At the scandalous premiere of Privileged Planet at the Smithsonian Institution several years ago, astronomer Guillermo Gonzalez said something to the effect “not only are we in the right place in the universe, we’re alive at the right time!” Dr. Gonzalez, normally unexpressive and soft spoken, was uncharacteristically emphatic about being alive at the right time in cosmic history, suggesting the window of arrival of homo sapiens and modern technology happened within an exceedingly narrow time frame. He was so emphatic that one would surmise he was seeing a miracle, as if whatever was the source of the universe specially ordained this time and place in the fabric of reality.
From the prestigious scientific journal Nature: Caught in the Act
Ever since Copernicus evicted Earth from its privileged spot at the centre of the Solar System, researchers have embraced the idea that there is nothing special about our time and place in the Universe. What observers see now, they presume, has been going on for billions of years — and will continue for eons to come.
But observations of the distant reaches of the Solar System made in the past few years are challenging that concept. The most active bodies out there — Jupiter’s moon Io and Saturn’s moons Enceladus and Titan — may be putting on limited-run shows that humans are lucky to witness. Saturn’s brilliant rings, too, might have appeared relatively recently, and could grow dingy over time. Some such proposals make planetary researchers uncomfortable, because it is statistically unlikely that humans would catch any one object engaged in unusual activity — let alone several.
The proposals also go against the grain of one of geology’s founding principles: uniformitarianism, which states that planets are shaped by gradual, ongoing processes. “Geologists like things to be the same as they ever were,” says Jeff Moore, a planetary scientist at the NASA Ames Research Center in Moffett Field, California. The unchanging world is “philosophically comforting because you don’t have to assume you’re living in special times”, he says.
But on occasion, the available evidence forces researchers out of their comfort zone. Here, Nature looks at some of the frozen worlds that may be putting on an unusual spectacle.
Enjoy the rest of the article: Caught in the Act.
This is suggestive of ID. Remember guys, UD isn’t about YEC, so officially this is merely a science report, guys. 😉
NOTES
1. Denyse, myself and others were there at the premier of Privileged Planet. In attendance was National Academy of Science member Phil Skell. What a wonderful night.
2. One of our loyal commenters complained recently of all the YEC stuff at UD. Well, personally I’ve only started 3 discussions in the last 2 months on specific YEC topics, the majority of YEC at UD has been firefights in the comment sections of various threads. However, I tried to explain to our loyal readers that I can’t suppress physical observation being made in the world of science. It’s not my fault the data might inspire our YEC readership.
3. HT Box
4. Anyone have the figures for the size of the time window that Gonzalez spoke of? It might be in his book. HELP! Thanks.
5. Circumstantial evidence suggests that Dr. Gonzalez was expelled form his academic post for suggesting we’re living on a privileged planet at a privileged time — very anti-Copernican. This reminds me that astronomer Alton Harp pointed out the stars appear to say: The Fingers of God are Pointing at You.
6. The reason the premiere of Privileged Planet was scandalous is detailed by Dr. Bergman here: Showdown at the Smithsonian.
7. YP Varshni seconds Arp (sort of): Is the earth the center of the universe?
Also, johnnyb makes this observation regarding how blessed we are to live in this time in he universe given a recent paper by physicist Lawrence Krauss:
If only to suggest, it is by grace that any of us know anything…
SC, re:
This is inaccurate to the relevant context and the history of ideas. In the Platonic and Aristotelian influenced way of thinking, it would be more accurate to say they saw the earth as the somewhat chaotic, imperfect SUMP of the cosmos. In this context, they did not have the same sort of centre is privileged/superior view we seem to assume today.
It can be argued that Copernicus, Brahe, Kepler and Galileo et al PROMOTED earth to the heavens.
(Cf discussion here on.)
I mention this, as this is a caricature that props up an unconscious chronological snobbery that fails to see that one does not tell progress to truth by the progress of the clock. And, as habitual accuracy and fairness on history are important, more important than we often realise.
KF
PS: And of course I am not unaware of the subtle, snide swipe being made in the most influential journal of all, Nature, against the privileged planet thesis, and broader design theory. By appeal to ill-informed prejudice and myths passed off as common sense history.
“Saturn’s brilliant rings, too, might have appeared relatively recently, and could grow dingy over time. Some such proposals make planetary researchers uncomfortable, because it is statistically unlikely that humans would catch any one object engaged in unusual activity — let alone several.”
This quote from the article was reminiscent to me of a thread I posted on the ARN forum some years ago. It probably wasn’t articulated the best, but the gist was that the young earth worldview had properties that lead one to have a least sense of surprise about one’s place in time in the universe.
This article is similar, but the surprise value is determined by finding a something that seem not disrupted, or that is essentially youthful. old worldview, surprise; young worldview, not so much.
By the way, the ARN thread article was about how surprised we should be to find ourselves at this point in time. From a worldview with an infinite timeline, we should be extremely surprised to find ourselves at this time. From a worldview with a tiny timeline, we should not be surprised. The more surprised one is, the less likely their worldview fits reality. 😀 Just saying!
