What is Our Place in the Cosmos and How Does it Impact Humanity?

[mattthecat]

Our planet is a microscopic particle amongst the cosmos. Most people don't consider were drifting in it on a daily either. It's bizarre to come into the full recognition of societys primitive mindset. Not trying to be demeaning, my point is we can't even fathom how big, or our place in the universe is. This on average would not cross the everyday persons mind, nor would anything outside of life on earth. In comparisson to our place in the cosmos everything on Earth seems so small. When I was a child stars just meant it was night out, never really thinking, hey wait a miniute, this is where we are, this is who we are.

 

[Evo]

What exactly did you want to discuss?

 

[Danger]

What exactly did you want to discuss?

I second that (not that such is necessary).
It's pretty obvious to anyone who looks outward that Earth is a meaningless speck on the face of our galaxy, and our galaxy is a meaningless speck on the face of the universe. We as individuals, however, have the opportunity to look beyond our ultimate demise and attempt to prepare a better tiny world for our offspring. (I don't actually have any, but if any beautiful young PF members should choose to reprod...)
Damn! Those Mentor warnings hurt when you get thwapped upside the head with them...

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

Our planet is a microscopic particle amongst the cosmos. Most people don't consider were drifting in it on a daily either. It's bizarre to come into the full recognition of societys primitive mindset. Not trying to be demeaning, my point is we can't even fathom how big, or our place in the universe is. This on average would not cross the everyday persons mind, nor would anything outside of life on earth. In comparisson to our place in the cosmos everything on Earth seems so small. When I was a child stars just meant it was night out, never really thinking, hey wait a miniute, this is where we are, this is who we are.

I'm an everyday person, or at least I was one. These days I'm not so sure. Anyway I get that microscopic particle thing. I guess it depends on what kind of microscope you've got. Mine is a cheap plastic thing that my parents got for me when I was a kid. I used to use it to peek into the neighbors' windows. To get back to the point, I haven't drifted in it as much as I used to since the transmission on my car went south and I gave it to that charity. Of course, I've been walking a lot more than before and believe you me, this is one huge honking particle. It's a matter of perspective, isn't it?

Lately, I've been spending a lot of my time trying to fathom just how large the galaxy in Andromeda is. I've never seen it naked eye, but using a pair of binoculars, I was able to make out a distinct smudge so I'm well on my way to figuring it out and trust me, it's astronomical. Yet I'm told that in the big picture, it's a microscopic particle too. So in the big picture, the Earth is the same size as the Andromeda galaxy.

Now I make the important decisions in the family, leaving minor issues to my wife. She decides what we'll have for dinner, while I determine how big our place in the universe is. Obviously, I have to take into account who we are vis-a-vis the stars at night. For instance, here in South Jersey, they are little pinpoints and that always make me feel quite small. However, they are big and bright deep in the heart of Texas. I have to juggle all of these facts. My final conclusion is that my place in the universe is right here on the Earth. You?

 

[arildno]

Our planet is a microscopic particle amongst the cosmos. Most people don't consider were drifting in it on a daily either. It's bizarre to come into the full recognition of societys primitive mindset. Not trying to be demeaning, my point is we can't even fathom how big, or our place in the universe is. This on average would not cross the everyday persons mind, nor would anything outside of life on earth. In comparisson to our place in the cosmos everything on Earth seems so small. When I was a child stars just meant it was night out, never really thinking, hey wait a miniute, this is where we are, this is who we are.

Somebody said this much better:

" The Total Perspective Votex derives its picture of the whole Universe on the principle of extrapolated matter analyses.

To explain--since every piece of matter in the Universe is in some way affected by every other piece of matter in the Universe, it is in theory possible to extrapolate the whole of creation--every sun, every planet, their orbits, their composition, and their economic and social history from, say, one small piece of fairy cake.

The man who invented the Total Perspective Vortex did so basically in order to annoy his wife.

Trin Tragula--for that was his name--was a dreamer, a thinker, a speculative philosopher or, as his wife would have it, an idiot.

