Cosmology Fine tuning Multiverse News Science

Rutgers conference on multiverse, evil, and fine-tuning

Spread the love

June 10–11, 2016

From NY/NJ Philosophy of Science group:

===========ABSTRACTS================

Title: Everettian Quantum Mechanics and Evil
Author: Jason Turner
Abstract: The problem of evil has been around for a long time: How can an all-powerful and all-good God allow evil of the sorts we see in the world? If the Everettian interpretation of quantum mechanics is correct, though, then there is a lot more evil in the world than what we see. This suggest a second problem of evil: If Everettianism is true, how can an all-powerful and all-good God allow evil of the sort we don’t see? If the original problem of evil already pushed you into atheism, worries about Everettianism aren’t likely to make much difference. On the other hand, even if you have reconciled the evils we know about with theism to your satisfaction, you may be troubled by the extra Everettian evils. These evils, I will argue, pose an extra challenge for theism. I do not say the challenge cannot be met; some extant responses to the old problem of evil, if successful, may work against the new problem, too. But some won’t. As a result, the challenge is strictly harder: every solution to it is also a solution to the old problem of evil, but not every solution to the old problem of evil is a solution to it.
Title: A Probability Problem in the Fine-Tuning Argument
Author: Hans Halvorson
Abstract: According to the fine-tuning argument: (i) the probability of a life-permitting universe, conditional on the non-existence of God, is low; and (ii) the probability of a life-permitting universe, conditional on the existence of God, is high. I demonstrate that these two claims cannot be simultaneously justified. In particular, if there are good reasons for a non-theist to think that the probability of a life-permitting universe is low, then these are also good reasons for a theist.
More.

—–

Templeton (also funding an evolution rethink) is one of the sponsors.

See also: Copernicus, you are not going to believe who is using your name. Or how.

Not only is earth one nice planet among many, but our entire universe is lost in a crowd

and

But who needs reality-based thinking anyway? Not the new cosmologists

Follow UD News at Twitter!

3 Replies to “Rutgers conference on multiverse, evil, and fine-tuning

  1. 1
    bornagain77 says:

    1 If evil exists then God exists.

    2. Everettian Many worlds is epistemologically self defeating as well as empirically false.

    3. Fine-tuning, specifically Penrose’s 1 in 10^10^123 fine tuning for the initial entropy of the universe drives atheistic naturalism into epistemological failure.

    notes:

    If Good and Evil Exist, God Exists: Prager University – video
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xliyujhwhNM

    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.....n-argument

    Fine Tuning, Multiverse Pink Unicorns, and The Triune God – video
    https://www.facebook.com/philip.cunningham.73/videos/vb.100000088262100/1145151962164402/?type=2&theater

    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

    Too many worlds – Philip Ball – Feb. 17, 2015
    Excerpt:,,, You measure the path of an electron, and in this world it seems to go this way, but in another world it went that way.
    That requires a parallel, identical apparatus for the electron to traverse. More – it requires a parallel you to measure it. Once begun, this process of fabrication has no end: you have to build an entire parallel universe around that one electron, identical in all respects except where the electron went. You avoid the complication of wavefunction collapse, but at the expense of making another universe.,,,
    http://aeon.co/magazine/scienc.....a-fantasy/

    A Critique of the Many Worlds Interpretation – (Inspiring Philosophy – 2014) – video
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_42skzOHjtA&list=UU5qDet6sa6rODi7t6wfpg8g

    Maverick branches, a proof that Everett’s (Many Worlds) theory is totally wrong – December 02, 2015
    http://motls.blogspot.com/2015.....s.html?m=1

    The many-worlds interpretation is an interpretation of quantum mechanics that asserts the objective reality of the universal wavefunction and denies the actuality of wavefunction collapse. (wiki)

    Yet, contrary to MWI, the following experiment shows that the collapse of the wave function is a real effect,,

    Quantum experiment verifies Einstein’s ‘spooky action at a distance’ – March 24, 2015
    Excerpt: An experiment,, has for the first time demonstrated Albert Einstein’s original conception of “spooky action at a distance” using a single particle.
    ,,Professor Howard Wiseman and his experimental collaborators,, report their use of homodyne measurements to show what Einstein did not believe to be real, namely the non-local collapse of a (single) particle’s wave function.,,
    According to quantum mechanics, a single particle can be described by a wave function that spreads over arbitrarily large distances,,,
    ,, by splitting a single photon between two laboratories, scientists have used homodyne detectors—which measure wave-like properties—to show the collapse of the wave function is a real effect,, This phenomenon is explained in quantum theory,, the instantaneous non-local, (beyond space and time), collapse of the wave function to wherever the particle is detected.,,,
    “Einstein never accepted orthodox quantum mechanics and the original basis of his contention was this single-particle argument. This is why it is important to demonstrate non-local wave function collapse with a single particle,” says Professor Wiseman.
    “Einstein’s view was that the detection of the particle only ever at one point could be much better explained by the hypothesis that the particle is only ever at one point, without invoking the instantaneous collapse of the wave function to nothing at all other points.
    “However, rather than simply detecting the presence or absence of the particle, we used homodyne measurements enabling one party to make different measurements and the other, using quantum tomography, to test the effect of those choices.”
    “Through these different measurements, you see the wave function collapse in different ways, thus proving its existence and showing that Einstein was wrong.”
    http://phys.org/news/2015-03-q.....tance.html

  2. 2
    bornagain77 says:

    Of related note, besides the fact that many worlds and the multiverse of naturalists are both epistemologically self-defeating as well as both having no empirical support, on the other hand the Theist does have very good empirical support for his contention of the reality of a heavenly and hellish dimension from two of our best theories in science. From special and general relativity respectively:

    Special and General Relativity compared to Heavenly and Hellish Near Death Experiences – video (reworked May 2016 – following two videos referenced in it)
    https://www.facebook.com/philip.cunningham.73/videos/1193118270701104/

    (Entropic Concerns) The Resurrection of Jesus Christ from the Dead is the correct solution for the “Theory of Everything” – video
    https://www.facebook.com/philip.cunningham.73/videos/1121720701174195/?pnref=story

    Albert Einstein vs. “The Now” of Philosophers and Quantum Mechanics – video
    https://www.facebook.com/philip.cunningham.73/videos/vb.100000088262100/1129789497033982/?type=2&theater

    also of interest:

    (Centrality Concerns) The Resurrection of Jesus Christ from Death as the “Theory of Everything” – video
    https://www.facebook.com/philip.cunningham.73/videos/vb.100000088262100/1143437869002478/?type=2&theater

    Colossians 1:15-20
    The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.

  3. 3
    Robert Byers says:

    Evil happening is never a issue in Evangelical Christian circles.
    We understand better the biblical equation on this.
    The bible is clear on the subject.

    The bible says all people are evil and have it coming. We all deserve destruction.
    Satan is around and does it. including influencing mens thoughts.
    The only reason for the lack of eternal evil happening to us is because Gods love interferes with evil.
    Its not why he allows evil but why he stops as much as he does.
    Its love and giving us a chance to be saved from hell in the next eternal world.

Leave a Reply