”No creation can be free to exist if it cannot exist without the will or intervention of its creator”.
Overview:
While current theories like the Fine-Tuning Argument use the precise calibration of the universe’s constants and laws to justify intentionality at the moment of creation, they do not delve into what these same characteristics reveal about the perceived priorities or objectives embedded in the cosmos’ foundational elements. The Sovereign Cosmos Theory disrupts this standard view by expanding the analysis to show that it is possible to infer these priorities from the characteristics of the universe’s foundational elements. These defined characteristics seem to prioritize certain aspects over others—suggesting a deeper, underlying objective or purpose that can be speculated upon, beyond just the fine-tuning for life.
Sovereign Cosmos Theory is a philosophical framework that suggests the universe was intentionally designed to function autonomously, free from external control or interference. It posits that the evolution and actions of living beings are not controlled by forces external to the cosmos, and that most of the cosmos elements can, surprisingly, be explained by one central principle: maximizing specific degrees of freedom for living beings. The theory explores the nature of elements, existence, autonomy, and freedom within the cosmos, suggesting that observing the universe’s limitations and capabilities makes it possible to infer that its main aspects exist due to purposeful and intentional objectives, guided by certain priorities: The first priority is for the universe to operate sovereignly, allowing living beings to evolve and act freely without external control or further intervention. The second priority is to sustain this existence over time. For that to happen, other aspects of freedom, such as the freedom to destroy, need to be limited – and they are. (“Nothing is lost, nothing is created, everything is transformed,” Antoine Lavoisier).
While the theory aligns with scientific discoveries and encourages research and exploration of the universe, it doesn’t intend to be purely scientific. Many of its hypotheses are speculative and cannot be empirically proven. The theory complements scientific understanding by addressing important existential questions that guide our actions but remain unanswered by current science.
Core Tenets
- Non-aleatory and Purposeful Elements: The theory establishes that our cosmos’s elements exist purposefully rather than by chance. However, it acknowledges that its purposes may not always be understood by observing its elements. Surprisingly, by observing our cosmos from within, there is a possible simple explanation, which is intriguing as it is also better aligned with what we have understood from the universe so far than previous attempts.
Main Arguments:- Laws of physics are fixed and do not change over time, with no observable variation since the Big Bang.
- The types of chemical elements and forms of energy are limited and fixed, only capable of transformation among existing elements but not creation or destruction of new ones.
- The fine-tuning of physical constants allows life to exist, as even small changes in these constants would make life impossible. Additionally, the four fundamental forces—gravity, electromagnetism, and the strong and weak nuclear forces work in harmony to maintain balance, preventing the universe from descending into chaos.
- Randomness is extremely unlikely to produce order without laws to guide it. (A monkey can type randomly at a computer and eventually can create one operating software, maybe after a million years – but it will likely destroy what has created and create millions of operating software with a lot of noise before for each one without it.)
- Matter and energy are stable and structured, with no signs of chaotic noise. (The cosmos, while containing dark matter, dark energy, and vast emptiness, is fundamentally composed of a few simple elements: space, time, life, energy, and matter. Despite its vast scale)
- Symmetry is very hard to be achieved by chance, and it plays a crucial role in reducing chaos and creating order at the universe.
- Even the Entropy (Chaos/Disorder) of the universe is not random and follow predictable pathways.
- Unknown Architect Entities: The theory says little about who, how or what has decided about the cosmos foundational elements like physics, energies and others, leaving room for beliefs both from one or more god-like entity or other unknown entities, due to the unknown nature of these entities the theory avoids using any discrimination, but refers to these forces as the “architect(s) of cosmos”.
- Sovereign of the cosmos: There are no signs of anything in our cosmos that didn’t start with the Big Bang, nor are there any proofs of external influence on science. This sovereign can justify most of the central decisions of the cosmos. Even evolution can be explained as giving freedom to living beings without affecting their right to exist. Also, most of the restrictions and complexity of the universe can be traced back to it, including the dispositions of the planets and our cosmos’ capability of sustaining life – the reason why the theory considers it the most critical aspect in our cosmos structure choices.
