing space, time and with matter/energy already in existence too. Therefore there was a before the Big Bang and if there was one such before the Big Bang event there could have been more than one, in fact an infinite number of before the Big Bang events, or in other words, an infinite number of Big Bangs.

* The Big Bang could not have been a micro event, as to stuff the contents of our Universe into a tiny volume would result in the Mother of all Black Holes and while a Black Hole can evaporate, our Universe condensed down into a Black Hole would result in a Black Hole of large enough size that it would take trillions upon trillions of years to do so. That’s in contrast to the standard model of the Big Bang event which suggests it was more akin to a ‘wham-bam thank you ma’am’ quickie. I like to think of the Big Bang more as the Mother of all Pseudo-Supernovae. I say ‘pseudo’ because the Big Bang wasn’t literally a supernova since the ratios of elements created in the Big Bang don’t parallel that created by real supernova. I see the pseudo-supernova more akin to zillions upon zillions of people all increasingly squeezing together while madly rushing the department store front door at the start of the post-Xmas sales (collapsing universe) then fanning out again (Big Bang and expansion) once past the door and into the store proper, rather than an actual explosion. 

* Though I personally consider both time and space to be concepts, and not things, others believe that time and space are indeed things. Be that as it may.

* To avoid awkward questions regarding space and time, as in what’s beyond and what came before, I just plain postulate an infinite time and space without any quantum ‘atomic structure’. In other words, both time and space are infinitely divisible into smaller and smaller segments. There is no ultimate structure involving time and space that cannot be further divided. If you don’t care for the word “infinite” then substitute “forever” or “eternal”. 

* That an infinite cosmos exists in both time and space makes sense since there are forces which (in theory) can extend their influence out to infinity in time and in space – gravity and electromagnetism. If you shine your flashlight, beam it out into space, there’s nothing to stop it going on indefinitely through space and in time.

* If time and space are infinite then that implies a cyclic cosmos in that everything that can happen does happen and infinite number of times. So, you get another go and another and another and another. However, because you have no consciousness of time between the time of your demise and the time of your next hatching, which could be millennia later in a distant galaxy far, far away, your existences are pretty continuous.  However, you’d never know the nitty-gritty of your previous existences, though perhaps it might explain senses of déjà vu. But, in addition to multi-universes in the same space, but over time, there is multi-universes spread out in space at the same time. That follows if the cosmos is infinite in volume. Of course if the cosmos is infinite in volume then right now there are up to an infinite number of you in all possible variations. My use of “you” refers not so much to your various physical forms and lifestyles but to your mind which gives you our sense of “you”. Your mind after all really is what defines “you”.

* Because space is infinite in time, and time is infinite in space, there was no first cause; therefore, there’s absolutely no requirement for any supernatural deity or deities to act as a creator.

* Cyclic universe: As suggested above, there was a Big Bang but there was also a before the Big Bang. IMHO there was a Big Bang before that and another before that. Despite the observation that our Universe is ever expanding, and ever expanding at an ever faster rate, there are ways and means, alternative cosmologies, that can result in, and require, a cyclic universe scenario, which, if you wish to count each universe as separate and apart, results in a Multiverse at least over the time dimension. As hinted above, there would be an infinite number of these cyclic universes.

* There is a Multiverse; that follows of necessity if you postulate an infinite yet dynamic cosmos in time and space. Apart from a cyclic Multiverse as per above, there can also be a spatial Multiverse – universes existing not as discrete universes at the same point in space at differing times, but discrete universes existing in differing points in space but at the same time.

* The interior of a Black Hole is the absolute final frontier of all final frontiers left as the undiscovered country. Here there are dragons for sure!

* Causality rules as per my absolute bedrock foundations – there is absolute predetermination (therefore no free will). No matter what happens, that happening had a cause, and more likely as not, that happening will in turn be the cause of a further happening, and so on down the line (or up the line if you run the film backwards). In cosmology terms, the Universe did not, could not, create itself because a cause cannot cause or bootstrap itself.

* Causality rules in classical (macro) physics. Probability rules in quantum (micro) physics, at least that’s the standard micro model as proposed by physicists. However, quantum mechanics has IMHO deeper cause-and-effect principles. Probability as a concept is observer dependent. In a universe without any observers, without any life, would it be meaningful to invoke the idea of quantum probability or uncertainty? It’s not that difficult to imagine a universe without life. In fact that no doubt was the state of our universe for several billion years post the Big Bang event. Before any life evolved anywhere, the cosmos ticked along in clockwork (cause-and-effect) fashion very nicely, thank you very much. If it did so before humans were thought of in anyone’s philosophy, it can and will continue to do so despite humans being now present and accounted for and befuddled by the realm of indeterminacy exhibited by quantum mechanics. Ultimately quantum physics will be founded in causality just like classical physics.

* There are no free lunches as per my absolute bedrock foundations – no creating something-from-nothing is allowed. That’s because IMHO conservation laws governing the creation and destruction of matter and energy, even time and space, are absolute.

* String Theory as an alternative to the standard model of particle physics is absolute nonsense and will remain so until proponents put some experimental runs on the board.

* General Relativity and Quantum Physics have been, are, and forever will remain separate and apart. They are incompatible in theory as well as in practice and never the twain shall meet. Translated, there never will be a unified theory of quantum gravity.

