Sabine Hossenfelder argues that the multiverse is “no better than God”

When the fine tuning of the cosmos for humans is understood as the non-linear, necessary product of human consciousness, at least those of us who find ourselves "here," it makes a great deal of sense. No need to invoke "God" as a super-intelligent designer when logic and math as innate, necessary guiding qualities of experience do all the high-resolution fine tuning automatically.William J Murray

August 2, 2021

August

08

Aug

2

02

2021

06:55 AM

6

06

55

AM

PDT

Copy Comment Link

As to: "Sabine Hossenfelder Argues That The Multiverse Is “No Better Than God” Actually, compared to God, and via Penrose, “these world ensemble hypothesis are worse than useless in explaining the anthropic fine-tuning of the universe”.

Multiverse and the Design Argument – William Lane Craig Excerpt: Or again, if our universe is but one member of a multiverse, then we ought to be observing highly extraordinary events, like horses’ popping into and out of existence by random collisions, or perpetual motion machines, since these are vastly more probable than all of nature’s constants and quantities’ falling by chance into the virtually infinitesimal life-permitting range. Observable universes like those strange worlds are simply much more plenteous in the ensemble of universes than worlds like ours and, therefore, ought to be observed by us if the universe were but a random member of a multiverse of worlds. Since we do not have such observations, that fact strongly disconfirms the multiverse hypothesis. On naturalism, at least, it is therefore highly probable that there is no multiverse. — Penrose puts it bluntly “these world ensemble hypothesis are worse than useless in explaining the anthropic fine-tuning of the universe”. http://www.reasonablefaith.org/multiverse-and-the-design-argument Does a Multiverse Explain the Fine Tuning of the Universe? – Dr. Craig (observer selection effect vs. Boltzmann Brains) – video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pb9aXduPfuA

,,,,, the multiverse is a 'worse than useless" hypothesis that "entails a nihilistic irrationality that destroys the very possibility of science."

GORDON: Hawking irrational arguments Theoretical physicist takes leave of his senses By Bruce L. Gordon - October 1, 2010 Excerpt: For instance, we find multiverse cosmologists debating the “Boltzmann Brain” problem: In the most “reasonable” models for a multiverse, it is immeasurably more likely that our consciousness is associated with a brain that has spontaneously fluctuated into existence in the quantum vacuum than it is that we have parents and exist in an orderly universe with a 13.7 billion-year history. This is absurd. The multiverse hypothesis is therefore falsified because it renders false what we know to be true about ourselves. Clearly, embracing the multiverse idea entails a nihilistic irrationality that destroys the very possibility of science. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/oct/1/hawking-irrational-arguments/ But Who Needs Reality-Based Thinking Anyway? Not the New Cosmologists – Denyse O’Leary January 2, 2014 Excerpt: Logic and reason are likewise irrelevant. Consider the multiverse claim that there are “infinite copies of you and your loved ones leading lives, up until this moment, that are absolutely identical to yours.” Mathematician George F. R. Ellis notes that, if so, the deep mysteries of nature are too absurd to be explicable and that the proposed nine types of multiverse in one scheme are “mutually exclusive.” True, but in a multiverse, “inexplicable” is okay. “Absurd” and “mutually exclusive” are meaningless concepts. It is equally meaningless to assert that one event is more probable than another. As David Berlinski puts it, “Why is Newton’s universal law of gravitation true? No need to ask. In another universe, it is not”(Devil’s Delusion, p. 124).,,, http://www.evolutionnews.org/2014/01/but_who_needs_r080281.html

Thus, not only is the multiverse 'not science', as Hossenfelder holds, but these multiverse scenarios are actually 'anti-science' in that "it makes scientific rationality impossible.'

The End Of Materialism? - Dr. Bruce Gordon * In the multiverse, anything can happen for no reason at all.? * In other words, the materialist is forced to believe in random miracles as a explanatory principle.? * In a Theistic universe, nothing happens without a reason. Miracles are therefore intelligently directed deviations from divinely maintained regularities, and are thus expressions of rational purpose.? * Scientific materialism is (therefore) epistemically self defeating: it makes scientific rationality impossible. - The Absurdity of Inflation, String Theory and The Multiverse - Dr. Bruce Gordon – video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ff_sNyGNSko

Supplemental note: Via Stephen Meyer’s new book “Return of the God hypothesis”, here are the three necessary Christian presuppositions that lay at the founding of modern science in Medieval Christian Europe.

“Science in its modern form arose in the Western civilization alone, among all the cultures of the world”, because only the Christian West possessed the necessary “intellectual presuppositions”. – Ian Barbour Presupposition 1: The contingency of nature “In 1277, the Etienne Tempier, the bishop of Paris, writing with support of Pope John XXI, condemned “necessarian theology” and 219 separate theses influenced by Greek philosophy about what God could and couldn’t do.”,, “The order in nature could have been otherwise (therefore) the job of the natural philosopher, (i.e. scientist), was not to ask what God must have done but (to ask) what God actually did.” Presupposition 2: The intelligibility of nature “Modern science was inspired by the conviction that the universe is the product of a rational mind who designed it to be understood and who (also) designed the human mind to understand it.” (i.e. human exceptionalism), “God created us in his own image so that we could share in his own thoughts” – Johannes Kepler Presupposition 3: Human Fallibility “Humans are vulnerable to self-deception, flights of fancy, and jumping to conclusions.”, (i.e. original sin), Scientists must therefore employ “systematic experimental methods.” – Stephen Meyer on Intelligent Design and The Return of the God Hypothesis – Hoover Institution https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_8PPO-cAlA

Verse:

38: 1-10 Then the Lord spoke to Job out of the storm. He said: “Who is this that obscures my plans with words without knowledge? Brace yourself like a man; I will question you, and you shall answer me. “Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation? Tell me, if you understand. Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know! Who stretched a measuring line across it? On what were its footings set, or who laid its cornerstone— while the morning stars sang together and all the angels shouted for joy? “Who shut up the sea behind doors when it burst forth from the womb, when I made the clouds its garment and wrapped it in thick darkness, when I fixed limits for it and set its doors and bars in place, when I said, ‘This far you may come and no farther; here is where your proud waves halt’?

bornagain77

August 2, 2021

August

08

Aug

2

02

2021

03:47 AM

3

03

47

AM

PDT

Copy Comment Link