- Freedom as the central pillar: The theory hypothesizes that the universe’s central, maybe all, aspects can be explained by the goal of maximizing some degree of freedom for its living beings, following a certain priority, with the freedom to exist in a sustained way as the most important of them.
- Degrees of Freedom: Living beings are granted varying levels of freedom related to existence, organized into different “degrees.” The freedoms revolve around the ability to exist, destroy what exists, transform what exists, and create existence itself. These degrees define how beings interact with the universe within the constraints of natural laws. While there are many other degrees of freedom—such as the ability to explore, reproduce, and perceive—these are intrinsic to the individual and do not significantly impact the collective, and thus are not emphasized here.
- Freedom to Exist: The most fundamental freedom granted to living beings is the autonomy to continue their existence. This freedom is enhanced when their existence is not dependent on the will of a creator and cannot be influenced, dictated, or altered by forces outside the cosmos.
- Freedom to Destroy or Create: Living beings do not possess this freedom at the existential level. An individual can kill another and end their life, but cannot remove from the universe the capability of sustaining life. Neither can create existence, only transform the cosmos to generate a new existence already possible within the cosmos’ rules. The first law of thermodynamics—conservation of energy—ensures that energy cannot be created or destroyed, only transformed. This limitation preserves the universe’s fundamental structure while allowing for transformation.
- Freedom to Transform: Living beings can transform existing matter and energy, which is the most accessible form of freedom in the cosmos. This freedom has increased as species evolve, enabling technological innovation and biological evolution. However, transformation operates within the constraints of the cosmos’s fixed laws.
- Priorities of Freedom: The degrees of freedom in the cosmos follow a hierarchical structure based on their impact on living beings. Freedom to Transform is naturally limited by the necessity to maintain Sustained Freedom Over Time, ensuring stability and continuity. Meanwhile, Freedom to Destroy or Create must be constrained in order to preserve both the Freedom to Exist and the Freedom to Transform, as unchecked creation or destruction could disrupt the fundamental balance that allows life to thrive and evolve.
- Sustained Freedom Over Time: The cosmos appears to prioritize long-term, stable freedoms over short-lived, extreme freedoms. Living beings are not granted the freedom to create or destroy energy, as this would disrupt the universe’s balance. Instead, the emphasis is on sustained freedom, such as the Freedom to Exist, which is preserved by the laws of physics, including the first law of thermodynamics.
- Emphasis on Freedom to Exist: The cosmos provides the necessary conditions for life to emerge and persist without external influence. Restrictions on other types of freedom can also be justified to guarantee the sustainable existence of living beings, and most of the central aspects of the universe seem to privilege this type of freedom instead of others.
- Limitation on the Freedom to Transform: While beings are free to transform their environment, this freedom is limited by physical laws and the possible deliberate isolation of life on celestial bodies, such as planets. This isolation may ensure that only species capable of balancing their transformative potential with self-preservation can explore further.
- Other possible associations of main elements of the cosmos with Freedom: Beyond the foundational elements previously discussed, several key aspects of the cosmos can be interpreted as deliberate decisions that enhance these degrees of freedom:
- Dimensionality of Space-Time: The universe’s three spatial dimensions and one time dimension allow for complex structures and stable environments, supporting life and enabling movement and interaction, which expands the capability of transformation.
- Chemical Diversity: The existence of numerous chemical elements and their ability to be combined expands the possibilities for organisms to utilize and transform their environment, and also overcome potential designed barriers as the living beings evolve.
- Consciousness and Intelligence: The possibility of emergence of intelligence enables beings to reflect, innovate, and intentionally transform their environment.
- Electromagnetic Spectrum Utilization: Access to various energy forms allows beings to perceive, communicate, and manipulate their surroundings in diverse ways.
- Gravitational Stability: Precise gravitational forces create stable planetary systems, providing consistent habitats where life can develop and thrive.
- Unidirectional Time: The consistent flow of time allows for cause and effect, enabling learning, planning, and progress.
- Resource Availability: Abundant resources like water and minerals support survival and technological advancement.
- Mathematical Order: The universe’s adherence to mathematical principles enables predictability and technological development.
- Cosmic Isolation: Vast distances between celestial bodies allow independent evolution without external interference.
- Possibility of Interstellar Travel: The available chemical elements and physics rules allows for the possibility of interstellar travel and communication, offering opportunities for expansion and collaboration.
- Conservation Laws: Laws like energy conservation maintain cosmic balance, preventing arbitrary creation or destruction.
Association with other principles
- Possibility of Multiple Universes: The theory does not describe or corroborate any inference related to the existence of multiple universes, instead, it focuses on the sovereignty of our universe. But acknowledges the possibility of their existence, each with its own set of laws and potentially created by different architects.
- Semi-deterministic Universe: The theory correlates the goal of freedom with existence of randomness – concluding that the universe contains elements of both deterministic order and randomness. This randomness introduces genuine unpredictability, allowing for a nuanced form of freedom, that is neither strictly deterministic nor chaotic, but deterministic in some aspects and not others.
- Life as a by-product of thermodynamic laws: This theory suggests that life may have emerged as a natural consequence of thermodynamic laws, implying that life could be an integral part of the universe’s design. Proposed by Jeremy England, a physicist from MIT, the theory of “dissipation-driven adaptation” posits that living organisms contribute to increasing the universe’s overall entropy while maintaining local order. This aligns with the universe’s fundamental principle of maximizing entropy.
Differences from Other Theories
Sovereign Cosmos Theory differs from other cosmological and philosophical theories in several key ways:
- Philosophical Stance: The theory is presented as a philosophical exploration of autonomy and freedom in the universe rather than a scientific theory making empirical claims.
- Deism: While Deism posits that a creator initiated the universe and refrains from further intervention, Sovereign Cosmos Theory extends this idea by emphasizing the importance of freedom for living beings and the carefully designed framework that allows for that freedom.
- Intelligent Design: Contrary to Intelligent Design, which suggests ongoing guidance or intervention by an intelligent creator, Sovereign Cosmos Theory holds that the architects do not intervene after creation. The universe evolves independently, with randomness and autonomy built into its framework, aligning with scientific perspectives.
- Deterministic Theories: Deterministic theories propose that every event is a consequence of preceding events. Sovereign Cosmos Theory allows for randomness, meaning not all outcomes are predetermined, and living beings possess genuine autonomy within the cosmic framework.
Philosophical Implications
The Sovereign Cosmos Theory presents profound philosophical implications regarding the nature of freedom, autonomy, and existence:
- Redefining Freedom: The theory redefines freedom as something that exists within the balance of determinism and randomness. It suggests that complete freedom may be unattainable, but the architects designed a framework that maximizes autonomy for living beings while ensuring cosmic stability. This approach challenges traditional notions of free will, presenting it as an emergent property rather than an absolute state.
- Epistemological Questions: A stronger engagement with epistemological questions, such as how we could possibly know about the architects or their intentions, enhances the credibility of the theory. Sovereign Cosmos Theory posits that we can infer the architects’ intentions through the observable decisions they made in the universe’s design—much like understanding the purpose of a car by observing its structure and function. This analogy underscores the importance of empirical observation in deducing metaphysical claims.
- Freedom vs. Determinism: The coexistence of deterministic laws and randomness in the cosmos allows for a nuanced version of freedom that is neither illusory nor chaotic. This perspective challenges deterministic frameworks by suggesting that randomness is a necessary component for meaningful autonomy, making the theory a genuinely new contribution to discussions of free will and cosmic order.
