Jul 9, 2022 10:01 PM
https://iai.tv/articles/lee-smolin-the-l...-auid-2174
EXCERPTS: We tend to think of the laws of nature as fixed. They came into existence along with the universe, and have been the same ever since. But once you start asking why the laws of the universe are what they are, their invariance also comes into question. Lee Smolin is the type of theoretical physicist who likes asking such “why” questions. His inquiries have led him to believe that the laws of the universe have evolved from earlier forms, along the lines of natural selection. In this in depth interview he offers an account of how he came to this view of the evolving universe and explains why physics needs to change its view of time...
[...] It’s perhaps hard to appreciate how unconventional this way of thinking about physics is. Leibniz was a key figure of early modern rationalist philosophy that held necessity to be the key concept that would unlock the mysteries of the universe – things are the way they are because they had to be this way, and reason could explain why that was. Modern science on the other hand for the most part has given up on this idea that the world is governed by rational necessity. Instead, contingency rules: the way things are is the way things are, we can’t really know why. For many scientists the question doesn’t even make sense...
[...] Smolin is prepared to go a lot further in his questioning than most. Pushing the boundaries of explanation has led him to put forward some extraordinary theories, including the idea that the laws of the universe are not invariable across space and time, but are evolving...
[...] Smolin came of age during the era when the main puzzle of theoretical physics was how to make Einstein’s General Relativity consistent with Quantum Mechanics. Time according to General Relativity was seen as a relational property – not as something absolute or external to the universe, as Newton had thought. This means that time becomes secondary, as Smolin says – a merely relational property between events in the universe, not something fundamental.
Quantum mechanics, on the other hand, still seemed to depend on an absolute framework of time that wasn’t relational. This was one the key contradictions at the heart of physics at the time Smolin was still a physics student and laws of nature were seen as invariant – as time-independent.
[...] Smolin came up with the idea of applying the principles of evolutionary biology to the universe as a whole. In the same way that in biology Darwinian evolution was able to explain the existence of perfectly developed organisms, with organs that work just the right way to keep them alive and functioning, the idea that the universe as a whole has been undergoing a process of evolution can explain the existence of this fine tuning of cosmological constants.
This seemingly paradoxical balance of the cosmos is not a mere accident - there was a process behind it, akin to natural selection, that gave rise to it. It’s an idea that he was surprised to find the American pragmatist philosopher Charles Peirce had also hinted at in the early 20th century.
Putting forward this theory of the dynamically evolving universe led to the other central idea in Smolin’s work: a reassessment of the centrality of time... (MORE - missing details)
EXCERPTS: We tend to think of the laws of nature as fixed. They came into existence along with the universe, and have been the same ever since. But once you start asking why the laws of the universe are what they are, their invariance also comes into question. Lee Smolin is the type of theoretical physicist who likes asking such “why” questions. His inquiries have led him to believe that the laws of the universe have evolved from earlier forms, along the lines of natural selection. In this in depth interview he offers an account of how he came to this view of the evolving universe and explains why physics needs to change its view of time...
[...] It’s perhaps hard to appreciate how unconventional this way of thinking about physics is. Leibniz was a key figure of early modern rationalist philosophy that held necessity to be the key concept that would unlock the mysteries of the universe – things are the way they are because they had to be this way, and reason could explain why that was. Modern science on the other hand for the most part has given up on this idea that the world is governed by rational necessity. Instead, contingency rules: the way things are is the way things are, we can’t really know why. For many scientists the question doesn’t even make sense...
[...] Smolin is prepared to go a lot further in his questioning than most. Pushing the boundaries of explanation has led him to put forward some extraordinary theories, including the idea that the laws of the universe are not invariable across space and time, but are evolving...
[...] Smolin came of age during the era when the main puzzle of theoretical physics was how to make Einstein’s General Relativity consistent with Quantum Mechanics. Time according to General Relativity was seen as a relational property – not as something absolute or external to the universe, as Newton had thought. This means that time becomes secondary, as Smolin says – a merely relational property between events in the universe, not something fundamental.
Quantum mechanics, on the other hand, still seemed to depend on an absolute framework of time that wasn’t relational. This was one the key contradictions at the heart of physics at the time Smolin was still a physics student and laws of nature were seen as invariant – as time-independent.
[...] Smolin came up with the idea of applying the principles of evolutionary biology to the universe as a whole. In the same way that in biology Darwinian evolution was able to explain the existence of perfectly developed organisms, with organs that work just the right way to keep them alive and functioning, the idea that the universe as a whole has been undergoing a process of evolution can explain the existence of this fine tuning of cosmological constants.
This seemingly paradoxical balance of the cosmos is not a mere accident - there was a process behind it, akin to natural selection, that gave rise to it. It’s an idea that he was surprised to find the American pragmatist philosopher Charles Peirce had also hinted at in the early 20th century.
Putting forward this theory of the dynamically evolving universe led to the other central idea in Smolin’s work: a reassessment of the centrality of time... (MORE - missing details)