* There is no meaning or purpose to the cosmos – it just is. That puts the kibosh on the Strong Anthropic Principle which suggests that the Universe was designed to be the way it is in order to give rise to life and intelligent life. It was the Universe’s way of being able to contemplate its own navel.

* The Weak Anthropic Principle is however stating the bleeding obvious, which is that because life exists in the Universe, the Universe must possess laws, principles and relationships that make the Universe a bio-friendly or Goldilocks Universe.

* In infinite time and space and a Multiverse, extraterrestrial intelligence will have come to pass if at least one such universe is a Goldilocks universe, which is actually required since in an infinite Multiverse anything that can happen does happen – an infinite number of times. 

* The Universe is the way it is. Whether the Universe is good, bad or ugly; indifferent or malicious, there’s nothing you can do about it, so cross it off your ‘need-to-worry-about-this’ list.

(#) It recently struck home how often we shift our worldviews. We have no worldview at birth. Our worldview at five is one that’s full of self, Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, imaginary friends, and parties with lots of cakes, cookies, soda pop and presents. All of that certainly changes, and drastically so, when you hit the teens when your worldview shifts to the opposite sex and sex and rebellion against all things adult. Maybe somewhere there’s an easing in period, a first stirrings, where you start to acquire a worldview of a God and heaven and angels and all things bright and beautiful (that’s probably imposed on you by parents and social mores). Then you get thrust out (usually by choice) into the adult world that’s full of bills and responsibilities and employment and/or family life raising your own brats. During all of this you probably never really think of the ‘natural’ cosmic context you find yourself in. But that tends to come as you pass the half-way mark and start heading downhill. The Big Questions come more to the fore and you start to adopt a worldview that makes comforting sense away from the normal routine worldview of taxes and nasty bosses and your kids in trouble with the police again. Again, for most, that tends to revolve around God and heaven and angels, etc. But some people start thinking more outside the comforting religious box and more about space and time, and before and after, and finite vs. infinity and what non-religious Big Picture makes the most philosophical and logical common sense. And whatever specific you come up with can also shift as you reflect on your earlier reflections without end as new concepts and connections come into being or focus which you’ve got to ponder and fit into the master worldview jigsaw puzzle you’ve established.

To be continued.

The Lone Electron

One way of coming to terms with the cosmos is to do thought experiments and keeping things simple. When you come to terms with the simple picture, then you can gradually build up the complexity until you start to model the real cosmos. There’s nothing much simpler than to imagine an entire universe that contains one and only one electron – absolutely nothing else: just the Lone Electron. What sort of worldview would our Lone Electron have or we have of it? Actually it would be Boring with a capital B.

With respect to a Lone Electron universe, let’s consider…

ACCELERATION/DECELERATION: None. The same argument applies as with velocity. 

ARROW OF TIME: If there is no time experienced by the Lone Electron, then there can be no arrow of time either. In short, the Lone Electron has no experience of a past, present, or future.

CHARGE: Yes, the electron has a charge of minus one or in other words a negative charge of one unit. However, in order for charge to be meaningful, it has to be acting with or against another charge of which there is none. So, does our Lone Electron have charge in this context or doesn’t it?

COLOUR: An electron is colourless. In any event you need photons, electromagnetic energy, light waves, to transmit (wavelength and frequency) what we (our brains) interpret as colour. Our drab, bland, colourless Lone Electron has no photons to transmit any information about itself, and there are no eyeballs and brains to interpret that information in any event.

ELECTROMAGNETISM: The electron is most associated with electromagnetism and the electromagnetic force. The associated force particle is the photon and electrons can absorb and emit photons (absorb and emit energy). However, in this scenario, there are no photons, so therefore there is no electromagnetic force. In any event, a force is only a meaningful concept if there are two of more particles involved, since, if you are the sum total of things, you can’t give off or receive a force.

ENTROPY: Entropy is a statistical concept where over time, left to themselves, things tend to go from an ordered state to a disordered state, like before-and-after pictures of a wild party. One electron does not make for statistical analysis, so the electron’s state of order or disorder is what it is. It doesn’t increase nor decrease. In fact it’s rather meaningless to philosophize over it. 

EQUILIBRIUM: The Lone Electron is in a state of equilibrium with respect to its surroundings. It could hardly be otherwise since there are no other surroundings except nothingness.

EXISTENCE: Yes, it would be incorrect to say our Lone Electron didn’t exist. However, there’s nothing else around it to verify that existence or give any meaning to it.

GRAVITY: Since the electron has mass, it must have gravity. However, gravity only has real meaning between two (or more) objects with mass, like the Earth – Moon – Sun trilogy; or, in the most traditional of traditional scenarios, the Earth – falling apple scenario that, according to mythology, inspired Isaac Newton. So, in the Lone Electron scenario, it’s pretty meaningless to talk about gravity. In fact it might be meaningless to talk about gravity since gravity is equivalent to acceleration as shown by Einstein. Acceleration implies motion or velocity which in the context of a one electron universe is meaningless. Further, the (hypothetical) particle associated with gravity, the graviton, would be conspicuous by its absence in this Lone Electron thought experiment.

MASS: Yes, the electron has mass. However, it’s yet another particle, known as the Higgs Boson that gives particles with mass, their mass. The Lone Electron has no Higgs Bosons around to give it muscle.

MOMENTUM: None. The same argument applies as with velocity. 

PHASE: There is no phase. One electron does not a solid, liquid, gas or plasma make. An electron, all by its little lonesome, cannot undergo any phase change, like say from a liquid to a solid.

