- Jun 4, 2013
- 10,132
- 996
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Widowed
- Politics
- US-Others
Then why the previous post stating there must be infinite universes? Or did you mean an infinite universe?
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Hey man you are singing to the choir.
Then I'll retrace. You say it would require trillions of trillions of universes to make it possible for our universe to exist. (Leaving aside the fact that that statement is logically nonsense) how do you know that there are not trillions of trillions of universes, and that the existence of our universe is not therefore simply a logical likelihood?I'm not sure what you mean. If it can "exist" we know that it couldn't exist at all if certain elements were not precisely the way they are. So I'm not sure what you are disagreeing with?
Then I'll retrace. You say it would require trillions of trillions of universes to make it possible for our universe to exist. (Leaving aside the fact that that statement is logically nonsense) how do you know that there are not trillions of trillions of universes, and that the existence of our universe is not therefore simply a logical likelihood?
No it's not.Let me see if I can clear this up once and for all. Fine Tuning is not a term made up by the theists.
Then co opted by creationists.It is a term created by scientists, a label they created for the phenomena they observe.
Sure it is.My idea of fine tuning is not any different than any of the scientists that have provided the data about it. Fine tuning is the phenomena, the facts that we know about the universe.
Yes it is.They themselves believe there is no reason to believe that the fine tuned constants could not be something different. This is not something I or any other theist "made up". Ok?
No it's not.Fine tuning is a scientific term for a real phenomena.
I've had it straight sinice my first post.Now there are explanations that scientist, theists and the unreligious have to explain said phenomena. Evidence vs. Explanation. Do we have it straight now?
OK so where to next?Alright then.
Previous tactics of others merits the sad face. Sorry I jumped to conclusions. So yes, when we say Intelligent Designer we are implying conscious sentient Being with intelligence such as ours but of course much more intelligent than we are.
Not real reasons. Nothing it this post supports the assumption the those laws can be changed.Except I have every reason to assume they can be and are. We call them laws of physics because they hold true every single time we check them. So which is it, are the laws of physics not valid or so fine tuned we can count on them every day? You can't have it both ways, regardless of how much you might wish it to be so.
Sorry?Then why the previous post stating there must be infinite universes? Or did you mean an infinite universe?
I give up.No it's not.
Then co opted by creationists.
Sure it is.
Yes it is.
No it's not.
I've had it straight sinice my first post.
Lets see here:OK so where to next?
bhsmte could you please just stop. Please. Take your snide remarks somewhere else.I think we all know.
There is no evidence that shows that.Then I'll retrace. You say it would require trillions of trillions of universes to make it possible for our universe to exist. (Leaving aside the fact that that statement is logically nonsense) how do you know that there are not trillions of trillions of universes, and that the existence of our universe is not therefore simply a logical likelihood?
With the caveat of the "life as we know it objection "1. You agree that fine tuning is a real phenomena.
Yes, or some yet to be considered hypothesis that similarly makes the probability likely.2. You agree that chance is not a factor unless one adds the multiverse/mega verse.
AgreedYou agree that there is no known law of nature that explains the fine tuning phenomena.
AgreedYou hold a default position
I'm sorry but you really just are so confusing.It's one thing to be stubborn when you're right, it another when you're wrong. The many probelms of fine tuning have been pointed out again and again. But I do agree, giving up on fine tuning is a good idea.
Life as we know it objection? Explain what you mean exactly. Thanks.With the caveat of the "life as we know it objection "
Yes, or some yet to be considered hypothesis that similarly makes the probability likely.
Agreed
Agreed
Sure. When you say that fine tuning is a real thing it assumes life as we know it. We don't know what conditions are required for life generally and so it could be the case that a different universe would be life permitting to a different form of life. It takes away some of the force of the fine tuning argument because it opens the door to the possibility that any universe could be life permitting...we just don't know.Life as we know it objection? Explain what you mean exactly. Thanks.
So you are going to argue that other universes explain fine tuning then?Sure. When you say that fine tuning is a real thing it assumes life as we know it. We don't know what conditions are required for life generally and so it could be the case that a different universe would be life permitting to a different form of life. It takes away some of the force of the fine tuning argument because it opens the door to the possibility that any universe could be life permitting...we just don't know.
I think models that include other universes can account for the fine tuning in our own yes. But what I am getting st with the life as we know it objecton is a bit different. When you say our universe exibits fine tuning what do you mean, fine tuned for what? I presume you mean for intelligent life. The issue is that we don't know what conditions are required for life generally. We do know what life as we know it requires but not life generally. It is possible that any universe that exists would also allow for life, just that the life would be different from the life as we know it.So you are going to argue that other universes explain fine tuning then?
We should start here maybe then:Sure. When you say that fine tuning is a real thing it assumes life as we know it. We don't know what conditions are required for life generally and so it could be the case that a different universe would be life permitting to a different form of life. It takes away some of the force of the fine tuning argument because it opens the door to the possibility that any universe could be life permitting...we just don't know.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?