Why do we exist ?

why do we exist ?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=sNhhvQGsMEc
oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/exploration.html
science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2001/ast13apr_1
nytimes.com/1982/04/20/science/100-years-after-darwin-s-death-his-theory-still-evolves.html?pagewanted=all
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

to dream and crumble and die.

we never had a choice. Would a better question would be, 'why would we not exist'?

No reason, really. Just Nature doing Nature. Just like all the bacteria living inside our bodies. There is probably a bacterium inside you right now asking the same thing. His name is carl. He doesn't have many friends.

Because your daddy did this to your momma!!!

sauce?????

>why would we not exist
you still wouldn't have a choice in that socrates.

Evolution, by chance, has brought us to this point.

That is all.

Literal billions of billions of other planets in all the galaxies and superclusters aren't in the Goldilocks Zone, and have no sentient life on them.

I live to make cummies.

To suffer

You're assuming anyone else exists.

To jerk off to My Little Pony

To fuck and die

Or in my case to just die alone

To be host to spirits, trapped on this planet and to feed emotion energy to a higher life force, then we die and do it all over again

Physics. Atoms just keep interacting with atoms and after billions of years you've got Sup Forums

to create all possible universes and ultimately become god

God is a child with a fistful of feathers trying to make a chicken.

Death is an illusion, life is but a dream and we're the imagination of ourselves!

Here's Tom with the weather.

We exist because someone or something created a single cell. He programmed it's fitness as the following:

1) You want to be alive, not dead
2) You must plan ahead to prepare against death

They gave us a run time environment as well, with seemingly random characteristics.

And so here we are, one of millions of variations on that first life. Each of us - man, dog, deer, lotus, seaweed, eagle - a way of life 'hedging it's bets' against death. In any conceivable eventuality (extinction event), something must be so specialized and niche that it could survive that event, and so life goes on. Those on the bottom of the ocean hopefully survive some incredible volcano. Those in the air, some equally specific scenario. Those with highly advanced tools, perhaps a planet-wide extinction event - and they dip out to another planet.

Life invested heavily into us. For instance, we have rendered other species (other means of a fail-safe) extinct. It has invested so heavily into us because we are extremely versatile - we show great promise for being able to avoid extinction. But one of the tools that made us so promising now inadvertently corrupts us - we are too smart. We just don't give a fuck about the game sometimes. What could be more counterintuitive than suicide?

The only thing we can do is become like the beings that made us, begin our own tree and be gods for it. That is what AI will be and it will happen in our lifetime.


sauce on gif?

Because we do. Quit with your existential bullshit. Stop trying to find a higher meaning for yourself. A man made God. Be one.

indoctrinated and proud.

If you can ask the question then you can answer it.

There are 10 Trillion Galaxies in the observable universe.

It's logically impossible for Human to be the only sentient life forms in existence.

Respect digits in this thread

>He doesn't have many friends.
Bullshit. How can bacteria be lonely if there are tens of trillions of them in my colon?

If you want to know, take a shit ton of acid

2 trillion seems to be the figure popping up in most places, though of course we don't really know to any good degree of precision, so 10 trillion is probably still possible (though barely).

to whack off and post on fooooooooourrrchaaaaaan

Fuck you, did that. Felt that shit, it's real

To screw, pop out babies, and then let the cycle continue.

>logic

Logically, the chances of sentient life arising in this hostile universe is probably higher than 100 billion to one.
There is every chance we are alone and earth is unique

I dunno, man. Maybe he's kind of a dick.

infinity is overwhelming

We're here for God. So he can see how we will react to different situations and gather knowledge. We are here, born, live, cry, hate, feel, for God to learn.

To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women!

To suffer.

I'd imagine it is

Love is a reason where as we take these forms for spiritual work.

apart from the 7 earth class worlds we found in 1 solar system afew months ago

so, why havent we said hello to them yet?

...

literally fpbp every single time

The honest reason is because sexy girls like this one let men fuck them raw and men in their intense urges feel the need to cum deep inside her.

It's more like 100-200 billion. But some have trillions of stars.

>Literal billions of billions of other planets in all the galaxies and superclusters aren't in the Goldilocks Zone
Literal billions of other planets in all the galaxies and superclusters are in the Goldilocks zone, though. We are beginning to realize that they're more common than we thought.

It is also very possible life won't abide by the rules we have deduced based on our own circumstance.

Is that you Bill?

How can you be lonely if there are 7 billion people on earth?

>You want to be alive, not dead
Desire is a mental characteristic, and the only organisms on Earth that apparently have minds are those with central nervous systems. So no, single cells do not want to be alive, because they don't want anything.

