Cosmologic philosophy: fine tuning is a puzzle (Introduction)

by dhw, Friday, December 23, 2016, 12:29 (2892 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: Another article on the problem of understanding it by an expert:

https://cosmosmagazine.com/physics/a-universe-made-for-me-physics-fine-tuning-and-life
QUOTE: "But the multiverse seems so wasteful, producing so many dead, empty universes for each one that could potentially host life. And why did it produce any life-bearing universes at all when it would have been easy for them all to be sterile? The question of fine-tuning seems to have been pushed to a higher level.”

I don’t think we need the multiverse hypothesis to pose the question of wastefulness. We don’t know whether our own universe is finite or infinite, but the colossal number of solar systems in existence, not to mention the colossal number that must have disappeared, poses the same problem.

QUOTE: "To some, the picture of the multiverse is comforting, naturally explaining the puzzle of our own fine-tuning. But at present, we have no idea whether this immense sea of universes exists, and they may always be beyond the reach of experiment and observation; if this is the case, is the multiverse more philosophical musing than robust science?”

Spot on. The conjuring-up of unprovable multiverses is no more scientific than the unprovable hypothesis that the mechanisms for life and evolution could have assembled themselves by chance, or the unprovable hypothesis that there is a superintelligence that created the universe and life on Planet Earth. Belief in any of these hypotheses is based on faith (as you so rightly conclude, David) and has nothing to do with science.

QUOTE: "The fine-tuning of our universe for life represents a true mystery of science, a mystery that appears to point to something profound lying at the heart of science. We may never find out why we are living in a “just right” universe, but if we ever do, the universe, and our place in it, will be changed forever."
David’s comment: a great article covering all the fine points of fine tuning. Worth reading. It is a strong argument for God, but not conclusive. Back to faith as a necessity.

It is indeed a great article. I have read it all now, and you have done a brilliant job editing it for us. Once again, many thanks. As for “faith as a necessity”, I take it you mean that the only way one can convince oneself that one has found a solution to the mystery is through faith, and that is as true of the atheist as it is of the theist.