Refuting Vic Stenger (Introduction)

by David Turell , Monday, December 31, 2012, 12:28 (4137 days ago)

Here is a complex refutation of Vic Stenger's book which claims fine-tuning is a fallacy. Stenger is an ardent atheist, retired particle physicist, who makes enormous mistakes in his book, according to Luke Barnes, author of this article:-http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1112/1112.4647v1.pdf-Abstract:-The ne-tuning of the universe for intelligent life has received a great deal of attention in recent years, both in the philosophical and scientic literature. The claim is that in the space of possible physical laws, parameters and initial conditions, the set that permits the evolution of
intelligent life is very small. I present here a review of the scientific literature, outlining cases of fine-tuning in the classic works of Carter, Carr and Rees, and Barrow and Tipler, as well as more recent work. To sharpen the discussion, the role of the antagonist will be played by Victor Stenger's recent book The Fallacy of Fine-Tuning: Why the Universe is Not Designed
for Us. Stenger claims that all known ne-tuning cases can be explained without the need for a multiverse. Many of Stenger's claims will be found to be highly problematic. We will touch on such issues as the logical necessity of the laws of nature; objectivity, invariance and symmetry; theoretical physics and possible universes; entropy in cosmology; cosmic in ation and initial conditions; galaxy formation; the cosmological constant; stars and their formation; the properties of elementary particles and their eect on chemistry and the macroscopic world; the origin of mass; grand unied theories; and the dimensionality of space and time. I also provide an assessment of the multiverse, noting the signicant challenges that it must face. I do not attempt to defend any conclusion based on the ne-tuning of the universe for intelligent life. This paper can be viewed as a critique of Stenger's book, or read independently.