Is the universe alive?

[old.Tohtori]

Was just doing random googling, from boobies to gaming related news(as you do) and somehow ended up on the list of things that determine a living being(just one of the sources that have it);

1. Are able to grow and change.
2. Can reproduce and propagate their species with their own cell machinery 1.
3. Are able to maintain stable internal conditions (homeostasis) such as temperature or water content.
4. Possess a metabolism that provides them with energy (e.g. animals ingest food; plants carry out photosynthesis)
5. Die.

And got to thinking that does this apply to the universe?

Just a random discussion topic, interested in the more science-wise folk answers especially

 

[Scouse]

The answer is yes but not by that ruleset. We are the universe experiencing itself subjectively.

 

[Nate]

Not sure that can be right, it's just a group of things that are alive within it. If you put it in another perspective, a team is a group of living things coming together, but the team is never alive itself.

 

[Scouse]

Not sure that can be right, it's just a group of things that are alive within it. If you put it in another perspective, a team is a group of living things coming together, but the team is never alive itself.

We are the Universe. We're made of it.

A "team" is a notional collection of individuals with common purpose.

Humans (and all life, inanimate objects, inert gasses and everything you can think of) are collections of bits of the universe experiencing itself.

I'm not sure if planets "experience" anything, per se, but the life on them, which springs from them, does.

Why divorce yourself from what you are due to certain unique properties that you exhibit?

 

[Chilly]

Not sure that can be right, it's just a group of things that are alive within it. If you put it in another perspective, a team is a group of living things coming together, but the team is never alive itself.

A human is a team of cells that cooperate. The cells individually are certainly alive and we also consider ourselves to be a single organism that is alive, too.

 

[rynnor]

The universe is just a set of parameters - fundamental constants that allow the formation of matter, stars, planets and us - at some point another set of parameters will take over and our universe will cease to exist.

 

[Chilly]

I'm going to parameter your mum...or something...

 

[Job]

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/11/27/physicists-universe-giant-brain_n_2196346.html

 

[BloodOmen]

christ, in that case my arse must be alive right now because I've just farted and I swear it smells like something has died up there.

 

[old.Tohtori]

So in pretty dumber down terms; if we put the universe in a bubble(which kinda sorta it might be), we can call that whole bubble a living being in equal terms as a human?

Afterall, if we're the universes bacteria(scale wise), then we would know equally much about the higher thinking that the universe does as the bacteria know about ours.

I shall call the Universe "Lawrence" from now on, it's only fair to be on first name basis.

 

[Scouse]

The universe is just a set of parameters

Disagree.

Humans seek meaning and enlightenment by attempting to define the universe by a variety of parameters. The universe itself is a physical object, made up of a number of different physical objects and their interactions.

We're just a bit of it.

 

[rynnor]

Disagree.

Humans seek meaning and enlightenment by attempting to define the universe by a variety of parameters. The universe itself is a physical object, made up of a number of different physical objects and their interactions.

We're just a bit of it.

Below the level of matter the universe is made up of information - the most fundamental are the values of the strong and weak nuclear force, electromagnetism and gravity. It is thought these were determined by random fluctuations at the time of the big bang - these determine the nature of our universe.

Imagine a universe with no or very weak gravity - there would be no matter, no suns, no planets etc.

 

[Dukat]

I find it mind-boggling.

The 'Universe' just seems to big for us to comprehend it, let alone its function. Right now we can't even see/measure/detect all of it (I think?), so won't that skew our understanding of it somewhat?

Also isn't Lawrence its second name? First name Leonard?

 

[Scouse]

Below the level of matter the universe is made up of information

Again, I disagree.

That information is what humans use to understand "what is". But what actually is, is the matter.

The matter exists. The information only exists because we've discovered the matter, and found that if we use a ruleset we can understand more about the matter.

DNA exists. The we can understand the information it carries, but only because the DNA exists.

 

[rynnor]

Again, I disagree.

That information is what humans use to understand "what is". But what actually is, is the matter.

The matter exists. The information only exists because we've discovered the matter, and found that if we use a ruleset we can understand more about the matter.

DNA exists. The we can understand the information it carries, but only because the DNA exists.

Matter is just a temporary form of energy - and what you are talking about is a view of the universe at least a century out of date. What appears real on our level of experience is just a fog of empty space and probabilities on the atomic and quantum scales.

