Search results

In general terms, a naturalistic "fine tuning". Scientifically, in a word.... evolution. In nature and everywhere we look.

The fact is you're talking utter nonsense. No fine tuning has been confirmed at CERN or anywhere else. To dispel fine tuning, the universe need only be constrained by its fundamental properties causing it to form in the way it has. Same for life itself. Incomplete information offers only an...

If physics were based on faith, it wouldn't be physics. It would be religion. And faith is how phrases like 'fine tuning of the universe' became just another religious straw in the wind.

with respect to physics... gravity or multiverse it is then.

yep, good one. Somewhat unique:)

jimmie, That's not a tautology. That's that is a tautology.:rolleyes:

To create a Universe, God is not required. To create God, a Universe is required.

As far as the random chance argument went...it's only by leaving out all other options. Like inevitability for instance. A Universe due simply to the effects of gravity. But no you're right. It's comparing apples to oranges. The Tooth Fairy is more likely to be real.

It's also pretty easy (and indeed desirable :p), not to try to communicate or have a relationship with the Tooth Fairy. But I agree, I think it is pretty easy not to be atheist. Essentially, you just stop thinking.

I would suggest you check the space bar is working correctly on your keyboard dude. You're describing a theist. Not atheist.

Why do atheist's fear God? They don't do they? Surely that's what theists do.

it's gotta be a spoof article FF , but then again, over on the extreme right of things, some crazy shit does occur.:confused:

...she's white and it sounds more like Creationism than anything else.

andread My comment about baseball was analogous. There's nothing disrespectful at all about being compared to baseball in my view. The basic point being it (physics) is the real thing where ball meets bat. I meant philosophy in terms of a misunderstanding, which becomes, or almost becomes, a...

I really don't understand how you come to that. Surely it's clear I'm suggesting it's the philosophical propositions being derived here which I'm saying don't follow through with the science he confirms. I too prefer to listen to Nima. He is a brilliant physicist. All I suggest is the...

erm...first, your links confirm Nyman's physics not his philosophy and it's physics, not philosophy, that holds; which is my point. Philosophy: A route of many roads leading from nowhere to nothing. Ambrose Bierce Hence my baseball comment. Hope that clarifies.

In philosophical terms, everything might be emergent, or not, as the case may be.

I don't think so. As a physicist, Nima's physics is baseball. His philosophy, as all philosophy, is about keeping the ball away from the bat.

Time is what stops everything happening at once

Always thought of dipsomaniacs as a higher class of inebriate! I hear what you say and of course respect the valuable work you must have done over the years. Where resources aren't available then of course I agree, time should go to those who ask for help. But can't help thinking a little...