Thanks Sal, As to Gonzalez’s ‘narrow time frame’, here is one reference:
Also of note: The moon, as Gonzalez pointed out, due to these ‘perfect’ solar eclipses that we ‘just so happen’ to enjoy, was integral for the initial verification of the 4-D space-time of Einstein’s General relativity:
Of related note to the verification of the 4-D space-time of Einstein’s General Relativity with the moon, it is found that the prophetic calender, with the allowance of ‘leap months’, in its measure of time, exceeds the modern ‘scientific’ Gregorian calender. i.e. The Gregorian calender uses a fairly complex system of leap days (and seconds) to keep accuracy with the sun, whereas, on a whole consideration, the prophetic calender uses a simpler system of leap months to keep accuracy to the sun. When these two systems are compared against each other, side by side, the prophetic calender equals the Gregorian in accuracy at first approximation, and on in-depth analysis for extremely long periods of time (even to the limits for how precisely we can measure the Earth’s solar years) the prophetic calender exceeds the Gregorian calender in accuracy. i.e. God’s measure of time exceeds the best efforts of Man to scientifically measure time accurately for the earth.,, But why am I surprised about this? 🙂
To continue on with Gonzalez’s ‘observability correlation’:
Moreover, the time frame in which we can observe the beginning of the universe, i.e. the Cosmic Background Radiation, is also found to be relatively narrow:
Further note along that line:
Also of note:
Also of interest:
The following site is also of interest;
The preceding interactive graph points out that the smallest scale visible to the human eye (as well as a human egg) is at 10^-4 meters, which ‘just so happens’ to be directly in the exponential center of all possible sizes of our physical reality (not just ‘nearly’ in the exponential center!). i.e. 10^-4 is, exponentially, right in the middle of 10^-35 meters, which is the smallest possible unit of length, which is Planck length, and 10^27 meters, which is the largest possible unit of ‘observable’ length since space-time was created in the Big Bang, which is the diameter of the universe. This is very interesting for, as far as I can tell, the limits to human vision (as well as the size of the human egg) could have, theoretically, been at very different positions than directly in the exponential middle;
of related note:
importantly:
Verse and Music:
etc..
Does Nature have any blind watchmaker friendly articles wrt anything?
Regarding the assumption of uniformity across space and time:
1. It has always been a ideological assumption:
With his co-author, Stephen Hawking wrote in The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time on page 134 that scientists, “are not able to make cosmological models without some mixture of ideology”.
2. It has never been logically required:
Scientific American profiled cosmologist George Ellis quoting him stating that:
“People need to be aware that there is a range of models that could explain the observations… For instance, I can construct you a spherically symmetrical universe with Earth at its center, and you cannot disprove it based on observations… You can only exclude it on philosophical grounds… What I want to bring into the open is the fact that we are using philosophical criteria in choosing our models. A lot of cosmology tries to hide that.”
3. It is clung to in the face of observations “to avoid embarrassment”:
Feynman wrote:
‘… I suspect that the assumption of uniformity of the universe reflects a prejudice born of a sequence of overthrows of geocentric ideas. … It would be embarrassing to find, after stating that we live in an ordinary planet about an ordinary star in an ordinary galaxy, that our place in the universe is extraordinary … To avoid embarrassment we cling to the hypothesis of uniformity.’
Feynman, R.P., Morinigo, F.B. and Wagner, W.G., Feynman Lectures on Gravitation, Penguin Books, London, 1999. P.166
Nice Quotes Pseudolus! ,,, But also with this caveat,,,
The God Particle: Not the God of the Gaps, But the Whole Show – Monday, Aug. 2012
Excerpt: C. S. Lewis put it this way: “Men became scientific because they expected law in nature and they expected law in nature because they believed in a lawgiver.”
http://www.christianpost.com/n.....how-80307/
@bornagain77 I totally agree with that “caveat”; that is the recognition of the theistic worldview that lead to modern science. Additionally, from within a Biblical worldview, that same lawgiver revealed the occurrence of specific events that preceded and initiated the reliable operation of the observed “laws of nature” as well as events that transcend such “laws.”
I see what you did there.
BA77,
Thank you for helping me out. God bless you, sir!
and
Wow! We not only live on the Privileged Planet but at a Priviliged Time in all eternity! The Fingers of God are indeed pointing at us.
Sal.
The point of being/existing in a highly unlikely time was one point brought up in a TED talk by Brian Green I think. And expansion was the problem that showed we were in a special time…. Why would we exist at this point?…. I think the answer Greene suggested was that the universe was inflating, and something along the lines of statistically in the inflationary universe clumps or pockets of order would eventually happen, and those were the origins points of big bangs in this super inflationary model… and new life surprised to find itself at the start of a new expansion…etc.. etc.. Yeah, a few layers of assumptions, but the point of being in a special time was for the most part acknowledged.
I’m not sure if this is along the same lines as Krauss, but I’d guess that Greene and Krauss have worked, if not talked, together at some point on this.
Sal. Correction. It was a TED talk by Sean Carroll that that point was brought up.
For your dissection:
http://www.ted.com/talks/sean_.....verse.html
No problem Sal, I’m surprised more examples from Gonzalez have not been cited by others
As to the claim in post 5, from ‘The Galileo Affair’, that,,,
,,,It is also interesting to note that ‘higher dimensional’ mathematics had to be developed before Einstein could elucidate General Relativity, or even before Quantum Mechanics could be elucidated;
Quote: