At Mind Matters News: Weak Anthropic Principle? Not an explanation but a tautology!

It is also interesting to note that, via special relativity, (prior to Borde, Guth, and Vilenkin's proof that the space-time of this universe must have had an absolute beginning), we already knew that time, as we understand it, comes to a complete stop at the speed of light.

"The laws of relativity have changed timeless existence from a theological claim to a physical reality. Light, you see, is outside of time, a fact of nature proven in thousands of experiments at hundreds of universities. I don’t pretend to know how tomorrow can exist simultaneously with today and yesterday. But at the speed of light they actually and rigorously do. Time does not pass." - Dr. Richard Swenson - More Than Meets The Eye, Chpt. 11 Time dilation Special relativity indicates that, for an observer in an inertial frame of reference, a clock that is moving relative to them will be measured to tick slower than a clock that is at rest in their frame of reference. This case is sometimes called special relativistic time dilation. The faster the relative velocity, the greater the time dilation between one another, with the rate of time reaching zero as one approaches the speed of light (299,792,458 m/s). This causes massless particles that travel at the speed of light to be unaffected by the passage of time.,,, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation#Gravitational_time_dilation

So that time, as we understand it, would be shown to have an absolute beginning by Borde, Guth, and Vilenkin, is not really all that surprising. i.e. We already knew, via thousands of tests on special relativity, that time, as we understand it, comes to a complete stop at the speed of light. To grasp the whole ‘time coming to a complete stop at the speed of light’ concept a little more easily, imagine moving away from the face of a clock at the speed of light. Would not the hands on the clock stay stationary as you moved away from the face of the clock at the speed of light? Moving away from the face of a clock at the speed of light happens to be the same ‘thought experiment’ that gave Einstein his breakthrough insight into special relativity.

"In the spring of 1905, Einstein was riding on a bus and he looked back at the famous clock tower that dominates Bern Switzerland. And then he imagined, "What happens if that bus were racing near the speed of light?", (narrator: "In his imagination, Einstein looks back at the clock tower and what he sees is astonishing. As he reaches the speed of light, the hands of the clock appear frozen in time"), "Einstein would later write, "A storm broke in my mind. All of the sudden everything, everything, kept gushing forward.", (narrator: "Einstein knows that, back at the clock tower, time is passing normally, but on Einstein's light speed bus, as he reaches the speed of light, the light from the clock can no longer catch up to him. The faster he races through space, the slower he moves through time. This insight sparks the birth of Einstein's Special Theory of relativity, which says that space and time are deeply connected. In fact, they are one and the same. A flexible fabric called spacetime.") - Michio Kaku Einstein: Einstein’s Miracle Year (‘Insight into Eternity’ – Thought Experiment - 6:29 minute mark) – video https://youtu.be/QQ35opgrhNA?t=389

It is also interesting to note what happens when we 'turn around 180 degrees' the hypothetical observer in Einstein's thought experiment and, instead of visualizing the clock face as Einstein did in his thought experiment, we instead visualize what will happen to space-time itself as we approach the speed of light. At the 3:22 mark of the following video, which is entitled "Optical Effects of Special Relativity", we find that the 3-Dimensional world ‘folds and collapses’ into a tunnel shape as a ‘hypothetical observer' approaches the speed of light,

Optical Effects of Special Relativity – video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQnHTKZBTI4

All of this makes perfect sense. Namely, since time, as we understand it, does not pass for light, and yet light obviously moves from point A to point B in our universe, and therefore light is obviously not 'frozen within time', then it logically follows that light must be of a 'higher dimension' of time. If light did not have this 'higher dimensional' quality to it, light would simply be 'frozen within time' since time, as we understand it, does not pass for it. Moreover, while it is very difficult to see how the higher dimensional 4-D space-time of special relativity would make any sense whatsoever for the Atheistic Naturalist, on the other hand, for the Christian Theist, it is 'expected' that this universe would be described by higher dimensional mathematics. Namely, Christian Theism 'predicted' that this universe was created by God from the 'highest heavens' which 'belong' to Him.

