Why Is the Universe Comprehensible?

[WaveJumper]

We never reach tomorrow we only see the past and we only move around in the present toward some past event. No one can see my tomorrow until it is in my past which makes it yesterday for me and yes I have no idea when they will be able to see it unless I know how much time is between us which can be a measured of space.

It doesn't matter what someone will see. It matters that there is no universal time and time does not flow(time in relativity, not time as in your subjective experience). Reread what i said above, if you still don't see the point, i think you'll have to consult other sources. Maybe my explaining is at fault.

Anyway, when you find your way through, you'll see that the quote of Einstein that:

"The distinction between past, present and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion" shows that this incredible man knew as early as a century ago that the flow of time is related to consciousness(an illusion created by the mind). That's why i objected to admitting that it's very certain that the universe had positively existed(as it appears to our consciousness now) prior to the arrival of consciousness. I don't like basing definitive statements on what is misleadingly perceived by consciousness, until it's fully understood how consciousness itself works(if it ever will).

Here is what Roger Penrose says in an interview on the same topic:

"Yes I think physicists would agree that the feeling of time passing is simply an illusion, something that is not real. It has something to do with our perceptions."

There is no such thing as flow of time in quantum theory either.


There is a reason why the basics of relativity and qm aren't taught in secondary school. I feel the old Rutherford model of the atom, that's taught in schools, with its billiard ball electrons is a nice way around some disturbing turns in physics.

 

[WaveJumper]

Say we had a complete physical account in terms of physics of everything that is taking place in what we term the universe(aka theory of everything), would this complete comprehensibility cause anyone to wonder if there is something more, possibly a deep underlying connection between the human mind and the universe? If not, please specify reasons.

 

[WaveJumper]

Say we had a complete physical account in terms of physics of everything that is taking place in what we term the universe(aka theory of everything), would this complete comprehensibility cause anyone to wonder if there is something more, possibly a deep underlying connection between the human mind and the universe? If not, please specify reasons.

I, for one, would seriously start doubting the idea of an external world.

 

[ibcnunabit]

Most people don't ever bother in their lifetimes to ask this question, yet i am sure it will become a prime issue in the Philosophy of Science in the near future(as we explain more aspects of reality).

So, how would you answer the question - Why is the Universe comprehensible?

Why do dumb quantum fields and particles behave through emergent properties in a way that can create what we call Life, that can in turn observe and comprehend how those quantum fields work?

Well, first off, one could just as well say, "Why is the Universe so INcomprehensible?" I would say that most things in the universe that are not well-understood, or even at all. And there are many that we may not or can not ever know.

But to the extent that we CAN comprehend the universe, the answer descends from the anthropic principle: our universe has enough order in it for life forms to form and live long enough to discover principles of the universe, and it has enough chaos not to be crystalline and dead. If it were not so, we would not be here to observe it. A corollary to this is that if the universe, for whatever reason, "could not be comprehended", there would be nobody able to ask the question.

The other part of that is that life has developed and survived to the extent that it has been able to adapt to the universe and its principles. Our biggest human survival trait has been our ability to comprehend the universe. This comprehension is not a characteristic of the universe, but rather a characteristic of humans. Whatever it is that the universe is and "does," we can observe and create a model of. We started with rough principles, many of which were false or only very roughly true--then through the scientific method, we have been able to pass down, refine, and advance that knowledge. All this is because of the tools (our bodies) that our genes have been able to slowly develop through their own kind of experimentation.

Do you feel we are self-organising and self-arising quantum fields(or a rather bizarre manifestation of them) in universe tailored for life, who are looking to find some Higher Goal/Truth or Purpose?

No to the first part, the last part is up to the individual. If you go looking for a "higher purpose," don't go looking for it "out there"--look for it inside yourself. That's the only place where it has any meaning. Nature and the Universe "don't care."

Maybe the Truth about reality or something even more mind-boggling?(Yes, in QFT everything, the whole universe can be represented by quantum fields, and in principle, it should be possible to derive all the observed phenomena from their interactions).

Actually, if that is the case, it should be considerably LESS mind-boggling, since we will be able to actually understand everything with respect to one model!

So why is the universe comprehensible? The universe(atheists call it Nature) created each and every single one of us in an environment that can be observed, interacted with, described and comprehended for millions of years on end.

The universe is comprehensible because there are principles governing its actions which are just part of "what is," and which humans are able to discover by simply observing "what is" and applying reasoning and the scientific method.

The universe or Nature didn't "create" us, but rather we emerged from it and are still a part of it. We can never be outside of the universe. If we couldn't observe, or interact with the universe we essentially could not exist, and if we could not describe it or comprehend it, (which are characteristics, again, of US, not the "the universe" as a whole), then we could not ask the question and would not be human to begin with. [/Quote]

What is what you refer to as 'Nature' trying to accomplish by those emergent properties and could Nature have a plan that we are failing to see?

Not a thing. Nature, or the Universe has no agenda, is not trying to accomplish anything, has no goals, and no plan. It "just is." It is we humans that have the agendas, the goals, and the plans.

Why would those quantum fields want to observe themselves, grow, develop, talk, laugh, sing, fall in love and make the utmost Sacrifice - lose the emergent properties that brought them to life because of an unreturned love(for example)?

Quantum fields have no wants or desire, do no "observe themselves" (that is a function that happens many emergent levels up from the quantum level). One level emerges from the one below, but is not generally aware of the level below. Only at the "highest level" (if it can be called that) of the mind does that happen. Even then, although the mind can understand the parts of the brain and how they work (to a certain degree), the mind is not aware of the workings of the brain as it creates the mind, but can only surmise or deduce them from introspective observation.

I imagine that there are many universes in which there is no life to question them. Perhaps there are even an infinite number of such universes. In ours, life is possible, evidently, because we are here. I am very glad that I am possible.

 

[WaveJumper]

I imagine that there are many universes in which there is no life to question them. Perhaps there are even an infinite number of such universes. In ours, life is possible, evidently, because we are here. I am very glad that I am possible.

I see what you believe, but if we are serious about causation we have to ask what creates infinite universes(e.g. through Big Bangs)? There has to be somewhere down the line an uncaused first cause(though one cannot be certain about this). I don't see how that could be anything short of an all-powerful timeless incomprehensible intelligent process("god" for lack of a better word).

 

[Pupil]

I see what you believe, but if we are serious about causation we have to ask what creates infinite universes(e.g. through Big Bangs)? There has to be somewhere down the line an uncaused first cause(though one cannot be certain about this). I don't see how that could be anything short of an all-powerful timeless incomprehensible intelligent process("god" for lack of a better word).

From what I know of science, there isn't such a thing as an uncaused cause, just where we can't go or get too tired to look.

Personally, I won't give up searching for answers regardless of where our searching leads us. I'm an atheist, but if God reveals himself or I die and see him, I'll be the first to get a scalpel and start poking Him and asking if he had a daddy.

 

[octelcogopod]

The purpose for life in the universe is quite odd to begin with.
There is a definite difference between dead objects and living thinking objects.
The truth is that we have no idea why life and intelligence was created in this seemingly dead universe of particles and atoms.
But I do think that once life(and especially sensory systems and brains) had been created, they would have to be able to function in reality.

It seems logical to me that they are able to function and comprehend the universe because they are 1. made by the universe and 2. created from components of the universe exclusively.
Whether or not the idea of intelligence and consciousness was an accident/fluke or something planned is impossible to say now.
But we can say it was there for a reason.. Something must have happened(probably a long chain of events even), and there probably lies your answer to why the universe is comprehensible.