Big History – Human Behavior Patterns

What is Big History?

Big history, the history of the universe, offers a unified account of the entire past using the best available scientific information. It begins with the origins of the Universe, surveys the creation of stars, planets, and our own Earth, and then describes the history of life on Earth and the appearance of our own species. Then it describes the remarkable historical career of human beings, and it ends with a brief look into the future.

Big history can give valuable insights into human behavior patterns. Evolution of organisms and especially human evolution are coherently integrated into Big History, giving human evolution and human behavior patterns a broader perspective and meaning. David Christian, Professor of History at San Diego State University, uses eight important thresholds in Big History which ares also of importance to humanity and human behavior patterns. Big History surveys the past at all possible scales, from conventional history, to the much larger scales of biology and geology, to the universal scales of cosmology. It weaves a single story, stretching from the origins of the universe to the present day and beyond, using accounts of the past developed within scholarly disciplines that are usually studied quite separately. Human history is seen as part of the history of our Earth and biosphere, and the Earth’s history, in turn, is seen as part of the history of the Universe. In this way, the different disciplines that make up this large story can be used to illuminate each other. The unified account of the past assembled in this way can help us understand the place of humanity within the Universe. Like traditional creation stories, big history provides a map of our place in space and time; but it does so using the insights and knowledge of modern science.

At first, the sheer scale of big history may seem unfamiliar—after all, historians usually focus on human societies, particularly those that had states and left documentary records. Until the mid-20th century, “history,” in the sense of a chronologically structured account of the past, meant “human history” because we could only date those parts of the past for which we had written records. Since World War II, however, new dating techniques have allowed us to determine absolute dates for events before the appearance of written records or even of human beings. Radiometric dating techniques, based on the regular breakdown of radioactive materials, were at the heart of this chronometric revolution. These new chronometric techniques have transformed our ideas of the past, enabling us for the first time to construct a well-structured, scientifically rigorous history extending back to the origins of the Universe!

Telling this story is the daunting challenge taken up by Big History; however, we have so much knowledge today that no single individual can be an expert on it all. Thus, you will not find here detailed analyses of the functioning of DNA, the causes of the French Revolution, the myths of ancient Greece, or the artistic innovations of the Renaissance—plenty of other sources offer more detailed accounts of such topics. What you will find is an attempt to weave stories told within many different historical disciplines into a larger story so that, instead of focusing on the details of each period or discipline, we can see the larger patterns that link all parts of the past. The same tale can also be told, with varying emphases, by astronomers and geologists. But at the heart of any such account is a core story, one that enables us to see the underlying unity of modern knowledge.

The unifying theme adopted in Big History is the idea of increasing complexity. Though most of the Universe still consists of simple empty space, during almost 14 billion years new forms of complexity have appeared in pockets, including stars, all the chemical elements, planets, living organisms, and human societies. Each of these new forms of complexity has its own distinctive “emergent” properties, which is why each of them tends to be studied within a different scholarly discipline.

Tresholds in Big History (according to David Christian)
Threshold 1	The Universe—Cosmology
Threshold 2	The First Stars—Astronomy
Threshold 3	The Chemical Elements—Chemistry
Threshold 4	The Earth and the Solar System—Geology
Threshold 5	Life—Biology
Threshold 6	The Paleolithic Era—Human History
Threshold 7	The Agrarian Era—Human History
Threshold 8	The Modern Era—Human History

Display 1

The first threshold we cross is the creation of the Universe itself about 13.7 billion years ago during the big bang. This theory summarizes some of the main insights of modern cosmology. We move from cosmology to astronomy in the second threshold with the creation of stars, which were the first really complex objects to appear in our Universe as well as the source of energy and raw materials for later forms of complexity. The third threshold is the creation of the chemical elements, which laid the foundations for the new forms of complexity studied within the discipline of chemistry. In the fourth threshold, where we cross from chemistry to geology, we zoom in on our own tiny corner of the Universe: the solar system and the creation of the planets, including Earth.

Earth provided an ideal environment for the fifth threshold, which takes us from geology to biology and describes the appearance of life; we survey the history of life on Earth and the evolution of our own species. The sixth threshold in this course is the appearance of human beings between 200,000 and 300,000 years ago, leading us from biology to history and marking the beginning of the first of three major eras of human history. The seventh threshold is the appearance of agriculture about 10,000 to 11,000 years ago, which supported larger and denser populations and made possible the creation of more complex human societies. Finally, the eighth threshold concerns the modern world within the last few centuries; during this period, the pace of innovation increased, creating human societies vastly more complex and integrated than those of the Agrarian era.