Psalm 115: 2-3 and 15-16 Why do the nations say, "Where is their God?" Our God is in heaven; he does whatever pleases him.,,,, May you be blessed by the LORD, the Maker of heaven and earth. The highest heavens belong to the LORD, but the earth he has given to man.

In short, Christian Theism 'predicted' the universe to be created from a 'higher dimension' thousands of years before the higher dimensional mathematics that describe our universe were even elucidated.

The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences – Eugene Wigner – 1960 Excerpt: It is difficult to avoid the impression that a miracle confronts us here,,,, We now have, in physics, two theories of great power and interest: the theory of quantum phenomena and the theory of relativity.,,, The two theories operate with different mathematical concepts - the four dimensional Riemann space and the infinite dimensional Hilbert space, respectively.,,, https://www.maths.ed.ac.uk/~v1ranick/papers/wigner.pdf

Moreover, stunning confirmation for special relativity, namely confirmation for the time-dilation and 4-D space-time curvature of special relativity, comes from a very surprising place. Namely, Near Death Experiences, of all things, offer stunning confirmation for what special relativity predicts. In the following video clip, Mickey Robinson gives his Near Death testimony of what it felt like for him to experience a ‘timeless eternity’.

‘In the ‘spirit world,,, instantly, there was no sense of time. See, everything on earth is related to time. You got up this morning, you are going to go to bed tonight. Something is new, it will get old. Something is born, it’s going to die. Everything on the physical plane is relative to time, but everything in the spiritual plane is relative to eternity. Instantly I was in total consciousness and awareness of eternity, and you and I as we live in this earth cannot even comprehend it, because everything that we have here is filled within the veil of the temporal life. In the spirit life that is more real than anything else and it is awesome. Eternity as a concept is awesome. There is no such thing as time. I knew that whatever happened was going to go on and on.’ In The Presence Of Almighty God – The NDE of Mickey Robinson – video (testimony starts at 27:45 minute mark) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=voak1RM-pXo

And here are a few more quotes from people who have experienced Near Death, that speak of how their perception of time was radically altered as they were outside of their material body.

‘Earthly time has no meaning in the spirit realm. There is no concept of before or after. Everything – past, present, future – exists simultaneously.’ – Kimberly Clark Sharp – Near Death Experiencer ‘There is no way to tell whether minutes, hours or years go by. Existence is the only reality and it is inseparable from the eternal now.’ – John Star – NDE Experiencer

As well, Near Death Experiencers also frequently mention going through a tunnel to a higher heavenly dimension:

Ask the Experts: What Is a Near-Death Experience (NDE)? – article with video Excerpt: “Very often as they’re moving through the tunnel, there’s a very bright mystical light … not like a light we’re used to in our earthly lives. People call this mystical light, brilliant like a million times a million suns…” – Jeffrey Long M.D. – has studied NDE’s extensively – abcnews nightline The Tunnel and the Near-Death Experience Excerpt: One of the nine elements that generally occur during NDEs is the tunnel experience. This involves being drawn into darkness through a tunnel, at an extremely high speed, until reaching a realm of radiant golden-white light. – near death research

In the following video, Barbara Springer gives her testimony as to what it felt like for her to go through the tunnel to the 'higher dimension' of heaven:

“I started to move toward the light. The way I moved, the physics, was completely different than it is here on Earth. It was something I had never felt before and never felt since. It was a whole different sensation of motion. I obviously wasn’t walking or skipping or crawling. I was not floating. I was flowing. I was flowing toward the light. I was accelerating and I knew I was accelerating, but then again, I didn’t really feel the acceleration. I just knew I was accelerating toward the light. Again, the physics was different – the physics of motion of time, space, travel. It was completely different in that tunnel, than it is here on Earth. I came out into the light and when I came out into the light, I realized that I was in heaven.” Barbara Springer – Near Death Experience – The Tunnel – video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gv2jLeoAcMI

And in the following audio clip, Vicki Noratuk, who has been blind from birth, besides being able to see for the first time during in her life during her Near Death Experience, also gives testimony of going through a tunnel:

