Atheists: why is the universe fine-tuned for the emergence of intelligent life?

Question

If any of the physical constants of the universe were even slightly different, we wouldn't have stable atoms, let alone stars, planets, and life. Doesn't it make you wonder if there might be more going on than Democritus' "atoms and the void"?

"Physical constants" means electromagnetism, gravity, and the strong and weak nuclear force.

Answer 1

It's an interesting question. Your initial premise is wrong, however - the physical properties of the universe allow for the formation of stable elements including ones crucial to life like hydrogen (no H - no H2O) which the laws in a slightly different universe would not have permitted. However, the emergence of INTELLIGENT life is extremely moot, to the point of dismissal. Life existed for millions of years on Earth without intelligence and there are countless times that our species or the line of descent may have gone extinct - including a time believed to have been around 1.5 million years ago when there were no more than 2,000 humans alive. So our emergence is undoubtedly very special. Intelligent life is never preordained, by any kind of universe.

And there are no answers to your question (including "God did it", sorry). We don't know that there aren't an infinite number of universes in which the laws vary slightly and in which stability required for life (slightly different from your phrasing) cannot exist. The fact that we are in a universe that has that stability, and are here to contemplate the question, ignores the possibility of infinite others in which no such beings exist. And we also don't know whether or not the six numbers that lock the universe into stability aren't actually rigid and immobile - no certainty has yet been established. They may be as constant as Pi, and the relationship between them may be as fixed as the relationship between Pi and the diameter of a circle. Fortunately, theoretical physicists work constantly to answer those questions rather than to give up and say "Can't understand this - let's assume an answer out of thin air". That's how they arrived at the numbers you are talking about in the first place. Their track record is good, even you have to admit that. So let's not presume God did something just yet.

Answer 2

Responding only to your PS (the argument doesn't work, and I believe you when you say you see the errors): First, you technically haven't created a syllogism. A syllogism contains two premises a conclusion, which links together the end terms of the syllogism by means of a third term that appears in both premises. But, moving outside of vocabulary, I don't think errors could truly be avoided; if I did, I wouldn be an Atheist, now would I? :) You have captured intution--the feeling that this works--by sneaking in unwarranted assumptions in Part I, premises 2 & 3. Maybe you could leaf through Spinoza's 'Ethics' for wording on premises 4 and 5, but I have no real objections. Part II captures the same intuitions, although you'd have a hard time actually proving the premises if they were challenged. Part I really doesn't (logically) force the acceptance of either premise upon you. In short, a person could accept Part I and still deny Part II by denying the truth of the premises. Also, from the point of view of structure, Part II isn't written in such a way that the conclusion is forced by the premises. If you could find a way to reword it into a deductive argument (which will likely be several steps), it could have a stronger intuitive pull. I think that you've done the best that could be done, and you've done just as well as several philosophers of religion. Kudos to you.

Answer 3

the only reason you can ask this question is BECAUSE this particular universe has a number of parameters tweaked just so.

Some physicists have explored the notion that if the (dimensionless) fundamental physical constants had sufficiently different values, our universe would be so radically different that intelligent life would probably not have emerged, and that our universe therefore seems to be fine-tuned for intelligent life. The weak anthropic principle simply states that it is only because these fundamental constants acquired their respective values that there was sufficient order and richness in elemental diversity for life to have formed, which subsequently evolved the necessary intelligence toward observing that these constants have taken on the values they have.

Please, don't try to abuse the Anthropic principle.

Stephen Hawking suggests that our universe is much less 'special' than the proponents of the anthropic principle claim it is. According to Hawking, there is a 98% chance that a Big Bang will result in a universe of the same type as ours.

Anyway, for those willing to look at science in an objective way, please start here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle

and work your way from there.

Answer 4

Argument from ignorance. Not very interesting, and certainly not a reason to believe in magic and gods.

By far the best candidate for "more going on" would be the notion that many universes exist, each with different constants. In that light, this "fine-tuning" is an excellent illustration of the power of evolution (the general principle, not the biological version).

Answer 5

I'm not an Atheist as I believe in a creator. But if you're implying that your almighty "God" is right, then your argument could end right there. There is absolutely no proof that certain religion is right just as there is no proof of how the universe was started. It is all theory. Could the universe have been created by a super natural occurrence? Maybe. Could the universe have been created by a rational occurrence that could be explained by science? Maybe.

No one is right. Everything is about Belief, Faith, and Hope. The fact of the matter is, Science has more bold facts than Religion will ever offer. I'm not saying Science is superior to Religion, but most people can trust science because it provides us with one great important thing: Evidence.

Answer 6

If the physical constants were different, the universe would look and act differently. There could well be intelligent life, perhaps even more intelligent that we have.

What you're doing is arguing from the end results, that what is now is the only possible outcome. It's exactly like saying that the only possible result for rolling a die is 1, so therefore it has to be the result of a designer.

Now we're all smart enough to realise that there are more possible outcomes to that die roll. Same thing for physical universes.

Answer 7

Anthropic principle.

Also we don't know if a Universe could even exist with different constants at this stage, thats all Einstein meant when he asked rhetorically if god had any choice about making the universe.

Answer 8

This is nonsense. Why do you think we have deserts, polar ice-caps and barren wastelands and why do you think that most species go extinct? Our planet isn't fine tuned for anything-it's a brutal, hostile environment that actively discourages the survival of species. Animal species survive and evolve IN SPITE of the natural conditions that exist. If a God were to create a perfect planet it wouldn't remotely resemble this one.

Answer 9

"This is rather as if you imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, 'This is an interesting world I find myself in—an interesting hole I find myself in—fits me rather neatly, doesn't it?
In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!'
This is such a powerful idea that as the sun rises in the sky and the air heats up and as, gradually, the puddle gets smaller and smaller, it's still frantically hanging on to the notion that everything's going to be alright, because this world was meant to have him in it, was built to have him in it; so the moment he disappears catches him rather by surprise."
- Douglas Adams

Answer 10

Not really, for every thing that happens, there is a logical explanation, and for things that have no answer, we leave for our kids to sort out, as they are bound to work it out if we teach them all we know.

As a wise man once said - "...vital existence, instead of spiritual pipe dreams!"