SENSE OF IDENTITY: Our Lone Electron doesn’t have a sense of self-awareness since it isn’t conscious and in any event it has nothing else around it to provide a contrast to itself.

SPACE: Since the Lone Electron exists in this universe, it has to exist in some sort of realm, a concept we call space. However, space is not a thing, and the electron is, so while the two share a common existence, its all apples and oranges.  

SPIN: Our electron will either be spin-up or spin-down. However, orientation, as with velocity, is always with respect to something else. If you removed all of the rest of the Universe (stars, planets, constellations, the Sun, etc.) just leaving the Earth, well the labels North and South Pole become meaningless. There no longer is anything that’s up or down or sideways that one can orient the Earth’s axis to. We know north because that’s where the North Star is located. No North Star. We know south because the Southern Cross is overhead. No Southern Cross. A compass isn’t any help because it’s only an arbitrary convention what we call north and south and in any event the compass is an example of that ‘something else’. 

STRONG NUCLEAR FORCE: The strong nuclear force only applies in keeping an atomic nucleus together. Protons, with a positive charge, would like to repel each other. That they are held in check – confined to quarters - is due to the strong nuclear force. There is no atomic nucleus in a one electron universe, therefore there’s no strong nuclear force.

TIME: An electron is a fundamental particle, a basic building block. It doesn’t change any spots and there’s nothing else around to cause the electron’s spots to change or to ‘witness’ change. No change means the concept of time is meaningless, so therefore, no time unit need apply here for a job.

VELOCITY: No, the concept of velocity is meaningless in this context. Velocity only has meaning when measured relative or compared to something else. If you drive along at sixty miles per hour, that’s relative to the landscape you are driving past, like the surface of the road. The Lone Electron has no landscape for its velocity to be measured against.

WEAK NUCLEAR FORCE: The weak nuclear force governs radioactivity, or the decay of unstable atomic nuclei into more stable forms. One type of radioactivity (Beta decay) can emit an electron, but in the absence of any nuclei, unstable or otherwise, our Lone Electron has no connection with the weak nuclear force since in this, our electron’s universe, there ain’t no such critter. 

So we see how much more meaningful it is to have more than one item per universe. Fortunately, our Universe satisfies that criteria. But the real interesting bit, at least from a philosopher’s point of view, is how some of our most take-it-for-granted concepts that form our worldview, disappear or have no meaning when applied to just one entity. It’s impossible for us to imagine a worldview without there being time, the arrow of time (past, present, and future) or entropy. It’s impossible for us to imagine a worldview without mass or gravity. It’s impossible for us to imagine a worldview without motion. Yet it is entirely possible to imagine a Lone Electron universe where exactly that worldview has to apply!

A Universe Without Life: Part Two

You know and I know that at this point in time, our Universe is inhabited. Even if nowhere else in the cosmos, Planet Earth is host to terrestrial life. However, the Universe didn’t start off with any life, especially human life. This puts the kibosh on a certain brand of quantum philosophy, the brand that encompasses the role of the observer and the role played by probability.

Continued from yesterday’s Part One blog…

In a universe without life, it’s probably pretty meaningless to talk about concepts like free will. Then there’s that whole sackful of concepts related to good-and-evil like morals, ethics, sin, badness, righteousness, etc. and as such there’s no need for the concepts of heaven or hell. As such, scratch salvation, redemption, forgiveness, or damnation.

There are no emotions, suffering, pain, sorrow, pleasure, consciousness, or psychology. There’s obviously no disease.

There’s another bagful of concepts like the afterlife, reincarnation or resurrection that can go by the boards. Speaking of the latter, there’s no such thing in a lifeless universe as miracles. There is no such concept required like survival of the fittest; there are no wars, no death, and certainly no taxes! There were no soft science concepts around like society, culture, education (no homework), politics and government (no politicians), no economics (no bills), no religion (no thou shalt nots), no philosophy (who needs angels and pins), history (all those names, dates and places) and no environmental issues that needed addressing. There was no beauty (and no ugly either). In short, that pre-life era – that was what is known as the really good old days!

There’s one other important contrast between a lifeless universe and the universe that, in this case specifically contains and singles out humans and human concepts, and that is probability.  

Probability or uncertainty (two sides; same coin) dominates our existence. What odds my next child will be a female? What odds the next time I fly the plane will crash? What odds I win the lottery this week? What’s the probability I will be promoted this year? What’s the probability that I am normal, being of average height, weight, age, etc.? Even in science as performed by humans, probability or uncertainty dominates. Every measurement has error bars. Every forecast has some degree of uncertainty. Even the Sun rising tomorrow is not absolutely guaranteed (though I wouldn’t lose any sleep over that unlikely event). Every theory can ultimately be found to be wrong or incomplete. And just where is that damn electron anyway?

The fundamental question is, is probability an intrinsic property of Mother Nature like mass and gravity, or is it a human invention; a human concept? IMHO, there are no error bars in Mother Nature’s reality. Mother Nature knows the temperature is this, not around this but within this range. Mother Nature notes it will rain tomorrow, not just a chance of showers. Mother Nature knows that the Sun will rise tomorrow even though it will go nova the day after that. Mother Nature knew that Einstein’s theory of gravity was more precise than Newton’s theory of gravity millennia before Newton or Einstein was conceived of in anyone philosophy. And Mother Nature knows exactly where that damn electron is because the electron is. 

