The immensity of the universe;addendum (The nature of a \'Creator\')

by dhw, Saturday, March 18, 2017, 12:58 (2809 days ago) @ David Turell

QUOTE: Indeed, one of the intriguing aspects of cosmic fine tuning is the realisation that a vast universe is necessary to enable the conditions a tiny inhabited world like ours
DAVID: The vastness has to be taken seriously as in the Wikipedia article I found:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle

QUOTE: Carter was not the first to invoke some form of the anthropic principle. In fact, the evolutionary biologist Alfred Russel Wallace anticipated the anthropic principle as long ago as 1904: "Such a vast and complex universe as that which we know exists around us, may have been absolutely required [...] in order to produce a world that should be precisely adapted in every detail for the orderly development of life culminating in man."

“May have been…” Alternatively, may not have been.

QUOTE: In 1957, Robert Dicke wrote: "The age of the Universe 'now' is not random but conditioned by biological factors [...] [changes in the values of the fundamental constants of physics] would preclude the existence of man to consider the problem."

Why should we assume that the fundamental constants of physics require billions and billions of solar systems extant and extinct? See below for more unanswered questions.

QUOTE: Paul Davies's book The Goldilocks Enigma (2006) reviews the current state of the fine tuning debate in detail, and concludes by enumerating the following responses to that debate:
The absurd universe: Our universe just happens to be the way it is.
The unique universe: There is a deep underlying unity in physics which necessitates the Universe being the way it is. Some Theory of Everything will explain why the various features of the Universe must have exactly the values that we see.

A nicely balanced summary of the conflicting views, with the second choice requiring a theory we do not have.

DAVID’s comment: The article makes the point that with inflation the universe became vast before the time arrived when carbon and the metal were formed that support life. It took much time to have carbon appear in stars which then had to age and explode and spread the carbon around. The vastness is due to the slow evolution of the necessary elements for life to appear. Simple concept. Still no answer to multiple humans colonies concept. Could be. Vastness required!

Until we discover how life originated, whether there are other forms of life elsewhere in the universe, what sort of forms they are, what is the actual nature of the universe, whether it is limited, and also whether it is true that it is expanding*** (I have always questioned the Big Bang theory), it is patently absurd to state that the vastness is necessary. Wallace’s “may be necessary” is as far as one can go, and every theory related to the origin of life is a “may be” – including the existence of God.

*** Universe is Not Expanding After All, Controversial Study ...
www.sci-news.com/astronomy/science-universe-not-expanding-01940.html