Simplicity and complexity

What theme can possibly unite a story that embraces so many different disciplines? We will see that the idea of complexity offers a powerful unifying theme. Since the Universe appeared 13.7 billion years ago, more complex entities have appeared within it, from stars to living organisms to our own species, Homo sapiens. But what is complexity? And how did our Universe build more complex things? The question is tricky because one of the fundamental laws of physics, the second law of thermodynamics, implies that over time the level of disorder (or “entropy”) in the Universe ought to be increasing and the level of complexity should be diminishing. So how can complexity increase? The answer seems to be that even if disorder is increasing in the Universe as a whole, it can still decrease locally and temporarily. Where matter and energy are distributed unevenly, energy can flow and rearrange matter into new structures such as ourselves. Astronomer Eric Chaisson has suggested that we can even measure different levels of complexity by estimating the energy flows through different entities. These calculations, as far as we know, suggest that modern human societies may be among the most complex things ever created. If correct, this conclusion revolutionizes our understanding of our place in the modern creation story.

Basic properties of complex entities:
A. Complex things, like stars, planets, or living organisms, consist of diverse components bound into larger
structures.
B. These structures display “emergent” properties: features that are not present in the components from which
they are constructed, but appear only when those components are assembled in specific ways. For example,
the properties of water are not apparent in its component atoms, hydrogen and oxygen. They emerge only
from a particular arrangement of those atoms. Emergent properties can appear magical because they do not
reside in particular things but only in particular arrangements of those things. The idea of “emergence” is
present in many different religious and scholarly traditions.
C. Complex entities have a certain stability. Molecules or stars survive for billions of years; butterflies survive
for just a few days. But eventually they all break down.
D. Energy flows are needed to bind simple components into more complex structures. Without these flows the
structures break down.
E. We study complex things because we are complex. But there are also good biological reasons for our
fascination. To survive, we must be good at detecting complex patterns in our surroundings (such as tigers
or tax inspectors!).
Over 13 billion years, the upper level of complexity appears to have increased.
A. Intuitively, this is reasonably clear. The early Universe consisted of little more than hydrogen and helium; today’s Universe contains many more interesting objects, such as ourselves!
B. There may be more rigorous ways of demonstrating that complexity has increased. Astronomer Eric Chaisson (who teaches an astronomer’s version of big history in Boston) argues that if it takes energy flows to sustain complexity, we ought to be able to measure levels of complexity by estimating the size of those
energy flows in different complex entities.
C. To test this idea, Chaisson has estimated the amount of energy (in ergs) flowing through a given amount of mass (in grams) in a given amount of time (seconds) within several complex entities. He finds that these energy flows increase significantly as we move from stars to planets to living organisms to modern human
society.
D. Chaisson’s results suggest conclusions of fundamental importance for big history.
- Most of the Universe has remained simple.
- Yet the upper level of complexity has increased. Chaisson’s calculations suggest that living organisms are more complex than stars, and modern human societies may be among the most complex things we know.
- However, more complex objects also appear to be rarer and more fragile than simpler objects. Stars, for example, are more common and survive longer than butterflies. The simplest thing of all—the vacuum—is more common than either!

The idea that complexity has increased may seem to contradict one of the most fundamental laws of physics: the second law of thermodynamics. The laws of thermodynamics describe the relationship between energy and work (the ability to make things happen, to cause change).
A. The first law states that the total amount of energy available in any closed system (such as the Universe) is fixed.
B. Yet at any particular point in the Universe, the form, distribution, and intensity of energy can change. This matters because work can be done only when energy is distributed unevenly, so that it can flow from one level to another: from the top to the bottom of a waterfall, or from the boiler to the condenser of a steam engine.
C. However, as energy flows its distribution evens out, thereby reducing the capacity of energy to perform work. As a battery does work, electrons flow from one terminal to the other until the distribution of electrons has evened out and we say the battery has “run down.” Energy has not disappeared; it is simply distributed more evenly so it cannot flow or do work. The level of simplicity or disorder (known as “entropy”) has increased.
D. The second law of thermodynamics was formulated by a German physicist, Rudolf Clausius (1822–1888). It generalizes these principles, stating that differences in energy levels tend to diminish as work is done, so that entropy increases. Applied to the Universe as a whole, the second law of thermodynamics implies that energy flows ought to decrease over time.
E. As Stuart Kauffman puts it:
“The consequence of the second law is that … order—the most unlikely of the arrangements—tends to disappear. … It follows that the maintenance of order requires that some form of work be done on the system. In the absence of work, order disappears. Hence we come to our current sense that an incoherent collapse of order is the natural state of things.” (Kauffman, At Home in the Universe, pp. 9–10)
Complexity ought to be decreasing, not increasing!

