Why do atheist's fear God?

The major problem with fine tuning is the lack of independent constants. You can't change one while holding the rest constant.
Good point, and as yet, no one knows exactly how many independent physical constants there actually may be. A number of physicists consider perhaps only one fundamental fixed constant, so that all other constants (currently 25), may be the inescapable consequences of that one's own fundamental properties.

There is nothing to say that the limitations of each natural physical constants' parameters own fundamental properties, aren't what determine its value. Thereby dispelling notions of any supposed fine tuning.

Invoking question begging notions of fine tuning in the way some religious do, is nothing but a typical demonstration of how to condition a person to not understand the physical workings of the universe.
 
Last edited:
more proof that you can lead an et lefty to science... but you can't make them think. (or tell the truth)

note... in the first minute he explains to you they laws of cosmology are special in a way that is conducive to our own existence... then goes on to explain it.
All this is in response to a question about fine tuning.

At 2:25 ish he tells you there are about two dozen laws in the fine tuning category.



Tuned on a knifes edge? pfft... he does no such thing.

He explains the sharpest part of a knife edge being the tiny value of the cosmological constant.
He explains how physicists have never understood why the cosmological constant is soo small.

He does not explain how any of it IS fine tuned.

Of course, not Susskind, or anyone else, has science to confirm the cosmological constant IS fine tuned. Neither is he suggesting anywhere that he does. Only you and some other religious wackjobs are doing that.
Susskind does however have the science to show the cosmological constant is sitting on a knife edge, at the tiniest decimal away from zero.

As usual, you're going round in circles.
 
Last edited:
again... you are attempting to explain away the fine tuning with a hoped for future answer... which closely resembles the hoped for Theory of Everything.

but again... your speculation does not change the point...

We can all have hope in a Theory of Everything or a proof of a Multiverse or proof of a Tuner... but til then we have constants of our universe which for some reason are very finely tuned for life.



Good point, and as yet, no one knows exactly how many independent physical constants there actually may be. A number of physicists consider perhaps only one fundamental fixed constant, so that all other constants (currently 25), may be the inescapable consequences of that one's own fundamental properties.

There is nothing to say that the limitations of each natural physical constants' parameters own fundamental properties, aren't what determine its value. Thereby dispelling notions of any supposed fine tuning.

Invoking question begging notions of fine tuning in the way some religious do, is nothing but a typical demonstration of how to condition a person to not understand the physical workings of the universe.
 
He doesn't say there IS any fine tuning!

You're going round in circles..again Jem and now officially ET's circle jerk.

3POyupA.gif
 
you are a science denying troll... stu.
I can see you don't even understand what scientists mean when they say fine tuning.
you get all worked up in in zealous atheist lather and then start to lie your ass off.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-tuned_Universe

The premise of the fine-tuned Universe assertion is that a small change in several of the dimensionless fundamental physical constants would make the Universe radically different. As Stephen Hawking has noted, "The laws of science, as we know them at present, contain many fundamental numbers, like the size of the electric charge of the electron and the ratio of the masses of the proton and the electron. ... The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers seem to have been very finely adjusted to make possible the development of life."[9]

If, for example, the strong nuclear force were 2% stronger than it is (i.e., if the coupling constant representing its strength were 2% larger), while the other constants were left unchanged, diprotons would be stable and hydrogen would fuse into them instead ofdeuterium and helium.[10] This would drastically alter the physics of stars, and presumably preclude the existence of life similar to what we observe on Earth. The existence of the diproton would short-circuit the slow fusion of hydrogen into deuterium. Hydrogen would fuse so easily that it is likely that all of the Universe's hydrogen would be consumed in the first few minutes after the Big Bang.[10] However, some of the fundamental constants describe the properties of the unstable strange, charmed, bottom and top quarks and mu and tau leptons that seem to play little part in the Universe or the structure of matter.[citation needed]
 
Back
Top