“I was in a body, and the only way that I can describe it was a body of energy, or of light. And this body had a form. It had a head, it had arms and it had legs. And it was like it was made out of light. And it was everything that was me. All of my memories, my consciousness, everything.”,,, “And then this vehicle formed itself around me. Vehicle is the only thing, or tube, or something, but it was a mode of transportation that’s for sure! And it formed around me. And there was no one in it with me. I was in it alone. But I knew there were other people ahead of me and behind me. What they were doing I don’t know, but there were people ahead of me and people behind me, but I was alone in my particular conveyance. And I could see out of it. And it went at a tremendously, horrifically, rapid rate of speed. But it wasn’t unpleasant. It was beautiful in fact.,, I was reclining in this thing, I wasn’t sitting straight up, but I wasn’t lying down either. I was sitting back. And it was just so fast. I can’t even begin to tell you where it went or whatever it was just fast!” – Vicki’s NDE – Blind since birth – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e65KhcCS5-Y

And the following people who had a NDE both testify that they firmly believed that they were in a higher dimension that is above this three-dimensional world and that the primary reason that they have a very difficult time explaining what their Near Death Experiences felt like is because we simply don’t currently have the words to properly describe that higher dimension:

“Regardless, it is impossible for me to adequately describe what I saw and felt. When I try to recount my experiences now, the description feels very pale. I feel as though I’m trying to describe a three-dimensional experience while living in a two-dimensional world. The appropriate words, descriptions and concepts don’t even exist in our current language. I have subsequently read the accounts of other people’s near-death experiences and their portrayals of heaven and I able to see the same limitations in their descriptions and vocabulary that I see in my own.” - Mary C. Neal, MD – To Heaven And Back pg. 71 “Well, when I was taking geometry, they always told me there were only three dimensions, and I always just accepted that. But they were wrong. There are more… And that is why so hard for me to tell you this. I have to describe with words that are three-dimensional. That’s as close as I can get to it, but it’s really not adequate.” - John Burke – Imagine Heaven pg. 51 – quoting a Near Death Experiencer

That what we now know to be true from special relativity, (namely that it outlines a ‘timeless’, i.e. eternal, dimension that exists in a higher dimension above this temporal dimension), would fit hand and glove with the personal testimonies of people who have had deep heavenly NDEs is, needless to say, (very) powerful evidence that their testimonies are, in fact, true and that they are accurately describing the ‘reality’ of a higher heavenly dimension that exists above this temporal dimension. I would even go so far as to say that such corroboration from ‘non-physicists’, who, in all likelihood, know nothing about the intricacies of special relativity, is a complete verification of the overall validity of their personal NDE testimonies. Verse:

2 Corinthians 12:2-4 I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven. Whether it was in the body or out of the body I do not know—God knows. And I know that this man—whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, but God knows— was caught up to paradise and heard inexpressible things, things that no one is permitted to tell.

bornagain77

That Borde, Guth, and Vilenkin would, ingenuously, use special relativity, to provide a more robust proof that the universe had an absolute beginning,,,,

Inflationary spacetimes are not past-complete - 2003 Arvind Borde,1, 2 Alan H. Guth,1, 3 and Alexander Vilenkin1 Excerpt: we will construct a definition for H that depends only on the relative motion of the observer and test particles. In order to motivate what we do, we first consider the case of nonrelativistic velocities in Minkowski space. Suppose that the observer measures the velocities of the test particles as a function of the time t on his own clock.,,, IV. Discussion. Our argument shows that null and time- like geodesics are, in general, past-incomplete in infla- tionary models, whether or not energy conditions hold, provided only that the averaged expansion condition Hav > 0 holds along these past-directed geodesics. This is a stronger conclusion than the one arrived at in pre- vious work [8] in that we have shown under reasonable assumptions that almost all causal geodesics, when ex- tended to the past of an arbitrary point, reach the bound- ary of the inflating region of spacetime in a finite proper time (finite affine length, in the null case). https://www.brainmaster.com/software/pubs/physics/Inflation%20past0110012v2.pdf Stephen Meyer Discusses the Big Bang, Einstein, Hawking, and More – video – 36:42 minute mark https://youtu.be/m_AeA4fMHhI?t=2202

