Abstract

The article discusses the modern interest in discussing ideas about space and the Universe, as intended to either protect humanity or destroy it. The author examines both alternatives, showing what real cosmological knowledge is and whether it can provide forecasting and modeling of the future in relations of life or death. The first point of view and concept, examined on the example of the concepts of O. Bazaluk and Russian cosmists, interpret the Universe as good and salvation for man if he obeys its laws, but not passively, but by transforming himself and the world. The second appeals to thermal death, the extinction of the Sun, and other random cosmic cataclysms (the Earth will collide with another celestial body or lose its magnetic field, or this field will be destroyed by a supernova explosion, or the Earth will die as a result of the natural evolution of the Universe). And no one knows when: maybe in a couple of billion years, maybe tomorrow. The death of humanity as a result of its own activity and conflicts (ecological crisis, nuclear war, manmade disasters) cannot be discounted. Why, the author asks, are the latter not transformed forms of action of the same cosmos and Universe? The author shows that cosmological knowledge is teachings or discourses, and not strict theories, therefore it is almost impossible to predict and calculate on their basis. However, a number of measures are being outlined that should help minimize the threat to life on Earth: reasonable restrictions on our desires, while simultaneously collectively discussing what “reasonable” means; creating conditions that reduce the likelihood of the death of our planet from random impacts of space; further exploration of space with the goal not so much of learning how the Universe works, but of being patient while waiting for it to become clearer what is in front of us, and for our real capabilities in terms of interstellar travel to become clearer.

Keywords

space, universe, research, knowledge, models, life, death, salvation