Any observer, via instrumentation or via the five senses, usually has to interpret what that observation actually represents – it’s not always obvious. If it was, science would have concluded its work decades ago, or just be engaged in refining things from the tenth to the twelfth decimal place. Interpretation – the choice between two or more possibilities – well that’s weighing probabilities.

* We’ve all observed a cat rubbing its head along an object. What’s the probability the cat is putting its scent on the object or the probability does it have an itch to scratch?

* We might have observed a boat passing away from us and disappearing over the horizon. Is this because the Earth is probably round or did the boat probably sink?

* In quantum physics, observations suggest a wave-particle duality. But is it more probably a wave or is it more likely a particle? 

* Is that unusual light in the sky probably an alien spaceship or is it probably a weather balloon?

* Does viewing a sunrise suggest t you that the Sun probably goes around the Earth or that the Earth probably is rotating around its axis?

* You spot that tornado on the horizon – maybe it will miss you or maybe it won’t. What are the odds? It certainly can’t both hit you and miss you at the same time and place.

* Is Pluto probably a real planet or isn’t it (and does it even cosmically matter)?

* My friend has a cold. I have a cold. Did I probably catch his or did he probably catch mine or was there probably something contagious in the meal we shared several nights ago?

* That Sasquatch I saw. Was it probably too much to drink or was it probably real and if it was real was it probably a bear or was it probably an unknown primate?

* Did the apple fall to earth because it’s probably seeking its natural place or was it probably due to an external force called gravity?

* Is Schrodinger’s cat probably dead or probably alive? It can’t be both simultaneously despite what quantum physics suggest.

* Why is the night sky dark? Is it probably because the Sun’s not shining in the sky at night or probably because the Universe is expanding or probably because there’s only a finite number of stars and galaxies giving off light.

* Why did the chicken cross the road this morning? You may not know (though you can probably come up with a half-dozen possibilities) but the chicken probably does.

There’s little doubt in my mind that to all of these probably observations there is but one answer(s). In many cases we’ve sussed out the answer(s). We don’t have the answer(s) in all the cases. I say answer(s) because there can be more than one answer acting jointly, like there really was a Sasquatch and yes, you were also really, really drunk; yes the Earth is round, but yes, the boat sank as well. But its an either/or certainty of an explanation(s), not a bit of both ways by sometimes probably having your cake and sometimes probably eating it too, probability, as in sometimes the apple falls to earth because it is seeking its natural place and sometimes it falls to earth because of gravity; or that Pluto is a planet on odd days or in months containing an “R” and not a planet on even days or non-“R” months; or sometimes the night sky is dark because the Sun isn’t in the sky, but at other times the night sky is dark because the Universe is expanding and at yet even on other occasions its only dark because there’s only a finite number of stars and galaxies.

The bottom line is that the Universe isn’t governed by probability. Given identical sets of circumstances or conditions, the outcomes remain the same. Observers and observations are irrelevant. That’s made crystal clear during all those millennia the Universe was observer-free.   

A Universe Without Life: Part One

You know and I know that at this point in time, our Universe is inhabited. Even if nowhere else in the cosmos, Planet Earth is host to terrestrial life, from the humble bacteria through to plants, invertebrates, fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals. In terms of sheer numbers of species and total biomass, microbes and insects rule the roost, though humans alone pat themselves on the back. However, the Universe didn’t start off with any life, especially human life. This puts the kibosh on a certain brand of quantum metaphysics, the brand that encompasses the role of the observer and the role played by probability.

I think everyone would agree that before they were thought of in anyone’s philosophy, the Universe existed. You’d agree that the Universe existed before humans existed, unless you’re one of those fundamentalists who interpret the Book of Genesis literally, and even then there were a few days for the Universe to enjoy a pre-human existence. If you’re not one of those extreme right wing all-things-literal Christians, then you’d go along with the Universe existing before life, any kind of life, arose on Terra Firma (or anywhere else in the cosmos for that matter). You’d also have to go along with the notion that the Universe existed before the Earth (and therefore the Sun and solar system) existed, since the parent (the Universe) has to exist before the offspring (Earth, Sun and solar system). In fact, to bring this string to its logical conclusion, the Universe existed even before our home parent galaxy, the Milky Way existed.

The origin of our Universe via that Big Bang event was roughly 13.7 billion years ago. Our own galaxy didn’t come into its own until three plus billion years post Big Bang. Planet Earth (plus Sun and solar system) came about some 4.5 billion years ago; the first stirrings of what we’d call life happened on Earth within a half a billion years of Earth’s origin event. If you want to equate life in the Universe with life on Earth (terrestrial biology is the proverbial IT), then the Universe has been lifeless for the first 9.7 billion years of its existence.

Our Universe is bio-friendly otherwise we wouldn’t be here to discuss the issue. That’s often termed the Weak Anthropic Principle. A bio-friendly Universe is a Goldilocks Universe, albeit a dangerous Goldilocks Universe with lots of places that are too hot or too cold or otherwise not quite right and not quite bio-friendly. But, any port in a storm.

But before life was thought of in anyone’s (not that there was anyone) philosophy, we’re certain that:

* Chemistry still happened.

* Stars still shined and photons still did their photon thing.

* Gravity still grabbed; Black Holes still formed.

* Radioactivity decay still proceeded.

* Neutrinos still whizzed their merry way along the cosmic byways and pathways.