 

[Ctuchik]

Was just doing random googling, from boobies to gaming related news(as you do) and somehow ended up on the list of things that determine a living being(just one of the sources that have it);

1. Are able to grow and change.
2. Can reproduce and propagate their species with their own cell machinery 1.
3. Are able to maintain stable internal conditions (homeostasis) such as temperature or water content.
4. Possess a metabolism that provides them with energy (e.g. animals ingest food; plants carry out photosynthesis)
5. Die.

And got to thinking that does this apply to the universe?


Just a random discussion topic, interested in the more science-wise folk answers especially

Is this one of those "i think, therefore i am" philosophical bullshit?

 

[Scouse]

Matter is just a temporary form of energy - and what you are talking about is a view of the universe at least a century out of date. What appears real on our level of experience is just a fog of empty space and probabilities on the atomic and quantum scales.

You're talking in terms of abstracts. "Probabilities" only exist conceptually, not physically.

The abstracts you're talking about exist only to explain the physical. It matters not if matter is a temporary form of energy, that energy is interchangable, etc. etc. Whatever form it exists in, whatever dimension it exists in: it exists.

 

[rynnor]

You're talking in terms of abstracts. "Probabilities" only exist conceptually, not physically.

The 'probabilities' scenario has been proven by experimentation - its not just a concept - its part of our reality.

 

[Scouse]

The 'probabilities' scenario has been proven by experimentation - its not just a concept - its part of our reality.

A probability isn't a thing rynnor. It doesn't "exist".

It's a measure of the likelihood of something happening/being. Its probability.

It's how we measure our reality - in probabilities. You can't weigh a probability, or touch one. It's an abstract.


What about this simple thing aren't you getting?

 

[Chilly]

Walking away from this clusterfuck. People with uninformed opinions arguing with each other over something they saw on TV once five years ago

Just like every thread!

 

[Nate]

I disagree with you walking away Chilly.

 

[TdC]

I find it mind-boggling.

The 'Universe' just seems to big for us to comprehend it, let alone its function. Right now we can't even see/measure/detect all of it (I think?), so won't that skew our understanding of it somewhat?

Also isn't Lawrence its second name? First name Leonard?

a wild lion appears! TdC used BACON!! it's SUPER effective!!!

 

[rynnor]

A probability isn't a thing rynnor. It doesn't "exist".

It's a measure of the likelihood of something happening/being. Its probability.

It's how we measure our reality - in probabilities. You can't weigh a probability, or touch one. It's an abstract.


What about this simple thing aren't you getting?

What is this 'exist' - what's your objective test for it? Do you believe bacteria/viruses exist - yet you cant touch them?

 

[Scouse]

Do you believe bacteria/viruses exist - yet you cant touch them?

Of course you can touch them. You can manipulate, modify, stain in illuminous colourings and move them about. They're clearly physical.

 

[Dukat]

a wild lion appears! TdC used BACON!! it's SUPER effective!!!

Bacon is the universes way of saying 'Good job'.

 

[rynnor]

Of course you can touch them. You can manipulate, modify, stain in illuminous colourings and move them about. They're clearly physical.

Viruses exist in a scale that only machines can detect - in the same way we can detect probabilities through machines so how clearcut is your test for existence?

 

[Dukat]

Viruses exist in a scale that only machines can detect - in the same way we can detect probabilities through machines so how clearcut is your test for existence?

Probabilities are abstract. Thier existence isn't likely to give you fraction-aids. Viruses are a little bit different in that aspect, surely?

 

[old.Tohtori]

I find it mind-boggling.

The 'Universe' just seems to big for us to comprehend it, let alone its function. Right now we can't even see/measure/detect all of it (I think?), so won't that skew our understanding of it somewhat?

Also isn't Lawrence its second name? First name Leonard?

Leonard Lawrence Wigglesworth the Third.

 

[rynnor]

Probabilities are abstract. Thier existence isn't likely to give you fraction-aids. Viruses are a little bit different in that aspect, surely?

Underpinning even the atomic scale is the quantum world and down there things stop being so predictable and become probabilistic - see the Schrodingers Cat mind experiment. It has been experimentally verified in relation to light.

 

[Zarjazz]

Walking away from this clusterfuck. People with uninformed opinions arguing with each other over something they saw on TV once five years ago

Just like every thread!

How can you say that. It's always a laugh to watch a group of random people without Physics backgrounds trying to explain Quantum Mechanics.

The more you observe the thread the less they seem to actually know. Hmm, a pretty good analogy for QM afterall