Meaning of Life

You have a stutter, thats unfortunate

Shall I assume your ability to understand my language is somehow compromised? That would honestly explain a lot.

The universe does have a goal, what is our goal, to survive and carry on our genes

Please supply the intrinsic goals of the universe along with evidence to support your claim.

As for survival this is a goal but not provably an intrinsic one.

An essential goal of the universe is to supply life

Life so far as we know exists as a thin film stuck to the surface of one small world. If life is a goal of the universe it would seem to have mostly failed at this goal. Still I think you misunderstand the difference between goals and unguided causation. 

The tides are not a goal of the moon. The tides are simply caused by the moon. 

I don't know what your point is and I'm not sure I agree with this statement anyway.

Must I preface every statement with it would appear or all evidence points too? Can we not at some point simply take that as read? The tides do not appear to be a goal 9f the moon. Unless you can demonstrate otherwise then I have no choice but to reject any claim to the contrary. 

If we are just an another planet, then there would be another planet of life

There may be other planets that support life. We do not know of any such planets however and the vast majority of observable space would appear to be completely inhospitable to life. 

If you see a flaw in my logic please point it out and offer a counterfactual. 

is evolution really that rare, wow God did it

We have no way of knowing exactly how rare life is but far more of the universe appears to be empty uninhabited space than anything else. Why would we not think that empty space rather than occupied space was the goal given these observations?

Prove it

Prove that the universe would appear to be mostly empty space? Do you not have access to Google? Are you unfamiliar with our current cosmological models? If so you would seem to be woefully underprepared for this conversation. 

Well I have to assume the universe isnt real, right?

Solipsism is impossible to dismiss philosophically and it is true that we can never be certain but it provides no actionable data and even if the universe is illusory we can still evaluate "reality" and become conversant in the physical laws that govern it. If the universe is an illusion it would appear to be mostly the illusion of empty inhospitable space containing no apparent life or means of supporting life.

If you see a specific flaw in my logic please point it out and provide a counterfactual. 

SOMETIMES, perceiving something as real doesn’t cut it. With the shimmering image of a hologram, the illusion is clear enough. That 3D representation is a trick of the light, a projection of information encoded in just two dimensions. But it would be a bit of a shocker if we found out that the entire universe were made that way.
We’re not close to proving that, still less working out the implications. But a groundswell of work in theoretical physics suggests it’s a distinct possibility.
The story really begins in the 1990s. Physicists were struggling to tame the intractable mathematics of string theory – our best stab at forcing gravity to play nicely with the other three forces of nature – when they discovered a cunning trick. Under certain circumstances, by subtracting one from the number of dimensions in the universe you were dealing with – in other words, treating it like a hologram – gravity could be made to disappear.


The best-researched instance of this “holographic principle”, known as the AdS/CFT correspondence, only works in a complex 5D space-time bent back on itself rather like the surface of a Pringle. The trick has proved surprisingly useful, not just in string theory but also to elucidate the workings of practical things like superconductors, and explain such stubborn problems as why particles have mass.

SOMETIMES, perceiving something as real doesn’t cut it. With the shimmering image of a hologram, the illusion is clear enough. That 3D representation is a trick of the light, a projection of information encoded in just two dimensions. But it would be a bit of a shocker if we found out that the entire universe were made that way.
We’re not close to proving that, still less working out the implications. But a groundswell of work in theoretical physics suggests it’s a distinct possibility.
The story really begins in the 1990s. Physicists were struggling to tame the intractable mathematics of string theory – our best stab at forcing gravity to play nicely with the other three forces of nature – when they discovered a cunning trick. Under certain circumstances, by subtracting one from the number of dimensions in the universe you were dealing with – in other words, treating it like a hologram – gravity could be made to disappear.


The best-researched instance of this “holographic principle”, known as the AdS/CFT correspondence, only works in a complex 5D space-time bent back on itself rather like the surface of a Pringle. The trick has proved surprisingly useful, not just in string theory but also to elucidate the workings of practical things like superconductors, and explain such stubborn problems as why particles have mass.

If the universe is a hologram it still doesn't change its apparent nature. It still appears to have no intrinsic goals and to be mostly full of empty space with a very occasional material body to break the monotony. 

You say the universe may not be real. As a soft solipsistic I agree whole simultaneously informing you that it is immaterial to our discussion.

Te universe is pretty!!!!

So evolution is fake too

Within the possibly illusory universe we inhabit evolution is observable taking place. If the universe is real then so is evolution and if the universe is an illusion then evolution is an observable part of that illusion and at least as real as all the rest of it.

God is an observable part too 

That many people claim the existence of god(s) is observable. The god(s) themselves do not appear to be. Not in the way that evolution and gravity are observable anyway.

How do you know that? God talks to us

Anecdotal evidence is insufficient to establish such an extraordinary claim. Without independently verifiable testable evidence your claim can and should be dismissed. 

why

Because skepticism is the default.