* Electrons still quantum hopped from orbit to orbit giving off and absorbing energy.

* Quarks still carried on their threesome relationships inside protons and neutrons.

Okay, there clearly was a time when the cosmos was lifeless and the above were cosmic truisms. There clearly might come such a time again if Planet Earth is the proverbial IT when it comes to the life part of “life, the Universe and everything”. Humans aren’t immortal; Planet Earth isn’t immortal, and as I said earlier, the Universe can be a dangerous place. Perhaps humans don’t even need assistance from the Universe at large to bring about their extinction and the extinction of all life on Earth. If life on Earth goes kaput, then:

* Hurricanes, tornadoes, thunderstorms, blizzards, floods and droughts will still happen on Terra Firma.

* Volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, avalanches, Ice Ages, tsunamis, meteor impacts, erosion, mountain building, and continental drift will still happen on Terra Firma.

* The tides will still ebb and flow; the Moon still waxes and wanes.

Now the $64,000 question is why is a lifeless Universe of any interest whatsoever? The answer is “observers”, or in the case of a lifeless Universe, “no observers”.

Many, especially the religious, think the Universe had a purpose, and that was to be fruitful and produce life, intelligence and consciousness, a way of the Universe being able to contemplate its own navel. That’s often termed the Strong Anthropic Principle. Most scientists give that the thumbs down on the grounds that the Universe just is. The Universe doesn’t have a consciousness, or a deity controlling it, and therefore the cosmos can’t have a purpose to its existence, nor a ways and means that it can consciously direct itself toward such a goal.

However, many quantum physicists suggest that the Universe cannot have achieved a reality until such time as observers (life) appeared to give the Universe reality. That’s often termed the Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum mechanics. The idea is that all possible realities exist in a state of superposition and only one becomes reality when someone actually observes and forces the numerous possibilities down to one certainty. All possible realities are grouped together and termed the probability wave-function or wave of probability. When crunch-comes-crunch and someone peeks, Mother Nature is forced to make a decision, the wave-function collapses and one and only one certainty results.

Until life appeared then, the Universe was in a superposition of all possible realities, a wave-function that was a composite of all possibilities. That first observer hence collapsed the wave-function of near infinite possibilities down to one reality. Or is that just so much bovine fertilizer?

Now between the time of the creation, that Big Bang event some 13.7 billion years ago, and the time of that first observer arising, the cosmos expanded and evolved. Stars formed, solar systems formed, galaxies formed, and so on. Now all that suggests that there was one reality, one chain of events, and a causality that was universal – the Universe was not in a composite of all possible states of reality even while no life existed. It’s silly to think that that ever first proto-cell billions of years ago determined the single structure or reality of the Universe we see around us today. For observers to have come into being, the Universe had to have already been in a state of being. Therefore, the Copenhagen Interpretation of all things quantum is utter nonsense.

So, does the Universe exist even if nobody is looking? Yes! Did the Universe exist even when there was nobody to look? Yes! Are observers relevant? No!

Having settled the observer question, let’s move on to the next phase.

To be continued…

Profound Things & Concepts

There are many things and concepts within the collective worldviews of humanity that are considered pretty mundane. However, there’s certainly a collection of things and ideas which rise to the top in profoundness when compared and contrasted with the ordinary everyday routine. These are the sorts of profound things and concepts which keep you awake at night, pondering the Big Issues. No two people will come up with identical lists. Without further ado, here is mine. 

1) There Is Something Rather Than Nothing! Why is there something rather than nothing? Let’s say there’s a 50-50 probability between a universe that contains nothing and one that contains something. Or even make the ratio 60-40 or 99-1 or even odds of a billion to one, as long as the probability of a something universe isn’t zero. Then, well that’s something to be said for a something universe. Now a nothing universe isn’t bio-friendly and a something universe can be, so since we’re a friendly bio-entity that must mean we live in a something universe. So, as far as we are concerned, that’s what there is something rather than nothing, because if there was nothing we wouldn’t be here to ponder the issue. Still, it’s one of the most profound and debated topics in all philosophy.

2) 95% of the Universe is Missing! If you add up all of the matter and energy in the Universe that is required to account for actual observations about the Universe, well, those in the know come up short – to the tune of 95% short in actual fact! The missing stuff is divided into Dark Matter (27%), which we know exists because of it’s gravitational influence though it doesn’t interact with electromagnetism (like light); and Dark Energy (68%) which we know exists because the expansion rate of the Universe is increasing, ever increasing. To accelerate the stuff of the Universe to ever faster velocities requires energy, hence the phrase “Dark Energy” – its energy Jim, but not as we know it. In a nutshell, we haven’t a clue what Dark Energy actually is; we have no idea exactly what Dark Matter is. Therefore, 95% of the Universe is missing, well that’s not really true. It’s not so much missing as astronomers have no rational explanation for Dark Matter or Dark Energy. What we have are two profound anomalies.

3) Black Holes! Black Holes are profound because nobody has the foggiest idea what actually transpires inside. What’s the substance and structure inside the Event Horizon? The equations break down that one normally relies upon for such insights. When the mystery is ultimately solved, no doubt the resolution will be a profound one.

4) The Universe Is Bio-Friendly! Our Universe is a Goldilocks Universe if you will – which doesn’t of necessity imply the Universe was deliberately fine-tuned for bio-friendliness, just that there are many more options for disorder than for order, so to there are many more ways to envision a bio-unfriendly not-just-right-for-life Universe than a just-right-for-life cosmos.  

