Voyage of the Stars

There is no doubt that if there is no life, then the universe will eventually move towards chaos and death in a cold and terrible way as described by the second law of thermodynamics.

Of course, there are loopholes in using only the second law of thermodynamics to predict the end of the universe. In his opinion, Gander pointed out that people have long been blinded by the second law of thermodynamics.

In fact, from the beginning of the universe to the present, the entire universe has been an evolutionary process from balance to imbalance, from no structure to structure, and from chaos to order.

First of all, Gander pointed out that in fact, the early universe after the Big Bang was in an extremely hot state and was a "fireball" with a uniform temperature. Because entropy is equal to the transferred heat energy divided by the temperature, the universe at this time is exactly what the second law of thermodynamics says, and it is in an extremely disordered thermal equilibrium state with maximum entropy value.

After that, the balance of the universe was broken, and then it slowly moved toward order, thus continuously creating more and more orderly, advanced, and complex things and structures, such as quarks, protons and neutrons, atoms and molecules, planets, nebulae, and galaxies. and the gorgeous large-scale structure of the universe.

It is in this highly ordered universe that intelligent life can be born.

As for why it is said that intelligent life is the universe saving itself, that is because intelligent life was born in such a background. It will naturally think that the universe with this background is the most beautiful and harmonious, and it is also the most comfortable environment for intelligent life to survive.

So, one day, intelligent life will find that the universe in which it lives will eventually move towards the death of nothingness, and everything will eventually end in nothingness. So what will happen to intelligent life?

Is it appointed to die with the universe? Or escaping reality and trying not to think about the ending of the universe? Or try your best to save the universe through your own efforts?

If nothing else is taken into account, the answer is probably all three.

But Gander told everyone in his discussion that the answer is that intelligent life will eventually work hard to save the universe.

As a scientist, Gander would naturally not say anything out of nowhere.

The view he gave in his paper was: genetic instinct and intelligence.

The first is genes. Human beings now know that genes are the source code of life, and the instinct of genes is to continue. In order to continue themselves, they show an extremely selfish side.

The book "The Selfish Gene" discusses this point very well. The book even goes to the extreme point that our lives are just carriers of genes, and our behaviors and decisions are controlled by genes. The nature of selfishness is profound. In genes, whether human or animal.

In this book, the love that people admire is just the product of behavior controlled by genetic instinct. The continuation of future generations is the result of genes unwilling to die together with the short life of the previous generation. From another perspective, because genes must be continued by any means necessary, genes manifest themselves as stronger impulses in males.

After mating, females often need to spend more time taking care of their offspring, so they become larger to males and are less likely to betray them. On the contrary, males are more likely to abandon females to find other females in order to spread more widely. their genes.

From the perspective of genetic continuation, this is the three-hole strategy of genetic continuation.

So what does this have to do with saving the universe?

Of course, the instinct to continue genes will make the individual life carrying them work hard to survive, and the instinct shown is greed for life and fear of death.

In this case, genes naturally do not want to die as the universe returns to ruins. Of course, genetic instinct alone is not enough. It only provides a driving force.

When the organisms carrying genes have intelligence and are intelligent organisms, this continuation will reach a higher level and become the continuation of civilization. If it gets any crazier, it becomes continuing civilization at all costs.

Of course. "Civilization" is not created solely by genetic instinct, but also by wisdom.

Intelligence and genetic instinct are interdependent and at war with each other.

Among the intelligent life that forms a 'civilization', when "wisdom" cannot defeat "genetic instinct", then it is difficult for individuals of this "civilization" to live forever. At this time, the characteristics expressed in this "civilization" are that they will carry All the information of this "civilization" of intelligent life is continued from generation to generation as much as possible.

And when wisdom obtains the continuation of defeating the most primitive genetic instinct, this intelligent life individual will obtain eternal life. At this time, it will be manifested in the "civilization" composed of these intelligent life individuals, and it will continue to exist.

Because there is an "eternal existence" hidden in the wisdom self.

Therefore, the intelligent life that has evolved in the universe, whether genes or intelligence prevail in the end, will eventually find a way to survive, so they will not sit back and watch the end of the universe and ignore it.

Of course, this alone is not enough. After all, intelligent life is too small for the universe. Even if civilizations develop one after another, they are just big ants. It is not enough to save the universe, and it may even become the culprit of accelerating the destruction of the universe.

Therefore, the mysterious evolution of the universe has given intelligent life some inexplicable but reasonable "materials", such as seeking knowledge, curiosity, and imagination.

The vast universe, with its bright stars, is deep and mysterious. When intelligent life looked up at the stars for the first time, the curiosity deep in wisdom had already set sail for knowledge.

Under the combined action of various driving forces, one intelligent life has ignited the desire to explore, and among them, there may be a civilization that can develop to the point of saving the universe from extinction.

Gander's views published on the Human Science Network provide mankind with a new perspective. In this perspective, all intelligent life, including humans, has the potential to become the savior of the universe.

Although it is just his family's words, it puts human beings in a glorious image, thereby gradually forming some lofty ideals in people's minds to a certain extent.

Perhaps, this ideal will trigger the lofty goals of some human individuals, thereby causing some transformation and sublimation of the entire human race at the ideological level.

Of course, this effect cannot be instantaneous, but a long and subtle process.

Well, actually not all human scientists accept Gander’s point of view. After Gander published this theory of cosmic evolution, a large group of scientists from all walks of life scorned it and formed groups to find loopholes in this view.

These scientists believe that the emergence and evolution of life are a series of common results of natural laws, just one possibility among countless possibilities, rather than an inevitable result of the evolution of the universe.

They pointed out that the original starting point of this article was wrong, just like biological evolution should be changed to biological evolution. Using the word "evolution" is very inaccurate and wrong. Evolution should be used.

Some of these scientists pointed out that Gander's view intentionally or unintentionally compared the universe to a willful being, which is unacceptable.

With the publication of Gander's article, human scientists were like a stone that started a thousand waves, and suddenly became lively, and meetings in the scientific community became more frequent.

For a time, scientists were divided into two groups, one supporting Gander's view and the other opposing it. The two views bickered at scientific seminars one after another.