Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Plausibilities Over Theories

  1. Apr 11, 2009 #1
    There are some questions which will probably never be answered-- at least not for sure. In this thread, I present 3 basic questions about life in general for which no theory explains. I do not expect that a rigorous scientific theory will ever exist. However, it is much easier to propose a plausibility than a theory. What I mean by plausibility is some explanation, which although it cannot be tested or proven, would at least offer an explanation for the existence of the phenomena.

    I invite you to think upon the following questions and propose possible plausibilities.

    (1) If the universe was created from a singularity at the big bang, then something must have existed before the universe, because things don't happen for no reason, and the idea that time created itself is ludicrous. Without time, no events can take place. This seems like the greatest paradox of all time (pun intended), but we are proof that there is a logical explanation.

    (2) The fundamental laws of the universe that we know of are anything but arbitrary. There seem to be a small number of fundamental laws, which are very simple in nature, yet give rise to a seemingly infinite level of structure in the universe...from sub atomic particles to atomic particles to elements to stars, planets, solar systems, galaxies and life itself. These laws are anything but random. Even given the vast amount of scientific knowledge that we have gathered, I doubt that the most brilliant human minds of all time would be capable of coming up with a fictitious set of auxiliary laws that could account for the variety and complexity of structures present in the universe that can simultaneously exist in such a stable state...let alone derive the set of laws completely from scratch. What I'm getting at is that...the laws of our universe were seemingly "chosen" to be perfect in every way imaginable...and this sort of thing doesn't happen by chance. I'm not suggesting that it happened by an intelligence force, either (that would raise even more difficult to answer questions). The only forces that we know of in the universe which can explain the existence of well-suited things are "natural selection" and perhaps certain quantum phenoma that seem to explore all possibilities simultaneously. Either of these principles could be used to explain the seemingly perfect set of laws in the universe. It is not unthinkable that universes themselves, coupled with fundamental forces, could not only exist in numbers but also cease to exist (if the forces did not result in a stable equilibrium), or possibly spawn new universes themselves. Thus..it is possible that our universe itself is the result of evolution at a macro scale. The other possible alternative is that somehow, all possible universes with all possible laws exist, and then naturally as long as there is some probability of a stable set of laws existing, it will exist somewhere, and life will exist in those universes only.

    (3) It was recently proven that "if humans have free will, then so do particles." This is probably as close to a proof that free will does not exist that we will ever get. The concept of free will defies the most basic observations we have made of the universe: that it is either deterministic, or possibly stochastic at the small scale. It makes sense that, in order for humans to have free will, particles would need to have it to. It's sort of like the concept that no arrangement of 2 dimensional points can create a 3 dimensional structure. But along these lines, one might also argue that if humans have self-awareness, then particles have self-awareness. I can't imagine that a fundamental particle is self-aware. We have no physical or mathematical representation for self-awareness. It simply cannot exist in any of our equations...yet it does exist. I doubt that we will ever have a scientific theory that explains it, but perhaps we can at least someday have a plausible explanation.
  2. jcsd
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Can you offer guidance or do you also need help?
Draft saved Draft deleted