- Ethical Implications of Non-Intervention: The architects’ decision not to intervene raises questions about the ethical implications of their actions. The theory implies that the architects prioritize the evolution and autonomy of species rather than the welfare of individual beings. This aligns with a broader evolutionary perspective, where the survival of species capable of managing their destructive capabilities is favored over direct protection or interference.
- Purpose and Cosmic Balance: The theory emphasizes the architects’ role in creating a balance between freedom and destruction. By establishing limits on the destructive potential of living beings, the architects aimed to ensure that the universe could sustain meaningful freedom without collapsing into chaos. This balance reflects a deliberate cosmic design, where freedom is preserved as long as it does not lead to self-destruction.
Historical Evolution of the Concept
- Aristotle (384–322 BCE): Introduced the concept of the Unmoved Mover, suggesting a prime cause that initiates motion but does not intervene thereafter. This idea of non-intervention set the foundation for later philosophical explorations into the autonomy of the universe.
- Reference: Aristotle, Metaphysics, Book XII.
- Epicurus (341–270 BCE): Proposed that the gods were indifferent to human affairs and did not intervene in the world. His idea of random atomic “swerves” as a source of free will echoes the allowance for randomness in Sovereign Cosmos Theory.
- Reference: Epicurus, Letter to Herodotus.
- Baruch Spinoza (1632–1677): Suggested that God and nature are one and that the universe operates under fixed laws, with no further divine interference. Spinoza’s concept of an orderly universe influenced later ideas of cosmic sovereignty.
- Reference: Spinoza, Ethics.
- Isaac Newton (1642–1727): Newton’s laws of motion suggested that the universe operates under immutable physical laws, which were set into motion at creation. His idea of a clockwork universe provided a scientific foundation for non-interventionist theories.
- Reference: Newton, Principia Mathematica.
- David Hume (1711–1776): Argued against the existence of miracles and divine intervention, stating that the natural world operates under observable laws. Hume’s skepticism helped establish the idea that the universe functions autonomously.
- Reference: Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding.
- Immanuel Kant (1724–1804): Kant’s exploration of the inherent laws of perception and cognition contributed to the understanding of an ordered universe governed by rational principles.
- Reference: Kant, Critique of Pure Reason.
- Deism (18th Century): The Deist movement, including thinkers like Voltaire and Thomas Paine, posited that God created the universe but refrained from interfering with it afterward. This laid the groundwork for the non-interventionist aspects of Sovereign Cosmos Theory.
- Reference: Paine, The Age of Reason; Voltaire, Philosophical Letters.
- Pierre-Simon Laplace (1749–1827): His work on celestial mechanics, coupled with his assertion that divine intervention is unnecessary to explain the workings of the universe, furthered the notion of a self-regulating cosmos.
- Reference: Laplace, A Philosophical Essay on Probabilities.
- Albert Einstein (1879–1955): Einstein’s theories of relativity described a deterministic universe governed by laws, but his discomfort with quantum randomness left a tension between determinism and randomness that resonates in Sovereign Cosmos Theory.
- Reference: Einstein, The Meaning of Relativity.
Limitations and Ongoing Inquiry
The Sovereign Cosmos Theory is a philosophical framework that explores concepts beyond empirical verification. It acknowledges that some of its ideas are speculative and may not be testable with current scientific methods. The theory invites open-minded consideration and encourages ongoing philosophical and scientific exploration to deepen our understanding of the universe and our place within it.
References:
- Aristotle, Metaphysics, Book XII.
- Epicurus, Letter to Herodotus.
- Spinoza, Baruch. Ethics.
- Newton, Isaac. Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica.
- Hume, David. An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding.
- Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Pure Reason.
- Paine, Thomas. The Age of Reason.
- Voltaire. Philosophical Letters.
- Laplace, Pierre-Simon. A Philosophical Essay on Probabilities.
- Einstein, Albert. The Meaning of Relativity.
- Canadian Sovereign Theory Institute, Sovereign Cosmos Theory.