• bunchberry@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    22 hours ago

    It seems more likely in a universe that is infinitely large that brains would come into existence through simpler deterministic processes like they did on earth than random fluctuations no?

    • cynar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      13 hours ago

      Our best ideas on the big bang put the universe as huge, but finite in space. (Way bigger than the observable universe) The question is time. If time is infinite then Boltzmann brains win.

      Matter has a finite life, energy differentials run out. Stars run out of fuel. Black holes evaporate. Even protons eventually fall apart to energy. Then there is endless emptiness.

      That emptiness would be finite in space, but infinite in time. Without that last boundary, weird things happen to maths.

      • bunchberry@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 hours ago

        If you appeal to heat death then you cannot say brains pop back into existence either because “matter has a finite life,” and so it is self-defeating. If brains can pop back into existence due to random fluctuations then surely planets and stars could as well given enough time.

        • cynar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 hours ago

          The energy to spontaneously create a planet is vastly more than a brain. Then again, with the weird maths of infinities, it might play out.

          Though to recreate the full illusion would require something closer to the big bang itself.

          It’s well into the “here he dragons” realms of science however. Speculating well beyond reliable evidence.