Live data from Hacker News

Why Earth's History Appears So Miraculous

theatlantic.com

41–50 of 61 posts

Re: Why Earth's History Appears So Miraculous

#41
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many worlds is an interpretation of quantum uncertainly, but what we seem to be talking about here are multiverse theories. One of these, M-Theory is an extension of string theory and is the only theory known to elegantly unify quantum mechanics with general relativity's gravitational force in a mathematically consistent way. It’s not supported by experimental evidence yet, but I’d hardly characterise it as no differ…

Actually, I _am_ referring to 'many worlds' (at least according to the technical explanation in this article: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2011/05/26/... ) and not a multiverse. And yes, there is some hope that there will be some testable empirical evidence at some point, but if in the end it turns out that there are not 'many worlds', then I don't see that big a difference. I'd love it if there w…

Really your arguments work equally well for any multiverse theory, be it quantum or cosmological or mathematical.

Re: Why Earth's History Appears So Miraculous

#42
post #32
post #12

It brings to mind the sentient mud puddle. If a mud puddle were sentient, it might marvel at how the mud around it was so perfectly shaped so as to exactly match the shape of the water the puddle was made up of. Amazing. Unbelievable. Couldn't be a coincidence, that there's such a perfect fit. What are the chances that this unique shape of the water outline would be matched exactly by the shape of the mud around it.…

The anthropic principle doesn't make our universe any less surprising. It's like saying "of course I survived that catastrophic accident, otherwise I wouldn't be observing the fact I survived the accident."

I'll leave this old comment of mine here, since it's relevant:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10070140

Re: Why Earth's History Appears So Miraculous

#43

Makes me think about the Fermi paradox [1] and Great Filters [2]. But for all we know the universe could be full of life at chimpanzee intelligence; no way to know unless we send probes [3] or seriously up our telescopes [4]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Filter [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakthrough_Starshot [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FOCAL_(sp…

The Fermi paradox is unlikely to be answered by something making it very unlikely for our chimp level ancestors jumping to human level. The number of Homo species on the planet that co-evolved to human level intelligence suggests this is not extremely difficult. What is a huge filter is the requirement of a stable climate over million of years. The key to this is the Moon which keeps the Earth's axis of rotation from…

Why is the moon so unlikely when many planets in the solar system have 1 moon or more.

Re: Why Earth's History Appears So Miraculous

#44

Makes me think about the Fermi paradox [1] and Great Filters [2]. But for all we know the universe could be full of life at chimpanzee intelligence; no way to know unless we send probes [3] or seriously up our telescopes [4]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Filter [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakthrough_Starshot [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FOCAL_(sp…

The Fermi paradox is unlikely to be answered by something making it very unlikely for our chimp level ancestors jumping to human level. The number of Homo species on the planet that co-evolved to human level intelligence suggests this is not extremely difficult. What is a huge filter is the requirement of a stable climate over million of years. The key to this is the Moon which keeps the Earth's axis of rotation from…

>>"[..] Homo species on the planet that co-evolved to human level intelligence [..]"

Can you elaborate on this? I'm a little at lost about what you mean.

Re: Why Earth's History Appears So Miraculous

#45
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Fermi paradox is unlikely to be answered by something making it very unlikely for our chimp level ancestors jumping to human level. The number of Homo species on the planet that co-evolved to human level intelligence suggests this is not extremely difficult. What is a huge filter is the requirement of a stable climate over million of years. The key to this is the Moon which keeps the Earth's axis of rotation from…

Why is the moon so unlikely when many planets in the solar system have 1 moon or more.

The Moon is very large compared to the Earth - I have seen the Earth/Moon described as a double planet. How it formed (most likely a collision) is very, very unlikely.

All the other moons in the solar system are nowhere near large enough to stabilise the planet's axis of rotation.

Re: Why Earth's History Appears So Miraculous

#46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Fermi paradox is unlikely to be answered by something making it very unlikely for our chimp level ancestors jumping to human level. The number of Homo species on the planet that co-evolved to human level intelligence suggests this is not extremely difficult. What is a huge filter is the requirement of a stable climate over million of years. The key to this is the Moon which keeps the Earth's axis of rotation from…

>>"[..] Homo species on the planet that co-evolved to human level intelligence [..]" Can you elaborate on this? I'm a little at lost about what you mean.

There were at least two other Homo species that co-evolved to human level intelligence separate from the one that arose in sub-Sahran Africa. The reason we know this because at least two inbred with the African Homo sapiens; Homo neanderthalensis and Homo “Desnisovan” [0].

0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaic_human_admixture_with_m...

Re: Why Earth's History Appears So Miraculous

#47

Makes me think about the Fermi paradox [1] and Great Filters [2]. But for all we know the universe could be full of life at chimpanzee intelligence; no way to know unless we send probes [3] or seriously up our telescopes [4]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Filter [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakthrough_Starshot [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FOCAL_(sp…

This is one is my favorite comments of all time, simply because while I was familiar with the Fermi Paradox, the rest of the links were new and unexpected. Thank you!

Learning about the great filter can cause depression, reader beware.

Re: Why Earth's History Appears So Miraculous

#48
post #35
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The anthropic principle doesn't make our universe any less surprising. It's like saying "of course I survived that catastrophic accident, otherwise I wouldn't be observing the fact I survived the accident."

The difference is that we have a decent amount of information on the number of catastrophic accidents that occur and the number of people who survive them. Since that number is known to be low, there’s nothing unsurprising about your own survival of such an accident. But we don’t know the number of times life has emerged in the universe, except that it is at least 1. Every intelligent life form we are aware of are on…

Perhaps, but the anthropic principle itself is an invalid argument.

Re: Why Earth's History Appears So Miraculous

#49
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The anthropic principle doesn't make our universe any less surprising. It's like saying "of course I survived that catastrophic accident, otherwise I wouldn't be observing the fact I survived the accident."

I'll leave this old comment of mine here, since it's relevant: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10070140

WLC is good at pointing out fallacies.

Re: Why Earth's History Appears So Miraculous

#50
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is the moon so unlikely when many planets in the solar system have 1 moon or more.

The Moon is very large compared to the Earth - I have seen the Earth/Moon described as a double planet. How it formed (most likely a collision) is very, very unlikely. All the other moons in the solar system are nowhere near large enough to stabilise the planet's axis of rotation.

The Moon also has the same rotation and revolution time, so that it always shows the same face to us. I've always wondered if having different rotation and revolution times could have helped humankind to consider the existence of spherical planets a lot before, hence helping progress.
Post reply on HN