The Reason of the Universe

Will a moment come when mankind will fully, definitely and irreversibly acknowledge the fact that the Universe is equipped with reason?

What are the potential consequences of acknowledging the reasonability of the Universe by mankind?

Is Reason a phenomenon of local scale, a manifestation of random local fluctuations with a limited lifespan? Or is its existence predetermined by the laws of the Universe, and does it have its quite specific purpose and role in life and in the evolution of the Universe?

To assess the importance of the role of reason, let us look around stating facts which are known to virtually everyone.

Today, mankind is able to fulfil a rather unusual task from the point of view of the fundamental laws of physics. Which ones specifically? It can destroy the Earth by a targeted detonation of all already produced nuclear warheads.

But what is unusual about this task from the perspective of the fundamental physics?

It lays in the fact that if you imagine yourself as an observer watching the movement of the planets in the Solar System from a distance, the sadden explosion of one of the planets may become result in quite natural surprise.

If the observer were a physicist possessing the amount of knowledge offpossessed by the contemporary physics, he/she could hardly find a law which would help to forecast the existence of such an eventuality in the Solar System as well as to predict the moment of such an explosion.

To illustrate this idea better, let us consider several similar examples.

Not only is humankind able to destroy the Earth, but also to change its path by a targeted explosion using part of the accumulated nuclear stockpile. Accordingly, let us consider the picture that an observer following the developments in the Solar System can see.

He/she will see the following.

For a certain period of time, the Solar System has existed and showed a type motion dynamics fully consistent with the corresponding laws of physics. But at a certain moment in time, one of the planets suddenly changes its trajectory. No external effects have been observed in the meantime, such as collisions or changes in the surrounding gravitational or magnetic fields which could become the cause of such a change. If, however, as the result of the will of the people inhabiting a given planet, it changes its path in an arbitrary manner at least once in a thousand years, then our external observer will feel a serious discomfort trying to find an explanation to such a weird behaviour of one of the planets of the Solar System.

He/she must be in an uneasy situation, since if he/she remains within the limits of the known laws of physics, he/she will not be able to explain the events happening in the Solar System and why the laws of gravitation work so well with respect to all the planets except for one.

What if in one, two or ten thousand years, mankind decides that it is necessary to periodically change the path of the movement of all the planets in order to achieve specific goals which may seem to be justified?

What will our observers think of it?

I fully admit that the shock experienced by the observer would be comparable to the one if we threw down a big piece of rock from the 25th floor and follow it changing its path to the left, then right before reaching the 5th floor and then up, higher and higher until disappearing from view like a little bird with invisible wings.

Such misdemeanour on the side of this unique rock will wipe out all the fundaments of our knowledge on gravitation. Based on the existing views on the world corresponding to the existing laws of physics, nothing can ever happen in the Solar System in the future that mankind is in the position to do today.

This is why we will have to change our views and to acknowledge that certain important components responsible for the occurrence and existence of such a phenomenon are missing in the amount of knowledge we possess, such as reason which has the potential to affect the events in space in an arbitrary fashion.

In order to develop this proposition, let us prolong our virtual journey to estimate the scale of reason as of a phenomenon assuming that the wider its scope, the easier it is to accept the necessity of searching for a fundamental law that would describe its existence.

Let us assume that our observer, in possession of much more developed means than we have in the present, has detected some huge asteroid, a piece of galactic dark matter, a fragment of an exploded star, whose trajectory runs through our Solar System. He/she will state with relief that in 150,000 years, this enormous piece of space waste will collide with the Solar System, will destroy the Sun and all the planets and will put an end to the "bad behaviour" of the reckless planetary system which refuses to meet its direct gravitational responsibilities.

But how surprised he/she will be if suddenly, 50,000 years after the appearance of such "an encouraging trace of hope", an object (an asteroid) moving towards the Solar System and aiming to fulfil such an important, admonishing and just mission, changes its direction and starts to move perpendicularly to the plane of the galaxy into the intragalactic space. What else can be more unfair than the necessity to give up ones habitual view of the world?

This is exactly why our observer will feel frustrated and will possibly admit to having big deficiencies in the amount of the knowledge he/she possesses. And this will be for him just the beginning after which a shift should follow towards more adequate views on the Universe and its laws governing life as well as on the role played by reason and its purpose and, finally, on the causes of its origination.

Now, let us attempt to compare reason with other phenomena to obtain additional criteria for the assessment of its importance and scale.

We are able to interfere into gravitational matters already today changing its influence on a limited region of space, although by far not significantly in terms of the Universe or even the size of our galaxy.

Let us assume that mankind is sufficiently sensible not to destroy itself and the cosmos surrounding us, i.e. sufficiently well-behaved not to devastate the Solar System by some kind of intrusion from the outside, making it possible for us to survive as a community of sensible creatures for several million years to come. Is not it reasonable to suppose that during that period, we will widen our possibilities of influencing the environment surrounding us, at least by building a shield that would control the movement of various objects having the potential to cause damage to the Solar System, and will change their paths at a long distance excluding any risk of destruction of the established stability, if it suits us?