And she would nag him incessantly about the utterly inordinate amount of time he spent staring out into space, or mulling over the mechanics of safety pins, or doing spectrographic analyses of pieces of fairy cake.

"Have some sense of proportion!" she would say, sometimes as often as thirty-eight times in a single day.

And so he built the Total Perspective Vortex--just to show her.

And into one end, he plugged the whole of reality as extrapolated from a piece of fairy cake, and into the other, he plugged his wife: so that when he turned it on she saw in one instant the whole infinity of creation and herself in relation to it.

To Trin Tragula's horror, the shock completely annihilated her brain, but to his satisfaction he realized that he had proved conclusively that if life is going to exist in a Universe of this size, then one thing it cannot afford to have is a sense of proportion.

-- The HitchHiker's Guide"

 

[arildno]

And here, from the original radio series:

 

[Constantinos]

I don't think we are so insignificant just because we take a small amount of space in the universe. This pale little blue dot of a planet has given rise to lifeforms which can have knowledge of themselves and the universe around them. I'm not sure how significant this is, but at least it is special, for all we know such a thing does not exist in a radius of hundrends of light years across. Maybe intelligent life is very rare and that makes us rare too :D

I love the discussions on this forum...

 

[Danger]

I love the discussions on this forum...

While I have no authority to type on behalf of either the administration or other members of PF, I don't expect that anyone will sanction me for saying that we are very glad to have you aboard. This is one of the very few places where you can both learn and teach at the same time (even if that teaching is only in the form of expressing your opinions).
In fact, the only adversarial comments made in living memory were my fault... and that was due to being on (prescribed) experimental pharmaceuticals at the time.
As for our uniqueness... it's statistically almost impossible for us to be the only species as scientifically advanced as we are.
I just thought of this analogy, and am thinking of copyrighting it, so don't go quoting me. Consider that you are on a transcontinental road trip, and have to periodically spit out of your window. If the trip is long enough, at some point one of your gobs will smack an ant upside the head. Not likely, but inevitable given sufficient time.
I doubt very much that any ET life will in any way resemble humans, and there's certainly no possibility of cross-pollination, but that shouldn't prevent us from becoming friends.

 

[Constantinos]

While I have no authority to type on behalf of either the administration or other members of PF, I don't expect that anyone will sanction me for saying that we are very glad to have you aboard. This is one of the very few places where you can both learn and teach at the same time (even if that teaching is only in the form of expressing your opinions).

Thank you! I particularly like the fact that discussions are made appealing to rational arguments. This is a great way to learn! I have a hard time learning if I'm not shown to be wrong! There are of course other kinds of arguments like appealing to emotions or authorities, but I feel the former to be very subjective and the latter to require something to be believed without knowing -in detail- why. All forums are a blend of this. I feel this particular one is the right blend for me.[/QUOTE]

In fact, the only adversarial comments made in living memory were my fault... and that was due to being on (prescribed) experimental pharmaceuticals at the time.

That's kind of a dangerous thing to do, but I shouldn't expect anything less from you should I? :P

As for our uniqueness... it's statistically almost impossible for us to be the only species as scientifically advanced as we are.
I just thought of this analogy, and am thinking of copyrighting it, so don't go quoting me. Consider that you are on a transcontinental road trip, and have to periodically spit out of your window. If the trip is long enough, at some point one of your gobs will smack an ant upside the head. Not likely, but inevitable given sufficient time.
I doubt very much that any ET life will in any way resemble humans, and there's certainly no possibility of cross-pollination, but that shouldn't prevent us from becoming friends.

Gosh, I'm into a very long trip and an ocean of spit! :D
Well I almost completely agree with you, but I see no reason why there should be no cross-pollination except in some specific cases.

