• ynthrepic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    What would be the point of a universe if there was nothing experiencing it?

    Who or what is it “best” for?

      • ynthrepic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        12 hours ago

        Us. Conscious creatures humans or otherwise. We are the genesis of “point”.

        By analogy, what’s the point of a sun, or a planet, being a thing? It just is, right? A mechanism of nature.

        Maybe we are do, but it’s undeniable that we experience reality. Experience is the only thing they can have a point, by definition. This is simply axiomatic.

        There is no knowing a universe without knowers, so whether something just is, absent is, is a nonsense question. Sense to whom, after all?

        • SaraTonin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          21 hours ago

          Maybe we are do, but it’s undeniable tjsybwe experience reality.

          I’m sticking that as text over an image of Neil DeGrasse Tyson.

        • Rachelhazideas@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          19 hours ago

          Why does the universe need to be known?

          What makes ‘us’ so special that the worth of a whole universe is determined by our existence, inspite of the brevity of human history? Written history has only been around for 5,000. The oldest homo sapiens has only been around for 300,000 years. Was the universe insignificant for the rest of its 13,799,700,000 years?

          • ynthrepic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 hours ago

            It doesn’t. But “needing” itself is an undefined term without consciousness - definition itself is a product of conscious experience.

            The point is that there is no fact of a universe existing without something that can know facts. It’s necessarily tautological, after all we cannot know not existing.

            Were we not, the universe could not be as we know it. Whether or not it exists at all without us cannot matter, because mattering itself cannot be defined without a definer, nor can existence itself be verified without a verifier.

            That which “just is” could be absolutely anything at any time.

            In other words, Maybe the big bang happened some 13.8 billion years ago and over all this time events transpired until the first consciousnesses came online. Suddenly the universe knows being. Then one day you come online, somewhere around the age of 5 or 6.

            Or… That is just what it looks like to you and in reality someone preprogrammed the simulation and switched it on and you came into existence at the moment of your oldest memory. All that history is true only in the sense that it’s what the simulation shows you. But 13.8 billion years never really happened.

            That’s basically how it is, and it doesn’t need to be an external simulation. Those 13.8 billion years had nothing in them to experience, to remember, or to document concepts like duration, and years are a relational measurement we invented.