In the meantime, we will have the opportunity to perform also other activities. If we wish, for example, we can redirect some huge asteroid to fly elsewhere in the intragalactic space, towards another star cluster or planetary system interfering with the existing situation and changing parts of the Galaxy situated at a long distances from us. We will be able to gradually increase the chaos or, on the contrary, to counter its expansion into more and more sizable parts of our Galaxy.

It will appear that the today’s possibilities of influencing the Earth’s path are just the first signs of the potential of the human capability aimed at influencing the events in the entire Galaxy, at changing the movement of stars and planets, ensuring stability, equilibrium or explosive dynamics within chosen areas of the Galaxy, inducing destructive events of increasing scales, chain reactions and disturbances of equilibrium of local gravitational systems.

We can thus rightfully assume that reason, as a phenomenon, is by far of no less global significance in size than gravitation. This allows assigning a completely different status to reason dissimilar to the one accepted today. A phenomenon, whose extent in the Universe is comparable with the scale of gravitation, can justly be named as a universal and fundamental one and can be the consequence of the manifestation of equally large-scale and universal fundamental laws. It would certainly be unreasonable to conduct such a search only after having been able to change the trajectory of our entire Galaxy. Isn’t it possible to state with confidence that mankind will not have such an ability sometime in the future?

 Let’s continue with our deliberations on the scale of reason. Let us consider another aspect of the estimation of its extent, i.e. to what extent is reason, as a phenomenon, wide spread in the Universe both in time and space?

Let’s assume that, at present, thinking creatures exist only on the Earth and nowhere else in the Universe.

It follows that one specific universal feature of the Universe, equally important as gravitation, is localised, for unknown reasons, into a little point of space creating thus a full and unexplainable advantage for that specific point as compared with the rest of the space in the Universe.

Do we have the right to assume that something like this is not possible?

Otherwise, we would have to admit that neither gravitation nor electromagnetism nor any other phenomena known to us can manifest themselves in some parts of the Universe but not in others. It would mean, for instance, that gravitation exists in our galaxy but not in other ones. Somewhere there, the stars do not attract each other but rather repel each other or absolutely do not register each others’ existence remaining indifferent.

It is impossible to imagine something like this, and also setting the Solar System apart from the rest of the space in terms of the existence of reason looks quite ridiculous. Therefore, reason must exist in many other sectors of the Universe.

The question arises as to whether the number of such sectors is limited or not.

Let’s verify this based on logic and the principles on which our entire scientific worldview is built.

If reason existed only within a limited number of galaxies, no matter how large this number would be, we could draw a sphere that would encompass all the galaxies containing reason.

Then the above said sphere would obtain an equally unjustified and unfair advantage as compared with the rest of the Universe; this would be exactly the same advantage that we would have, if we regarded ourselves as the only thinking creatures in the entire Universe.

Our observations, however, do not allow us to admit the existence of such inequity in the Universe.

Fundamental phenomena must be in existence in all the corners of the Universe without any spatial limitations whatsoever.

Accordingly, we can make the following conclusion with a great relief: no matter how large our imaginary sphere delimiting the borders of parts of our Universe is, there will always exist an unlimited number of places outside the borders of such a sphere that will contain intelligent beings.

Therefore, the number of thinking creatures in the Universe is unlimited.

Let’s now consider where things stand with respect to the time aspect of the propagation of reason.

The following question seems then quite logical: When did reason occur in the Universe for the first time? How long will it still survive and when will it disappear annihilating into nonexistence?

Let us assume that reason firs appeared in the course of the evolution of the Universe at a specific point of time. And, before that moment, no thinking creature had existed in the Universe.

Further, following the logical chain of such an assumption, we will have to admit that at any point of time, the number of thinking creatures is limited and encompassed by a spatial sector, i.e. a sphere containing all the thinking creatures existing at that moment, irrespective of the speed by which reason is spreading.

As a result, we stand before the same picture as in the previous case. The assumption that reason occurred sometime at some place leads us to the conclusion that there always exists such a local space, a limited sector of the Universe, where there is reason, and the remaining space is deprived of such a privilege!

Such unjust deprivation of the larger part of the Universe from a characteristic like possessing thinking creatures appears to be inadmissible and is inconsistent with the principles of equitability with regard to all the parts of the Universe.

This is why we tend to accept the other alternative admitting that reason never occurred and has always existed at any moment till now in an unlimited number of sectors of the Universe, and that whatever point of time we take into consideration, the number of thinking beings by that moment would have been unlimited.

Accordingly, one is forced to come to the following conclusion: The Universe has possessed reason at all times.

It is natural to assume that it will remain reasonable also in the future whatever distant point of time in the future we consider. Unless it itself decides to voluntarily free itself of reason. However, it is worthless to seriously deal with such nonsense.

One of the aspects potentially aspiring to the primary cause of the existence of reason in the Universe, as regard the search of such cause, can be the aspect of influencing the order and regularity of different parts of the Universe.

Grigori Tigal