,,, instead of using general relativity like Hawking, Penrose and Ellis did in their proof for a beginning of the universe, makes a lot of sense,

Big Bang Theory - An Overview of the main evidence Excerpt: Steven Hawking, George Ellis, and Roger Penrose turned their attention to the Theory of Relativity and its implications regarding our notions of time. In 1968 and 1970, they published papers in which they extended Einstein's Theory of General Relativity to include measurements of time and space.1, 2 According to their calculations, time and space had a finite beginning that corresponded to the origin of matter and energy."3 Steven W. Hawking, George F.R. Ellis, "The Cosmic Black-Body Radiation and the Existence of Singularities in our Universe," Astrophysical Journal, 152, (1968) pp. 25-36. Steven W. Hawking, Roger Penrose, "The Singularities of Gravitational Collapse and Cosmology," Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, series A, 314 (1970) pp. 529-548. http://www.big-bang-theory.com/ "Every solution to the equations of general relativity guarantees the existence of a singular boundary for space and time in the past." (Hawking, Penrose, Ellis) - 1970? "Before he worked on black hole evaporation, Hawking worked with Penrose on the singularity theorems. Penrose’s theorem showed that, in contrast to what most physicists believed at the time, black holes are a pretty much unavoidable consequence of stellar collapse. Before that, physicists thought black holes are mathematical curiosities that would not be produced in reality. It was only because of the singularity theorems that black holes began to be taken seriously. Eventually astronomers looked for them, and now we have solid experimental evidence that black holes exist. Hawking applied the same method to the early universe to show that the Big Bang singularity is likewise unavoidable, unless General Relativity somehow breaks down. And that is an absolutely amazing insight about the origin of our universe." - Sabine Hossenfelder

The reason that it makes a lot of sense that special relativity would provide a more robust proof for an absolute beginning for the universe is that special relativity, via 'brushing infinity under the rug', has already been 'unified' with quantum mechanics, whereas general relativity, notoriously and infamously, refuses to 'play nicely' with the other forces and particles.

Theories of the Universe: Quantum Mechanics vs. General Relativity Excerpt: The first attempt at unifying relativity and quantum mechanics took place when special relativity was merged with electromagnetism. This created the theory of quantum electrodynamics, or QED. It is an example of what has come to be known as relativistic quantum field theory, or just quantum field theory. QED is considered by most physicists to be the most precise theory of natural phenomena ever developed. In the 1960s and '70s, the success of QED prompted other physicists to try an analogous approach to unifying the weak, the strong, and the gravitational forces. Out of these discoveries came another set of theories that merged the strong and weak forces called quantum chromodynamics, or QCD, and quantum electroweak theory, or simply the electroweak theory, which you've already been introduced to. If you examine the forces and particles that have been combined in the theories we just covered, you'll notice that the obvious force missing is that of gravity (i.e. General Relativity). http://www.infoplease.com/cig/theories-universe/quantum-mechanics-vs-general-relativity.html

So that special relativity would provide a more robust proof for an absolute beginning of the universe than general relativity would simply makes a lot of sense since special relativity has already been 'unified' with the other forces and particles of the universe and thus can offer us a more accurate description of what the other particle and forces are doing at various points in space-time. It is also interesting to note, prior to Einstein's elucidation of General Relativity circa 1915, that "In 1908, Hermann Minkowski—once one of the math professors of a young Einstein in Zurich—presented a geometric interpretation of special relativity that fused time and the three spatial dimensions of space into a single four-dimensional continuum now known as Minkowski space." In fact, in 1916, Einstein fully acknowledged his indebtedness to Minkowski, whose (geometric) interpretation (of special relativity) greatly facilitated the transition to general relativity.

