Home
» Cosmology, Intelligent Design, News » Here’s a current cosmology debate on why the world exists
Here’s a current cosmology debate on why the world exists
| February 16, 2014 | Posted by News under Cosmology, Intelligent Design, News |
From the size of an electron’s charge to the cosmological constant, the universe appears to be mysteriously fine-tuned to support life. Can dark matter or infinite parallel universes explain why the world exists, or are such questions fundamentally insoluble?
The Panel: Templeton Prize-winning cosmologist George Ellis, theoretical physicist Laura Mersini-Houghton and Oxford philosopher David Wallace dispute the origins of existence.
Circle the preferred option:
a) dark matter
b) infinite parallel universes
c) question fundamentally insoluble
or
See also: The Science Fictions series at your fingertips (cosmology)
9 Responses to Here’s a current cosmology debate on why the world exists
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
“Can dark matter or infinite parallel universes explain why the world exists, or are such questions fundamentally insoluble?”
Circle the preferred option:
a) dark matter
b) infinite parallel universes
c) question fundamentally insoluble
or:
d) Isaiah 45:18-19
For thus says the Lord, who created the heavens, who is God, who formed the earth and made it, who established it, who did not create it in vain, who formed it to be inhabited: “I am the Lord, and there is no other. I have not spoken in secret, in a dark place of the earth; I did not say to the seed of Jacob, ‘seek me in vain’; I, the Lord speak righteousness, I declare things that are right.”
Music:
Wake Me O Lord! – Inspirational Poem – music
https://vimeo.com/groups/229867/videos/38692431
Praise the lord!
Exactly right, BA!
We just disagree on how He did that and on how long He took to do it.
And what do we really lose if the revelation in “the book of nature” is consistent with an understanding of Genesis that focuses on spiritual truths rather than viewing it as highly literal?
OT Goodie:
Nye debating global warming on Stossel – get’s demolished, imo:
http://www.mrctv.org/videos/cl.....ate-change
We’ll get you praising the Lord one way or another, Graham. Great to see.
One more time…
Reasonable Faith – Topic page – brief synopsis main arguments
http://www.originsdiscussion.info/topics.html
Slides of Interest
Cosmological Argument –
http://www.originsdiscussion.i.....Slide1.JPG
Fine Tuning of Initial Conditions Of The Universe –
http://www.originsdiscussion.i.....Slide2.JPG
Fine Tuning of Laws Of Physics
http://www.originsdiscussion.i.....Slide3.JPG
Does The Multiverse Help Explain Fine Tuning?
http://www.originsdiscussion.i.....Slide4.JPG
I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Believe In a Naturalistic Origin Of Life
http://www.originsdiscussion.i.....Slide5.JPG
Resurrection Evidence – “Minimal Facts”
http://www.originsdiscussion.i.....Slide7.JPG
b) infinite parallel universes
Many may not like it but it is the proposed hypothesis which needs to be tested thoroughly.
Why God is not a solution? We have no idea of God’s form, His capabilities, God’s mechanism for interaction with our universe, when and where He intervenes and How He decides the intervention time and place.
Selva @8: “it is the proposed hypothese which needs to be tested thoroughly”. This is the core problem with the infinite parallel universe theory. Since the proposed parallel universes are all coexisting in some sort of undefined “other” dimension which is not reachable, measurable, or even detectable from our own plane of existence the theory can in fact never be tested. As such, it is nothing more than a faith statement, created out of whole cloth in an effort to find something (anything!) that can make the obvious fine-tuning of our own universe appear a little less remarkable. Occam would suggest that all things being equal, the simpler explanation (that a universe that looks designed has a designer) might be the best option.