5) Extraterrestrial Life! Either we are alone in the Universe or we have cosmic company. Either scenario has profound philosophical implications. Related to that profound concept is the profound observation that advanced intelligent extraterrestrial civilizations, assuming advanced intelligent extraterrestrial civilizations, should be bloody obvious, having already visited us. Where is everybody? That’s the profound observation (or lack of observation) known as the Fermi Paradox. If they exist, we should know about it. 

6) Now! “Now” is the only period where anything can happen. The past (what has happened) is unchangeable; the future (what will happen) is yet to be. And there are more “now” moments in one standard second than all the numbers of all the humans who have ever lived and are currently alive to boot. That only “now” has any real significance is a pretty profound idea. Fortunately, “now” is an ongoing process.

7) Why Is It So? The electron and the proton have an equal and opposite electromagnetic charge. You cannot determine from first principles what the properties of the Universe, or the fundamental particles that make up the Universe, are. They apparently can have free range. A proton is 2000 times more massive than an electron, but you can’t calculate that from the theoretical laws, principles and relationships of physics. It’s only determined experimentally. There doesn’t seem to be any reason why the proton couldn’t have been 0.2, 2, 20, 200 or 20,000 times the mass of an electron. The same applies to the relative forces. The theoretical laws, principles and relationships of physics do not require an opposite yet equal value of charge between the negative electron and the positive proton. Presumably the value of each could have been as far apart as their masses – that is a proton could have been 2000 times as positive as the electron is negative. Why not? There’s no reason why not apart from the fact that the Universe as we know it then wouldn’t work, but then we wouldn’t be here to worry about that or what might have been. 

8) Wave-Particle Duality! The general picture here is that when a particle is given off, it is in fact a particle – a little billiard ball is emitted. When a particle is absorbed or detected it is in fact a particle that’s detected – a little billiard ball. What about the in-between times? Well, then apparently the little billiard ball undergoes a phase transition into a wave. Now I don’t believe for a moment that the particle actually turns into a nebulous or undefined maybe-here-maybe-there smeared out wave. It’s weird enough that it waves around though truth be known the ‘wave’ is actually a wave of probability. The little billiard ball, well it’s most likely to be in this vicinity or in this volume of space, a bit less likely to be over there, though some say that means there’s a tiny percentage of probability that it’s now on the other side of the Universe – which is nuts since that would imply superluminal velocities. The best analogy that springs to mind is that when the baseball leaves the pitcher’s hand, it’s a particle and when it impacts the catcher’s mitt, it’s a particle, but in-between it’s like a wave – a knuckleball, a slider, a spitter, a curve, etc. The batter (and sometimes the catcher) has to estimate the probability of where that baseball-particle actually is so as to placing the bat (or the mitt) in the right place at the right time. 

9) The Concept of Infinity! There are many things claimed to have (or have had) the property of infinity, though that cannot be. Things like infinite temperature at the Big Bang, or infinite density of the singularity inside a Black Hole. Nonsense isn’t profound. What is profound however - concepts that logically could be infinite. I refer in particular to the concepts (not things) that we call space and time. There’s no reason that if you headed off in a particular direction, that you could not just keep on keeping on without end. There’s no reason that if you headed off in a particular direction, that you could not just keep on keeping on for all eternity. There’s no requirement for there to be an alpha or omega in space or in time. In general you cannot indefinitely divide things, but you can when it comes to non-things or concepts, like the idea of a line that can be chopped into smaller and smaller segments indefinitely, or say of time. Of course not all not-things make logical sense in terms of dividing them. You can’t split Xmas indefinitely or the concept of a car.  

 

10) Self-Awareness! It’s not too difficult to comprehend increasing levels of complexity, from fundamental particles to atoms to molecules to 3-D structures of substance. However, while one branch of increasing complexity (or organisation) – dust and gas, debris, stars and planets, galaxies, clusters of galaxies – doesn’t achieve self-awareness (to the best of our knowledge anyway), another branch undergoes a phase change on the organisational road that’s ever upwards. That’s a change from structures with substance that have no self-awareness (like a rock) to structures with substance that are self-aware (like a bird or mammal). Exactly how that phase change has been accomplished is still one of those profound mysteries. Related, your brain, and my brain, in fact all normal human brains, share one thing. The brain is the only organ capable of studying itself! Now that’s profound!

11) The Simulated Universe! The human species, especially since the proliferation of the computer and associated technologies, have created thousands of simulated landscapes and virtual beings, from the humble Microsoft office assistant to pilot training simulators to video games that cater to all types of interests and age groups. Entire movies are now computer generated simulations – no actual on-location travel required; no humans need apply in hopes of earning an eventual Oscar for best actor. In view of the explosion of simulation technologies, and it’s only going to increase and get ever more realistic than it already is, the question has arisen, if we can create virtual worlds, might not we in turn be virtual beings ‘living’ in a simulated landscape programmed for some purpose or other, by other beings which might be futuristic humans recreating their past history, or ET’s video game version of “The Life and Times on the Third Rock in the Sol Planetary System”. It’s a best seller on Krypton! Though once just sci-fi speculation, that profound idea that we don’t really exist is now taken very seriously indeed.