Spacetime Excerpt: In 1908, Hermann Minkowski—once one of the math professors of a young Einstein in Zurich—presented a geometric interpretation of special relativity that fused time and the three spatial dimensions of space into a single four-dimensional continuum now known as Minkowski space. A key feature of this interpretation is the definition of a spacetime interval that combines distance and time. Although measurements of distance and time between events differ for measurements made in different reference frames, the spacetime interval is independent of the inertial frame of reference in which they are recorded. Minkowski's geometric interpretation of relativity was to prove vital to Einstein's development of his 1915 general theory of relativity, wherein he showed that spacetime becomes curved in the presence of mass or energy.,,, Einstein, for his part, was initially dismissive of Minkowski's geometric interpretation of special relativity, regarding it as überflüssige Gelehrsamkeit (superfluous learnedness). However, in order to complete his search for general relativity that started in 1907, the geometric interpretation of relativity proved to be vital, and in 1916, Einstein fully acknowledged his indebtedness to Minkowski, whose interpretation greatly facilitated the transition to general relativity.[10]:151–152 Since there are other types of spacetime, such as the curved spacetime of general relativity, the spacetime of special relativity is today known as Minkowski spacetime. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spacetime Beyond the Surface of Einstein’s Relativity Lay a Chimerical Geometry BY VASUDEVAN MUKUNTH - 10/09/2015 Excerpt: let’s skip forward to July 1912, when Einstein had just returned from Prague to Zurich. The first thing he did was to speak to his friend Marcel Grossmann, who was also the head of the maths department at the Zurich Polytechnic: “Grossmann, you’ve got to help me or I will go crazy” (Einstein: His Life and Universe, Walter Isaacson, p. 193).,,, The problem was that Einstein didn’t know the mathematical laws that described the properties of the gravitational field he was trying to uncover. When working on his special theory of relativity, he hadn’t bothered with the mathematical rules of the system – only their physical properties and behaviour. It was after he’d published his results that his former teacher, Hermann Minkowski, described the geometry of special relativity’s space-time, since called Minkowski space-time. But with general relativity, Einstein felt he needed to explore the maths himself as he was starting to realise it would help him make discoveries that lay beyond the reach of his famed intuition.,,, Grossmann referred Einstein to the work of Riemann,,, Einstein had only popularised what Riemann had found in 1854.,,, Einstein’s theories were contested by various mathematicians who saw in his conception of relativity the imprint of their discoveries in geometry – in turn drawn from the findings of Riemann and his teacher, Gauss.,,, For example, Minkowski is often credited with unifying space and time into a single continuum in 1907,,,, https://thewire.in/10451/beyond-the-surface-of-einsteins-relativity-lay-a-chimerical-geometry/ General Relativity Excerpt: General relativity, also known as the general theory of relativity, is the geometric theory of gravitation published by Albert Einstein in 1915 and is the current description of gravitation in modern physics. General relativity generalizes special relativity and refines Newton's law of universal gravitation, providing a unified description of gravity as a geometric property of space and time or four-dimensional spacetime. In particular, the curvature of spacetime is directly related to the energy and momentum of whatever matter and radiation are present. The relation is specified by the Einstein field equations, a system of partial differential equations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_relativity

bornagain77

Well that was interesting to learn, Borde, Guth, and Vilenkin’s proof for a beginning for the universe, (being based on special relativity, not General Relativity), is considered a more robust proof for the beginning of the universe than Hawking, Penrose, and Ellis’s proof was for a beginning of the universe Stephen Meyer Discusses the Big Bang, Einstein, Hawking, and More - video - 36:42 minute mark https://youtu.be/m_AeA4fMHhI?t=2202 bornagain77

Of related note is this recently uploaded video: Stephen Meyer Discusses the Big Bang, Einstein, Hawking, and More https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_AeA4fMHhI bornagain77

ChuckDarwin, perhaps you should read deeper into the articles that you yourself cite rather than just reading the headline and the first few paragraphs. https://uncommondesc.wpengine.com/philosophy/michael-egnor-science-can-and-does-point-to-gods-existence/#comment-738101 bornagain77

#1: Bornagain77 Perhaps Egnor should bone up on his cosmology:

To understand [the Big Bang], consider the singularity that cosmologists universally agree was the source of the Big Bang.... Egnor, Mind Matters, Oct.3

Compare the above quote with the following from astrophysicist, Ethan Seigel:

One of the most common [non-scientist answers to what caused the Big Bang] is “a singularity,” which refers to an instant where all the matter and energy in the Universe was concentrated into a single point. The temperatures, densities, and energies of the Universe would be arbitrarily, infinitely large, and could even coincide with the birth of time and space itself. But this picture isn’t just wrong, it’s nearly 40 years out of date! We are absolutely certain there was no singularity associated with the hot Big Bang, and there may not have even been a birth to space and time at all. https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2018/07/27/there-was-no-big-bang-singularity/?sh=16bc9b277d81

chuckdarwin

Egnor:

The Weak Anthropic Principle isn’t a scientific explanation for the fine-tuning in the universe. It isn’t science and it isn’t an explanation of anything — no tautology is.

