Can a Living Creature Be as Big as a Galaxy? • Hacker News Board

Re: Can a Living Creature Be as Big as a Galaxy?

#21

Post by dwaltrip » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 5:46 PM UTC

bitL wrote: post #18

banachtarski wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We do. If you bothered to read the article, it makes a point that the communication speed between the components would be slow enough (even at light speed signaling) that the age of the universe would not have permitted sufficient time for such an organism to evolve and do anything.

Universe is full of particles with quantum entanglement; those can be your "immediate" messengers of information. But anyway, there are way too many assumptions in your objections about the character of such life and its requirements, as well as in the article itself. We still don't know the fabrics of the Universe, just some rough approximations in certain areas with known confidence; there likely are many surprises…

As I understand it, quantum entanglement doesn't allow for affecting causality faster than the speed of light. So that doesn't solve the problem.

Your comment doesn't really give accurate credit to the current state of knowledge.

Re: Can a Living Creature Be as Big as a Galaxy?

#22

Post by bitL » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 5:49 PM UTC

dwaltrip wrote: post #21

bitL wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Universe is full of particles with quantum entanglement; those can be your "immediate" messengers of information. But anyway, there are way too many assumptions in your objections about the character of such life and its requirements, as well as in the article itself. We still don't know the fabrics of the Universe, just some rough approximations in certain areas with known confidence; there likely are many surprises…

As I understand it, quantum entanglement doesn't allow for affecting causality faster than the speed of light. So that doesn't solve the problem. Your comment doesn't really give accurate credit to the current state of knowledge.

Yeah, it was kinda stupid in this context; I meant to show that some actions are happening "immediately" even across huge distances and not that we need to wait for e.g. gravitational waves to move at the speed of light. Not that we can actually utilize this for conveying information immediately.

Re: Can a Living Creature Be as Big as a Galaxy?

#23

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 5:49 PM UTC

bitL wrote: post #18

banachtarski wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We do. If you bothered to read the article, it makes a point that the communication speed between the components would be slow enough (even at light speed signaling) that the age of the universe would not have permitted sufficient time for such an organism to evolve and do anything.

Universe is full of particles with quantum entanglement; those can be your "immediate" messengers of information. But anyway, there are way too many assumptions in your objections about the character of such life and its requirements, as well as in the article itself. We still don't know the fabrics of the Universe, just some rough approximations in certain areas with known confidence; there likely are many surprises…

[deleted]

Re: Can a Living Creature Be as Big as a Galaxy?

#24

Post by samstave » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 5:50 PM UTC

dwaltrip wrote: post #21

bitL wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Universe is full of particles with quantum entanglement; those can be your "immediate" messengers of information. But anyway, there are way too many assumptions in your objections about the character of such life and its requirements, as well as in the article itself. We still don't know the fabrics of the Universe, just some rough approximations in certain areas with known confidence; there likely are many surprises…

As I understand it, quantum entanglement doesn't allow for affecting causality faster than the speed of light. So that doesn't solve the problem. Your comment doesn't really give accurate credit to the current state of knowledge.

What if quantum entanglement is simple an indicator that there is another way to send information - but we haven't discovered that function of that mechanism to do so yet?

Re: Can a Living Creature Be as Big as a Galaxy?

#25

Post by neom » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 5:50 PM UTC

devoply wrote: post #4

This article does not take into account quantum phenomenon. It's possible that instead of being limited by the speed of light transmissions, such a system uses quantum phenomenon for communication. Which then would make the whole argument that this article makes invalid. It's based on the premise that life would be based on the same sort of physics as life on Earth... which does not make sense as such life if it exis…

I've thought about this a bunch also. Once you start to think about say, the outside of the outside of a pilot wave...or the determination of the resonance of a string... I don't think it's fair to say the article is invalid, but it doesn't account for a lot of the more fringe areas of quantum mechanics for sure. I'm surprised you're getting downvoted.

Re: Can a Living Creature Be as Big as a Galaxy?

#26

Post by dwaltrip » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 5:50 PM UTC

paradite wrote: post #14

banachtarski wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We do. If you bothered to read the article, it makes a point that the communication speed between the components would be slow enough (even at light speed signaling) that the age of the universe would not have permitted sufficient time for such an organism to evolve and do anything.

Well, maybe the age of universe is indeed "too short" for it to do anything useful yet? Your argument seems to be supporting the idea that the universe is like a baby who is still too young to do anything.

Or that it might not be useful to conceptualize the entire universe as a single biological organism.

Re: Can a Living Creature Be as Big as a Galaxy?

#27

Post by paradite » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 5:52 PM UTC

axiom92 wrote: post #19

devoply wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's funny with all the downvotes, first I never said that anything violated the laws of physics, I said that they don't follow the physics as life on earth. Second, there are many downvotes, but no actual evidence of what I said being wrong. I feel as if I am arguing with self-reassured people.

The burden of proof lies on you, not 'them'. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot

The same analogy can be applied in reverse.

The article here is the one that is making an unfalsifiable claim that "a living creature cannot be as big as a galaxy", but offers no definitive proof of nonexistence of such creative.

Re: Can a Living Creature Be as Big as a Galaxy?

#28

Post by dwaltrip » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 5:52 PM UTC

samstave wrote: post #24

dwaltrip wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I understand it, quantum entanglement doesn't allow for affecting causality faster than the speed of light. So that doesn't solve the problem. Your comment doesn't really give accurate credit to the current state of knowledge.

What if quantum entanglement is simple an indicator that there is another way to send information - but we haven't discovered that function of that mechanism to do so yet?

It's a fun idea. I'm not sure if there is any reason to think that quantum entanglement actually indicates this. I haven't heard anything like that before, and it doesn't seem like a small leap of logic, so I would guess not. But I'm also not a physicist.

Re: Can a Living Creature Be as Big as a Galaxy?

#29

Post by baron816 » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 5:58 PM UTC

Challenge accepted

Re: Can a Living Creature Be as Big as a Galaxy?

#30

Post by SAI_Peregrinus » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 5:59 PM UTC

devoply wrote: post #16

Retra wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All communication relies on quantum phenomenon. The universe is a big mess of quantum phenomenon. It's not magic that lets you violate the laws of physics, it is the laws of physics.

It's funny with all the downvotes, first I never said that anything violated the laws of physics, I said that they don't follow the physics as life on earth. Second, there are many downvotes, but no actual evidence of what I said being wrong. I feel as if I am arguing with self-reassured people.

Non-locality doesn't allow FTL communication. Our universe seems to obey the same laws of physics everywhere. We can speculate all day about other universes, but there's no evidence we'd ever reach them even if they do exist. If you want to figure out what things are likely you have to start with what's possible.