That's very valid. One could also argue that it described the birth of the electromagnetic force itself at the beginning of the Quark Epoch and thusly the fundamental forces as we know them; the universe is now shaped by four fundamental forces: gravity, the weak nuclear force, the strong nuclear force, and electromagnetism. During the Planck Epoch they were unified as one grand force but as average energy distribution level decreased it splintered.
First gravity splintered from the unified force. The remainder was then called the electrostrong force. Then the strong nuclear force splintered from this, rendering the remainder the electroweak force. Finally this split so as to form the weak nuclear force and electromagnetism. There were then the four forces we obey today. All of this happened in just 10 to the negative 12th power of a second after the beginning of the Big Bang.
The birth of electromagnetism marked the beginning of the Quark Epoch. As the photon is the gauge boson force carrier of electromagnetism, the familiar universe did in a sense begin with light, but we're both likely giving a bit too much credit to a guy who doesn't exist and scarcely got anything else right in his entire book.
Still, it's really difficult to choose a side. On one hand we have mathematics, physics, supportive data, and evidence, but on the other hand we have talking snakes, fruit that makes you evil, contradictions, and a magic sky man who had people kill his son so he could... forgive them. Obviously is this a very even playing field in terms of logic and there's absolutely nothing depressing about the fact that this is even a debate in 2021. It's very understandable that the species that created computers and walked on the moon struggles with this very difficult call. Determining whether or not snakes can talk is definitely right up there with our attempts to unify gravity with quantum mechanics and obtain the so-called "theory of everything". In other words, that quest and the one to determine whether or not snakes talk are equally daunting tasks, perhaps beyond the ability of the human brain; we may have to develop a sup-human intelligence via an artificially intelligent quantum computer to figure out if snakes can talk. This is next-level shit, maybe even the level after the next level.
I'm fairly fascinated by abiogenesis. Despite its currently elusive nature, I suspect that abiogenesis is common, perhaps even moreso than panspermia; experiments such as the Miller-Urey experiment suggest that, just as chemistry is a natural manifestation of physics, biology is a natural manifestation of chemistry rather than a freakish accident.
It's also worth noting that there are likely heaps of biology variants. The progression of science is like a tree and thusly branches out. While there are different areas of mathematics, it's one coding language, the only one possible. Physics is like an operating system. Our universe uses a particular operating system, but any OS that can be described by mathematics likely exists and most of us now indeed suspect that there's actually a multiverse containing other universes with different laws of physics that are nonetheless explainable by mathematics. In fact, some people even suspect that the discrepancy between the apparent mass of galaxies and their apparent behavior isn't resolved by dark matter or modified gravity but by other universes or "OSs" subtly affecting our universe merely by being in the same multiverse or "stored on the same physical drive".
Within our set of physics, the rules in turn give rise to multiple types of chemistry, one happening to be familiar biochemistry. It only logically follows that tradition doesn't end here and that a myriad of biologies exist as well. Non-carbon-based biochemistries seem like they could work, especially those of silicon. Sagan referred to limiting the search for extraterrestrial life to Earth-like conditions as "carbon chauvinism".
Even more likely (almost incontrovertibly even), alternative-chirality biomolecules of even our familiar system should work. Terrestrial life virtually always uses L-form amino acids and D-form sugars, but there's virtually no reason to suspect that an anti-chiral system using D-form amino acids and L-form sugars wouldn't work. It would manifest as a macroscopically identical, microscopically mirrored biology that was incompatible with ours despite appearance. It's a matter of stereochemistry.
Regardless of chirality and choice of atom, it's suspected that non-water solvents could foster life. It's also suspected that just as plants are green so as to optimize photosynthetic compatibility with our star and distance therefrom, yellow and red plant-like organisms may be incredibly common so as to make the most of varying stellar situations.
Going incredibly far from familiar life, it's even possible that dust particles suspended in plasma could lead to systems technically fitting some definitions of life. In fact, computer simulations showed such particles self-organizing into microscopic helical structures! Sound familiar?
More mind-blowing still, deep inside stars, monopole particles threaded on cosmic strings provide both a mechanism to encode information and to reproduce. Perhaps the most alien form of life I've described, it also very well may be the simplest and most common form of life in the universe.
At any rate, I'll definitely check that group out. Thanks for the suggestion.
Btw, I agree with you on the "even playing field". The magic sky man, talking snakes, fruit causing evil have competed for head space against 72 virgins in paradise, and other outrageous calls for mindless followers for over 20 centuries. After 100 generations or so, irrational persuasion becomes tuned by the Darwinian selection of ideas. Exploitation of primitive human impulses and insecurities is optimized by exactly the right amount of emotional shock and awe. And, I suspect that the same irrationality is being simulated by AI in the advertising industry to mimic the success of religious indoctrination.
I took a class in string theory not long ago. The quark epoch has some cool math associated with it; good topic for future discussion.
I hope it didn't go beneath the radar that the entire fourth paragraph was relentless sarcasm. I find it ridiculous that people seriously consider such things now and I consider it all a more or less closed case.
I would think that fervent followers of the magic sky man would be as completely oblivious to the sarcasm, as they are to the inanity of religion. These people lack the intelligence to even survive an ice age like our ancestors did 10,000 years ago. In the last century, every decade has seen the bell curve for IQ skew further to the right. Honestly, it's sad.