Meyer:

(.... ) perhaps the most popular approach, at least initially, was the weak anthropic principle (WAP). Nevetheless, WAP has recently encountered severe criticism from philosophers of physics and cosmology. WAP advocates claimed that if the universe were not fine-tuned to allow for life, then humans would not be here to observe it. Thus, they claimed, the fine-tuning requires no explanation. Yet as John Leslie and William Craig (1996: 23) argue, the origin of the fine-tuning does require explanation. Though we humans should not be surprised to find ourselves living n a universe suited for life (by definition), we ought to be surprised to learn that the conditions necessary for life are so vastly improbable. Leslie likens our situation to that of a blindfolded man who has discovered that, against all odds, he has survived a firing squad of 100 expert marksmen (1982: 150). Though his continued existence is certainly consistent with all the marksmen having missed, it does not explain why the marksmen actually did miss. In essence, the weak anthropic principle asserts that the statement of a necessary condition of an event eliminates the need for a causal explanation of that event. Yet oxygen is a necessary condition of fire, but saying so does not provide a causal explanation of the San Francisco fire. Similarly, the fine-tuning of the physical constants is a necessary condition for the existence of life, but that does not explain, or eliminate the need to explain, the origin of the fine-tuning.

Origenes on vacation

Sounds to me like the Weak Anthropic Principle should be known as the Completely Ridiculous Anthropic Principle. EvilSnack

Dr. Egnor is certainly one ex-atheist, turned Catholic, that Darwinists should not have messed with when he said that he found the arguments for ID persuasive. Year in, year out, Dr. Egnor has simply been devastating in his 'straight to the point' critiques of the Atheists's arguments.

A Neurosurgeon, Not A Darwinist - Michael Egnor - 2009 Excerpt: I was vilified on the Internet. Calls came to my office demanding that I be fired. And much of the venom was ideological. The vast majority of evolutionary biologists are atheists. I'm Catholic, and my religious faith was mocked by my fellow scientists. Many Darwinists openly express their hatred for Christianity--atheist biologist P.Z. Myers desecrated a Eucharistic host on his Web site. In 1989, Oxford evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins wrote in the New York Times book review section that people who don't accept evolution are "ignorant, stupid, insane … or wicked." He has described the religious upbringing of children as "child abuse." In his book, Darwin's Dangerous Idea, atheist philosopher and Darwinist Daniel Dennett has written that "[s]afety demands that religions be put in cages too--when absolutely necessary." The fight against the design inference in biology is motivated by fundamentalist atheism. Darwinists detest intelligent design theory because it is compatible with belief in God. But the evidence is unassailable. The most reasonable scientific explanation for functional biological complexity--the genetic code and the intricate nanotechnology inside living cells--is that they were designed by intelligent agency. There is no scientific evidence that unintelligent processes can create substantial new biological structures and function. There is no unintelligent process known to science that can generate codes and machines. https://www.forbes.com/2009/02/06/neurosurgeon-intelligent-design-opinions-darwin09_0205_michael_egnor.html?sh=5a0c82f9469b At Mind Matters News: Non-Materialist Science Is Wanted — Dead Or Alive - August 29, 2021 Michael Egnor: ,,, "I’ve gotten calls to my department in my university demanding that I be fired. That’s a fairly frequent thing. I was called a couple of years ago by the campus police that there was a death threat against me and they wanted to protect me. So this kind of stuff goes on. And some of these people are vicious." https://uncommondesc.wpengine.com/intelligent-design/at-mind-matters-news-non-materialist-science-is-wanted-dead-or-alive/

bornagain77