Remind me how many Tuesdays there are next week.....
Why Does The Universe Exist?
- Thread starter Dryson
- Start date
Remind me how many Tuesdays there are next week.....
Depends which universe you're in this week
That one over there
Second star to the right and straight on 'til next Tuesday.
Would have been the perfect segue from TUC into Generations.
Would have been the perfect segue from TUC into Generations.
Not the other quote from Peter Pan - all of this has happened before, and it will all happen again - probably in Enterprise?Second star to the right and straight on 'til next Tuesday.
Would have been the perfect segue from TUC into Generations.
we can only conceptualize total non-existance. That is easy enough to do as we can conceptualize lack of senses, or a vacuum chamber surrounded by a faraday cage. We can't so easily imagine the underpinnings of the universe as we don't directly access those with our senses or use them in the day to day business of being who we are, unless who we are happens to be quantum physicists or something like that.
but the complete and utter absense of everything has no evidence to be possible, because as far as we understand, it never has, and under the rules the universe operates on, never will. So the universe exists because existence is the absolute 01 of everything. 00 is only theoretical and useful in math.
but the complete and utter absense of everything has no evidence to be possible, because as far as we understand, it never has, and under the rules the universe operates on, never will. So the universe exists because existence is the absolute 01 of everything. 00 is only theoretical and useful in math.
Does there always have to be a reason? With a pretty butterfly or a handsome person we don't ask why they exist. We are happy that they do and we enjoy watching them.
To me it's the same with the universe. It doesn't really have to exist but I'm certainly glad it does. As the philosopher Leibnitz said this is the best of all possible worlds (very likely just for the reason that it invented us). So I simply enjoy it for as long as I can
To me it's the same with the universe. It doesn't really have to exist but I'm certainly glad it does. As the philosopher Leibnitz said this is the best of all possible worlds (very likely just for the reason that it invented us). So I simply enjoy it for as long as I can
If life didn't exist at in our entire Universe and never had the ability for life to survive in our Universe what is the purpose of the Universe then?
Without life existing in the Universe what need would there be for the Universe?
There is no other need other than to support life in a Universe as the reason for a Universe to exist.
Cause then maybe instead of reason.
What would cause a Universe to exist without any life in the Universe?
I thinks its impossible for a Universe to exist without any life in it across a large region of the Universe without carbon being present.
Without life existing in the Universe what need would there be for the Universe?
There is no other need other than to support life in a Universe as the reason for a Universe to exist.
Cause then maybe instead of reason.
What would cause a Universe to exist without any life in the Universe?
I thinks its impossible for a Universe to exist without any life in it across a large region of the Universe without carbon being present.
My mom used to ask me if my head was full of rocks. I finally realized what she meant.
Why would a Universe need to exist without life present? What logical purpose does a Universe serve if there is no life at all in that Universe.
It is not possible for a Universe to exist other than to support and nurture life across large regions of the Universe. Our solar system is much like a small volcano island just beginning to jut out of the ocean of space time. There are much larger regions of space where life exist and flourish in dramatically large amounts. Each generation of human life raising the island of humanity that much more out of the ocean of the Universe.
At some point life decided to leap to the next energy level much like the electron jumps to a higher orbital to change to a different state of energy output.
The question is was it life that created the Big Bang to further its own need to exist? Only life has a need. Inanimate minerals, electrons, protons, neutrons, quarks, etc. do not have a need to exist. They are merely energetic reactions. Life on the other hand would have the need to create the Big Bang in order to use those energetic reactions and particles to create a better existence for itself.
But what type of existence? The reason that a Universe would exist and why we exist is so that the Universe can see itself through our eyes. Without life in the Universe, the Universe would never be able to feel a sense of it self. The Universe would never see itself.
Without life such as human life existing the Universe would be blind and never see itself let alone hear the raging water falls of the Universe.
We exist as the eyes of the Universe. Without life to view the Universe there is no purpose for the Universe to exist, at all.
Life is a marvel itself viewing the marvels of the Universe. It's basically the same aspect that Narcissus enjoyed but failed to understand and died because he stared at himself all day long. The lesson Narcissus failed to understand is that you can't stare at yourself all day long...you have to go out into the Universe and colonize it, seed it with life. Regardless of how difficult it might be too seed the Universe with human and Earth based life, the actual point at which Infinity needed too create life was much more difficult.
Last edited:
This universe exists because it's co-dependent with others, in the quantum layering.