12) Man Not On the Moon! Humans from Earth landed on the Moon and returned safely to Earth during the period 1969-1972. Three further missions were scrubbed for economic reasons – sort of like buying the car then not driving it because you couldn’t afford gasoline. Since then, economics apparently haven’t improved since we’ve never been back. That we haven’t returned in over 40 years is unprecedented in the history of manned exploration. It’s like if Charles Lindbergh had flown the Atlantic in 1927 and nearly 90 years on there was still no sign of any trans-Atlantic air travel on the horizon. There are currently no plans yet set in concrete for a lunar return mission(s). It’s one of the most shameful and ill-profound examples of human stupidity yet on the public record. There is no logical reason humans shouldn’t have established at least one lunar colony 20 years ago; there’s no logical reason why humans shouldn’t have already landed on Mars.   

Honourable Mention! How is it profoundly possible that the Boston Red Sox (the wild card entry no less) could end up beating the New York Yankees four straight games after being behind three games to zip in the 2004 ALCS? It’s profoundly good if you’re a Boston fan (which I’m not) and profoundly bad if you are a Yankee’s fan (which I am). But no matter which way you slice it, the end result was profound as it was the first time in Major League Baseball playoff history that a team lost the first three games and went on to win the next four to prove victorious in an overall best of seven game series. It’s still a nightmare episode out of “The Twilight Zone” as far as I’m concerned.

It’s Your Shuffle, Dr. Quantum

The realm of the micro, quantum mechanics, is presented as a realm of probability, uncertainty, indeterminacy, indecision, and related terms. This is in contrast to the realm of the macro where events tend to be on firmer footing – you needn’t worry about the Sun rising tomorrow morning. However, such terms as probability are human terms and human interpretations and often result from natural limits on what we can learn about the micro. If you eliminate the human then you eliminate the distinction between the micro and the macro.

Go to the store and buy a fully wrapped fresh deck of standard playing cards. Have ten friends available to shuffle the new deck starting with person one through person ten, ten shuffles per person. At the end of those 100 shuffles, you’d probably agree that the deck is about as shuffled as it can be. Now place the deck on top of the table, all 52 cards face down.

Now the question is, what is the value of the top card (or the 5^th card or the 26^th card or the 51^st card) down from the top? Which card doesn’t matter; just choose one card in the one location.

Quantum physics will give you several possible scenarios.

Many Worlds Interpretation #1: You know, and I know, that the top card can be one of 52 possibilities. No one possibility is more or less likely than the next. So, since there’s nothing that favours one card over another, when the top card is turned over, all 52 possibilities eventuate. That’s accomplished because the cosmos divides into 51 further universes. In our Universe, one card will eventuate as the top card. Since there are 51 other possibilities, all equally possible, each one happens in each of the 51 new universes. There is no favouritism.

The issue of credibility comes into play when you realise that throughout our entire universe, zillions of ‘forks in the road’ decision or option branches happen each second. Thus every second zillions of new universes have to be created in order to give each and every possibility a fair go. Considering how many seconds have elapsed in our universe in the past 13.7 billion years, well that’s a tad more newly created universes than you can count on your fingers and toes! Further, each newly created universe, a branch-off of ours, in turn generates zillions more universes each second, each of which creates zillions more each second, and so on and so on.

The ‘many worlds’ tag isn’t quite ‘infinite worlds’, but the number of universes present and accounted for is several orders of magnitude larger by now than ‘many’ would suggest. The good news is that in one universe, all of those ‘forks in the road’ over all the millennia have been by chance allowed you to become Master of the Universe – well that specific universe anyway! 

Many Worlds Interpretation #2: The other side of the Many Worlds coin is that from the get-go there already exists all those other 51 universes, each with a new deck of cards shuffled 100 times. In those 51 universes plus our own, all top card possibilities are realized. Of course that means that in the beginning there were all those zillions and zillions and zillions of universes each one having its own unique cosmic history. When all are put together, everything that can happen does happen, so all possibilities get a fair go and thus their moment of glory basking in the sunshine.

Copenhagen Interpretation: In this scenario, as above, all you and I know is that the top card is one of 52 possibilities. In the Copenhagen Interpretation, not one of those 52 possibilities is really real until such time as someone peeks. Options all exist equally and simultaneously until then. That’s called the wave-function – it’s a measure of probability. It’s the very act of observation or measurement (same difference) that gives rise to a single and unique reality. That’s termed the collapse of the wave-function. No observation, therefore no reality, just a superposition or a composite of all possible realities. [Actually the entire deck is in a state of ever shifting superposition since the value of every card is undetermined.] The problem here is that how is it that the lucky card becomes the lucky card and the other 51 possibilities go ‘poof’ into the realm of unreality. One card lives; 51 cards die without rhyme or reason.

The other problem is that when it comes to ‘forks in the road’, the universe has made the reality/unreality decision zillions of times without there being anyone around to peek, make a measurement or an observation. Taken to its logical conclusion the Copenhagen Interpretation suggests that the Universe exists and has tangible reality because observers exist. Without observers (life) the entire Universe would be in just one superposition of all possible states simultaneously. So, the question is, is an observer really necessary in order for a state of probabilities to become one actual reality and hence other possibilities achieve unreality? If not, and it would appear that’s the case since the universe hasn’t always had peeping-toms, the Copenhagen Interpretation is kaput. The Universe did nicely without observers (life) for billions of years. Observers are nice but unnecessary.

