Evo Devo Universe: towards a biological paradigm for cosmology Clément Vidal Department of Philosophy, Free University of Brussels (VUB) Evolution, Complexity and Cognition group (ECCO) and Centrum Leo Apostel (CLEA)

1. Introduction 2. Lee Smolin’s theory of 3. An Evo-Devo Universe 4. Discussion

Aren’t God, TOE, RM, CNS and EDU models The underlying paradigm for cosmology is theoretical Cosmological Natural Selection extension of CNS physics. How could it be enriched with a biological paradigm? all highly speculative? ... Indeed, they are! (CNS) Limitations of CNS • Theology - the problem is to find a suitable complexity • The roles of life and intelligence in the universe are To understand our universe with all its , we CNS is a variation on the multiverse hypothesis interpretation of God. Biology incidental. need suitable cognitive tools. describes systems attempting to solve the FT problem by introducing a • Science - the problem is that we have no with the greatest structural and functional complexity, thus • No proposed mechanism of heredity. biologically-inspired paradigm. (Smolin 1997). observational and experimental support, at present. we could look to apply biological insights to cosmology. In CNS, the concept of natural selection is extended How can we imagine these theories to be testable? Analogies are fundamental and very powerful cognitive to the largest scale of space and time: the universe. CNS Biology Cosmology Speculative philosophy tools, provided that we are aware of their limitations. proposes a Darwinian evolution of universes whose Components Description (cell) (universe) (for e.g. an analogy is not a proof, see (Holyoak & Thagard 1995)). Plan for the The information constants are fine-tuned for black hole generation, a Physical laws and Tackling problems without observational and Blueprint construction of the contained in the constants experimental support is very different from a traditional Our general hypothesis is that the Universe exhibits prediction that can in principle be falsified. offspring DNA Carries out the scientific enquiry. How to best answer those kinds of processes which are both contingently adaptive Factory Cell The universe at large construction problems? (evolutionary) and statistically predictable (developmental). Biology (yesterday) Physics (nowadays) The regulatory A cosmic ethics, This becomes a problem of speculative philosophy Ensures the factory mechanisms of the aiming at universe (1) Why are the (1’) Why are the Controller follows the plan that we can tackle by constructing comprehensive and mitosis reproduction. Application to the fine-tuning problem different species as they are? constants as they are? coherent worldviews. (Vidal 2007). Transmits a copy of (2) Species are timeless. (2’) Constants are timeless. Duplicating The reproduction Highly evolved the blueprint to the Definition: Why do the parameters of the standard Table 1. The situation of nowadays physics is analogous of the DNA intelligence machine offspring models of particle physics and cosmology fall to the biologists’ before Darwin. (Smolin 1997, 260). very tiny box Table 2. Components of a von Neumann’s (1948) self-reproducing automaton, with a description of each 5. Conclusion in a in the space of parameters in component, and examples in biology (the cell) and in cosmology (the universe). We see clearly the limits of which there are stars and organic chemistry? CNS model, which is not specifying what the controller and the duplicating machine are. Variation: Black holes give birth to new universes by We showed that being inspired by a biological Fine-Tuning (FT) argument producing the equivalent of a Big Bang, which highly evolved intelligence paradigm can bring new insights into cosmology. This : If any of a number of produces a baby universe with slightly different As long as this parameters, both fundamental constants and plays a « more-than-CNS » role in modification of was shown through Smolin’s solution to the fine-tuning no constants. parameters in the next cycle, we can posit a reason for problem which we critically examined to propose an cosmological parameters were slightly different, linking intelligence with complexity of any sort would come into existence. intelligence to emerge thus extension of it. We suggested that the problem of the Selection: The differential success in self-reproduction of the universe, i.e. answering to problem (5) above. See (Leslie 1989) for a good review. speculative nature of the scientific theories explored can universes via their black holes. (Crane 1994; Harrisson 1995; Smart 1999; Baláz 2001; Gardner 2003) be reduced by searching for tests by simulations.