>You must plan ahead to prepare against death
Planning is an even more complex mental process, and it is not found even in most animals, let alone in single-elled organisms

>They gave us a run time environment as well, with seemingly random characteristics.
Our environment is not remotely random. While life is adapted to its environment, that environment needs to be suited to life in some respects for it to exist at all. We won't find life on the Sun, in the vacuum of space, or in a black hole. Clearly, our environment is a relatively special one in the cosmos in its ability to host life. It's almost certainly not unique, but it's still far from random.

>In any conceivable eventuality (extinction event), something must be so specialized and niche that it could survive that event
But that is not in fact the case. There are some events that would destroy all life on Earth. For example, if a black hole enters the inner solar system centuries from now, there will be no way to stop it flinging planets from their orbits, making life impossible.

>Life invested heavily into us
"Life" isn't a person. It is an abstract concept used to categorize objects with certain properties. It can't "invest," any more than electricity can.

No. There isn't. The Universe may be infinite, and we've come in at 13.7 billion years after its creation. You really think that 8-16 million species in one tiny corner of the Universe is an anomaly? Law of large numbers, my friend, no fucking way we're the only ones.

As for purpose? There is no real purpose for life. You may decide on one, but we have no inherent purpose.

As for how? Mathematically, we are bound to this existence not once, but eternally. It will happen infinite times in infinite different ways. It will never be perceptible to us.

One day, all the black holes will absorb all other matter, leaving only black holes gravitationally pulling other black holes. When the black holes have all met, and the observable universe reaches critical mass, it will expand again. Until this happens again. Forever.

>The only thing we can do is become like the beings that made us
Our parents?

ITT enlightened intellectuals giving self-righteous and condesending answers to this question that will be proved completely incorrect in the future.

the universe is too big and time is too long for us not to exist, existential questions are just silly

Because between existing and not existing, existing is the better option.

Someone I know killed himself a few days ag oand I've been wondering about this a lot

40 trillion is a lot more than 7 billion, and the Earth is a lot bigger than my ass.

the fermi paradox
youtube.com/watch?v=sNhhvQGsMEc

>When the black holes have all met, and the observable universe reaches critical mass, it will expand again.
That's not really accurate. For one thing, black holes are not eternal; they evaporate slowly over time. As the universe continues to expand, the CMB will continue to cool, until eventually it is colder than even the largest black holes, causing them to shrink rather than grow. Over a far, far longer timescale, they will evaporate away completely. Furthermore, the expansion of a dark energy-dominated universe will continue to accelerate, so most black holes will never meet.

I'm also not sure what you mean by "critical mass." That term is usually used in reference to nuclear chain reactions.

Layers.

A human isn't just a single being. We're made up of multiple different systems, populated by bacteria and bugs and shit, all working together towards both their own goals, and a mutual end goal that is incomprehensible to these individual systems. Like, your kidneys don't really give a shit what your brain wants to do. Until you make it work extra hard by drinking or something.

We are part of that same sort of system for an even greater being than ourselves. God is the entire universe. Not a persona like religions teach, like literally, everything in the universe is a part of the physical makeup of God. We're like the bacteria in God's colon, or enzymes in his liver or something. Maybe our God's a drunk and that's why life sucks?

I don't know if that helps, but that's what mushrooms taught me.

Would it not be safe to assume black holes merging would have a similar effect as nuclear fusion?

Repeating digits are pleasing to people with classic autism. These people enjoy recognizing patterns and are often infatuated with numbers.

The very definition of mental illness.

Look it up, it's fairly common knowledge.

Multiverse theory = every universe would be an individual being itself, meaning that there's something even bigger than Gods

>God is the entire universe
I think this is called "pantheism," and I never really understood it. When you say that God is the universe, I think you are not just renaming "universe" to "God," I think you are trying to assign some characteristics to that universe that you think makes the label of "God" appropriate. But I'm not sure what those characteristics are. Could you explain your thoughts a little?

Nobody knows, all theories. We don't even fully know where life can survive. Just a few decades ago we thought life could not survive in the deep ocean, which we still know nothing about.

All theories, anyone in this thread or otherwise speaking on this subject in absolutes are delusional.

No. Black holes exist in the infinite future. To a distant observer, their event horizons are unreachable in finite time. The black holes themselves "have no hair," in the sense that they have no external characteristics except position, momentum, angular momentum, mass, and electric charge. When they merge in a vacuum, they emit no particles and no radiation except gravitational radiation. There is no comparison to nuclear reactions.

Good points.

1
It's hard for a human being to come up with language so fundamental that it would be appropriate in the context of a single cell - we're just a couple dudes bullshittin on the internet at 2 in the morning, after all. By desire, I mean you give it a 'fitness' (initial conditions, parameters, whatever) and you evolve it such that the offspring that are kept are the ones that best fit the parameters. This is the basic idea that surrounds genetic programs.

2
Again, just my ape words that mean nothing. It wouldn't even be a word. It would be numbers.

3
I'm basically saying there was a god that made this whole shop we call our universe.

4
Right, Life isn't necessarily going to win. It tries, though.

5
Bruh

Yeah basically man

There are a lot of reasons why this might be the case. Maybe they already know of us, maybe they came by and scanned for intelligent life and didn't find any. Maybe the universe is too big, or maybe extinction is too common. We've already had 6 mass extinctions where life survived by a thread

>Just a few decades ago we thought life could not survive in the deep ocean, which we still know nothing about.
Do you have a source for that? We might not have been certain that there was life in deep ocean trenches before we explored them, but this is the first time I've heard someone claim we believed it would be impossible or even unlikely. And while we know relatively little about the open ocean, it isn't fair to say we know "nothing."

That said, there are some places where we have been genuinely surprised to find life, such as rock layers deep below the ocean floor.

Well fucking put

To elaborate, nuclear fusion is simply two atoms fusing, and the result is a denser atom. This process releases an immense amount of energy.

Given the nature of black holes, merging would make them denser, but I cannot see energy as we know it each as escaping, hence gravitational waves.

Also, the heat death of the universe is not proven, correct?

Just an organism thats a part of a much larger organism

>By desire, I mean you give it a 'fitness' (initial conditions, parameters, whatever) and you evolve it such that the offspring that are kept are the ones that best fit the parameters.
Fair enough. The analogy makes sense.

>2 in the morning
You in Brazil or something?

>I'm basically saying there was a god that made this whole shop we call our universe.
The apparent randomness of the universe is not strong evidence for the existence of a god.

I'll try.

Not renaming universe. I mean, the universe as we know it exists as we know it, but on top of that, it is also a living being. Everything in the universe (think way bigger than us) is like an organ to this being. The edge of the known universe would be like the skin of God.

Think of this concept of God as different than the concept of gods that created humans and love and care for them. God is like us, but in a much, much bigger sense. There is a God world out there, that the universe/God interacts with the same way we interact with out own world. Maybe "God" or "gods" in the classical sense existed, I doubt it. If they did though, they were not the creators of everything.

Maybe God/universe is still in the womb?

because we can.

-each as, silly phone

>Given the nature of black holes, merging would make them denser
That would make intuitive sense, but it turns out that the density of a black hole is actually inversely proportional to its mass (a black hole's surface area is proportional to its mass, while volume is proportional to the three-halves power of surface area). So after colliding, the new black hole is actually less dense than either of the original black holes.

>I cannot see energy as we know it each as escaping, hence gravitational waves.
I can't pretend to understand the process, but an enormous amount of energy *does* escape in gravitational waves, amounting to a significant fraction of the mass of the black holes.

oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/exploration.html

Pretty much know nothing of the ocean.

As far as our theory of life existing down there. We thought life needed very specific criteria to exist, we were dead wrong and will continue to be wrong.

Life always finds a way. That's what it does

>God is like us
That's probably my biggest hangup with this idea. In what sense is the universe at all "like us"? Is this just something that sounds nice, or do you actually have reasons to think it is true?

>As far as our theory of life existing down there. We thought life needed very specific criteria to exist, we were dead wrong and will continue to be wrong.
I've heard people say that before, and I think it's a myth.

You totally misunderstood what I meant by "like us"

I mean that the universe is sentient and does it's own thing. I don't mean that if you look from the outside, God looks like a person. That's stupid.

If that were true it would be the saddest and most comforting thing ever but the numbers say there are other advanced species out there

>I mean that the universe is sentient
Right, that's where I disagree. I know you don't mean that it is just like humans in particular.

...

You not believing it doesn't make it untrue. Have you heard of the chimneys in the deep ocean? One of many things our science was wrong about, just a few decades ago

2
Canada

3
I agree there for sure. I perceive that in the near future there will be AI that rivals human intelligence. I was an atheist for a long time .. but if that AI is created I'll have no choice but to believe there was a 'god'. I only say these maddening things now because I feel sure it's discovery is coming soon.

Humans exist to ask questions. An animals purpose in nature is to do what it does best (which is driven by evolution). Humans are the only animal that asks questions and reasons over unnecessary things, like aesthetics or existence. Since reasoning is Humans niche that is what we are meant to do.

>You not believing it doesn't make it untrue.
It is untrue on its own. It is not the case that people expected no life to exist on the ocean floor. Do you have literally any statements from people making such a claim?

>Have you heard of the chimneys in the deep ocean?
Yes, the hydrothermal vent communities were obviously a surprise. But life exists even far from these vents, and much of it is similar to life that exists at higher layers.

I apologize, I'm misusing words. I'm a philosopher, not a physicist. More massive would be the term I am looking for I believe, after reading up on it. I thought that mass and density were interchangeable.

