The current advancement in technology; the exclusivity of nature and the deleterious nature of mysticism do not give us an alternative but to envision the concept of self existence.Especially,if the current research on anti-ageing becomes successful then it will give us a boost of zest that this concept of self-existence may after all be feasible.
Drugs like nicotinamide mononucleotide (NMN)are currently in human trials to see their effects on human ageing and discern for sure that they have the expected results of longeivity on humans.Mankind has so many adversaries which are attempting to extinguish his life which is so unique in this harsh and dead Cosmos that we live in starting from diseases,wars,ageing,meteors,dark energy and so on which are becoming a treat to his life.
Some people say that the dieing of a star and the dieing of a Universe are just ‘natural processes’ therefore, there is nothing that we can do to defend life.So we must succumb to death.But my counter argument is that so are earthquakes,tsunamis and epidemics who would want to die in an epidemic or an earthquake because they are ‘natural processes’ ??? Mankind throughout history has established technologies to defend his existence from natural challenges.Whether,it is a primitive spade to defend his life from predator beasts or antibiotics to save himself from pathogenic bacteria.Hence, a dieing star or a dieing Universe are no exception from any other natural adversity they need to be overcome by human intelligence,if not by artificial intelligence.
When I say what has been mentioned hiterto I am not stating it as a dogma as a proposal that if possible mankind must survive all challenges to his life and be a self-existent being in nature.If technology and the laws of nature allow that to happen rather than accepting his natural fate as a mortal self-insufficient primate.All observable evidence to any man endowed with commonsense indicate that man is not a creation but an evolution.Therefore,considering the logic that something cannot evolve from nothing.We are obliged to infere that man must be the metamorphosis of an eternal entity.Thus, preserving consciousness becomes a necessity.
The next topic to consider is are the laws of nature immutable? Inother words, are they absolute eternal dogma that we are enslaved to and can never escape? Can intelligence circumvent the laws of nature ? Is intelligence more powerful than the laws of nature ? The idea that comes to mind when I mull these questions is that if the laws of gravity was immutable then space science would never have been possible because nothing would ever leave earth.The Apollo moon landing in contradiction to the law of gravity would never have been possible.Human intelligence circumvented but never broke the law of gravity to land mankind on the moon.
Other evidences to consider for the mutability of the laws of nature is the final days of the universe itself trillion of years into the future when it dies in a big freeze due to accelerated expansion at that moment the laws of nature mutate and breakdown to leave behind nothingness (virtual particles).
From a professional perpective let us read an excerpt subtopic entitled “Can intelligent life survive ? ” from professor Michio Kaku’s book Parallel worlds which I recommend (read the entire chapter to get the whole picture) and is a very good read.In it on chapter 10- The end of everything: page 299 he say’s:
“CAN INTELLIGENCE SURVIVE?
Given the mind-numbing conditions found at the end of the big
freeze, scientists have debated whether any intelligent life form can possibly survive. At first, it seems pointless to discuss intelligent life surviving in stage 5, when temperatures plunge to near absolute zero. However, there is actually a spirited debate among physicists about whether intelligent life can survive.
The debate centers upon two key questions. The first is: can intelligent beings operate their machines when temperatures approach absolute zero? By the laws of thermodynamics, because energy flows from a higher temperature to a lower temperature, this movement of energy can be used to do usable mechanical work. For example, mechanical work can be extracted by a heat engine that connects two regions at different temperatures. The greater the difference in temperature, the greater the efficiency of the engine. This is the basis of the machines that powered the Industrial Revolution,such as the steam engine and the locomotive. At first, it seems impossible to extract any work from a heat engine in stage 5, since all temperatures will be the same.
The second question is: can an intelligent life form send and receive information? According to information theory, the smallest unit that can be sent and received is proportional to the temperature.As the temperature drops to near absolute zero, the ability to process information is also severely impaired. Bits of information that can be transmitted as the universe cools will have to be smaller and smaller.
Physicist Freeman Dyson and others have reanalyzed the physics
of intelligent life coping in a dying universe. Can ingenious ways,they ask, be found for intelligent life to survive even as temperatures drop near absolute zero?
As the temperature begins to drop throughout the universe, at
first creatures may try to lower their body temperature using genetic engineering. This way, they could be much more efficient in using the dwindling energy supply. But eventually, body temperatures will reach the freezing point of water. At this time, intelligent beings may have to abandon their frail bodies of flesh and blood and assume robotic bodies. Mechanical bodies can withstand the cold much better than flesh. But machines also must obey the laws of information theory and thermodynamics, making life extremely difficult,even for robots.
Even if intelligent creatures abandon their robotic bodies and
transform themselves into pure consciousness, there is still the problem of information processing. As the temperature continues to fall, the only way to survive will be to “think” slower. Dyson concludes that an ingenious life form would still be able to think for an indefinite amount of time by spreading out the time required for information processing and also by hibernating to conserve energy.Although the physical time necessary to think and process information may be spread out over billions of years, the “subjective time,” as seen by the intelligent creatures themselves, will remain the same. They will never notice the difference. They will still be able to think deep thoughts but only on a much, much slower time scale.Dyson concludes, on a strange but optimistic note, that in this manner,intelligent life will be able to process information and “think” indefinitely. Processing a single thought may take trillions of years, but with respect to “subjective time,” thinking will proceed normally.
