Cosmic Constants Are Amazing - Was the Universe Created by Intelligent Design?

Do "cosmic constants" prove that the universe is of intelligent design?

What We Still Don't Know: "Are We Real?" part 2/5 talks about Cosmic Constants and how our universe is so fine tuned (to the trillionth decimal point) that it's pretty much impossible that our universe wasn't created by intelligent design.

God Spoke And Bang! It Happened
By Michael Licona

In 1965, two Bell Laboratory scientists, Robert Wilson and Arno Penzias, discovered a blanket of microwave radiation in the center of the universe. This indicates that the universe was very dense and hot in its center at some time in the distant past. From this point, the universe seems to be expanding outwardly. This seems to confirm the “big-bang” theory.

Some scientists said that since we know that the universe began with a bang, God is no longer needed to account for its origin. These scientists spoke too soon. During our generation, further results from the field of astrophysics have revealed that subsequent to the big bang, the universe must have been fine-tuned and balanced with an incredible precision to sustain intelligent life. There are factors referred to as “cosmic constants” that must be precisely what they are, or intelligent life would not be possible. If these varied slightly, our universe would be life-prohibiting, rather than life-permitting.

Some examples of cosmic constants concern planet/star relationships. If a planet is too close to its sun, the planet will be too warm for a stable water system to support life. If too far, the planet will be too cold for a stable water system to support life. The age and size of the parent star, as well as its position in the galaxy, are, likewise, crucial.

Another example of a cosmic constant concerns the expansion rate of the universe. Current scientific data indicates that the universe is expanding from its center. It is the rate of the expansion that is of interest. If the universe were expanding any faster, galaxies could not form. Therefore, planet/star relationships would not be possible. If the universe were expanding any slower, the gravitational pull from the big-bang would have caused the universe to cease expanding, and then reverse its direction until it collapsed on itself.

This “big-crunch” would have occurred prior to star formation. The amount of variation in this expansion rate required to render the universe as life-prohibiting is simply amazing. One percent is represented as 10-2 (or within two decimal places of 1; 0.01). One one-millionth of one percent is represented as 10-8 (or within eight decimal places of 1; 0.00000001).

The amount of variation of the expansion rate of the universe needed to render it as life-prohibiting is around 10-55! This number is so small that the variation in the total weight of the earth produced by removing a single human hair is gigantic in comparison. Keep in mind that the expansion rate is only one cosmic constant. There are more than 50 cosmic constants, half of which require the same precision!(1)

Cosmic constants provide the strong appearance that the universe was designed with life in mind. The prominent astronomer and former atheist, Fred Hoyle, concludes that, “a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology.”(2) Similarly, Paul Davies, a prominent physicist moved from promoting atheism in 1983 to conceding in 1984 that “the laws [of physics] . . . Seem themselves to be the product of exceedingly ingenious design.” One year after this statement, Davies said that there “is, for me, powerful evidence that there is something going on behind it all. The impression of design is overwhelming.”(3) Robert Jastrow, Founder-Director of NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies refers to cosmic constants as “the most theistic result ever to come out of science.”(4)

 

From the video:

Perhaps there is a rational explanation for why the laws of nature were set so precisely to the birth of our universe. Until we fully understand those first moments, we should not assume any special reason for their values.​

 

Yet the fine-tuned values exist nonetheless.

It's an interesting documentary.

 

how do you know the universe was fine-tuned for life to exist in its current form and not that life fine-tuned itself to flourish in the conditions the universe had to offer?

 

I guess he doesn't know, he prefers that explanation because it fits what he believes.

 

The universe wasn't designed with us in mind any more than the hole was designed with the puddle in mind. It just happens to fit it perfectly by the nature of puddles, Not the design of holes.

The people who make these claims and throw around numbers are making them up. The fact is we don't know, and have no way of knowing, the probability of something happening if we are only aware of it happening once. We don't have any data to use to calculate the probability.

And seriously, Design? Most of our planet is uninhabitable, let alone the universe. If god "designed" the universe with life in mind then he is an incompetent imbecile.

 

Even if we assume the numbers are correct (and I certainly do not), the assumptions are still false. There are several things left out.

First, the possibility of life as we do not know it. Do you know what the cosmic constants would need to be to form silcone based life? What about some other elementary based life? What if the particles that form elements in our universe has different masses then they do now, how does that change what the constants need to be? We find lifeforms all the time in places we were sure life could not exist (geysers, highly acidic environments, etc...)

Second, the sheer number of chances for the right solar system to form in our own universe. If every solar system had a planet with life that would be one thing. Yes, for intelligent life AS WE KNOW IT to form you have to be on a planet a certain distance away from a certain type of star, blah, blah, blah.... Well the huge number of solar systems in our universe increases the chances of finding one or more such systems is much better.

Third, intelligent life as we know it is a term that changes within our own universe all the time. Humans like to believe they are the only intelligent race, but everything we have used to determine what makes life intelligent has been shown in other species (all of the traits have been found in other species as well).

Fourth, the multi-verse hypothesis (which has quite a bit of evidence) suggests there may be an infinite number of other universes (space-times, whatever) that we don't see. If this is the case then in an infinite number of systems you will find an infinite number of combinations of constants. If they are truly infinite you would find an infinite number of them that supports intelligent life. That hardly makes it astonishing or improbable.

There's more, but that's enough. Yes, the complexity of our universe is beautiful and beyond our current understanding. That hardly means it had to be designed.

 

Good post bluegrass, and very thought provoking.

 

Chaos canot create order. this is a very simple statement. I dont understand why people will argue against common sense??????

 

beware of common sense. Common sense is strongly dependent on the cultural context and is useless. Ptolemaic universe made lots of sense some time ago. Fortunately there were some who stood against that common sense.

 

Infinity requires every possible combination of order and chaos.
Its all just superstring theory.

 

Common sense might tell you that order cannot come from chaos, but scientific research shows that it is easier to create order by introducing chaos in certain situations. One experiment using pendulums found that when they tried to swing the pendulums using regularly timed force on them caused them to swing in disorder, but by applying the force at random intervals to different pendulums they swung more in unison.

Systems move towards a balance of chaos and order. Truthfully, chaos actually is order. Chaotic systems appear to be random but can actually be predicted if there is enough information. Randomness is what most people think of chaos as being, but actually chaos is a very complex form of order. Interestingly, when something is truly random, the results often leave clumped groupings that appear like order. So the appearance of chaos can actually mean order and the appearance of order can actually mean randomness.

 

There is method in the madness as they say.