|
Author
|
Topic: Is the Universe IC?
|
stuartharris
unregistered
|
posted 28. February 2002 20:18
A recent article by David Berlinski got me thinking again about something having to do with "anthropic coincidences", "fine-tuning of the Universe", etc.. Here's a piece from his article:
The constants of mathematical physics may make possible the existence of life, but the laws of mathematical physics make possible the existence of matter. They have, those laws, an overwhelmingly specific character. Other laws, under which not much exists, are at least imaginable. What explanation can mathematical physics itself provide for the fact that the laws of nature are arranged as they are and that they have the form that they do? It is hardly an unreasonable question.
(The bolding is mine.) Why is it even imaginable that a Universe with laws and constants other than the existing ones could even exist or be imaginable? I know some fine-tuning theorists will posit that "if such-and-such a constant was different by .00001% then stars couldn't form the way they do and therefore carbon wouldn't be formed and thus no life would exist."
But, I've often thought about the Universe in the way Behe thinks about the fundamental aspects of life. Might it be that the Universe itself is an irreducibly complex system and that any change to it's laws and constants would not result in simply a differently functioning Universe, but rather, no Universe at all? Has anyone in the ID community written on this idea, that the Universe is itself irreducibly complex? Did God really have no choice in the creating the world the way it is?
Stu [ 28 February 2002: Message edited by: Stuart S. Harris ]
IP: Logged
|
|
ordinary man
Member
Member # 188
|
posted 20. March 2002 17:29
quote:
Did God really have no choice in the creating the world the way it is?
That is a good question. Insofar as universal constants are concerned, I think the first and most important challenge to an interpretation of fine-tuning relates to William A. Dembski's definition of intelligent agency as requiring contingency. (See Intelligent Design: The Bridge Between Science & Theology.)
It is my understanding that in order to reach a strong inference of something being a product of intelligent design -- that is, for intelligent design to be the best explanation -- one needs all three of the items that Dembski discusses: contingency, complexity, and specification. If any one of these criteria is not shown to be present, an inference of intelligent design is not valid.
So, regarding the fine-tuning of the universe, the first question is: What evidence is there of contingency on a cosmological level? What evidence is there that the constants could have taken on (or could still take on) other values but were "dialed" to the right settings by a supernatural intelligence?
Another question is: What evidence do we have that life as we know it could not exist under other universal constants? What evidence is there that other forms of life obeying different rules could not exist under other universal constants?
The answers in each case are that we do not know. We have no other universes for comparison. Even in our universe with its putative fine-tuning, our planet contains the only life we know of. So how can we possibly say with any confidence that we have definitive proof of fine-tuning by an intelligence that selected from a range of possible universal conditions? We can't, and so at least at the cosmological level, design is an invalid inference.
[ 20 March 2002, 21:11: Message edited by: ordinary man ]
IP: Logged
|
|
Jules
Member
Member # 181
|
posted 21. March 2002 18:48
I hope this doesn't stray from the original topic. It seems to me that the Theistic IDist has two options in considering how God designed things. The usual one is that God designed the universe as a place that could sustain life, and then God designed life. We might compare it to an artist first making a framed canvas, and then painting a picture on it. However, there is a second one. It could be that God has "front-loaded" all the information needed both for sustaining life and for creating it into the initial conditions at the beginning of the universe. If God did indeed do things this second way, is there anyway we could detect it?
IP: Logged
|
|
Evan
Member
Member # 164
|
posted 22. March 2002 10:32
Jules, you might look at the thread "Evolution and Design: a synthesis" below. There I suggest a hypothetical theory that somewhat responds to the question you are asking.
IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic