Roger Penrose on a purpose of the Universe

 Penrose has today been awarded with a half Nobel prize in Physics. 

He was the first to predict that Einstein's general theory of relativity predicts black holes. (the  other  half of the price goes to the ones who discovered what must be a black hole in the middle of our galaxy).  


Penrose describes himself as an atheist but; 

In the film A Brief History of Time, he said, "I think I would say that the universe has a purpose, it's not somehow just there by chance ... some people, I think, take the view that the universe is just there and it runs along – it's a bit like it just sort of computes, and we happen somehow by accident to find ourselves in this thing. But I don't think that's a very fruitful or helpful way of looking at the universe, I think that there is something much deeper about it."[ He went on to explain that he believed our universe would end in a Big Crunch, a scenario cosmology has since found to be unlikely. Penrose's model regarding the ultimate fate of the universe is called Conformal Cyclic Cosmology - CCC. It refers to the expansion of the universe, not a Big Crunch. (from Wikipedia) 

2010 Roger Penrose advanced a general relativity based theory which he calls the "conformal cyclic cosmology”. The theory explains that the universe will expand until all matter decays and is ultimately turned to light. Since nothing in the universe would have any time or distance scale associated with it, it becomes identical with the Big Bang, in turn resulting in a type of Big Crunch which becomes the next big bang, thus perpetuating the next cycle. (from Wikipedia) 

So what have we here? 

Well the CCC is not confirmed and will maybe never have evidence in form of mathematics or observations. 

But as what is said about life on other planets, it's an o interesting hypothesis that we, or I, can speculate about.

What science says now about the end of our universe and end of time is quite boring and pessimistic; it will end in an eternal silence and in lack of everything, even the tiniest particle. Time is gone, because nothing is left to do mess with - see entropy...

(of course messy people like me are gone too... ;~}

Common science predict that this is the end of everything, but Penrose means that nothing and total order is the same state as before the Big Bang. So why not a new Bing Bang after the big silence?! 

Not a Big Crunch that may have the same result, but another cause. 

So why care, as our  old Universe will anyway disappear in a far future?

Please note; the "death" of the universe is so far so it's nearly impossible to imagine, and no one knows exactly when or what will happen then - though science seem to be clear that our sun will die long before that - and even that timeline is hard to get a grip of...

 Well, if we look at our Universe like an organism or a colossal plant, and not like machine, we can imagine Her like a mother, having children in her old days, sacrificing herself för a new generation. 

And some of her wisdom may be passed to the new universe, like the DNA i ourselves... 

Maybe the mistakes we humans have maked will not be repeated. 

Maybe the kind of lessons we have no with the Corona will have to come again....

Anyway, if the Universe has a purpose, like Penrose thinks, there is room for a lot of new stories to be told. 

And the experiences we make in our time, may not be made in vain. 


Great Mother Goddess
You who was there before all time
Arise from the watery abyss
From whence all life was created
Come to me, Ancient Mother
Teach me the ebb and flow of life
Help me understand that for things to be reborn,
they first must die
Show me the inner strength and gifts that lay inside
as my modern world engulfs me
Help me to remain connected to what is really important
Remind me of the messages in the wind
Great Mother Goddess
Nameless one but not forgotten
Let me honour you.
- Aset Moon



Overspill :Penrose tried To explain why there was an universe before ours and Will be One after it:https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ypjZF6Pdrws 












 




 


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Cora Diamond on eating animals - with the help of Wittgenstein´s ideas

Image
Cora Diamond is a new name for me, even if she has worked as a professor in Philosophy in the states for a long time and is still  teaching at the university of Virginia, even she is over 80 years old. She has written a lot about Wittgenstein and that has helped her to express her view of the topic. Although she, like Wittgenstein,  has lived in a hut in Norway - and actually brought Tractatus with hes - she seems to be different and for sure more glad than W. Anyways, its W: s writings that interests her and especially his critics of metaphysics and ethics in philosophy. As it is said in Tractacus  : " Whereof one  cannot speak , thereof one must be silent." And of ethics philosophy should not speak - why? Is it like in Buddhism - its better to sit in silence and let know yourself, than to speculate about what will happen when we die? But for sure there ethical guidelines in Buddhism,  but the behaviors is often named skilful, not good (or bad). Another
Read more

I think, therefore I am NOT

Image
So Descartes was wrong. He said that he could doubt everything about himself except that he was thinking. That proved that he existed. The word "I" is the central point here. What does it mean? Perhaps we are sure that we know the answer. Is it the thoughts? In that case - where are you when you aren't thinking? Is it your job, your title? In that case - what happens if you loose your job or change job? Is it your house, your nation? Under my course to be a mindfulness instructor, the teacher, Ola Schenström, made us ask to each other; "Who are you?" After each answer the question was repeated by the questioner.We soon discovered that there were no end to the answers - or maybe an adequate end could be; "I don't know."Or maybe; "It seems I have no essence." Other thinkers have come to the same conclusions; Buddha, Sartre and more recently Damasio and Parfit. Sartre, for instance, has said that we are the sum of our actions. We ha
Read more

Wittgenstein and Buddha -buddies?

Image
Ludwig Wittgenstein, the famous philosopher, reflected in the posthumously published  book "Philosophical Investigations" about the picture above; Is it a hare or duck?  He meant that we make, or must make, a statement what it is. And I suppose he meant that we often or always has to interpret the world around us. But two different interpretations can both be right! Language and thoughts controls what we see.....   You can compare with the picture of a glass. Half empty or half empty?  Who decides? Yes, it's you... And whatever you say is right.  But you can be aware of what you think. That can say more of yourself than of the glass....  You can be aware of that you always do interpretations of things that happens.  If you have a pessimistic or a naive point of view, you can be aware of the view and your statements.  Buddha and Wittgenstein were both aware of that different persons uses different perspectives.  But Buddha spoke about the "right 
Read more