For example, imagine that we meet an intelligent ET who is a species of communicating individuals. Well because of its intelligence it should be able to recognize patterns in its universe. Let's take advantage of that. Now if I stand before it and I turn my head at the Sun(which I believe it can recognize as an entity, as well as light because, well it has mastered interstellar travel!)and hold an LED screen in front of it which says SUN, then most probably it will understand nothing. But now if I keep doing it with other objects I'm sure he has come to notice (like a planet, or Eta-Carinae or some distant quasar) then most surely it will get a pattern. And if it has experience with communication with others, then he most probably think that I try to communicate with him and maybe he'll try the same.

If communication is established, then anything goes, from exchange of tech to friendship (if the ET understands such a concept) to co-evolution to war (maybe someone gets completely disgusted by knowing the other, or deems there is some benefit to that). I'm not sure what exactly you mean by "cross-pollination", but I think that whatever it is, it is achiveable once communication is established.

Well all that would be impossible though if the intelligent ET has no experience of communication, for example a huge super-organism that evolved in its home planet as the only intelligent individual. This guy would never have the need to communicate let alone evolve any mechanism for it, and I believe it would never understand us. I feel like it would be solipsistic to the core, and only perceive us as an interesting pattern in its mind. But then I find it difficult to think how intelligence evolved without communication.

Now don't get me wrong, I don't spend sleepless nights thinking over these things! You just gave me a thought to think over and responded :P I could well be very wrong. It's just an opinion.

 

[Danger]

I'm not sure what exactly you mean by "cross-pollination"

Sorry about that. I was referring to all of those human-Vulcan, human-Klingon, human-Betazoid, human-whatever, mongrels inhabiting various entertainment media. There is virtually no chance of our parts even being compatible, let alone our DNA (if they even have DNA).
I agree with what you said about communication.

 

[mattthecat]

It's just extremely unfathomable, the size and distances of the universe. I can never get over the fact that we are drifting through space right now on a very small planet. It's an awe inspring thought to think that the universe has reached compacity and complexity to understand its' self through intelligent life. In a sense one could say we are all the universe, it's what were made of. When we die the matter in our body simply changes forms never dissapering. If the big bang theory holds true, then at one point we were all one, pure energy.

 

[siiix]

that depends, it is sadly possible that we are VERY unique, that the development of intelligent life (or even life in general) is just a HUGE coincidence, in that case maybe in the entire universe there only a few planets that support life

in my opinion this would be sad, BUT right away it would make this planet one of the most significant places in the entire universe.. why significant because we are capable of causing change... there is a SLIGHT possibility that we can populate, use, change an ever growing part of that universe, over billions of years we might spread to more and more space, and the speed of expansion will be explonational with the amount of solar systems we colonize... we change nature to our liking, we brake the random flow of nature to our liking.. and THAT is very significant.. IF we ever make it that far of course

 

[arildno]

siix:
Why would such "change" be significant for a bacterial population or a piece of rock??

We are, by definition, hugely significant for ourselves, but it is silly to try to regard our significance as something equally significant for other existences..

 

[Ryan_m_b]

that depends, it is sadly possible that we are VERY unique, that the development of intelligent life (or even life in general) is just a HUGE coincidence, in that case maybe in the entire universe there only a few planets that support life

Considering all we have to observe is the handful of planets in our solar system and a few giant exoplanets we hardly have a conclusive idea of how rare life is. "Life" is simply structures that can self-replicate with mutation. Tool using life is a whole different conversation.

in my opinion this would be sad, BUT right away it would make this planet one of the most significant places in the entire universe.

As Arildno has pointed out we are only "significant" depending on how we are measuring it. We deem ourselves so because we have widespread beliefs that consciousness (a phenomenon we cannot even accurately define) is somehow intrinsically better than a non-consciousness.

why significant because we are capable of causing change

There are many things in this universe that are capable of causing far more "change" than us; dark matter, gravity etc. The fact that we are conscious does not make the change we effect on a system any more significant.

there is a SLIGHT possibility that we can populate, use, change an ever growing part of that universe, over billions of years we might spread to more and more space, and the speed of expansion will be explonational with the amount of solar systems we colonize... we change nature to our liking, we brake the random flow of nature to our liking.. and THAT is very significant.. IF we ever make it that far of course

A lot of speculation there that as a species we will survive billions of years and that we will experience exponential population growth (considering the near freeze of population growth in developed countries I would disagree on the exponential front). Regardless of if we develop fantastic technologies that allow us to send out colonists not only to the nearest systems but other galaxies we cannot rewrite the laws of physics. Our fate is tied to that of the universe, we can throw around matter and energy as much as we like but in the end entropy wins.

