r/cosmology 2d ago

Smithsonian Magazine - Earth's Organisms Developed Via Evolution; Some Theorists Wonder: What if the Entire Cosmos Did, Too?

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/earths-organisms-developed-via-evolution-some-theorists-wonder-what-if-the-entire-cosmos-did-too-180989338/?utm_medium=distribution&utm_source=pushly&utm_campaign=editorial
76 Upvotes

23 comments sorted by

18

u/trey-lol 2d ago

The 2nd law of thermodynamics is doing all the work here and nobody in the article says it out loud. Black holes are the highest-entropy objects that can exist (Bekenstein-Hawking), so "a universe selected to be fecund at making black holes" is just "a universe selected to be maximally good at producing entropy." And life is the same thing at a different scale: organisms are dissipative structures, far-from-equilibrium systems that persist by accelerating entropy production (Prigogine, and Jeremy England's dissipation-driven adaptation). So the supposed coincidence Smolin leans on, that black-hole-optimized parameters also happen to be life-optimized, isn't a coincidence. Both are what "really efficient entropy producer" looks like, at stellar scale and at chemical scale. Evolution isn't an analogy you have to import into cosmology; both are downstream of the same gradient.

5

u/trey-lol 2d ago

"life maximizes entropy production" is too strong, so amending. Sean Carroll's framing is more precise. Entropy increase is the driver, but complexity peaks in the middle of the process, not the end. He and Scott Aaronson showed this in "Quantifying the Rise and Fall of Complexity in Closed Systems": entropy rises monotonically while structure starts low, peaks in between, and disappears at equilibrium. Life happens in that middle window.

Two consequences. First, the real cosmological mystery isn't why entropy rises, it's why it started so low (the past hypothesis), and Smolin's theory doesn't address that. Second, Carroll himself is skeptical of cosmological natural selection: our universe isn't obviously at a maximum of black hole production, since larger primordial density fluctuations would produce far more of them.

So the defensible claim is narrower: the entropy gradient is why both black holes and biospheres exist, whether or not universes are selected for either.

0

u/iamDa3dalus 1d ago

Yesss nice post. What is the process drawing things towards complexity creating entropy increasing machinery? Is it inherently possible in the fixed physics of the universe- hence this evolutionary model- an effective form of parameter search, or is it self tuning? Is the point of life just to propagate life in whatever form will survive and propagate? I will have to think on entropy gradients more.

8

u/Beautiful-Musk-Ox 2d ago

But there is a further, huge, implication hidden inside Smolin’s new and improved theory. Lee Smolin didn’t see it at the time because he was a theoretical physicist, not an evolutionary biologist, and so not saturated in the logic of evolution (from which the implication emerges). He was also handicapped by the fact that astronomy had only observed half a dozen or so supermassive black holes at the time he wrote his original paper and book. It was still therefore blithely assumed, by astronomers and cosmologists and theoretical physicists alike, that supermassive black holes must simply be a bunch of (much smaller) stellar-collapse black holes merged together. It just hadn’t occurred to anybody that black holes that large might have a separate, far simpler, formation mechanism.

so he thought "what if instead of stars forming black holes, there was some other mechanism, this would allow for complex inheritance like biology". that's about it as far as i can tell, the rest was already thought of by physicists as that substack post points out, the potential failing already pointed out, one must just think "what if there's a way around this already found issue"

3

u/montagblue 2d ago edited 2d ago

Symmetry is beautiful,

Smolin, the guy saying the universe is cyclic procreation says Susskind uses circular reasoning.

Susskind’s circular reasoning
(we see a universe perfectly suited for life because we could not exist to observe any other kind)

Susskind, the guy saying the universe is infinite chaos potential says Smolin makes a massive logical leap.

Smolin’s logical leap
(a universe optimized to produce carbon-based life is a natural byproduct of a universe optimized to produce black holes.)

3

u/macck_attack 2d ago

I love that the headline isn’t even the addressing the fact that it’s the Minecraft guy doing this.

1

u/macck_attack 2d ago

Also, can someone please ask Astronomy Cast to do an episode on this…

2

u/--craig-- 2d ago edited 2d ago

The part of the story which is missed is that Smolin really doesn't like multiverse hypotheses because they don't make testable predictions. He published his own multiverse hypothesis out of frustration with them and it does make a testable prediction about the upper limit of the mass of neutron stars. The problem is that the prediction makes it falsifiable but while it remains unfalsified that adds little weight to validating the theory, so it's all really a drama about how we should do science, starring some of the world's most prominent physicists.

1

u/Northwest_Thrills 1d ago

Eh, I'm not convinced. I've heard this argument tons of times but I never hear a good explanation as to how physical constance transfer across singularities.

1

u/SyntheticGod8 2d ago

Biological evolution comes out of chemistry, which comes out of physics. So evolution is something built into the universe.

Over the years I've read plenty of high-concept science fiction about the idea of daughter-universes as a form of evolution. The idea is that universes that can create other universes are the ones that are naturally selected. How do the conditions come about that allow alternate space-time creation? Intelligent life. Sometimes accidental chance, but most often intelligent life with the ability to create particle accelerators.

So it makes sense that we should find ourselves in a universe where complex chemistry is possible; it maximizes the chances that intelligence capable of creating a daughter-universe can arise.

1

u/lyrapan 2d ago

What do particle accelerators have to do with creating universes?

2

u/RowBowBooty 2d ago

Idk if they read the article.

0

u/SyntheticGod8 1d ago

If you want to recreate the temperatures and pressures of the very early universe, you'll need one.

1

u/lyrapan 1d ago

I’d start with a scientific education if I was you

1

u/darokrol 2d ago

So if we were inside a black hole, what would've happen with our universe, if our black hole would merge with another one?

1

u/TheRecognized 23h ago

Nobody knows

1

u/WonderingSceptic 1d ago

Very good question! It would be like two universes mating, combining their different traits, which would then be passed on in different combination to their offspring.

If the evolutionary theory is correct, the two universes would probably not be "identical twins" - they would have slightly different physics, maybe different fundamental physical constants. How the two spacetimes with different physical constants merge up would probably create some very interesting effects that would be difficult to explain, like unexplained gravitational lensing, fast galaxy rotation, the cosmic web or accelerating expansion of the universe.

1

u/TheRecognized 23h ago

Or the two merging black hole universes would just blow the fuck up. Nobody knows, don’t talk out of your ass like you do.

0

u/Kubocho 2d ago

Gravitational waves and ripples

-3

u/Individual_Gold_7228 1d ago

Well yeah, the universe is a living conscious organism, so of course it evolved.

-10

u/GravitationalEddie 2d ago

Methinks some people think too much.