Putting God's Design In Perspective

[viole]

I'm pretty sure we were an unexpected consequence.

Yes. The Universe is fine tuned for something else, for instance Mt. Everest, or transuranic atoms, or Sirius. We, and life, are just an unplanned, and probably unpleasant, side effect.

Ciao

- viole

 

[viole]

I am not a physicist. I am gonna need that in layman's terms. What I see is a function were I assume A and B are slope coefficients, and I see we exponentiate from a base e, but I don't know what i is nor do I know what k and w are. So if you really understand what that means please break it down for someone who only knows the very basics of physics.

Imagine your room.
Now imagine that in that room there is a particle. No idea where it is.
Now imagine that at each point in that room is defined a probability density to find the particles close to that point, if you looked for it. The higher the density at a point, the more likely you would find the particle in that neighborhood.
So, that probability density is a function of the coordinates of each point of your room (e.g. x,y,z)
Now imagine that those probabilities densities, as long as you do not try to find out where the particle is, vary with time at each point.
So, we have a function of three coordinates that change with time.

That varying function should give you an idea of a probability wave. It evolves like a wave of water when you replace water density (changing at each point with time) with probability density (also changing with time at any point), so to speak. The crucial cognitive step is to see probabilities as physical objects that vary with time.

Just an intuition pump. What is relevant in QM is the wave function, but the basic idea is the same.

Ciao

- viole

 

[viole]

Thats right....the fine tuning, intelligent design is practically unbeatable for the hyper skeptics.

There gonna love my statement too, lol

We gotta get these hyper skeptics, there runnin all over the place. They gonna poison the worlds minds.

Try me. It is very beatable, believe me. And you don't need to be hyper to beat it.

Ciao

- viole

 

[ratiocinator]

The building blocks of particles are like fuzzy clouds of probability waves, without any definite attributes, until they are observed by a conscious mind. In other words, the universe doesn't exist without any human consciousness; we humans are an essential part of our universe, because unlike anything else, our human consciousness is what collapses the wave functions of the cosmos.

Particles or sub-particles don't exist at any particular point in space until they are consciously observed.

This is actually an minority interpretation of quantum mechanics - not part of the theory itself. I don't think you'll find many scientists who think consciousness is necessary...

Added: Many other interpretations are available: Interpretations of quantum mechanics

 

[shunyadragon]

Noah's account is one part of Genesis. It is not Genesis.
I asked you how you know something, and all you do is repeat yourself and post something that does not answer the question.
Simply, you do not know what you are saying, hence why you can't answer the question... I know because A B C.

All you do is live in self denial and ignore the very specific evidence.

There is more . . .

This is like asking ....
How do you know there are multiverses?

...and getting the response....
Simply there are multiverses.
Most physicists believe they are multiverses.
So simply there are multiverses.

The scientists support the multiverse based on the evidence, and not because they believe it.

There is more . . .

 

[nPeace]

All you do is live in self denial and ignore the very specific evidence.

There is more . . .

That's you. Every time, and when you have no evidence you run in circles, and create distractions. That's as it is.

The scientists support the multiverse based on the evidence, and not because they believe it.

There is more . . .

So it is known that multiverse exists... My...
Have a good day.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Yes. The Universe is fine tuned for something else, for instance Mt. Everest, or transuranic atoms, or Sirius. We, and life, are just an unplanned, and probably unpleasant, side effect.

Ciao

- viole

Maybe the universe is fine tuned for beetles. They are the most numerous group of organisms that have been described.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Try me. It is very beatable, believe me. And you don't need to be hyper to beat it.

Ciao

- viole

I would be interested in reading what you have to say on the subject. I do not see it as unbeatable evidence for intelligent design and maybe not even as apparent fine tuning.

 

[InChrist]

But he just created the same thing over and over and over and over, and over and . . . , which hardly speaks to much creativity at all.

.

How can you even say that, as if you know it's just the same thing over and over and over again? There's so much humans haven't seen, discovered or understood yet.

 

[Ellen Brown]

I've got a "picture" of the Milky Way Galaxy with the perspective of about 60 Degrees above the Galactic plain with the various parts labelled. This one says we are in the Orion Spur. Another one I had said we were in the Perseus Arm and it is doubtful that I'll ever know for sure which. The reality of existence is a terrible blow to the human ego, and that is easy to see at my age. In my younger years, I believed we were God's special creation, though it was difficult to process some of the things I could see happening to me and others around me. Preachers said it was because of our sin nature and it was my fault.

These days I don't know what I believe very well because it seems to be changing at "Light Speed". My present opinion, for what it is worth, is that the Creator grew lonely and started creating things that it would talk to. Was Homo Sapiens the first sentient creation? We aren't given that information but some egoists say we were. One of my frustrations with both Scientists and Religionists is both contain aggressive, 'shouty' folk who want to force their views on others. Lately, it occurs to me that those individuals are very frightened about reality and getting others to believe as they do makes them feel more secure perhaps?

