From Noosphere to the Technosphere
Tracing Earth's Evolutionary Journey from Rock Layers to Thinking Layers
The Emergence of the Earth System Science
Before the mid-18th century, the dominant view was that the Earth's features were essentially unchanging and had been created in their current form just about 6,000 years ago, with little to no change over time, in line with the biblical account of creation. This view began to shift with the work of Scottish geologist James Hutton (1726-1797), who was the first to introduce the revolutionary concept of the Earth as a constantly evolving, self-regulating system. It was a significant step towards a more comprehensive understanding of the planet. His pioneering work laid the foundations of modern geology and the groundwork for a more dynamic and interconnected view of the Earth’s geological features and their formation.
In the early 20th century, the Ukrainian geochemist Vladimir Vernadsky made groundbreaking contributions to our understanding of the Earth as an interconnected system. Vernadsky proposed that the Earth's atmosphere, hydrosphere, and biosphere are deeply interconnected and profoundly influenced by biological processes. He argued that the biosphere, the thin spherical shell of matter that surrounds Earth’s incandescent interior, which is inhabited by living organisms, is not a passive entity, but rather a dynamic, self-regulating system that exerts a powerful geological influence.
Vernadsky's ideas were initially overlooked by his contemporaries but his insights paved the way for a more holistic and interdisciplinary approach to understanding the planet’s dynamics and evolution, influencing the development of modern Earth system science.
Pioneering the Noosphere and the Integration of Human Thought with Earth's Systems
One of Vernadsky’s most intriguing concepts is the noosphere (derives from ancient Greek νοῦς meaning ‘mind’ and σφαῖρα meaning sphere, so it could be translated as a ‘sphere of mind’), something like a sphere of human thought emerging among human beings through culture and technology.
Its history starts in 1922–1923 when Vladimir Vernadsky visited the Sorbonne in Paris to teach geochemistry. There he met palaeontologist Pierre Teilhard de Chardin and mathematician Édouard Le Roy and their discussions led them to the idea that the biosphere is evolving a new thinking layer, or noosphere. Vernadsky presented the concept in a 1944 article that was translated into English and published in the science magazine The American Scientist in January 1945, but it was Teilhard who coined the term ‘noosphere’, and later expanded on the idea in his 1947 essay The Formation of the Noosphere.
Emerging from the industrial revolution, the noosphere represented the next stage in the evolution of the biosphere. In this stage, humanity evolves into a “large-scale geological force” capable of accelerating global connectivity and profoundly transforming the global biochemical cycles. Vernadsky defined it as “a reconstruction of the biosphere in the interests of freely thinking humanity as a single totality.”
In his book ‘The Phenomenon of Man (1965), Teilhard argued that people were already beginning to communicate on a global scale. He described it as a new layer, the “thinking layer” with the
“earth not only becoming covered by myriads of grains of thought but becoming enclosed in a single thinking envelope so as to form, functionally, no more than a single vast grain of thought on the sidereal scale, the plurality of individual reflections grouping themselves together and reinforcing one another in the act of a single unanimous reflection.” (Teilhard , 1965)
As humans communicate and share knowledge they contribute to this collective activity of cognition, which functions on a planetary scale, a Planetary Mind, if you will, capable of high-order thinking, and problem-solving ideas about how humanity can collectively work towards addressing complex global challenges, ranging from climate change and environmental degradation, to global conflicts and economic disparities. It implies a shift from competition to cooperation, as humans realise that working together yields better results for the species and the planet.
The noosphere has been interpreted in various ways over time, but here will focus on its potential to become a planetary superorganism. This includes the geosphere, the biosphere, humanity, and the technosphere, the latter representing the material flows, technical infrastructures and technological artefacts created by humans. It is emerging as a global system, functionally equivalent to other Earth spheres, such as lithosphere and biosphere, by metabolising energy, but lacking (at least until now) the ability to recycle its waste.
The emergence of the Technosphere represents a major transition in the development of Earth. It could be argued that it is both a driver and a result of the Anthropocene, a proposed geological epoch that recognises that human activities have a dominant influence on the environment, climate and ecology of the Earth. Key indicators of this impact include climate change, biodiversity loss, plastic pollution and changes in the composition of the atmosphere, oceans and soils.
