I was having dinner the other night at Sperry’s, when the waiter sparked conversation over my interest in the universe and my thoughts about it. We talked for a while, and by the time I was getting ready to leave, he suggested I read a book called “Biocentrism” by Robert Lanza. I haven’t finished the book, but here are things that have stuck out to me and my thoughts throughout reading it thus far:
Science cannot explain how consciousness arose from matter. Our current model of how the universe came to be and how the universe works, does not comply with consciousness or the reason for why we fall in love, why we think of nature being beautiful, or anything of that sort. Why do we know so little about consciousness, and why doesn’t modern physics account for this? The book puts it well:
“Our current model simply does not allow for consciousness, and our understanding of this most basic phenomenon of our existence is virtually nil. Interestingly, our present model of physics does not even recognize this as a problem.”
We don’t account for consciousness in our theories and current models. Why is that? It seems as though we haven’t even figured out why we have consciousness and for what reason we feel specific feelings.
Another thought that came to mind whilst reading this book and is important to note: Why does quantum theory work well mathematically but then on the side of logic, doesn’t seem to make any sense? This is a question that I am unable to answer, but it seems as though quantum physicists have made “elaborate theories such as an infinite number of alternate universes” to try to explain how quantum theory logically works, and this is one of the flaws that can be easily observed. What I have noticed from this is that it seems that we make some theory to try to comply with the unknown and what we can’t figure out. We don’t really know what happened 13.7 billion years ago when the universe was apparently created so we make a theory, whether it be educated or not, on how the universe came to be. Every person has their own perception of how the universe was created whether it be the Big Bang, religion, or some idea they created themselves.
The book also makes a good point on the Big Bang and how it happened: “The cosmos (according to recent refinements) sprang out of nothingness 13.7 billion years ago, in a titanic event humorously labeled the Big Bang” and how we “continually tinker with the details, including adding an inflationary period with physics we don’t yet understand, but the existence of which is needed in order to be consistent with our observations.” In other words, as we figure out more or question our current methods and theories, we constantly change details of the Big Bang, whether it be big or little, to accurately coincide with a new observation or discovery. As history has shown, we think we know everything about something, and then a discovery or technological advancement happens and we figure out everything or part of what we previous thought was true is not. People once thought the world was flat. It’s not. People once thought the earth was solely fire, water, earth, and air, but we later figured out that the world consists of others things besides those four.
Law of Physics
Another great question that interested me:
“Why are the laws of physics exactly balanced for animal life to exist?
For example, if the Big Bang had been one-part-in-a-million more powerful, it would have rushed out too fast for the galaxies and life to develop. If the strong nuclear force were decreased 2 percent, atomic nuclei wouldn’t old together, and plain-vanilla hydrogen would be the only kind of atom in the universe. If we decreased gravitational force by just a hair, stars (including the Sun) would not ignite.”
The way we created our law of physics, is to perfectly coincide with the existence of animal life, which in itself seems to be a major flaw. As stated above, if we slightly changed anything from the strong nuclear force to gravitational force, the universe would not be the same. Why is it that it all came out to be so perfect?
My Thoughts On The Universe
The fact that we barely know anything about space and this universe intrigues me, and makes me want to learn more about it. The universe, in my eyes, is one of the things that we still really know nothing about. I really like what Elon Musk is currently doing. He’s trying to get us off the use of hydrocarbons and on to the use of sustainable transport and sustainable energy with Tesla and Solar City. He’s also trying to make rockets reusable with VTOL and further space exploration. He’s also already revolutionized online payments with PayPal. Elon is taking us in the right direction.
Throughout the years it has seemed as though school has no innovation (at least to the schools I have gone to), and the way school is taught it seems as though we are brought up to think that things are the way things are and that we can’t do anything about it. We are given information, theories, or reasons for different subjects, and it seems as though we are just supposed to deal with these theories or notions and not challenge them. I think challenging and going against something is good, and I feel as though coming up with new ideas or theories should be taught more in schools rather than here is the information, remember it and believe it. We should be trying to come up with new ways to explain things rather than just believe in what’s already here. Many ideas and theories that once were thought to be true among the vast majority of the world have been disproved through advancement, and new theories have been created.
This book got me thinking about how and why the universe is the way it is and made me think about many different questions that we have failed to answer. You can get the book here.