TED Conversations

James Hart

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

As humans are we the universe's way of self preservation?

As humans we can make choices and therefore go against random occurrences so as to move and create things and so (on small scale at the moment) we can change high entropy situations into low entropy situations, although only within closed circuits. For example we can make sandcastles (low entropy) out of a pile of sand (high entropy). If in the future we can do this on a much larger scale could we, in theory, lengthen the age the earth, sun or even the whole universe will last. Or could we go even further and, in a sense, turn back time by changing the whole universes state of entropy back to a lower entropy form? If so would this make us the universe's way of self preservation

0
Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Jun 16 2011: You're question suggests a conscious Universe with a desire to be preserved. I don't see any rationale for this.
    If however you are concerned with whether or not we can survive indefinately in some form or other:
    - We don't know enough about anything one way or another to be confident one way or another about the theoretical possibility of this.
    - Though given our current state its looking more and more improbable that theoretical possibility will even matter :)
    • thumb
      Jun 16 2011: It was meant purely as personification to show the question is more about the universe than humans (I know badly put :S).
      That is not what im trying to get at, more whether we can go against certain universal laws just by being able to think, Heisenberg's observation theory, and therefore control the survival of the universe indefinately.
      • thumb
        Jun 16 2011: Ah ok.
        Well as I said i don't think we have enough information to make a call one way or the other but I like to be optimistic about it :)
      • Jun 18 2011: Hello James. Who knows what the future may bring. I can see where you are coming from. On a smaller scale, (micro not macro.) it does make you think that one day it may be possible. The virus for example; when it infects the body and science has to discover ways to destroy it, the virus mutates to guard against the cure. Science does win most of the time but not in all cases. We are getting there however. This scenario is similar to the one you suggest, but on a much smaller scale. So who knows?
    • Jun 23 2011: Well I would like to ask the question: Preservation of what? Physical form or the conscious. I for some reason believe that consciousness is not a function of physical thing. For Conciousness to exist it does not need a physical THING to exist. Of course it would need a physical THING(in our case this human body) to interact and express itslef in the physical world.
      Having said that I would go back to James', sand castle example. Going by that analogy I would say human body is very low entropy state for a human conscousness to occupy or be in. I think its universes way of becoming wiser by getting into high entropy state. So if given a choice, I(speaking as consciousness) would choose to be without the body just to get to next higher entropy state. No I would not like to take the universe back, its better going forward, the way it is.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.