Like the Noosphere, the Anthropocene challenges the traditional division between ‘nature and ‘culture’; however, whereas the Noosphere concept often overlooks the potential negative outcomes of humanity’s impact on planetary processes, emphasising instead the transformation brought about by the emergence of a global culture and ethical awareness, the Anthropocene questions humanity’s ability to guide the future development of the Technosphere.
The Gaia hypothesis
In 1972, James Lovelock presented a thought-provoking theory. He suggested that life is not merely a passive inhabitant of a fortuitously habitable planet. Instead, life has played an active role in regulating the planetary environment throughout geological history.
Lovelock has already pursued a successful career inventing chemical instruments, including, most famously, the electron capture detector (ECD). The ECD's ability to detect even the smallest traces of harmful chemicals has led to its widespread adoption by government agencies, such as the US Food and Drug Administration, in their efforts to monitor and regulate the presence of these substances. Its exceptional sensitivity allowed researchers to uncover the widespread contamination of the natural world by pesticides, such as DDT (dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane). which was originally used against incest-borne disease, notably stopping the epidemic of typhus that ravaged Naples in the aftermath of the Second World War. (Sonnenberg, 2015). In a discussion with science writer Fred Pearce, published in the British newspaper The Independent in 1997, Lovelock said that “that work provided the hard data that allowed Rachel Carson to write her book Silent Spring, a book that was one of the triggers for the start of modern environmentalism. And it launched an international campaign to ban DDT and PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls). [1]
Due to ECD’s great utility, Lovelock was invited to participate in a NASA project to work out how to ascertain if NASA contained life. NASA was designing the Viking spacecraft, the first spacecraft ever to land on the surface of another planet, and one of the priorities was to decide which instruments to put on board. [2] So, in 1961, Lovelock moved to California to help the JPL scientists design instruments for NASA’s planetary exploration team. The assumption at that time was that life on Mars would be much the same as life on Earth. But Lovelock was sceptical. At the time, none of the scientists knew much about the composition of Mars’s atmosphere, but infrared astronomy revealed the Mars atmosphere to be composed almost entirely of carbon dioxide, and therefore probably lifeless. Lovelock wondered what life could be on Mars if didn’t look like terrestrial life. How would they be able to recognise and detect it? And what is life, anyway? It was this question and the problem of how to detect the presence of life on another planet that stimulated Lovelock’s thoughts on the Gaia hypothesis.
Over time, Lovelock realised that the Earth’s atmosphere could be seen as an extension of the planet’s biosphere. He envisioned Earth as a living system, an organism, where both physical and biological components work together to enable life. He named this system, this super-organism, Gaia (a name suggested by the novelist William Golding in1969), after the Greek goddess of the Earth.
Lynn Margulis, a pioneering microbiologist at Boston University, proposed that in the distant evolutionary past, primitive cells could ‘enslave’ other cells (engulf them without killing them), thus benefiting from the capabilities of the enslaved cell. She proposed that this process, known as endosymbiosis, had occurred multiple times throughout Earth’s history, and had significantly advanced our understanding of cellular evolution. Endosymbiosis, which is now widely accepted, provides an explanation for the presence of complex organelles, such as mitochondria and chloroplasts in eukaryotic cells, indicating the evolutionary step from simple prokaryotic life forms to the complex cells in multicellular organisms.
In their first joint paper, Margulis and Lovelock stated that the Gaia Hypothesis views the biosphere as an active, adaptive system able to maintain the Earth in homeostasis, that is a stable and balanced environment that keeps conditions favourable for life.
“Unless we see the Earth as a planet that behaves as if it were alive, at least to the extent of regulating its climate and chemistry, we will lack the will to change our way of life and to understand that we have made it our worst enemy." James Lovelock (Lovelock, The Revenge of Gaia, 2006)
The Gaia hypothesis has been modified over time in response to criticisms and therefore it is difficult to provide a precise definition. This lack of clarity has presented a problem to those scientists who needed a deep and accurate understanding of how our environment works in order to successfully negotiate the next few centuries of tremendous human-induced changes. Although the hypothesis never developed to be a significant scientific theory, it prompted both scientists and environmentalists to view Earth as a global and interconnected system that needed to be investigated and understood.
