Cosmological natural selection also called the fecund universes, is a hypothesis proposed by Lee Smolin intended as a scientific alternative to the anthropic principle. It addresses the problem of complexity in our universe, which is largely unexplained. The hypothesis suggests that a process analog... Read more
Buy The Life of the Cosmos Revised ed. by Smolin, Lee (ISBN: 9780195126648) from Amazon’s Book Store. Everyday low prices and free delivery on eligible orders.
The most full proposal for the mechanism of cosmological natural selection comes from physicist Lee Smolin. Here is the mind-blowing hypothesis that he first outlined in 1992 in his book The Life of the Cosmos.
The Logic and Beauty of Cosmological Natural Selection
I have a prediction. There is a scientific hypothesis, formulated over 20 years ago, that we will one day look back on, when the evidence is in, and say “Of course that was right!
Interesting. I found this video informative but it doesn’t really explain why cells had metabolisms long before they chanced on reproducing themselves. This may be revisited one day and lots of biologists find out they just believed the usual story, rather then used a physicists mindset to allow many possible explanations.
In class this week we learned about two possible explanations for the first left forms on Earth. The two different hypothesizes were Metabolism first and Replication first. We spilt up into groups …
Oh wow, I heard of this but it was poopooed by my biology teacher at school. I think because he thought that if the chances are slim, why not add both slim chances together so there was only 1 problem to solve.
Teachers are not always right, either are biologists, either was Dyson, but I would like to hear why this isn’t accepted as a possibility. Adding the link to this comment so it shows the video in the comments section. Thanks for reminding me about the idea/hypothesis.
Paley’s keystone claim was completely wrong. not sure why people still believe that “There cannot be design without a designer; contrivance, without a contriver; order, without choice; … means suitable to an end, and executing their office in accomplishing that end, without the end ever having been contemplated”
Darwin's greatest discovery: Design without designer
Darwin's greatest contribution to science is that he completed the Copernican Revolution by drawing out for biology the notion of nature as a system of matter in motion governed by natural laws. With Darwin's discovery of natural selection, the origin and adaptations of organisms were brought into t... Read more
Why do men’s testicles hang outside the body? Why does our appendix sometimes explode and kill us? And who does the Designer like better, anyway - us, or sq...
Buy On the Origin of Species: The Illustrated Edition By Charles Darwin. Available in used condition with free delivery in the UK. ISBN: 9781402756399. ISBN-10: 1402756399
Amazon.com: Evolution Impossible: 12 Reasons Why Evolution Cannot Explain the Origin of Life on Earth (Audible Audio Edition): Dr. John F. Ashton, John McLain, Blackstone Audio, Inc.: Audible Audiobooks
Amazon.com: Evolution Impossible: 12 Reasons Why Evolution Cannot Explain the Origin of Life on Earth (Audible Audio Edition): Dr. John F. Ashton, John McLain, Blackstone Audio, Inc.: Audible Audiobooks
It’s hard to overstate just how brilliant and huge an idea Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection was and continues to be. It absolutely rocked Victorian England, to the extent that stuffy old Victorian England could be rocked past people just barely raising their voices in po... Read more
Here’s the best video on the subject, sorry.
read ‘Cosmological natural selection’
Agreed, highly recommended
The most full proposal for the mechanism of cosmological natural selection comes from physicist Lee Smolin. Here is the mind-blowing hypothesis that he first outlined in 1992 in his book The Life of the Cosmos.
No evidence but good arguments. We do still need evidence right? What if that is a quantum factor too, Probably not testable.
The DNA of the universe are the parameters that govern its laws
(3 upvotes)Cosmological Natural Selection
(1 upvotes)Interesting. I found this video informative but it doesn’t really explain why cells had metabolisms long before they chanced on reproducing themselves. This may be revisited one day and lots of biologists find out they just believed the usual story, rather then used a physicists mindset to allow many possible explanations.
This blog article is worth a read. though unstable doesn’t mean impossible.
Oh wow, I heard of this but it was poopooed by my biology teacher at school. I think because he thought that if the chances are slim, why not add both slim chances together so there was only 1 problem to solve.
Teachers are not always right, either are biologists, either was Dyson, but I would like to hear why this isn’t accepted as a possibility. Adding the link to this comment so it shows the video in the comments section. Thanks for reminding me about the idea/hypothesis.
Reproduce, replicate, divide? Either way, making the cell came first, splitting it to make more, must have come later, obviously. Not sure what the problem is? Read this new research paper: https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2021/03/scientists-create-simple-synthetic-cell-grows-and-divides-normally
Evolution may be smarter than we think – but not smarter than God.
Paley’s keystone claim was completely wrong. not sure why people still believe that “There cannot be design without a designer; contrivance, without a contriver; order, without choice; … means suitable to an end, and executing their office in accomplishing that end, without the end ever having been contemplated”
Intelligent design, according to Its believers, is the same as Creationism – therefore, not an answer.
If in doubt. go to the SciShow or CrashCourse… love these guys, what they contributed to was the information revolution, and will never be forgotten.
Rational Religion is a thing. ideas here too.
Quick review for those that don’t get it.
We often get told we shouldn’t comment on the bible unless you have read it. Same goes with the new “Good book” 😉
…tickles me when people say it’s only a “theory”. bad idea.
Such a loaded subject still. Too many people have too much invested in their God.
1 idea, evolution by natural selection – sounds like all the answers are in one place – sound familiar?
Evolution is only true (to you) if your parents didn’t indoctrinate you with ideas about the supernatural. – to me.
Not just Dawkins and his crowd. Lots of people are working hard to reality the deluded. Or turning it to their advantage.
Jury is still out on this idea. Hold your breath.