"Will Intelligence Rule the Universe?"

Source: http://www.podcastin...x.html/view.htm

Will Intelligence Rule the Universe?
Are thinking beings like ourselves merely bit players in the enormous drama of the cosmos? Or is intelligence destined to become something vastly more important: the architect of this universe, and of other universes to come? That’s the thesis put forward by James Gardner in his book, Biocosm. Gardner argues that intelligence is more than simply a smudge of clever biology that accidentally arises here and there. Rather, intelligence is destined to thoroughly control the cosmos, and engineer the “baby universes” it will produce. Provocative metaphysics? You bet. But Gardner has dared to take on the biggest of ideas. Join us as we consider whether the universe could simply be an oversized playpen for the rearing of intelligent beings. Guest: James Gardner, author of Biocosm.

Podcast:
Stream: http://www.podcastin...WA_05-01-09.mp3
(approx. 1 hour in length)

Source: http://www.biocosm.org/

Why is the universe bio-friendly? Bioastronomy, once an intriguing and speculative sideline, has become a major focus for cosmologists. James N. Gardner presents a startling hypothesis for how our apparently bio-friendly universe began and what its ultimate destiny will be. Originally presented in peer-reviewed scientific journals, his radical “Selfish Biocosm” hypothesis proposes that life and intelligence have not emerged in a series of Darwinian accidents but are essentially hardwired into the cycle of cosmic creation, evolution, death, and rebirth. He argues that the destiny of highly evolved intelligence (perhaps our distant progeny) is to infuse the entire universe with life, eventually to accomplish the ultimate feat of cosmic reproduction by spawning one or more “baby universes,” which will themselves be endowed with life generating properties. In this explanation of the role of life in the cosmos, Gardner presents an eloquent and lucid synthesis of the most recent advances in physics, cosmology, biology, biochemistry, astronomy, and complexity theory. These disciplines increasingly find themselves approaching the frontier of what was once the exclusive province of philosophers and theologians. Gardner’s Selfish Biocosm hypothesis challenges both Darwinists and advocates of intelligent design, and forces us to reconsider how we ourselves are shaping the future of life and the cosmos.

Reader's note: The author emphasizes that he is presenting an entirely naturalistic hypothesis, he is not advocating theism or intelligent design as we're familiar with it. His work is of interest and possible relevance to this community in so far as it relies on (predicts) the emergence of greater-than-human intelligence as reproductive means for this universe to create baby universes. Gardner also mentions Kurzweil's predictions, if they come to fruition, as tentative support for his hypothesis.

I'm not certain, but it does sound as if he's describing a multiversal meta-evolutionary process.

I will have to take a look at the podcast, Cosmos. Funny, here I was thinking I had come up with some original speculations, but it seems as if Gardner has already seriously contributed to this line of thought...

As is often the case, new ideas can have a long history before particular proponents come to public prominence. The idea of Earth life spreading through the cosmos ("Greening of the Galaxy") is a least a century old. The corollary of life influencing the evolution of universes has been around for a least several decades. It first came to my attention when John Barrow and Frank Tipler published the Cosmological Anthropic Principle in 1986. Here are two excerpts from my May, 1987, review of that book in Cryonics magazine

http://www.alcor.org...ryonics8705.txt

    In fact, even as many people around us still argue whether we are fit
to tamper with the habitat of the furbish lousewart, a profound consensus
is emerging in the field of physical eschatology:  Theories of the future
evolution of the universe must consider the consequences of intelligent
life acting on a cosmic scale.  Any purely physical theories of future
cosmological development are obsolete.  They are akin to a 17th century
explorer predicting the future ecology of Manhattan Island without
considering a future extensive human presence.

and

    As might be expected, some people went farther than this and suggested
something more radical:  The Universe must by its inherent nature, give
rise to intelligent life at some stage in its history.  This is termed the
Strong Anthropic Principle.  It implies that in the broadest context life
is not merely the "accidental" result of "indifferent" laws of physics, but
rather that there exists some profound, yet undiscovered, fundamental link
between life (read:  intelligent information processing) and laws of
physics.  It implies that ultimately life is an essential integral part of
the Cosmos in the same sense as those principles we now recognize as laws
of physics.

Incidentally, my book review, entitled "A Universe too Good to be True," appears to be the first published prediction that the Final Anthropic Principle, if correct, implies universal resurrection. Tipler later wrote an entire book about this controversial idea, called "The Physics of Immortality." The cosmological model that the book was based on has since gotten into trouble, but I recently read that Tipler may have found a way to restore the Omega Point scenario given current cosmology. Hope springs eternal.

---BrianW