The Emergence of the Technosphere: Humanity's New Geological Epoch
While the Gaia Hypothesis takes a holistic and interconnected view of the planet Earth, where human activities play a crucial role, it neglects to see the increasing influence of technology on the Earth system.
The technosphere, a term coined to describe the vast network of human-made systems and structures that sustain modern civilisation, is becoming an increasingly integral part of our daily existence. Humans are active ‘parts’ of the technosphere, functioning as essential subcomponents that enable its operation. Viewed from the inside by its human parts, the technosphere is perceived as a derived and controlled construct. However, viewed from the outside as a geological phenomenon, the technosphere appears as a ‘quasi-autonomous system,’ operating according to its own dynamics rather than purely as a human-generated phenomenon. It evolves as a powerful force with its own set of imperatives and constraints and with humans deeply dependent on its infrastructure for survival.
The technosphere, with its intricate web of systems and structures, has become an integral part of our geological landscape, shaping and influencing the very environment we inhabit. One of the most significant requirements of the technosphere is its insatiable demand for energy. Like a living organism, the technosphere relies on an abundant supply of energy to sustain its growth and functionality. It shows why attempts to limit resource use and environmental degradation by focusing only on human needs are likely to fail. Technology has evolved defensive mechanisms to perpetuate its mode of operation and resource consumption. It’s not that the people cannot influence this mode of operation, but they are incentivised to keep this system running because it basically keeps us alive and gives us many of the things we need and want, and that is why the technosphere is so powerful. This creates positive feedback loops that resist disruptions and attempts to constrain resource use. The central issue in the Technosphere, though, is not high energy use itself, argued geologist Peter K. Haff, who passed away in February 2024, but the lack of adequate recycling mechanisms, unlike, for example, hydrosphere’s water cycle. Climate change is the technosphere’s failure to recycle waste products, like carbon from fossil fuel combustion. We live in an unbalanced system and it’s accelerating rapidly towards—we don’t really know where. To quote Peter K. Haff, “we have seen many warning signals and there is a rumour that there is a cliff ahead, but nobody has a foot on the break.”
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is integral to the Technosphere, in fact, it accelerates its evolution by enabling innovation, improved performance and adaptation. As the presence of AI technologies is increasing in various aspects of our daily lives, from personal assistants, like Siri, to self-driving cars, healthcare, financial, education and entertainment, we can expect to see even more innovative applications across various industries. Through machine learning and data analytics, AI can identify patterns, predict outcomes and make decisions faster and more accurately than humans, leading to the development of even more advanced technological systems.
AI meets Earth System sciences
The integration of AI technologies into Earth system sciences has the potential to drive a transformative shift in our ability to better understand and predict the dynamics of our planet’s interconnected systems. As AI continues to evolve, this integration is likely to deepen, leading to more accurate models and predictions. Research initiatives like the LEAP (Learning the Earth with Artificial Intelligence and Physics) project are already developing new methods to merge physical modelling with machine learning, aiming to improve near-term climate projections. And as AI becomes more efficient at solving problems, it has the potential to be an ally in the fight against climate change, by offering solutions and improvements in various sectors, such as energy efficiency and agriculture.
However, this comes with a cost. Running AI systems requires a significant amount of computing power and electricity, which predominantly comes from fossil fuels. The resulting carbon dioxide emissions contribute to climate change. In addition, the production and operations of AI hardware consume natural resources and generate waste.
Predicting the future is always speculative, but based on current trends and as AI continues to advance—still under the guidance of human developers who design, train, and refine these systems—by surpassing human intelligence and abilities, the impact on human life and society will be profound and far-reaching. Joseph Weizenbaum, a pioneer of AI who created the first chatbot, ELIZA, in 1966, said that we must not let computers make important decisions for us because AI as a machine will never possess human qualities such as compassion and wisdom to morally discern and judge. (Weizenbaum, 1976). Nonetheless, perhaps it is already too late for that and a technological singularity is closer than we think. (Godfather of artificial intelligence weighs in on the past and potential, 2023),
Technology is the New Biology
Vladimir Vernadsky and Teilhard de Chardin envisioned the noosphere in the early 20th century as a new geological/evolutionary layer formed by human cognition and knowledge that would radically transform human civilisation. The concept has been interpreted in various ways over the years. One interpretation of the noosphere is closely related to the Gaia Hypothesis, which proposes that the biosphere interacts strongly with the non-living geological systems—air, water, and land—to maintain Earth’s habitable state. This collective activity of life creates a system that is self-maintaining.