Perhaps, as we approach the end of our present existence, we see that how we lived was more important than what we thought?

 

[viole]

I would be interested in reading what you have to say on the subject. I do not see it as unbeatable evidence for intelligent design and maybe not even as apparent fine tuning.

Well, first of all intelligent design vs. no design is a false dichotomy. For it is possible that all this is the product of stupid design. So, let us restrict to design vs. no design, leaving out question begging labels for the moment.

It is beatable because there is no way whatsoever to believe that life is the main reason of this alleged fine tuning. If there is a conscious fine tuning, then it could be that the fine tuner was interested in things that have nothing to do with life. For instance, He wanted to make the oxygen atom, or mount Everest, or any of the things that we observe today that would have required an amazing combination of initial conditions.

So, the argument itself assumes life as the purpose, and by doing that, it begs the question.

Ciao

- viole

 

[viole]

Maybe the universe is fine tuned for beetles. They are the most numerous group of organisms that have been described.

Cool. Close to my point.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Skwim]

How can you even say that, as if you know it's just the same thing over and over and over again?

So, what would you call

10,000,000 superclusters
25,000,000,000 galaxy groups
350,000,000,000 large galaxies
7,000,000,000,000 dwarf galaxies
and 30,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, stars
​

if it isn't the same thing over and over and over again?

.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Well, first of all intelligent design vs. no design is a false dichotomy. For it is possible that all this is the product of stupid design. So, let us restrict to design vs. no design, leaving out question begging labels for the moment.

It is beatable because there is no way whatsoever to believe that life is the main reason of this alleged fine tuning. If there is a conscious fine tuning, then it could be that the fine tuner was interested in things that have nothing to do with life. For instance, He wanted to make the oxygen atom, or mount Everest, or any of the things that we observe today that would have required an amazing combination of initial conditions.

So, the argument itself assumes life as the purpose, and by doing that, it begs the question.

Ciao

- viole

Thanks.

I was interested in seeing what others had to say about this. You have given me some interesting points to ponder and to include in my own understanding of the fine tuning argument.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

So, what would you call

10,000,000 superclusters
25,000,000,000 galaxy groups
350,000,000,000 large galaxies
7,000,000,000,000 dwarf galaxies
and 30,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, stars
​

if it isn't the same thing over and over and over again?

.

It would seem that stars may be what the universe was created for.

 

[Skwim]

It would seem that stars may be what the universe was created for.

In other words, the grand designer needed a space, about 93 billion light-years across, for his 30,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars, so that's what he created. 'Cause we all know that a billion trillion stars can't all fit in one room.


.

 

[Jollybear]

You can research the question in Theology and Philosophy, but not in science, because the question does not have any objective verifiable evidence to support it.

Hey, sorry i couldn't get to you sooner. Im noticing its hard to get ahead of the backlog of responses on the threads and typing on my phone dont help with speed.

Curious, i remember you said from a prior conversation you wer a scientist. What area of science is your expertise?

Ok, now to your points. You said the question of God has no verifiable evidence. I can agree with you there can be no DIRECT veriafiable evidence (proof) of God, simply due to not being able to SEE him.

However, there IS INDIRECT verifiable evidence in fine tuning and information (like DNA) and intelligent design. There is INDIRECT evidence i exist without you needing to DIRECTLY see me. That indirect evidence is the information in my posts.

No assumptions that there is nothing there. There is simply no evidence there. You can only test objective verifiable evidence,

The signs of design and information is there though.

Please provide objective verifiable evidence that can be verified by independent observation.

Everyone can verify the design and information.

The limits are set by the availability of the objective verifiable evidence,

Which this indirect evidence is there. Yet the rules say its not alowed.

ID may be your reasons for believing in God, OK, but non one at the Discovery Institute has every presented a hypothesis that may be falsified by scientific methods.

ID is falsifiable. If the alternative views to ID can be proven, then ID would be falsified. The two alternatives are a universe from nothing by chance and time. Or the universe was always here in one form or another.

 

[Jollybear]

In other words, the grand designer needed a space, about 93 billion light-years across, for his 30,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars, so that's what he created. 'Cause we all know that a billion trillion stars can't all fit in one room.


.

And all those stars also have solar systems, planets, galaxies, ect. You seam to oversimplify a complex system.

 

[InChrist]

So, what would you call

10,000,000 superclusters
25,000,000,000 galaxy groups
350,000,000,000 large galaxies
7,000,000,000,000 dwarf galaxies
and 30,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, stars
​

if it isn't the same thing over and over and over again?

.

Humans can be pretty oblivious, slow learners. Probably God has to repeat Himself over and over again to get our attention until we understand...

The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands. Psalm 19:1

 

[Dan From Smithville]

In other words, the grand designer needed a space, about 93 billion light-years across, for his 30,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars, so that's what he created. 'Cause we all know that a billion trillion stars can't all fit in one room.


.

Exactly. I have another hypothesis that its all about getting flies into space. I stole that idea from an old science fiction story I read as a kid, but it is as good an answer as any.