Going further with some plausible implications of an EDU model on FT 6. Further information http://www.evodevouniverse.com Classical approaches to the FT problem: God: An evo-devo universe doesn’t need the hypothesis of an http://clement.vidal.philosophons.com Please feel free to harshly criticize to... What scope for extrinsic designer whose nature could not be understood. [email protected] 1. God TOE: The EDU model predicts a TOE can never emerge. As in Acknowledgments: Many thanks to my colleague John Smart co-founder of the EDU God creates the laws and constants of our universe cosmology? biology, there will not be enough information (too many degrees community for his rich and valuable feedback. ab initio, in a fine-tuned manner.(e.g. (Craig 1999)). of freedom) within any universe to uniquely specify initial EDU is supported by The Complex Systems Institute, Paris (ISC-PIF). Image credits: Leonardo da Vinci, Hubble Space Telescope (The Antennae Galaxies-NGC (1) Why do the laws of physics have the form they do? (FT) parameters and constants. Yet by adding the constraint of an 4038-4039). Detailed credits for the tree of life: 2. Theory of everything (TOE) (2) Why do boundary conditions have the form they do? (FT) extrapolated multiversal environment (real or simulated) we http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/life_anims_verts.shtml Dream of a theory that would decide the values (3) Why do laws of physics exist? (ontology, teleology) may come to understand the fine-tuned values much better. of all the constants in a determined manner, (4) Why does anything exist? (ontology, metaphysics) Random Multiverse: The RM model is replaced by a multiversal (e.g (Greene 2000)). (5) Why does the universe allow the existence of intelligent life? 7. References thus there would be no fine-tuning. environment, whose evolution will be extensively constrained Balázs, B.A. (2001) The Cosmological Replication Cycle , the Extraterrestrial Paradigm and the Final Anthropic Principle, inProceedings of the 12th Congress of the International Association “Cosmos and Philosophy”. (link intelligence-universe) by the developmental cycle. EDU models may greatly pare Carr, B. (2007) Universe or multiverse. Cambridge University Press. Craig, W. L. (1999) The Ultimate Question of Origins: God and the Beginning of the Universe.Astrophysics and Space Science 269-270, p723-740. Crane, L. (1994) Possible implications of the quantum theory of gravity. http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/9402104. 3. Random multiverse (RM) with observer selection effect. down the number of possible universes, in a way that is in Ellis, G. F. R. (2006) Philosophy of cosmology, In Handbook in Philosophy of Physics, Ed J Butterfield and J Earman (Elsevier, 2006), 1183-1285. Cosmology also has to deal with this extended agenda, http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0602280 There exists a huge (possibly infinite) number of principle testable via simulation. Gardner, J. N. (2003) Biocosm. The New Scientific Theory of Evolution: Intelligent Life is the Architect of the Universe. Inner Ocean Publishing. raising deep philosophical questions. Greene, B. (2000) The Elegant Universe: Superstrings, Hidden Dimensions, and the Quest for the Ultimate Theory. Vintage. Adapded from Ellis (2005, section 8.2). Harrison, E. (1995) The natural selection of universes containing intelligent life.Quart. J. Roy. Astronom. Soc., 36, 193-203. universes, each with different, randomly-generated CNS: Evo-devo extensions of the CNS model of universe http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1996QJRAS..37..369B Holyoak, K. J., & Thagard, P. (1995) Mental leaps: Analogy in creative thought. Chapter 8,The Analogical Scientist. The MIT press. parameters and the fact that our universe appears fine- reproduction and development, by proposing the missing Leslie, J. (1989) Universes. Routledge. Smart, J. (1999) Introduction to the Developmental Singularity Hypothesis. Retrieved from AccelerationWatch.com 15 Jan, 2008. (Carr 2007). Smolin, L. (1997) The Life of the Cosmos. Oxford University Press. tuned is just an observational selection effect. hereditary mechanism (controller and duplicating machine) Vidal. C. (2007) An Enduring Philosophical Agenda: Worldview Construction as a Philosophical Method. Submitted to Zygon, the Journal of Religion & Science. http://ecco.vub.ac.be/~clement/vidal2007-wp.pdf may provide a functional role for black holes and highly evolved von Neumann, J. (1948) The general and logical theory of automata, In:Cerebral mechanisms in behavior : the Hixon symposium. Lloyd A. Jeffress. Reprint inJohn von Neumann, Collected Works, ed. A. H. Taub. civilization, and possibly make falsifiable predictions. http://www.dna.caltech.edu/courses/cs191/paperscs191/vonneumann1951.pdf