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

by dhw, Wednesday, March 22, 2017, 12:38 (2563 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: I am in no position to debate the issue. I do know, however, that these are not the only scientists to question the whole concept of expansion. This was merely one point among several to explain why it is patently absurd to state that the vastness is necessary. I presume you now agree.
DAVID: You have missed the point I presented. It took time in the evolution of the universe for the elements that support life to develop. In that time the universe expanded to be huge. Vastness is a necessary component of the result.
dhw: Yes, we know it took time for the elements that support life to develop. And yes, we know the universe is huge, whether it expanded or not. But that does not mean the universe had to be huge for the life-supporting elements to develop. None of the other references you produced argued that the hugeness was necessary. Even Wallace said “may be”.

DAVID: I set out to see whether hugeness was a vital component of fine tuning. It turns out to be concomitant.

If by concomitant you mean that it took time for life-supporting elements to develop and the universe is huge, fair enough. If you mean that the universe had to be huge for life-supporting elements to develop, no such cause-and-effect relationship has been established, so it’s still "maybe" (and therefore maybe not), as per Wallace et al.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum