Cosmological Reconstruction

The Forum is provided for both SIS members and non-members to discuss topics relevant to the Society's work. It also provides the opportunity for non-members to ask questions about the Society’s work and/or published material.
All posts are moderated before inclusion. No attachments are permitted.

Cosmological Reconstruction

Postby John » Mon 15 Oct 2012 5:12 pm

Whist I dismiss the standard cosmology, in common with many in the Society, the case for a 'beginning' seems difficult to ignore, so - I don't ignore it! I won't waste words on Big Bang theory which itself has so upset many thinkers. Initially I was captured by Fred Hoyle's "Steady State" theory but came to realise that it has a glaring weakness. While I share with the great Fred his view that, like matter itself, the Universe is essentially immortal, the presence of change and evidence of the introduction of new features over time makes it seem most probable that a 'beginning' of some kind is an unavoidable conclusion. In this sense a beginning would entail some sort of re-organisation that destroys any record of its past state. How this does, or even can, come about is probably unknowable, though perhaps it is yet another manifestation of universal electric power - your guess...! Thinking about the cosmos in a purely material and evolutionary sense, I saw what had been puzzling me for so long. Where is life in an eternal, un-reforming Universe? Surely life, hugely intelligent life, and evidence of its existence would be, literally, everywhere! From our own experience it seems virtually certain that intelligent life can make a home practically anywhere! If Fred was right - more or less - the relative absence of intelligent life can be only because life in all its forms is a latter-day phenomenon, requiring the creation of special conditions to inspire its appearance. You can only have such latter-day events after there has been a 'beginning'! Since no initial 'beginning' as such is possible, matter being eternal, the solution could be that our Universe is simply the 'latest' phase in an unending succession. This then should mean that the presence of life is a distinct 'marker' in the development of this or any other re-constructed Universe. So, I suggest we are early forms of intelligent life, amongst the first to appear. This, philosophically at least, seems to answer the question we have spent billions pursuing: Where is Intelligent Life? Possibly - as yet - only on Earth. What do you think of these several ideas?
John
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue 25 Sep 2012 9:03 am

Re: Cosmological Reconstruction

Postby barry » Tue 16 Oct 2012 8:33 am

In these days, when we have realised the importance of the rainforests to humanity, we should wonder if the existence of life actually requires two distinct symbiotic life forms. Any theory of the origins of life must accommodate our only example of life on the planets, i.e. two mutually beneficial forms of life. It is clear that the more recent evolution of the two life forms has only been possible because both exist and evolve together. How can two (or more?) life forms begin? do they have to be symbiotic to survive?
barry
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue 24 Apr 2012 5:06 pm

Re: Cosmological Reconstruction

Postby John » Fri 19 Oct 2012 11:44 am

I have posted a brief but comprehensive view on life in the "What is Life" thread. More directly, I believe that for not yet understood, but almost certainly unavoidable reasons, as in so many aspects of evolution, body shape and the separation of the functions of male and female sexes create the special conditions that prove essential in preparing a life form to accept and use those genetic changes that will result in advantageous physical and mental progress. Despite the vigorous and widely variable life forms that have flourished in the rainforests for millions of years, including social groups like monkeys or apes, none except man have been blessed with the initial makeup that can cater for virtually any fortunate genetic advance that may occur. Although the principle of 'use it or lose it' applies, it must already include the physical and mental make up that allows that acceptance - otherwise the 'advance', not finding 'fertile soil', will simply pass on by.
John
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue 25 Sep 2012 9:03 am


Return to SIS Discussion Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests