Skip to content

intergalactic, cosmic, interstellar, space oriented anthropocentric


Am wondering from the question of how anthropocene might translate, relate, or refute(??) itself when linked with the rest of our curiously nameless universe. (see notes bellow)

This lecture: – 28 mins in(ish) he talk of saving planet’s living orgs by preventing an imact by an astreoid kind of thing.
I wonder whether he might be correct. Can it be that given the resrats of planetary lives, having some bastards like us becomes worthwhile for genetic codes?
ie, if i was a code and was given a situation of million years (possible) development in a universe where in that time scale some rocks might probably kill or harm me big time – would i fancy developing beings that could avoid a restart?

Other anthopocenic linked thoughts? (catherine M) (ben b.)

Here’s why am bothered by this extraterrestrial anthropocene question:

Do we – and other animals/intelligence/etc. affect the sun by witnessing
it like an observer affects an art object by witnessing it?

What of moon and mars landings? Can it be claimed that moving bit of
ground here on earth is fundamentally different just because of scale?

How can it be known what and how we affect stuff – since future isn’t in
the known?
Why not go radical with lee smolin and say that in fact we evolve the
seeming laws of physics?

Indeed, why not go past the human and propose an opero-scene?
Or an Opera for short? When the idea is that creating energies, be it by
intelligence or by organic being – as with jeremy london’s hypothesis of
differences between organic and “non-organic” in terms of energy
production – is a part of the whole that indeed creates it?
Perhaps go to the very ability to be an organic compound..?
Indeed, that would imply a this-universe-centricity.. (is there a name for this universe?)

I don’t like that centricity..
Perhaps though, with Operativity, it can be claimed that even in a
universe when time operates as non operation, or de-operation, or as an
element that has nothing to do with operativity – by checking on something abstract like operations, that universe’s qualities could be appreciated?


  1. aharon

    Around 44 mins in with the he says something curious.
    He talks about sustainability of a civilization rather than “nature”.
    I think this is very interesting because it negates meta capitalism – the idea that competition, on a civilization as well as corporation, scales – is an idea to do.
    To keep certain values, one should not fancy competition on certain levels. Competition on a universal scale is, from even a capitalistic view point – not wanted nor needed.

Leave a Reply