How is it that we live in such an exquisitely fine-tuned universe?

Question

Even assuming that the universe could have popped out of nothingness, why should it have been such an orderly and hospitable one? Is there a scientific, testable answer for this question that does not simply appeal to imagination?

Wow! Not many answers, huh?

I can't believe that the best explanations are... "the universe isn't fine- tuned". as a matter of fact I was expecting a lot more of Anthropic Priciple, which isn't even that good.

Answer 1

I'm surprised there are no answers. I was really looking forward to reading them.

Edit: Great question, unimpressive answers. (With one or two exceptions.)

Answer 2

Like 'curious_compound' said, we are fine tuned for life in this universe as it happens to be, not the other way around. If the universe were different than what is now, we would be also, if we existed at all. Life evolves according to the surroundings it finds itself in, us where we are, the jellyfish in the sea. If you don't understand evolution already or refuse to consider it as a possibility, though, none of this will probably make any sense to you. The appeal to imagination is that the universe had to have been designed for us because of the kind of creatures that we are. The problem is, though, we weren't yet, we didn't exist yet. If the God that supposedly created us really is the all powerful entity that he is supposed to be, there should be no reason to think that we had to be just eactly the way we are and that our environment had to be created to suit us. He could have done it all, us and the universe as well, entirely differently.

Answer 3

Actually one answer to this question is the anthropic principle. Here the idea (this is a very vague approximation) is that there could be uncountable numbers of universes with all different values of fundamental constants. Some would have stars and planets and others would be empty and dead. The point is that life only arises in universes that have the right (by accident) conditions. You can't ask what conditions are in other universes because there is no one there to ask. Basically if you are around to ask the question then you universe has to be right for life but that doesn't mean that it is special or alone.

Answer 4

Plenty of answers, just no fast typists.

Apart from inferring deliberate creation,
the weak anthropic principle (with or without multiple bubble universes as a refinement) addresses the "tuning" question.

In any universe significantly different to this one, in terms of physical constants, there will be no beings asking the question "Why does the universe look like this?" Matter doesn't form, or stars don't, or it doesn't last long...

So in any universe that has beings capable of framing the question, the universe has to look something like the one we see.
That doesn't disprove a deity, but the universe can't be cited as proof of one (the assertion of Romans 1:20 notwithstanding.)

Answer 5

There are a number of postulations, several of which involve the multiverse and the whole bit where universes "evolve" until we wound up with this one. There are also ideas that this universe (with these constants) is the only one that can possibly exist, just as a universe can only possibly exist with matter and gravity.

Also the second law of thermodynamics includes something called "Dissipated systems" which mandates that order must come from randomness (the man who proved this won a nobel prize). So it IS entirely possible for order to arise from random disorder, in fact it is necessarily the case that order occurs.

What's interesting about the "fine tuned universe" is that it's not the most appropriate for life. The constants in this universe make for the perfect black hole generator (no other assortment would be as efficient, even if things were slightly off black hole production would be hurt). Now, when you consider that 99.999999% of all matter in the universe goes into black holes, and that 99.99999% of the universe is a radiation filled vacuum absolutely lethal to life... this universe is clearly fine tuned for black holes, not for life. So saying this universe is a "hospitable one" is staggeringly inaccurate.

Interestingly, one of the things Dr. Lee Smolin has found is that a perfect black hole generator would necessarily kick up specs of life. So we are a necessary byproduct.

Even if there was a supreme being, using the "fine tuning" argument we would have to conclude that god made this universe for black holes, not for us. We just happen to be an irrelevant consequence, even from that perspective.

The fact that this universe exists for black hole generation probably has something to do with the constants as they are, there is doubtless and intrinsic relationship between the constants and black holes, and this is probably the reason they are so "fine tuned."

Answer 6

It is orderly and fine tuned due to the laws of physics which are a constant. Math is not a subjective subject. However we do not know how many failed universe's there may have been before one actually got to the point where ours is now to be able to breed intelligent life and such.

Answer 7

Look up the anthropic principle. Also, go try living anywhere but on the surface of this planet, in between the arctic and antarctic circles and not in the ocean or desert. It's not all that hospitible a universe.

We don't know how many universes exist, so we don't know how unlikely it is that one of them has a ruleset that allows for life to eventually develop and become nominally sentient.

Answer 8

Actually, the universe ain't all that hospitable at all, once you consider just what a small percentage of it is inhabitable by humans. In point of fact, the universe is much more finely tuned as a breeding ground for BLACK HOLES than it is for human beings....

Answer 9

You have to understand the time involved. Billions upon billions of years. Work that out. See how ling it really is. Man, the creationists man or the evolved man, has been in existence for an eye blink. Infinitesimally small amount of time. Many things could have happened in there.

Answer 10

In my opinion, the anser is natural selection. Assuming the big bang is correct, i think it is, than many things came into being after it. Many of those thing did not work out and was ripped apart my the other tings around it. Eventually, The things that worked were pretty much all that was left.

Answer 11

Well, taking the devil's advocate position, evolution and survival of the fittest explain (not necessarily correctly) how life on earth is as it is. Life can exist here because only life forms capable of living here continued to exist here. If it wasn't capable of existing here it either died off (as the dinosaurs) or mutated to be even better suited to life here.

Now, it should be stated that I do not believe that evolution was the cause of life on earth, but it cannot be denied that evolution has occurred and continues to occur, as does survival of the fittest.