Friday, September 08, 2006
More theories
I learned earlier today (read the comments on yesterday's post) about the entropic interpretation of the anthropic principle. The entropic interpretation is very fascinating in its own right, from the little I've read about it so far. It appears that there are different ways to interpret the interpretation, which makes the entropic idea more complicated than the regular anthropic principle. You can read more about island's interpretation at evolutionarydesign.blogspot.com
Island says that "a true anthropic constraint on the forces of the universe will necessarily include the human evolutionary process." This is a powerful idea, and if it is correct, it will tremendously elevate the status of human evolution. By "elevate the status" I mean "make the theory of evolution more convincing for those who do not accept it."
The theory of evolution came under fire (and still is under fire) because many people believe that humans- not apes, other land mammals, algae, etc.- are made in the image of God, and therefore humans are not descended from more primitive life forms. Well, that's one reason. But probably the main reason is that intelligent design is a much easier idea. If you believe that God created the universe and all life forms in six days, then that's a much more concise thing to remember. You don't have to worry about studies of Galapagos finches or biochemical reactions or the skeletons of Australopithecus afarensis, never mind particle physics, relativity, and extrapolations of cosmological models to the early seconds of the universe. (Although religion, as long as it does not take intelligent design seriously, does not have to conflict with science. For example, the Vatican has many observatories, as well as a lot of astronomers and planetary scientists who are not afraid to do their job.) :)
Science takes into account all of those things. The entropic interpretation is a framework on which they can be unified. For one thing, it's a far more scientific anthropic interpretation than, say, Tipler's Omega Point theory. (Although I like the Omega Point theory a lot, I highly doubt that artificial intelligence will ever become THAT powerful.) ¶ 3:18 PM
Island says that "a true anthropic constraint on the forces of the universe will necessarily include the human evolutionary process." This is a powerful idea, and if it is correct, it will tremendously elevate the status of human evolution. By "elevate the status" I mean "make the theory of evolution more convincing for those who do not accept it."
The theory of evolution came under fire (and still is under fire) because many people believe that humans- not apes, other land mammals, algae, etc.- are made in the image of God, and therefore humans are not descended from more primitive life forms. Well, that's one reason. But probably the main reason is that intelligent design is a much easier idea. If you believe that God created the universe and all life forms in six days, then that's a much more concise thing to remember. You don't have to worry about studies of Galapagos finches or biochemical reactions or the skeletons of Australopithecus afarensis, never mind particle physics, relativity, and extrapolations of cosmological models to the early seconds of the universe. (Although religion, as long as it does not take intelligent design seriously, does not have to conflict with science. For example, the Vatican has many observatories, as well as a lot of astronomers and planetary scientists who are not afraid to do their job.) :)
Science takes into account all of those things. The entropic interpretation is a framework on which they can be unified. For one thing, it's a far more scientific anthropic interpretation than, say, Tipler's Omega Point theory. (Although I like the Omega Point theory a lot, I highly doubt that artificial intelligence will ever become THAT powerful.) ¶ 3:18 PM
Comments:
<< Home
Thank you for your vote of confidence in the idea, but wouldn't you agree that it isn't so much "my" idea, as it falls very naturally from theory given only "anthropic specialness" and the basic tennants of evolutionary theory?
"a true anthropic constraint on the forces of the universe will necessarily include the human evolutionary process."
Isn't that too obvious?
"a true anthropic constraint on the forces of the universe will necessarily include the human evolutionary process."
Isn't that too obvious?
Given that- as you state- a lot of scientists ignore that implication, I don't think they find it obvious. It is possible to interpret the anthropic principle such that evolution does not necessarily follow from it. Such an interpretation would merely focus on constants and properties of the microworld; these would be "if the electromagnetic force had a different strength, life could not exist" arguments. There could be many other biochemical reactions that would give rise to life, but not necessarily lead to evolution of any kind. That limited interpretation would only focus on conditions, not the actual processes. The strength of the entropic interpretation is that it provides implications for the processes, not just conditions.
All that I was after was an honest admission that this fall from two givens.
When supported, it makes for a valid hypothesis, and testable predictions that fall from research make it a valid scientific theory.
Given that- as you state- a lot of scientists ignore that implication, I don't think they find it obvious.
"I don't think that they find it obvious" - "given that they [willfully] ignore that impication".
I'll guarantee you that I can easily prove that nobody looks at the physics honestly. String theorists are motivated in their usage, LQG theorists are motivated in their disdain for anything that they can latch onto to throw at string theorists. Creationists are motivated to abuse the physics as "proof" of god, and neodarwinians are equally motivated to reject any and all implications that we are not here by accident, thanks to their fanatical counterparts.
It was a very respectable scientist by the name of Brandon Carter who called this "anticentrist dogma", not me. I have a great amount of respect for science and scientists, but MODERN science does not give equal time to the most apparent implication of evidence, and that is wrong.
You are exactly correct when you say that this is very powerful, because a true anthropic constraint on the forces explains why the forces are constrained in the manner that they are, and the explanation makes evolutionary theory the theory of everything... the TOE literally is the ToE... given only a valid anthropic cosmological principle.
Please understand that my beef is with willful ignorance that only deserves EQUAL time.
Post a Comment
When supported, it makes for a valid hypothesis, and testable predictions that fall from research make it a valid scientific theory.
Given that- as you state- a lot of scientists ignore that implication, I don't think they find it obvious.
"I don't think that they find it obvious" - "given that they [willfully] ignore that impication".
I'll guarantee you that I can easily prove that nobody looks at the physics honestly. String theorists are motivated in their usage, LQG theorists are motivated in their disdain for anything that they can latch onto to throw at string theorists. Creationists are motivated to abuse the physics as "proof" of god, and neodarwinians are equally motivated to reject any and all implications that we are not here by accident, thanks to their fanatical counterparts.
It was a very respectable scientist by the name of Brandon Carter who called this "anticentrist dogma", not me. I have a great amount of respect for science and scientists, but MODERN science does not give equal time to the most apparent implication of evidence, and that is wrong.
You are exactly correct when you say that this is very powerful, because a true anthropic constraint on the forces explains why the forces are constrained in the manner that they are, and the explanation makes evolutionary theory the theory of everything... the TOE literally is the ToE... given only a valid anthropic cosmological principle.
Please understand that my beef is with willful ignorance that only deserves EQUAL time.
<< Home
