What is the purpose of the Universe? Here is one possible answer.

[n2doc]

George Dvorsky

The more we learn about the universe, the more we discover just how diverse all its planets, stars, nebulae and unexplained chunks of matter really are. So what is all this matter doing in our universe, other than just floating in space?

Well, it just so happens that there is a theory that gives a kind of raison d'etre to our universe and all the objects flying through it. If true, it would mean that our universe is nothing more than a black hole generator, or a means to produce as many baby universes as possible. To learn more, we spoke to the man who came up with the idea.

It's called the theory of Cosmological Natural Selection and it was conjured by Lee Smolin, a researcher at the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics and and an adjunct professor of physics at the University of Waterloo.

In his book, The Life of the Cosmos, Smolin proposed that Darwinian processes still apply at the extreme macro-scale and to non-biological entities. Because the universe is a potentially replicative unit, he suggests that it's subject to selectional pressures. Consequently, nearly everything the universe does is geared toward replication.

more
http://io9.com/5981472/what-is-the-purpose-of-the-universe-here-is-one-possible-answer

[Warren DeMontague]

1. An endlessly self-replicating, infinitely expanding fractal.

[Hissyspit]

4. But what is that fractal "in?"

[Warren DeMontague]

5. AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

That's the question, aint it.

My answer is, it's not "in" anything. It just is.

[Hissyspit]

6. Exactly.

But where is it just? "There is no there there."

Gives me a headache just thinking about it.

[Warren DeMontague]

9. AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

That's why I had to stop smoking pot, honestly.

[freshwest]

8. There it is. (Dial up warning)

And example in geography:

[Warren DeMontague]

10. Oh, yeah.

Once you know what to look for, they're everywhere, aren't they.

[Champion Jack]

14. Very cool!

[lastlib]

15. D&*$n, we would've killed for that in the 60's..........

"And if your head explodes, with dark forebodings, too,
I'll see you on the dark side of the moon...."

Or:

"Picture yourself in a boat on a river, with tangerine trees and marshmallow skies...."

Or:
"For it's a land unknown to Man, where fantasy is fact,
So if you can, please understand, you might not come ba-aa-aaack......" (apologies for using a Nugent song.)

[freshwest]

16. The light show is free with every migraine, LOL!

[rhett o rick]

13. That's why I dont accept the label of "atheist", because there is a god and it's a fractal. nm

[FiveGoodMen]

2. That's an incredibly teleological take on it.

Why not just describe what it does and not make up shit about what it's "for"?

[patrice]

3. That's apparently what Smolin is doing, TTE, What it does IS what it is for & what it does is

endlessly replicate the conditions for black holes that produce "fit" (in the Darwinian sense) universes that do the same thing.

Most of the comments to the article are more or less like yours.

[Warren DeMontague]

12. I think this is more speculating on what natural processes it may be subject to.

[NoOneMan]

7. Isn't the quantity of matter/energy of a sub-universe constrained by that of its parent?

So, the universe isn't replicating per se, but subdividing. Only if it is in itself expanding (fed by an expanding black hole of another universe) could its children ever hope to reach its size. I don't think then that "replicating" is necessarily the correct term. Perhaps its increasing in complexity by developing sub-universes.

[Warren DeMontague]

11. Isn't the whole point of dark energy or vacuum energy that 0>0, counter intuitive as it may be?

If that's the case, there may be more energy than everything knows what to do with.

[caraher]

17. The Ultimate Free Lunch

It turns out that kind of constraint is not really constraining. Basically, a universe made of matter with space in between has positive energy bound up in its particles and negative energy in the form of gravity; those can add up to zero for something other than an empty universe.

So you can get "something" for zero energy when a new universe branches off from another one...

[tama]

18. depends

If you start from zero energy "ontology" and symmetry of positive and negative energy, there's no quantitative limit.

[Heywood J]

19. I thought it was already explained.

"L'enfer, c'est les autres."

[lindysalsagal]

20. Actually, no, it's:

[eppur_se_muova]

21. Why should it have a purpose ?

Just because humans have purpose, we think everything else must too. We might as plausibly assume the universe has a body, complete with eyes, nose, mouth, and all the rest, just because we do.