Common Sense Interpretation: Forget quantum probabilities. Causality rules, OK? If you observe all the variables that went into all the shuffling of that deck of cards, each and every one was grounded in cause-and-effect. If you filmed the entire shuffling sequence in high speed motion, then played back the film frame-by-frame, by knowing the original sequence of the brand new deck, you should be able to determine what the top card was after those 100 shuffles. There is no probability involved. Okay, even if you have no idea what the top card was after 100 shuffles, it is fixed and certain. The top card is not a composite of all 52 possibilities. Whether the top card is turned over seconds after that final shuffle, or 1000 years later, the value of that top card will be the same. Unfortunately you won’t tend to find this kind of explanation in the textbooks as any association between quantum physics and causality is frowned upon.

Discussion:

Now quantum physicists will tell you that in the realm of the very, very tiny, you cannot observe or measure to the absolute last decimal place the relative values quantum sized objects have. That’s because in the micro realm the very act of observation or measurement changes the very values of what you are trying to observe or measure. How is that? Well, if you wish to observe or measure a very tiny object, say an electron, you have got to bounce a photon (light particle) off of it and have that photon enter your eyeball or measuring device and thus record what information that photon reveals. However, the energy of that photon is sufficient to alter the velocity, position and trajectory of that electron when it hits and bounces off on the way to your eyeball. So, the best you can say is that the values have a certain probability of being this or that. The electron is somewhere within this range since you know not where the photon knocked it. 

Further, the value of the electron’s velocity, position or trajectory is also uncertain (to us) because of wave-particle duality. The particle electron is actually or allegedly waving in 3-D all over the place, which adds to only being able to describe the electron’s velocity, position or trajectory in probabilistic terms. While that’s true enough, that doesn’t translate, in my book anyway, that there isn’t an absolute last decimal place to whatever value you’re interested in. Like with the deck of cards, you don’t know the value of the top card after 100 shuffles but you had no doubt there was one, and one only value. That’s a certainty. That doesn’t change the fact that the probability, as far as you are concerned, of that top card being such-and-such was 1 in 52. 

Now I have no problem with electrons waving all over the place – it’s what photons (light waves) do. It’s just that the electron has an independent reality as a tiny little ‘billiard ball’, and so despite what the textbooks say, an electron cannot be in more than one place at one point in time. Like the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, there’s the position of the unknowable electron. But position it has. X marks the spot! The electron exists at time T at coordinates A, B, & C.

Put it this way, probability is just having lack of sufficient information to determine the absolute state of affairs of whatever system you are interested in. Your lack of information maybe because it is too complex or difficult to acquire to the degree required or there are too many variables to compute simultaneously or because the act of uncovering that information itself changes the system. But ultimately, there is an absolute state of affairs even if to you it is a probable state of affairs. If you want to look at it this way, Mother Nature (or God - if you are so inclined) knows, even if you don’t.

Note that what we are dealing with here is what we perceive as Mother Nature’s uncertainty or probability when it comes to Her doing this or that. When it comes to human indecision or uncertainty or probability it is just that - indecision or uncertainty or probability. IMHO, Mother Nature is a fixed and final entity; only humans don’t have sufficient data (and sufficient crunch power) or often can’t even get the data through no fault of their own. Thus our interpretation is that Mother Nature isn’t a fixed and final entity. It’s an illusion – our illusion. It is human inability to see or measure the Big Picture in the micro realm that doesn’t translate anywhere to the same degree in the macro realm which we live out our daily lives in.

Also note that so far I have thrown around terms like observers and measurements, and humans, and our, and you, and my, and us and similar sorts of words. In other words, when it comes to quantum uncertainty or probability, etc. as hinted at above, it’s humans that see things as uncertain or as probabilistic. Now, what if we eliminate the human being from the picture? In fact, let’s eliminate all living things. Let’s have a universe without any life at all. Would the concept of probability or uncertainty or indeterminacy be meaningful in a universe without life? 

In a universe without any observers, without any life, would it be meaningful to invoke the idea of quantum probability or uncertainty? It’s not that difficult to imagine a universe without life. In fact that no doubt was the state of our universe for several billion years post the Big Bang event. 

This is no doubt delving into deep philosophy, but to me the answer is clearly “NO”. For billions of years the universe ticked over just fine and everything was classically clockwork with no indecision or indeterminacy or probability or uncertainty about what-was-what and what-was-where and what-was-who and what-was-when. There was nobody around to give a damn about this or that election’s trajectory or position or velocity. It had one that was fixed and final. Of course there was no deck of 52 cards either, but if there had been, nobody would have given a damn about what the top card was or wasn’t. It too would have been fixed and final.

Of course if Planet Earth is the be-all-and-end-all of life in the Universe, and Planet Earth goes kaput, well the Universe has been lifeless before and all the physics therein won’t give a tinker’s damn. Physics, independent of life, will just keep on keeping on. As it was in the beginning so it shall ever be.

So the moral of the story is the natural worlds of the micro and the macro meshes just fine as long as there are no observers* around to artificially classify and put micro and macro concepts into quantum (micro) pigeon holes and classical (macro) pigeon holes that needn’t be put in pigeon holes at all.

There can be no fixed boundary line between the micro and the macro. The micro morphs into the macro or the macro morphs into the micro so it’s really nonsense talking about quantum physics (micro) and classical physics (macro) – there is just physics. 

*If no observers (life) existed, well that’s just an extension of what if you didn’t exist – and you didn’t for 13.7 billion years and you won’t for untold billions more.