How an ant colony populates an island has no bearing on the eruption of its volcano.

 

[Constantinos]

siix:
Why would such "change" be significant for a bacterial population or a piece of rock??

We are, by definition, hugely significant for ourselves, but it is silly to try to regard our significance as something equally significant for other existences..

Hey!

I don't really understand your point. How can rocks or bacteria conceive "significance"? I'd expect that for something to conceive "significance", a complex nervous systems is the prerequisite, maybe only that of humans. So since significance is only meaningful to those that can conceive it, I don't see how the inability of rocks to find our existence significant or otherwise is meaningful to anyone.

Unless you mean that whatever action we might take on the environment, it won't affect rocks or bacteria, which is false I believe because we can process rocks and use bacteria and generally change the things that constitute our environment. Only physics is the limit :D

 

[siiix]

As Arildno has pointed out we are only "significant" depending on how we are measuring it. We deem ourselves so because we have widespread beliefs that consciousness (a phenomenon we cannot even accurately define) is somehow intrinsically better than a non-consciousness.

How an ant colony populates an island has no bearing on the eruption of its volcano.

the difference between us and non (or limited) consciousness species is that our tools not just include objects , but we are capable to manipulate the laws of physics , where a monkey can use a stick, we might be able to change the path of entire planets.. and who knows how far we can go, a monkey can try to run from that volcano - who knows in the future we might be able to make that volcano stop erupting for good

how far our knowledge and capabilities go we do not know yet, so sure it is speculation, but in my opinion it is a remote possibility that our future knowledge gives us powers to overcome just about anything nature is throwing at us

sure i have to agree its much more likely that our numbers will eventually shrink and our speed of gaining knowledge will slow down maybe even stop, as we reach a state of comfort where laziness over comes the need to further progress...but the potential is there

i think time is a bigger factor then space, how long can we survive without being destroyed ? what would happen after the last star goes dark, is the universe pulsating and could we survive the next big bang ? because if so even if we just in a tiny spot of the entire universe , our presents in time would become permanent.. and that would be again very significant

i mean even now already let's say we would know that our sun goes supernova in let's say just 200 years, i highly doubt that we would as species die, the entire solar system would be destroyed but we have (and every day more so) tools to fight back and survive

how far we can go to manipulate nature is speculation, but fact is that there is potential, the ability to consciously manipulate the world around us, and so create a bubble of irregularity in the random flow of nature

in this context i would define "significant" as how big of an impact we capable of inflicting OR how unique/rare we are OR what unique situation we can create (like being a permanent presents in time/space)... "significant" don't mean that's there nothing else "significant" in the universe

the google definition is:
significant
1. Sufficiently great or important to be worthy of attention; noteworthy.
2. Having a particular meaning; indicative of something

 

[Ryan_m_b]

the difference between us and non (or limited) consciousness species is that our tools not just include objects , but we are capable to manipulate the laws of physics , where a monkey can use a stick, we might be able to change the path of entire planets.. and who knows how far we can go, a monkey can try to run from that volcano - who knows in the future we might be able to make that volcano stop erupting for good

We cannot manipulate nor break physical laws. We observe and characterise them and we apply the knowledge we gain to make tools. We are still confined by these rules though.

in this context i would define "significant" as how big of an impact we capable of inflicting OR how unique/rare we are OR what unique situation we can create (like being a permanent presents in time/space)... "significant" don't mean that's there nothing else "significant" in the universe

the google definition is:
significant
1. Sufficiently great or important to be worthy of attention; noteworthy.
2. Having a particular meaning; indicative of something

I've cut out all the baseless speculation to address your last point. The google definition doesn't really help you because it is entirely subjective what one finds worthy of attention.