But if intelligent creatures think slower, perhaps they might witness cosmic quantum transitions taking place in the universe.
Normally, such cosmic transitions, such as the creation of baby universes or the transition to another quantum universe, take place over trillions of years and hence are purely theoretical. In stage 5,however, trillions of years in “subjective time” will be compressed and may appear to be only a few seconds to these creatures; they will think so slowly that they might see bizarre quantum events happen all the time. They might regularly see bubble universes appearing out of nowhere or quantum leaps into alternate universes.
But in light of the recent discovery that the universe is accelerating,physicists have reexamined the work of Dyson and have ignited a new debate, reaching the opposite conclusions—intelligent life will necessarily perish in an accelerating universe. Physicists Lawrence Krauss and Glenn Starkman have concluded, “Billions of years ago the universe was too hot for life to exist. Countless eons hence, it will become so cold and empty that life, no matter how ingenious,will perish.”
In Dyson’s original work, he assumed that the 2.7-degree microwave radiation in the universe would continue to drop indefinitely,so intelligent beings might extract usable work from these tiny temperature differences. As long as the temperature continued to drop, usable work could always be extracted. However, Krauss and Stackman point out that if the universe has a cosmological constant,then temperatures will not drop forever, as Dyson had assumed, but will eventually hit a lower limit, the Gibbons-Hawking temperature(about 10^-29 degrees). Once this temperature is reached, the temperature
throughout the universe will be the same, and hence intelligent
beings will not be able to extract usable energy by exploiting temperature differences. Once the entire universe reaches a uniform temperature, all information processing will cease.
(In the 1980s, it was found that certain quantum systems, such as the Browning motion in a fluid, can serve as the basis of a computer,regardless of how cold the temperature is outside. So even as temperatures plunge, these computers can still compute by using less and less energy. This was good news to Dyson. But there was a catch.The system must satisfy two conditions: it must remain in equilibrium with its environment, and it must never discard information.But if the universe expands, equilibrium is impossible, because radiation gets diluted and stretched in its wavelength. An accelerating universe changes too rapidly for the system to reach equilibrium.And second, the requirement that it never discard information means that an intelligent being must never forget. Eventually, an intelligent
being, unable to discard old memories, might find itself reliving old memories over and over again. “Eternity would be a
prison, rather than an endlessly receding horizon of creativity and exploration. It might be nirvana, but would it be living?” Krauss and Starkman ask.)
In summary, we see that if the cosmological constant is close to
zero, intelligent life can “think” indefinitely as the universe cools by hibernating and thinking slower.But in an accelerating universe such as ours, this is impossible. All intelligent life is doomed to perish,according the laws of physics.
From the vantage point of this cosmic perspective, we see therefore that the conditions for life as we know it are but a fleeting episode in a much larger tapestry. There is only a tiny window where the temperatures are “just right” to support life, neither too hot nor too cold.”
Prof-Kaku in the next chapter [chapter 11] of this very book gives other options like leaving the Universe as an option:escape into a parallel Universe to preserve life and consciousness.But my question after reading the above subtopic is:Is it ever possible to create a Bigbang via human technology inorder to create a new Universe or slow down the expansion of the Universe itself ? What is preventing man from achieving that ? Isn’t man’s ignoramity and lack of ingenuity dooming him from achieving masterdom ? As an example consider dark energy and dark matter which constitute about 99 % of the Universe and we have no idea what they are !? So how can we conclude the final fate of humanity based of limited information & knowledge about the Universe itself ? Shouldn’t we have some sort of hope that full understanding of nature and ingenuity power may eventually provide life saving solutions to humanity ? What if we understand completely what dark energy is and devise a stratagem which can change the variables in our equation to finally give us a differnt conclusion ? This might sound insane but we might have the technology to stop the expansion of our Cosmos inorder to preserve life ? Why should we paint a bleak out look about nature that we do not even totally understand ?
Anyways,Professor Kaku in a more positive outlook on -chapter 11:Escaping the Universe- sets out eleven steps to preserve intelligent life in the future.The entire chapter is voluminous for this article so I recommend that you download the pdf format of the book from the internet here to read it but I cannot help but quote Prof.Kaku’s last statement on chapter 11 of his positive outlook as a conclusion for my article:
“Let me emphasize that every step I’ve mentioned in this process
is so far beyond today’s capability that it must read like science fiction.But billions of years into the future, for a type III Q civilization facing extinction, it may be the only possible path to salvation.Certainly, there is nothing in the laws of physics or biology to prevent this from occurring.My point is that the ultimate death of our universe may not necessarily mean the death of intelligence.Ofcourse, if the ability to transfer intelligence from one universe to another
is possible, it leaves open the possibility that a life form from another universe, facing its own big freeze, could try to burrow into some distant part of our own universe, where it is warmer and more hospitable.
In other words, the unified field theory, instead of being a useless but elegant curiosity, may ultimately provide the blueprint for the survival of intelligent life in the universe.”