And your second point makes sense. Perhaps the merging is akin to a supernova rather than nuclear fusion? i.e. extra matter being shed in a supernova

Like I mentioned before, think of how your body works. Think of how there are things working on the sub-microbial level to make things work. Do you think that system ends with us? Doesn't it make sense to think that we are acting on the sub-microbial level of something greater?

Also, what kind of evidence are you expecting here? We're talking about something infinitely bigger than ourselves, we can't ASK it what's really going on.

Also, like I said in the beginning, this came to me on mushrooms. It's not like I sat down and did math or something, so what the fuck?

Right, the new black hole will certainly be more massive. For most objects, that would in fact make it denser too, but black holes are just extremely weird.

And I guess the analogy to a supernova is OK, but keep in mind that the black hole isn't really losing "matter" per se, just mass. It is losing mass through gravitational waves.

Heat death is one of 3 generally accepted possible ends, with the big rip, and the opposite the big crunch being the others.
Essentially it boils down to dark matter which we don't really understand and something about it's energy

>Do you think that system ends with us?
I mean, in our particular case, yes. There are higher levels of organization (e.g. society), but they operate substantially differently from this one.

>Doesn't it make sense to think that we are acting on the sub-microbial level of something greater?
That doesn't make a lot of sense to me, but that's not really the problem. The structure of the entire universe is unlikely to make a lot of sense one way or the other. The real question is what the evidence suggests. And the evidence does not suggest the type of organization you are describing.

>Also, what kind of evidence are you expecting here?
Any? I simply am not capable of believing things that are not apparently true. That's sort of what "belief" means. In this case, you are drawing an analogy between living systems and the universe, so I would expect to find analogous structures and processes. For instance, I would expect to find large-scale structures capable of storing memories and making decisions.

>Also, like I said in the beginning, this came to me on mushrooms. It's not like I sat down and did math or something, so what the fuck?
My point wasn't that you were an idiot or crazy, my point was that you are probably wrong.

Procreate for the only purpose of more procreation and consumption
Cancer

And hawking radiation right?
I heard they create gravity waves when colliding but I didn't even think about them losing messes that way

The evidence is circumstantial. I wish you'd give me the courtesy of recognizing that.

It boils down to the density of the universe (including dark matter) and the nature of dark energy (which is unrelated to dark matter, despite having a similar name). At present, the universe is dominated by dark energy, which generates a constant negative pressure across the observable universe. As the universe expands, its density will decrease, but (as far as we understand) the negative pressure due to dark energy will remain constant. So based on our current best understanding, the universe will probably expand forever and experience heat death.

However, because dark energy is still poorly understood, we cannot rule out the possibility that it is not truly constant and will change over time, making either of other two scenarios possible.

>The evidence is circumstantial.
What evidence?

science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2001/ast13apr_1

nytimes.com/1982/04/20/science/100-years-after-darwin-s-death-his-theory-still-evolves.html?pagewanted=all

You seem intelligent enough to look this up on your own. Further disbelief on your part will be just that. Second article is an example of how wrong we usually are. Humans are not logical beings.

To destroy the planet and ecosystems to the point where we can't sustain ourselves and go extinct

Yes, and Hawking radiation. However, Hawking radiation is a slow process, and all black holes we have discovered are substantially colder than the microwave background radiation, meaning they actually absorb radiation faster than they emit it.

The reason they lose mass is due to mass-energy equivalence. If they emit E energy in gravitational waves, they lose E/c2 mass.

This raises the question for me, do other black holes absorb those waves?

I obviously lean towards the big crunch. Gravity is still a force beyond our reckoning; but I think that if it has the ability to warp time, then perhaps the laws of thermodynamics dont affect it as we'd think.

Well OP. i don't know about these losers. But I'm A FUCKING KANG NIGGA. I EXIST TO BE A MUTHA FUCKING KANGGGGGGGG

I don't think you are understanding what I am describing, to say that the evidence does not suggest this. Maybe I'm not explaining it well, but my guess is that you aren't wrapping your head around the concept of "infinite." Do you think much about the bacteria in your colon? What does it do? Does it wonder what the meaning of life is? To that bacteria, your colon is it's whole world, and in that context, you would be its universe. This is everywhere, though, not just in YOU. In every single animal, plant, whatever, there are lots of subsystems feeding into bigger systems. Layers. We're one layer of infinite layers of subsystems feeding into supersystems that are themselves subsystems for an even greater supersystem. So why would we assume that doesn't continue happening beyond our comprehension?

Neither of those articles makes the claim you want. The first one asserts that before 1977, biologists believed that photosynthesis was the basis of all ecosystems, which is true. But as I pointed out, life does exist on the abyssal plane far from vents, surviving mostly on marine snow. This is exactly what scientists expected to find. The second article makes no claim about this whatsoever.