As for your three definitions; the first just pushes the problem to the side by using the word "impact", now you have to define this and say why we are significant compared to forces such as gravity etc. The second definition conflates significant with rare, well ok but that doesn't add any positive value to our species. Lastly for the "unique situation" I fail to see what we could do (considering we can't break physical laws) that would be a "unique situation" other than facets of our society and I don't see why that even matters compared to the rest of the universe.

I think you are trying to fulfil a belief that as a species we have some intrinsic value that should be objectively recognisable when in fact there is no basis for such a thing.

 

[siiix]

@ryan_m_b you see it to complicated

when i say manipulate and use physics.. maybe I am not specific enough
what i mean is a normal flow of events like we not just use objects nature created, but we create events that naturaly would not occur, a good example what we already could do today is completely eliminate most life on this planet by carefully placing nuclear charges in well calculated places on the planet

now i hope we agree that the mass die-out of the dinosaurs was at least in the life of this planet a "significant" event.. such events only we can create AND nature

or turn it this way, we have already now the power to make a CHOICE to destroy something nature slowly created in a billion years in a mater of 30 minutes... we can do that in fact with a lot greater efficiency then that meteor impact did 65 million years ago

now i realize that we can only do this on planetary scale.. and this is where speculation starts.. "what if" we continue to gain knowledge and can destroy entire solar systems for example

its not about instinct at all, its about planing and consciously make decisions on what will happen on an ever larger scale

and i call that (maybe incorrectly) manipulating physics, NOT the laws of physics, we make things happen where they naturally they would not occur

so again what is significant ? i think significant is any inconsistency in the natural flow of things... and we create an ever larger inconsistency because we work against the natural flow of things.. for now planet wide but who knows

its pretty much us against nature... and so better we get at this so more significant our impact will get

 

[arildno]

"or turn it this way, we have already now the power to make a CHOICE to destroy something nature slowly created in a billion years in a mater of 30 minutes... we can do that in fact with a lot greater efficiency then that meteor impact did 65 million years ago"

Well, in a matter of SECONDS, a supernova will CREATE the matter necessary for anything else than stars to exist.

That humans are somehow "significant" in any other sense than significant to ourselves is just emotional nonsense.

 

[siiix]

@arildno it does not matter what the reason behind is what we do, what matter is that we can change the neutral flow of things

we can never be bigger then nature, but we can be the 2nd biggest force in the universe, now if there are many intelligent species who embrace they potential then of course we just one of many

that you brought up selfishness just makes my point stronger, we plan, nature does not

and as for supernova... if we get sufficient warning even a supernova would not be able to kill us already now... we are that good in what we do... entire planets would be gone, all other species here would be gone... but not the human race

what else in the universe can do that but a combination of knowledge and consciousness, and we have both

 

[DaveC426913]

Sorry about that. I was referring to all of those human-Vulcan, human-Klingon, human-Betazoid, human-whatever, mongrels inhabiting various entertainment media. There is virtually no chance of our parts even being compatible, let alone our DNA (if they even have DNA).

We have a far better chance of mating with a petunia than we do mating with an alien species.
- Carl Sagan

 

[mattthecat]

It's a rather sad thought to know that in this life time we might not have the technology to know how significant life is in the universe. However given the size of the cosmos it is mathematicaly rational to consider it is occurring in every galaxy, even if the detials are differn't ie; the elements composing it). It seems to be simply what matter does given enough time and the right conditions, and who knows that it specifically depends on being in the goldylocks zone of a star. Imagine exotic life composed of communities of gas microrganisms similar to the image of nebuale. the point I'd like to raise is where is the breaking point on our planet where we realize that we are one species, and not countries divided. It would be a terrible event to have come all this way and destroy ourselves in nuclear warfare. I hope one day we cross this thresholde.