With the evolution of technological intelligence, noosphere represents a planetary-scale transition integrating human and technological systems into Earth’s functioning. It appears as an early recognition of the phenomenon we now call the technological singularity—the idea that technological progress will lead to a point where it triggers a self-sustaining growth that will radically transform human civilisation.
Thinkers like Ray Kurzweil have built upon the noosphere concept to describe the technological singularity (Kurzweil used the term technology transcends biology), where accelerating technological progress will lead to rapid and unpredictable change as intelligent systems begin improving themselves in an exponential feedback loop.
We are facing immense planetary challenges. How we approach the major evolutionary transition that is unfolding in front of us will determine our future. Perhaps the concept of noosphere can provide insights into how humans relate to each other, with nature, and with the entire biosphere, representing a shift from an ego- and nation-centric worldview to a more holistic, planet-centred perspective that fosters a sense of shared responsibility for the planet's well-being. Despite all the difficulties and the bleak future that many see, I prefer to share Vernadsky's hope: ‘I look forward with great optimism. I think that we are experiencing not only a historical change but a planetary one as well. We live in a transition to the noosphere.’
Notes
[1] DDT's legacy is complex. It was discovered by Professor Paul Herman in 1939 and was awarded the Nobel Prize for his discovery, which saved millions of lives from vector-borne diseases and vastly improved the quality of life of hundreds of millions of people living in malaria regions. DDT and other insecticides became an environmental threat when agribusiness started using them on a large scale to improve crop yields, in the mid-20th century. However, the World Health Organization (WHO) still recommends DDT for vector control in areas with high rates of malaria, balancing its effectiveness against mosquitoes with the potential health risks. (DDT - A Brief History and Status)
[2] The Viking 1 lander made history when it became the first spacecraft to safely land on the surface of Mars, on July 20, 1976 Following this, Viking 2 also successfully landed on Mars on September 3 1976.
Bibliography
Godfather of artificial intelligence weighs in on the past and potential. (2023, March 25). Retrieved May 10, 2024, from CBS News : https://www.cbsnews.com/news/godfather-of-artificial-intelligence-weighs-in-on-the-past-and-potential-of-artificial-intelligence/
Haff, P. K. (2014, January ). Technology as a geological phenomenon: implications for human well-being. Geological Society, Special Publications.
Kurzweil, R. (2005). The Singularity is Near. Viking.
Lovelock, J. (1972). Gaia as seen through the atmosphere. Atmospheric Environment, 6(8), 579–80.
Lovelock, J. (1979). GAIA – A New Look at Life on Earth. Oxford University Press.
Lovelock, J. (2006). The Revenge of Gaia. Allen Lane.
Margulis, L., & Lovelock, J. E. (n.d.). Biological Modulation of Earth Atmosphere. Icarus, 21(4), 471–89.
Pearce, F. (1997, March 23). One Man and his Widget. The Independent. Retrieved from https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/one-man-and-his-widget-1274674.html
Sonnenberg, J. (2015, May 1). Shoot to Kill: Control and Controversy in the History of DDT Science. Stanford Journal of Public Health. Retrieved May 5, 2024, from https://web.stanford.edu/group/sjph/cgi-bin/sjphsite/shoot-to-kill-control-and-controversy-in-the-history-of-ddt-science/
Teilhard, P. d. (1965). The Phenomenon of Man. Harper Perennial.
Teilhard de Chardin, P. (1959). The formation of the noosphere: A plausible biological interpretation of human history. In In the future of Man (pp. 149–178), Image Books Doubleday. Retrieved from https://www.organism.earth/library/document/formation-of-the-noosphere
Vernadsky, V. I. (1998). The biosphere. Springer Science & Business Media.
Vernadsky, W. I. (1945, January). THE BIOSPHERE AND THE NOÖSPHERE. American Scientist, 33(1). http://www.jstor.org/stable/27826043
Vidal, C. (2024, January 13). What is the noosphere? Planetary superorganism, major evolutionary transition and emergence. Systems Research and Behavioral Science. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2997
Weizenbaum, J. (1976). Computer power and human reason: From judgment to calculation. San Fransisco : W H Freeman Publishing.