honorentheos wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 11:17 pm
MG 2.0 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 9:47 pm
Here is my question: What are the arguments that you have in opposition to
each of these examples which point to Fine Tuning?
Cosmic Constants-
1.Gravitational force constant
2.Electromagnetic force constant
3.Strong nuclear force constant
4.Weak nuclear force constant
5.Cosmological constant
Initial Conditions and “Brute Facts”-
6.Initial distribution of mass energy
7.Ratio of masses for protons and electrons
8.Velocity of light
9.Mass excess of neutron over proton
“Local” Planetary Conditions-
10.Steady plate tectonics with right kind of geological interior
11.Right amount of water in crust
12.Large moon with right rotation period
13.Proper concentration of sulfur
14.Right planetary mass
15.Near inner edge of circumstellar habitable zone
16.Low-eccentricity orbit outside spin-orbit and giant planet resonances
17.A few, large Jupiter-mass planetary neighbors in large circular orbits
18.Outside spiral arm of galaxy
19.Near co-rotation circle of galaxy, in circular orbit around galactic center
20.Within the galactic habitable zone
21.During the cosmic habitable age
Effects of Primary Fine-Tuning Parameters-
22.The polarity of the water molecule
There may be other examples in the Wiki article. Please have the balls to give some explanatory power behind your reasoning for rejecting the evidence for Fine Tuning.
Balls?
The idea here is the conditions of the universe we exist in appears specifically made for human life to have evolved and/or be created depending on how much science a person is willing to accept.
In other words, results prove intention.
So the question arises, do we see conditions supporting a given outcome outside of intention where the result is a product of conditions without intention first creating those conditions?
The answer is of course, yes. We see it all the time. Emergent properties of natural and human systems exist everywhere from the function of your own brain to the behavior of markets. The very difference between the quantum and relative scales of physics exist in the universe in ways we don't comprehend but the the qualities of the one emerge from the other.
We have had this conversation. I know you are convinced of fine tuning with intent just as the sentient puddle is sure the earth was contoured specifically so it could exist. Yeah, sure. If you want to call it "fine tuning" that the conditions we find ourselves in are the conditions we need to be able to exist to be able to observe them then have at it.
But that's silly. Don't take my word for it. Here is your own quote:
Now it can't be due to physical necessity because the constants and quantities are independent of the laws of nature. In fact, string theory predicts that there are around 10 to the 500th power different possible universes consistent with nature's laws.
The puddle as it exists is exactly the puddle - and the only puddle - that would exist in the conditions it finds itself in. Arguing that the conditions are uniquely the ones needed for us to be here isn't an argument. It's acknowledging a tautology.
What we need to determine is of any of your arguments demand intent? Or are things the way they are because preconditions define the limits of what is possible for outcomes? And our being able to recognize our good fortune of existing at all is just one of those outcomes?
Your source seems bewildered by mathematical models predicting infinite numbers of dimensions, telling us it's impossible for there to be a multiverse...but it's practically a given there is a superior intelligence that happens to really favor humans to the point they set all of creation into motion just so we could exist to do...?
And this intelligence favors the use of culturally evolving and emergent myth making to occur across many, many different cultures that all say different things but at one moment they came into focus and have us the right picture of said "God" in the borrowed mythology of a semitic tribe that kept getting conquered by bigger, stronger tribes.
And it just so happened that the myth-making of this tribe struggled with the question if why, if they were so special, did things not really work out for them most of the time? And this model became the model of myth for a limited population of a species that came into existence a blink ago in the timescale of the universe that collectively is capable of wondering why, if humans are so special, does the universe seem so indifferent to them? This being, of course, a population of the species that largely ignores their own views aren't universal to the species as a whole but don't really acknowledge the other populations because their mythology doesn't conform to the one moment of clarity. Anywho.
And in that struggle humanity finds out the puddle is shaped like humans and declares, "See! The universe was finely tuned just for us after all!" And we can be assured of our own special being until the conditions favoring our existence shift and we evaporate...just like the puddle.