Find solution
The Theory of a Flat Universe?

Multi-verse Theory and a Fine-Tuned Universe question...?

  • Which came first? The discovery of our Finely Tuned Universe or the Multiple Universe Theory? Fine-tuned Universe: The fine-tuned Universe is the proposition that the conditions that allow life in the Universe can only occur when certain universal fundamental physical constants lie within a very narrow range, so that if any of several fundamental constants were only slightly different, the Universe would be unlikely to be conducive to the establishment and development of matter, astronomical structures, elemental diversity, or life as it is presently understood. Multiverse: The Multiverse hypothesis assumes the existence of many universes with different physical constants, some of which are hospitable to intelligent life. Because we are intelligent beings, we are by definition in a hospitable one. In other words... Was the Multi-verse concept already established as a published theory when the discoveries of how finely tuned our universe actually is became known? Or was the Multi-verse theory simply a convenient way of explaining away the astronomical odds (pun intended) against a finely tuned universe apart from an intelligent creator?

  • Answer:

    The whole idea of the fine tuned universe is really a lot of rhetoric and nothing to do with actual science. Fine tuning is what you do in computer models. Fine tuning as described by creationists goes way over board with this idea because pretty much everything they say is completely wild speculation asserted as fact. First of all creationists tend to picture one value changing while the rest stay the same, but we do not know what combinations may produce a universe exactly like ours. From what we do understand you can't change one anyway. The values in the standard model do seem to be co-dependent, the value for one seems to constrain the range of possible values for another. Or perhaps the laws of physics were different you would get a universe that in unlike anything we can visualise. Speculative papers have been published that seem to suggest that if you took away the weak nuclear force, our universe would look pretty much the same. So right off the bat the idea of "fine tuning" is a rhetorical argument that is really meant to confuse more than anything else. The multi-verse idea is, in some form or another, probably a few centuries old. It's really the ultimate fulfilment of the Copernican principle; that we are mediocre. We're one planet orbiting an average star in an average galaxy in an average galactic super-cluster and we've known that for a hundred years I'm sure someone has asked the question of why stop there? Maybe we're just an average universe in a foam of universes. Multi-verse hypotheses have gained some traction in recent years not as a response to creationism, but because the idea is genuinely gaining ground. Attempts to reconcile general relativity with quantum mechanics (such as string theory) always seem to result in the prediction of multiple universes. It's not something that we're trying to do it's just something that seems to happen there is no getting away from it. Now this is theoretical but we may be just now seeing the first physical evidence of other universes, so it wouldn't surprise me that if you asked this question again in 10 years, I could provide experimental verification of the existence of other universes.

Roadfuzz... at Yahoo! Answers Visit the source

Was this solution helpful to you?

Other answers

I don't know.

highlander

Hi Roadfuzzz, Since you have already declared that… “I have been convinced in an intelligent creator for the universe, but always like to learn as much as I can on all sides of an issue.” ~ Roadfuzzz – http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AgKYwaRFBmNRJ.APMMHaXonsy6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20120318202314AAn0Yus …it isn’t clear that a scientific answer will be anything more than a mild curiosity to you. Science is about discovering ever deeper truths concerning the nature of reality, predicated upon the naturalistic interpretation of observations of nature, and experiments thereon. The ‘God did it’ answer, from whence the “intelligent creator” hypothesis arises, pre-supposes the actual existence of a fictional, supernatural, mythological character created by a bronze age Middle Eastern tribe (outside of its written tradition, within which any fictional character “exits”). Knowing the answer before you ask the question is antithetical to the whole scientific method, and especially so when the answer is predicated upon the god delusion. Your question implies the following order of events: 1. Physicists discover that a number of universal physical constants appear to be fine-tuned for the existence of life. 2. The “intelligent creator” zealots pounce on this discovery with their bog standard “Ah-HA! God did it!!!” answer. 3. Atheistic physicists run scared, and out of nowhere cook up the godless Multiple Universe Theory as “a convenient way of explaining away the astronomical odds (pun intended) against a finely tuned universe”. Nothing could be further from the truth. All it would have taken to answer you own question would have been for you to read the whole articles at Wikipedia from which the unattributed quotes in your question are taken: “The term [multiverse] was coined in 1895 by the American philosopher and psychologist William James. Contents 1 Multiverse hypotheses in physics 1.1 Tegmark's classification 1.1.1 Level I: Beyond our cosmological horizon 1.1.2 Level II: Universes with different physical constants 1.1.3 Level III: Many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics 1.1.4 Level IV: Ultimate Ensemble 1.2 Cyclic theories 1.3 M-theory 1.4 Anthropic principle” ~ Wikipedians, from ‘Multiverse’ » http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiverse “History In 1913, the chemist Lawrence Joseph Henderson (1878–1942) wrote ‘The Fitness of the Environment’, one of the first books to explore concepts of fine tuning in the Universe. Henderson discusses the importance of water and the environment with respect to living things, pointing out that life depends entirely on the very specific environmental conditions on Earth, especially with regard to the prevalence and properties of water.” ~ Wikipedians, from ‘Fine-tuned Universe’ » http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-tuned_Universe#History So although the multiverse concept predates the fine-tuned universe proposition by ~2 decades, it’s fair to say that both have been developed in parallel by countless scientists over the preceding century – with little to no regard to input from the ‘God did it’ religionists. Note also that the one-size-fits-all ‘God did it’ non-answer stands in stark contrast to the wide variety of scientifically plausible multiverse hypotheses discussed in peer-reviewed science journals – resolving such uncertainties drives scientific discovery forwards, while simplistic ‘God did it’ certainty always tends to act as a break on scientific enquiry. If you are genuinely interested in these multiverse hypotheses, I can highly recommend ‘The Hidden Reality: Parallel Universes and the Deep Laws of the Cosmos’ [1], wherein American theoretical physicist Brian Greene uses separate chapters to describe nine different current multiverse scenarios in some detail, for non-technical educated laypeople like us. How each scenario distinguishes one universe from another varies from hypothesis to hypothesis. Hope that’s broadened your understanding, and given you some pointers for further exploration, Peace-&-Love, Reason Love Science Logic – ∰ ♥ ♳ ⨁

Reason Love Science Logic

No, the "fine-tuned universe" concept is definitely older. It's also an illusion - the universe has a set of properties, and life as we know it is capable of arising & thriving here. In some verses with different properties, life of an entirely different sort could just as easily arise. Someone saying the universe is "fine-tuned" for life is a bit like a mud puddle marveling at just how perfectly it fits its hole. Granted, that hole is the only hole in which a mud puddle of that shape could possibly fit, but there are other holes with other mud puddles that are just as wet & sloppy. ;-)

Solomon Terra

Related Q & A:

Just Added Q & A:

Find solution

For every problem there is a solution! Proved by Solucija.

  • Got an issue and looking for advice?

  • Ask Solucija to search every corner of the Web for help.

  • Get workable solutions and helpful tips in a moment.

Just ask Solucija about an issue you face and immediately get a list of ready solutions, answers and tips from other Internet users. We always provide the most suitable and complete answer to your question at the top, along with a few good alternatives below.