Is it wrong that I think evolution denyers are absolute tools?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
That's very valid. One could also argue that it described the birth of the electromagnetic force itself at the beginning of the Quark Epoch and thusly the fundamental forces as we know them; the universe is now shaped by four fundamental forces: gravity, the weak nuclear force, the strong nuclear force, and electromagnetism. During the Planck Epoch they were unified as one grand force but as average energy distribution level decreased it splintered.
First gravity splintered from the unified force. The remainder was then called the electrostrong force. Then the strong nuclear force splintered from this, rendering the remainder the electroweak force. Finally this split so as to form the weak nuclear force and electromagnetism. There were then the four forces we obey today. All of this happened in just 10 to the negative 12th power of a second after the beginning of the Big Bang.
The birth of electromagnetism marked the beginning of the Quark Epoch. As the photon is the gauge boson force carrier of electromagnetism, the familiar universe did in a sense begin with light, but we're both likely giving a bit too much credit to a guy who doesn't exist and scarcely got anything else right in his entire book.
Still, it's really difficult to choose a side. On one hand we have mathematics, physics, supportive data, and evidence, but on the other hand we have talking snakes, fruit that makes you evil, contradictions, and a magic sky man who had people kill his son so he could... forgive them. Obviously is this a very even playing field in terms of logic and there's absolutely nothing depressing about the fact that this is even a debate in 2021. It's very understandable that the species that created computers and walked on the moon struggles with this very difficult call. Determining whether or not snakes can talk is definitely right up there with our attempts to unify gravity with quantum mechanics and obtain the so-called "theory of everything". In other words, that quest and the one to determine whether or not snakes talk are equally daunting tasks, perhaps beyond the ability of the human brain; we may have to develop a sup-human intelligence via an artificially intelligent quantum computer to figure out if snakes can talk. This is next-level shit, maybe even the level after the next level.
I'm fairly fascinated by abiogenesis. Despite its currently elusive nature, I suspect that abiogenesis is common, perhaps even moreso than panspermia; experiments such as the Miller-Urey experiment suggest that, just as chemistry is a natural manifestation of physics, biology is a natural manifestation of chemistry rather than a freakish accident.
It's also worth noting that there are likely heaps of biology variants. The progression of science is like a tree and thusly branches out. While there are different areas of mathematics, it's one coding language, the only one possible. Physics is like an operating system. Our universe uses a particular operating system, but any OS that can be described by mathematics likely exists and most of us now indeed suspect that there's actually a multiverse containing other universes with different laws of physics that are nonetheless explainable by mathematics. In fact, some people even suspect that the discrepancy between the apparent mass of galaxies and their apparent behavior isn't resolved by dark matter or modified gravity but by other universes or "OSs" subtly affecting our universe merely by being in the same multiverse or "stored on the same physical drive".
Within our set of physics, the rules in turn give rise to multiple types of chemistry, one happening to be familiar biochemistry. It only logically follows that tradition doesn't end here and that a myriad of biologies exist as well. Non-carbon-based biochemistries seem like they could work, especially those of silicon. Sagan referred to limiting the search for extraterrestrial life to Earth-like conditions as "carbon chauvinism".
Even more likely (almost incontrovertibly even), alternative-chirality biomolecules of even our familiar system should work. Terrestrial life virtually always uses L-form amino acids and D-form sugars, but there's virtually no reason to suspect that an anti-chiral system using D-form amino acids and L-form sugars wouldn't work. It would manifest as a macroscopically identical, microscopically mirrored biology that was incompatible with ours despite appearance. It's a matter of stereochemistry.
Regardless of chirality and choice of atom, it's suspected that non-water solvents could foster life. It's also suspected that just as plants are green so as to optimize photosynthetic compatibility with our star and distance therefrom, yellow and red plant-like organisms may be incredibly common so as to make the most of varying stellar situations.
Going incredibly far from familiar life, it's even possible that dust particles suspended in plasma could lead to systems technically fitting some definitions of life. In fact, computer simulations showed such particles self-organizing into microscopic helical structures! Sound familiar?
More mind-blowing still, deep inside stars, monopole particles threaded on cosmic strings provide both a mechanism to encode information and to reproduce. Perhaps the most alien form of life I've described, it also very well may be the simplest and most common form of life in the universe.
At any rate, I'll definitely check that group out. Thanks for the suggestion.
--
dude_Jones
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
No problem; I think you'll enjoy the group.
Btw, I agree with you on the "even playing field". The magic sky man, talking snakes, fruit causing evil have competed for head space against 72 virgins in paradise, and other outrageous calls for mindless followers for over 20 centuries. After 100 generations or so, irrational persuasion becomes tuned by the Darwinian selection of ideas. Exploitation of primitive human impulses and insecurities is optimized by exactly the right amount of emotional shock and awe. And, I suspect that the same irrationality is being simulated by AI in the advertising industry to mimic the success of religious indoctrination.
I took a class in string theory not long ago. The quark epoch has some cool math associated with it; good topic for future discussion.
Peace out.
--
S0UNDS_WEIRD
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
I hope it didn't go beneath the radar that the entire fourth paragraph was relentless sarcasm. I find it ridiculous that people seriously consider such things now and I consider it all a more or less closed case.
--
dude_Jones
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
I would think that fervent followers of the magic sky man would be as completely oblivious to the sarcasm, as they are to the inanity of religion. These people lack the intelligence to even survive an ice age like our ancestors did 10,000 years ago. In the last century, every decade has seen the bell curve for IQ skew further to the right. Honestly, it's sad.