Fine tuning and science

[pantheory]

WalterP suggested he would put this topic in a debate forum, and I thought I would put the science version of it in this forum so that if anyone wished to learn or discuss the science version of it they could.

 

To learn the science version of the fine-tuning argument read any of the links below. A few also mention the religious perspective.

 

IMO the fine-tuning argument, involving the so-called anthropocentric universe has its primary sway in religion rather than having a sound scientific basis. Most scientists today would strongly disagree with this statement. Also IMO Fine tuning is based upon the false assumption by mainstream science that the laws of nature and the so-called free parameters of physics collectively are a separate entity from nature and our universe, and could have preexisted it.  I believe the laws of nature and of physics do not have a separate existence by themselves. The so-called free parameters of physics are not free at all but bound to each other via the mechanics of nature. All of these parameters involving physical relationships have been discovered and invented by men to explain the physical relationships of nature. These so-called laws of physics and free parameters are often very good at predictions and explanations, but sometimes they have been proven wrong and are changed. If so, there would be no such thing as a fine-tuning argument. There is just one known universe. Along with it our invented laws of nature, physics and its parameters must be a part and could never be separate, one from another, and involve different parameters and constants -- or have an existence by themselves anymore than science, forces, ratios, calculations, equations etc. could be separate from reality.

 

Links below explain and/or propose a fine-tuned universe in the view of mainstream physicists. A few of these views are contrary to a religious interpretation of them, and some discuss the likelihood of a religious interpretation, whether right or wrong. If you have any questions concerning my comments, the links below, or clarification concerning the premise of fine tuning, please ask.

 

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/article/scientific-approaches-to-the-fine-tuning-problem/

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-tuned_universe

 

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-26300-7_6

 

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fine-tuning/

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2019/12/19/the-universe-really-is-fine-tuned-and-our-existence-is-the-proof/?sh

 

http://cosmos.nautil.us/short/119/fine-tuning-does-not-imply-a-fine-tuner

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[pantheory]

(quote from first link above)

“Embedded within the laws of physics are roughly 30 numbers (called free parameters)—including the masses of the elementary particles and the strengths of the fundamental forces—that must be specified to describe the universe as we know it. Why do these numbers take the values that they do?” Since there is no accepted answer to this question it is called the fine tuning problem.

 We have not been able to derive these numbers from our current laws of physics. But eventually if and when we can, there will no longer be a fine-tuning problem. That’s why these numbers are called free parameters, because we don’t know how to derive them from the inter-workings of nature. They instead have been derived from observations and simple relationships, but we presently don’t know how they all fit together.

As to fine tuning and life, our Universe has not been fine-tuned for life, instead life has been fine-tuned on Earth by natural selection.  If complicated life is discovered elsewhere then it will have been fine-tuned by its own different environment.

[◊ Weezer ◊]

Since I barely passed algebra in HS and college, I am certainly no expert on the subject of physics.  But it is hard to believe the universe and life "just happened".  But I am betting my afterlife it didn't happen like it says in Genesis.  

[pantheory]

16 hours ago, Weezer said:

Since I barely passed algebra in HS and college, I am certainly no expert on the subject of physics.  But it is hard to believe the universe and life "just happened".  But I am betting my afterlife it didn't happen like it says in Genesis.  

 

Yup, both Genesis and Revelations are the two obvious joke-books of the bible. Some scientists, probably the religious ones, have asserted the idea of a fine-tuned universe which lends itself to a religious interpretation. Some scientists don't see the problem but others think they can avoid this and quantum mechanic problems by proposing other universes in a multiverse of difference free parameters. To me most of these ideas are not science but instead pure sci-fi fantasies, or at best speculation since such ideas are neither verifiable or falsifiable -- both being requirements of any valid scientific proposal.

[pantheory]

16 hours ago, Weezer said:

Since I barely passed algebra in HS and college, I am certainly no expert on the subject of physics.  But it is hard to believe the universe and life "just happened".  But I am betting my afterlife it didn't happen like it says in Genesis.  

 

I didn't make such a bet without a potentially big gain. So instead I made a bet with the devil for my immortal soul against a six pack of beer, but soon thereafter I realized that he tricked me since the only place he would deliver the beer to me would be in hell.