Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community
Category

Multiverse

The Effect of Infinite Probabilistic Resources on ID and Science (Part 1)

If the infinite universe critique holds, then not only does it undermine ID, but every huckster, conman, and scam artist will have a field day. Read More ›

In a Darwinian multiverse, Eugene Koonin could be both right and wrong an infinite number of times

In “The origin and early evolution of eukaryotes in the light of phylogenomics” (Genome Biology 2010, 11:209 ) Eugene V Koonin argues for endosymbiosis (organisms ingest other organisms, but the latter remain alive and provide a new function for the whole) to explain eukaryotes (complex cells, not bacteria):

Phylogenomics of eukaryote supergroups suggest a highly complex last common ancestor of eukaryotes and a key role of mitochondrial endosymbiosis in the origin of eukaryotes.

Sure but he’s also argued for the multiverse to explain that too. Read More ›

Martin Rees wins Templeton Prize

A fine tuning and multiverse advocate, Martin J. Rees, today won the 2011 Templeton Prize. The astrophysicist with no religion won the Prize originally “for Progress in Religion.”
The 2011 Templeton Prize was announced today.

LONDON, APRIL 6 – Martin J. Rees, a theoretical astrophysicist whose profound insights on the cosmos have provoked vital questions that speak to humanity’s highest hopes and worst fears, has won the 2011 Templeton Prize.
Rees, Master of Trinity College, one of Cambridge University’s top academic posts, and former president of the Royal Society, the highest leadership position within British science, has spent decades investigating the implications of the big bang, the nature of black holes, events during the so-called ‘dark age’ of the early universe, and the mysterious explosions from galaxy centers known as gamma ray bursters. Read More ›

The Nature of Nature — sticky

THE NATURE OF NATURE is now finally out and widely available. If you haven’t bought it yet, let me suggest Amazon.com, which is selling it for $17.94, which is an incredible deal for a 7″x10″ 1000-page book with, for most of us, no tax and no shipping charge (it costs over $10 to ship this monster priority mail). This is a must-have book if you are interested at all in the ID debate. To get it from Amazon.com, click here. Below is the table of contents and some introductory matter.

(Other news coverage continues below)

———————————————

Seven years in the making, at 500,000 words, with three Nobel laureate contributors, this is the most thorough examination of naturalism to date.

<<<<<>>>>>

Nature of NatureThe Nature of Nature: Examining the Role of Naturalism in Science

Edited by Bruce L. Gordon

and William A. Dembski

ISI Books

Intercollegiate Studies Institute

Wilmington, DE 19807

Back Cover:


Read More ›

Einstein’s relativity predicts multiple and varied universes?

One group that isn’t going along with John “end of science” Horgan’s “immoral” rap about multiverse theorizing is the Templeton Foundation. A friend sends me this excerpt from a recent newsletter (which I can’t currently find online): Meanwhile, Cambridge University cosmologist and JTF Trustee John D. Barrow has just published the UK version of his new title, The Book of Universes. Barrow, a best-selling popular science author and the 2006 Templeton Prize winner, explores the underappreciated fact that Einstein’s theory of relativity predicts the existence of multiple and varied universes. What might these universes be like? And what do the latest scientific findings tell us about our own universe? Barrow’s Book gives readers a comprehensive overview of what we know, Read More ›

If you don’t think there are infinitely many universes out there, you are mere Popperazi?

John Horgan, who took it on the ear some years ago for prophesying the end of science, now asks, provocatively I suppose, whether theorizing about alternative universes is immoral: These multiverse theories all share the same fundamental defect: They can be neither confirmed nor falsified. Hence, they don’t deserve to be called scientific, according to the well-known criterion proposed by the philosopher Karl Popper. Some defenders of multiverses and strings mock skeptics who raise the issue of falsification as “Popperazi” – which is cute but not a counterargument. Multiverse theories aren’t theories – they’re science fictions, theologies, works of the imagination unconstrained by evidence. And they’re fun too. They’re everything except science, and good on Horgan for pointing it out. Read More ›

Naturalism is a priori evolutionary materialism, so it both begs the question and self-refutes

The thesis expressed in the title of this “opening bat” post is plainly controversial, and doubtless will be hotly contested and/or pointedly ignored. However, when all is said and done, it will be quite evident that it has the merit that it just happens to be both true and well-warranted. So, let us begin. Noted Harvard evolutionary biologist Richard Lewontin inadvertently lets the cat out of the bag in his well-known January 1997 New York Review of Books article, “Billions and Billions of Demons”: . . . to put a correct view of the universe into people’s heads we must first get an incorrect view out . . .   the problem is to get them to reject irrational and supernatural Read More ›

Multiverse: Recent studies suggest that some alternative universes “may not be so inhospitable” – assuming they exist

Well, the supernatural may be "outside the scope of science," but universes whose existence is not demonstrated, which are imagined principally to get out of a jam with the evidence from this universe, are reasonably doubted, despite thought experiments. The tentative tone here is well justified. It should be used more often. Read More ›