Darwin's Dangerous Idea - Evolution and the Meaning of Life

178 PRIMING DARWIN'S PUMP The Laws of the Game of Life 179
Is the theory testable? Smolin offers some predictions that would, if disconfirmed,
pretty well eliminate his idea: it should be the case that all the
"near" variations in physical constants from the values we enjoy should yield
universes in which black holes are less probable or less frequent than in our
own. In short, he thinks our universe should manifest at least a local, if not
global, optimum in die black-hole-making competition. The trouble is that
there are too few constraints, so far as I can see, on what should count as a
"near" variation and why, but perhaps further elaboration on the theory will
clarify this. Needless to say, it is hard to know what to make of this idea yet,
but whatever the eventual verdict of scientists, the idea already serves to
secure a philosophical point. Freeman Dyson and Fred Hoyle, among many
others, think they see a wonderful pattern in the laws of physics; if they or
anyone else were to make the tactical mistake of asking the rhetorical
question "What else but God could possibly explain it?" Smolin would have a
nicely deflating reply. (I advise my philosophy students to develop
hypersensitivity for rhetorical questions in philosophy. They paper over
whatever cracks there are in the arguments.)
But suppose, for the sake of argument, that Smolin's speculations are all
flawed; suppose selection of universes doesn't work after all. There is a
weaker, semi-Darwinian speculation that also answers the rhetorical question
handily. Hume toyed with this weaker idea, too, as we already noted, in part
VIII of his Dialogues-.
Instead of supposing matter infinite, as Epicurus did, let us suppose it finite.
A finite number of particles is only susceptible of finite transpositions: And
it must happen, in an eternal duration, that every possible order or position
must be tried an infinite number of times __
Suppose ... that matter were thrown into any position, by a blind,
unguided force; it is evident that this first position must in all probability
be die most confused and most disorderly imaginable, without any resemblance
to those works of human contrivance, which, along with a symmetry
of parts, discover an adjustment of means to ends and a tendency to
self-preservation— Suppose, that the actuating force, whatever it be, still
continues in matter— Thus the universe goes on for many ages in a
continued succession of chaos and disorder. But is it not possible that it
may settle at last... ? May we not hope for such a position, or rather be
assured of it, from the eternal revolutions of unguided matter, and may not
this account for all the appearing wisdom and contrivance which is in the
universe?
This idea exploits no version of selection at all, but simply draws attention
to the fact that we have eternity to play with. There is no five-billion-year
deadline in this instance, the way there is for the evolution of life on Earth.
As we saw in our consideration of the Libraries of Babel and Mendel,
we need reproduction and selection if we are to traverse Vast spaces in non-
Vast amounts of time, but when time is no longer a limiting consideration,
selection is no longer a requirement. In die course of eternity, you can go
everywhere in the Library of Babel or the Library of Mendel—or the Library
of Einstein (all possible values of all die constants of physics)—as long as
you keep moving. (Hume imagines an "actuating force" to keep the shuffling
going, and this reminds us of Locke's argument about matter without motion,
but it does not suppose diat the actuating force has any intelligence at all.) In
fact, if you shuffle through all the possibilities for eternity, you will pass
through each possible place in these Vast (but finite) spaces not just once but
an infinity of times!
Several versions of this speculation have been seriously considered by
physicists and cosmologists in recent years. John Archibald Wheeler (1974 ),
for instance, has proposed diat the universe oscillates back and forth for
eternity, a Big Bang is followed by expansion, which is followed by contraction
into a Big Crunch, which is followed by another Big Bang, and so
fordi forever, with random variations in the constants and odier crucial
parameters occurring in each oscillation. Each possible setting is tried an
infinity of times, and so every variation on every theme, both those diat
"make sense" and those diat are absurd, spins itself out, not once but an
infinity of times.
It is hard to believe that this idea is empirically testable in any meaningful
way, but we should reserve judgment. Variations or elaborations on the
theme just might have implications that could be confirmed or disconfirmed.
In die meantime, it is worth noting diat tiiis family of hypotiieses
does have the virtue of extending die principles of explanation diat work so
well in testable domains all the way out. Consistency and simplicity are in its
favor. And diat, once again, is certainly enough to blunt die appeal of the
traditional alternative. 9
Anybody who won a coin-tossing tournament would be tempted to think
he was blessed widi magical powers, especially if he had no direct knowledge
of die odier players. Suppose you were to create a ten-round cointossing
tournament without letting each of the 1,024 "contestants" realize he
was entered in a tournament. You say to each one as you recruit him.-
"Congratulations, my friend. I am Mephistopheles, and I am going to bestow
great powers on you. Witii me at your side, you are going to win ten
9. For a more detailed analysis of these issues, and a defense of a "neo-PIatonist" middle
ground, see J. Leslie 1989. (Like most middle grounds, this is not likely to appeal to either
the devout or the skeptical, but it is at least an ingenious attempt at a compromise.) Van
Inwagen (199 3a, chh. 7 and 8 ) provides a clear and relentless analysis of the arguments—
Leslie's, but also the arguments I have presented here—from a position of unusual neutrality.
Anyone less than satisfied with my treatment should turn to this source first.