Why should the physics of The Universe be so improbably fine-tuned to support Life?

Question

.
Even if the almost infinite number of vaccums in string theory might lend credence to the anthropic explanation [justifying life in our lucky little "neck of the woods"].
.
.
Anyway, please take a look in here and tell me what you think:
.
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/fundamentals/mg18825305.800.html
.
.

Thanks for your comments.
.
.

Yaoi - I am afraid your very "answer" demonstrates that you neither understood MY question, nor the argument in the article. And what exactly does "epistemology" and analyzing the nature of knowledge, per se, have anything to do with this here question???

Answer 1

This whole article is building a complex argument on a faulty premise. Namely religion can neither be proved nor disproved through science. (and the reverse is also true religion cannot prove nor disprove science) It is foolish and perhaps even dangerous to pretend otherwise.

Physics is hard enough without trying to mix it with religion. Scientists throughout the ages have been 'wrong' many many times and will continue to do so into the future. This does not disprove science as a whole.

There's nothing wrong with religion, it just doesn't have anything to do with science.

This is complex stuff and theories come and go. I get the feeling from this article that the path of science is too long and hard (it is for me) and people are getting impatient and just want t jump to the answer. But we must give our egg-heads a longer leash and allow them to venture down the path and let them see what they see instead of forcing an answer on them.

Answer 2

I think the argument the professor was making is that if there are an infinite number of universes with an infinite number of characteristics, it stands to reason that in at least one of those universes, the conditions will be right for intelligent life to evolve, and when it will,the intelligent life will grow up, evolve, and conduct scientific studies in the shadow of the "fine tuned" cosmological constant.

All of these theories smack too much of the "plum pudding" model of the atom before the development of effective microscopy, at least in my eyes. It seems like scientists are making excuses for what they don't understand by saying "that's just the way it is." If the ancient Greeks took that route, we'd be pretty screwed today.

Answer 3

I believe the fair way of quoting that article would be to use the sentence 'appears improbably fine-tuned for life'.

It is the difference between saying 'why is there a face on Mars?' versus 'why does there appear to be a face on Mars?'.

I personally don't believe the universe is particularly tolerant to life, otherwise it would be every where, and it simply isn't.

But somehow I sense that you are really wanting to ask quite a different question here.

Answer 4

The diatribe is the work of an educated person one who lacks objectivity.
The universe is the work of a series of events that produces what we see and experience.
We live in a quantum universe that can't tolerate the existence of the string theory.
Life requires three things;time,chemistry and environment.
The universe is abundant in all these factors.
Intelligent,technological life like ours is dotted throughout the universe.
We endow the universe with self awareness,it's ability to see hear and think.

Answer 5

This is the argument used to defend a higher power God. It is the support of the String Theorist who are stirring things up. We also must see that the Theorist are also talking Inter Dimensional Travel?

Answer 6

Your epistemology has a slight flaw: physics is only "fine tuned" here and on very few other planets compared to how many planets there are. It is not improbably that such physics will happen accidentally here and there. It would be improbable if it did not happen once in a while.

Answer 7

sorry i am too dumb to know all this string theory stuff, but viewing your questions from a newtonina perspective, i think universe is not fine tuned but life is finetuned to he universe.

Answer 8

Okay.

The simple answer is that without life there would be no need for physics.