lets try this again...
if don't understand how big this number in the denominator is .. I understand.
but if you don't understand how finely tuned that makes the initial conditions of the universe... you should not even speak on this issue.
As penrose says... _________________________
please watch the short video and fill in his exact words. (hint its towards the end).
Roger Penrose on Cosmic Fine-Tuning: "Incredible Precision in the Organization of the Initial Universe"
Casey Luskin April 12, 2010 8:00 AM | Permalink
I have no reason to believe that the acclaimed physicist Roger Penrose supports intelligent design. But he's definitely not afraid to take on critics of the argument for fine-tuning. In the video below, he explains that the fine-tuning of the initial entropy of the universe is this precise:
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/04/roger_penrose_on_cosmic_finetu033691.html
and here are the quotes from the 3 people below.
that is fine tuning...
https://godandsoul.wordpress.com/tag/leonard-mlodinow/
Barrow and Tipler aren’t using “fine-tuning” to promote theism. They are simply describing some of the fine-tuned conditions in the cosmos that make life possible. Similarly, cosmologist Martin Rees, Britain’s Astronomer Royal (and definitely
not a theist), also uses “fine-tuning” in a purely objective, scientific fashion:
These six numbers constitute a “recipe” for a universe. Moreover, the outcome is sensitive to their values: if any one of them were to be “untuned,” there would be no stars and no life. Is this tuning just a brute fact, a coincidence? Or is it the providence of a benign Creator? I take the view that it is neither. An infinity of other universes may well exist where the numbers are different. Most would be stillborn or sterile. We could only have emerged (and therefore we naturally now find ourselves) in a universe with the “right” combination. This realization offers a radically new perspective on our universe, on our place in it, and on the nature of physical laws. . . . If you imagine setting up a universe by adjusting six dials, then the tuning must be precise in order to yield a universe that could harbour life.
—Martin Rees, Just Six Numbers: The Deep Forces That Shape the Universe (New York: Basic Books, 2001), 4 and 22.
and....
In The Grand Design, physicists Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow also write about the fine-tuning of the cosmological constant in Einstein’s general relativity equations, calling it “the most impressive fine-tuning coincidence” in cosmology. They go on to describe other fine-tuning problems in cosmology:
Most of the fundamental constants in our theories appear fine-tuned in the sense that if they were altered by only modest amounts, the universe would be qualitatively different, and in many cases unsuitable for the development of life. . . . The emergence of the complex structures capable of supporting intelligent observers seems to be very fragile. The laws of nature form a system that is extremely fine-tuned, and very little in physical law can be altered without destroying the possibility of the development of life as we know it. Were it not for a series of startling coincidences in the precise details of physical law, it seems, humans and similar life-forms would never have come into being.
—Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow, The Grand Design (New York: Bantam, 2012), 160-161.
