But didn’t Freeman Dyson (1923–2020) say, “The more I examine the universe and the details of its architecture, the more evidence I find that the universe in some sense must have known we were coming.” The idea isn’t new; there’s just much more evidence for it.
Fine tuning
Michael Denton’s new book: Nature is fine-tuned for human existence
Publisher: Drawing on discoveries from a myriad of scientific fields, Denton masterfully documents how contemporary science has revived humanity’s special place in nature.
Rescuing the multiverse as a science concept… ?
Barnes on the multiverse: In the cycle of the scientific method, the multiverse is in an exploratory phase. We’ve got an idea that might explain a few things, if it was true. That makes it worthy of our attention, but it’s not quite science yet. We need to find evidence that is more direct, more decisive.
FOR REFERENCE: Globular Cluster M55 as illustrating apparent aging of our galaxy (& cosmos)
It seems helpful to illustrate cosmological scale apparent aging as stars depart main sequence: An idealised, Hertzsprung-Russell chart for Hydrogen-rich balls prone to become fusion furnaces is: Here is a comparative plot (for open clusters), constructing a “clock” by projected pattern as a cluster ages, in effect seeing what is left as a candle burns Read More…
Steve Meyer on why a supposed multiverse is no answer to the extreme fine-tuning of our universe
Meyer on multiverse cosmologists: “The speculative cosmologies (such as inflationary cosmology and string theory) they propose for generating alternative universes invariably invoke mechanisms that themselves require fine-tuning, thus begging the question as to the origin of that prior fine-tuning.”
Fine tuning of the universe: “Who Ya Gonna Believe Me or Your Own Eyes?”
So Larry Krauss argues “cosmological fine-tuning does not provide evidence of intelligent design, but instead, ‘the illusion of intelligent design.’” Isn’t that a misuse of the concept of illusion? Doesn’t it amount to saying, Who Ya Gonna Believe Me or Your Own Eyes?
Do galaxies retain a memory of the entire universe?
If galaxies somehow retain a memory of the entire universe, the significance is probably greater than just the fact that we can use our galaxy as a model.
At Mind Matters News: Is this idea too crazy?: There was life on the early Moon?
To the extent that the universe appears fine-tuned for life to a dramatic degree, it’s at least reasonable to think it could have survived on, say, the Moon or Mars until conditions there became prohibitive.
Deepening crisis in particle physics — Rob Sheldon responds
But when theoretical physicists start messing with reductionism, they are messing with the core assumptions of the meaningless universe. Many attempts are in progress to revalidate those assumptions, of course but…
Astrophysicist: Quit calling our sun an “average star”
Adam Frank: That whole “average star” meme works great if you want to make it seem like we are nothing special at all in the Universe. But from a stellar census point of view, it’s just not true.
Templeton tries to wish away fine-tuning of the universe
So there you have it, folks. Fine-tuning is either a fluke or a multiverse. No other possibility is conceivable. Maybe science is about eliminating the concept of intelligence from the universe.
Researchers: Moons make planets habitable — but not all planets can have them
University of Rochester: The researchers found that rocky planets larger than six times the mass of Earth (6M) and icy planets larger than one Earth mass (1M) produce fully—rather than partially—vaporized disks, and these fully-vaporized disks are not capable of forming fractionally large moons.
At Mind Matters News: Prof: Fine-tuning in nature is due to the mind of the universe
Panpsychists (or cosmopsychists) are permitted to make arguments that would be banned if made by, say, intelligent design advocates. Some change is afoot.
If there is a secret math in sand megaripples…
Is this not evidence of fundamental design in nature?
Can gravitational waves help account for why there is more matter than antimatter?
“not an electric charge, but some sort of charge”? Okay… At least we are still in the world of hard science here. One thing: They had better trademark the name Q-ball. If their idea takes off, they will be glad they did. Go Q-balls!