It's like 'Friends', but on a cosmic scale.
Well....more like 'Seinfeld', to some people. An elaborate show about nothing.
Glad I'm not living at the bottom of their gravity well.
It's like 'Friends', but on a cosmic scale.
Well....more like 'Seinfeld', to some people. An elaborate show about nothing.
Glad I'm not living at the bottom of their gravity well.
I must say I find this subject fascinating. The idea that reality is a consequence of consciousness. Waveform collapse, Schrödinger’s cat, trees falling without a sound in empty woods.
If the universe was devoid of life, things like weather wouldn’t matter, or warmth. Say there are other universes, not causally linked to this one, nothing in that universe can be observed by us, and it has no life of its own. Because it’s separate to our universe, we can’t see it or prove that it even exists, but for the sake of this argument, it is there. But does it exist, if nothing in it will ever be seen? Not to us it doesn’t, so if our universe was also empty of life and unobsersable to anyone or thing, by what definition would it exist?
If the universe was devoid of life, things like weather wouldn’t matter, or warmth. Say there are other universes, not causally linked to this one, nothing in that universe can be observed by us, and it has no life of its own. Because it’s separate to our universe, we can’t see it or prove that it even exists, but for the sake of this argument, it is there. But does it exist, if nothing in it will ever be seen? Not to us it doesn’t, so if our universe was also empty of life and unobsersable to anyone or thing, by what definition would it exist?
It would nevertheless exist. That we can not see something doesn't mean it doesn't exist. We are just not able to detect it.
For example: until fairly recently, we couldn't see the backside of the moon. Yet it certainly existed all the time and didn't just jump into existence the first time a probe flew around the edge of the Moon's visible part.
From my pov as a biologist, life isn't necessarily a vital (pardon the pun) item in or purpose of a universe. It's a nice and pleasant addition but it's not required for a system to exist. Quite the other way round.
For example: until fairly recently, we couldn't see the backside of the moon. Yet it certainly existed all the time and didn't just jump into existence the first time a probe flew around the edge of the Moon's visible part.
From my pov as a biologist, life isn't necessarily a vital (pardon the pun) item in or purpose of a universe. It's a nice and pleasant addition but it's not required for a system to exist. Quite the other way round.
It’s been argued that the likelihood of our universe not being a simulation is exceedingly low:
https://www.express.co.uk/news/scie...yson-brian-greene-elon-musk-simulation-theory.
That would give us a kind of purpose from the creators’ point of view. However, as seen in the article, this may be an untestable hypothesis. It has its attractions, though, since it leaves hope for some kind of afterlife.
But aside from that, I don’t see that the universe as we know it shows signs of having (or needing) a purpose, and certainly not a life-centric one; the proportion of its volume that can harbour life appears to be infinitesimally small.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/scie...yson-brian-greene-elon-musk-simulation-theory.
That would give us a kind of purpose from the creators’ point of view. However, as seen in the article, this may be an untestable hypothesis. It has its attractions, though, since it leaves hope for some kind of afterlife.
But aside from that, I don’t see that the universe as we know it shows signs of having (or needing) a purpose, and certainly not a life-centric one; the proportion of its volume that can harbour life appears to be infinitesimally small.
Last edited:
Not being able to see something because it’s not in our line of sight isn’t the same as not be able to see something that exists outside of the discrete package of everything that we call the universe, which shares no interactions. No light, no gravity, energy, radiation, particles; nothing passes from one to other. Without something inside that universe, nothing would know anything about it, but the presence of a single ant in that universe would change everything.
The similar question is what is nothing, and the common conclusion is that nothing is impossible. Nothing being the absence of something. Remove all of the matter and energy from a space and you’re still left with space time. You could remove the space time, but what would you do with it? You’d still have space time, which is a something, not a nothing.
Quantuum theories tell us that matter exists at the subatomic level in infinite possible states, until it is measured, a particle takes every possible path but is only observed taking one.
Life is the thing that makes reality.
the future is the past and the past is the future
way into the future our descendants figure out time travel and how to create universe from scratch ,so one of them time travel into the past with a device that goes boom and starts the universe going, ,the reason for doing it is so they will exist ,you are only a step on that journey
way into the future our descendants figure out time travel and how to create universe from scratch ,so one of them time travel into the past with a device that goes boom and starts the universe going, ,the reason for doing it is so they will exist ,you are only a step on that journey
Similar threads