How can the upper levels of complexity increase if energy flows in the Universe are constantly being run down? There have been several attempts to solve this apparent paradox.
A. Nobel Prize–winning chemist Ilya Prigogine (1917–2003) suggested there may exist a spontaneous tendency toward “self-organization” wherever there are large energy flows. As yet, though, it has been impossible to identify such laws.
B. A simpler answer is that even if energy differentials are diminishing over the entire Universe, they may increase locally. For example, gravity packs energy and matter into smaller spaces, thereby creating the local differentials in density and temperature from which stars are built. In turn, the heat generated in stars creates new energy flows within their hinterlands. This is why planets are good places for complex beings such as us. (Inside stars, however, the energy flows may be too intense for the building of new forms of complexity.)
C. Eric Chaisson has suggested a third possible source of free energy (or “negentropy”). The expansion of the Universe itself may constantly create new energy imbalances, ensuring that work can always be done somewhere in the Universe!
D. These conclusions do not contradict the second law of thermodynamics because in the long run local energy flows diminish energy differentials in the Universe as a whole.

The paradox between the second law of thermodynamics and increased complexity of human societies

Wherever there are local energy gradients allowing energy to flow, it is possible, in principle, for complex entities to appear. The second law of thermodynamics, however, states that in an isolated system, the total entropy (a measure of disorder) will never decrease over time. This law might seem at odds with the observed increase in complexity and order within human societies, but this apparent contradiction can be reconciled by considering several key points:

Human Societies are Not Isolated Systems:

The second law of thermodynamics applies strictly to isolated systems where no energy or matter enters or leaves. Human societies, however, are open systems. They exchange energy and matter with their environment. For instance, humans consume energy in the form of food, harness energy from natural resources, and release waste heat and other byproducts into the environment. This exchange allows for the local decrease in entropy within societies while the total entropy of the universe still increases.

Energy Input from the Sun:

The Earth receives a constant influx of energy from the Sun. This solar energy drives many processes that decrease local entropy on Earth, such as photosynthesis in plants, which forms the basis of most food chains. The energy from the Sun enables the development and maintenance of complex structures and systems, including human societies. While the Earth and its ecosystems may become more ordered, the Sun’s overall entropy increases as it radiates energy.

Local Decrease in Entropy vs. Global Increase:

The second law of thermodynamics allows for local decreases in entropy as long as they are offset by greater increases in entropy elsewhere. In human societies, the creation of order (e.g., constructing buildings, developing technology) involves processes that increase entropy elsewhere (e.g., burning fossil fuels, dissipating heat). Additionally, the decrease of entropy on earth is also mitigated by the increase of entropy of the Sun.
- Therefore, the decrease of entropy on Earth is assumed to be smaller than the increase of entropy of the Sun:
  - Sun’s Energy Output: The Sun emits a vast amount of energy into space, including towards Earth. This energy is primarily in the form of high-energy, low-entropy radiation (mostly visible light and some ultraviolet).
  - Energy Absorption on Earth: When Earth absorbs this solar energy, it uses part of it to drive processes that lead to decreases in local entropy. For example, photosynthesis in plants, the water cycle, and other biochemical processes create more ordered and complex structures from simpler components.
  - Heat Radiation from Earth: Earth then radiates energy back into space in the form of lower-energy, higher-entropy infrared radiation. The energy Earth radiates is less ordered than the energy it receives from the Sun.
  - Net Entropy Increase: The increase in entropy due to the Sun’s nuclear fusion processes and the radiation of energy from the Earth far exceeds the local decreases in entropy that occur on Earth. Essentially, while Earth becomes more ordered locally, the overall entropy of the Sun-Earth system increases because the energy transformations lead to greater disorder in the universe.
  - To sum up, the local decreases in entropy on Earth, which are necessary for the development of life and complex systems, are assumed to be more than compensated by the larger increase in entropy of the Sun and the overall system. This ensures compliance with the second law of thermodynamics, as the total entropy of the entire Sun-Earth system (and indeed, the universe) increases.

Entropy and Information Theory:

Entropy in thermodynamics is often associated with disorder, but in information theory, entropy can relate to the amount of information or complexity. Human societies can be seen as systems that process and organize information, creating structured and complex patterns. This organizational process can be associated with a decrease in entropy locally but is always accompanied by energy consumption and waste production, which increase entropy globally.

Evolution and Self-Organization:

Biological evolution and self-organization are processes that can lead to increased complexity and order over time. These processes are driven by the flow of energy and the natural selection of systems that are more efficient in utilizing available resources. Human societies have evolved through such mechanisms, becoming increasingly complex as they develop more sophisticated ways to harness and utilize energy.

In summary, the increase in complexity of human societies is not inconsistent with the second law of thermodynamics because these societies are not isolated systems. They draw energy from external sources, primarily the Sun, and release energy as waste heat and other byproducts, ensuring that the total entropy of the universe still increases. Thus, local decreases in entropy (increased order and complexity) are more than compensated by global increases in entropy.