🪐 A Questioner for the Survival of the Universe
📖 Reading to grasp the axis of history,
📜 Designing the future of civilization through policy,
🔭 Sowing seeds of thought that will endure even 100,000 years from now.

“The universe continues to expand, and so does my thinking within it. To be alive—this itself is my mission.”

“Welcome to a small planet for those who question life and civilization from a cosmic perspective, and for those who share the curiosity.”

12/30/2024

When one first encounters cosmology, the words most often heard in a philosophical context are the Anthropic Principle and the Copernican Revolution. To put it simply, the anthropic principle is a human-centered theory: it claims that humanity is special, and that Earth is finely tuned in such a way that our existence was inevitable. The Copernican revolution, on the other hand, asserts that neither Earth nor humanity holds a privileged position, but rather that we are merely one of countless possible planets and intelligent species in the universe. In short, the anthropic principle is subjective and absolute, while the Copernican revolution is objective and relative. One could describe this as an irreconcilable clash between geocentrism and heliocentrism.

And yet, in science, the two can coexist. As mentioned earlier, because of the property of emergence, both perspectives can be valid at different scales. Newtonian mechanics, for example, is based on the absoluteness of time and space, whereas Einstein’s relativity is built upon the relativity (or the deeper invariance) of spacetime. Both, however, remain useful in their own domains: Newtonian mechanics, though less accurate, is widely and practically applied, while Einstein’s relativity, closer to physical truth, is indispensable only in advanced technologies such as GPS. By analogy, Newtonian mechanics may be likened to the anthropic principle, and Einsteinian relativity to the Copernican revolution. Thus, what appears to be an irreconcilable conflict may in fact become a reconciliation of extremes, much like geocentrism and heliocentrism.

From the standpoint of the anthropic principle, even the slightest variation in the ratios of the four fundamental forces of physics (gravity, electromagnetism, the weak force, and the strong force), or a change in the value of the cosmological constant, would make the existence of Earth-like planets impossible—thereby underscoring humanity’s uniqueness. From the perspective of the Copernican revolution, however, our existence is inevitable, rooted in the infinite expanse of the universe and the possibility of the multiverse. Yet subjectivity and objectivity have always complemented one another in shaping human life and judgment. If imagination is grounded in scientific verification, I am confident that even such seemingly opposing principles can achieve harmony within science.


The Cosmic Thinker’s and Essayist’s Notebook에서 더 알아보기

구독을 신청하면 최신 게시물을 이메일로 받아볼 수 있습니다.

Posted in

댓글 남기기

The Cosmic Thinker’s and Essayist’s Notebook에서 더 알아보기

지금 구독하여 계속 읽고 전체 아카이브에 액세스하세요.

계속 읽기