Hi Doug;
Its just a way of communicating the degree of precision found to be necessary
in the values of the fundamental constants in order for the universe to be
"precisely as it is observed to be." No need to read anything else into the
phrase. Nature is "in a habit" of fine tuning its parameters - resulting in
the evolution of orderly objects.
Sincerely
George A.
Doug Hayworth wrote:
> In my admittedly cursory reading on the Anthropic Principle (AP), I have
> been uncomfortable with the use of the term "fine-tuning". This term seems
> to connote that God (on this list, we are all agreed that if there is
> anything that can be called fine tuning, it is God who does it) somehow
> adjusts something that was formerly only crudely "tuned". Conceptions of
> the AP that require this meaning do not appeal to me, since they imply that
> there is some background or foundational order in the Creation that is less
> than perfect or complete. As a Christian, I would prefer the term
> "finely-established" or "finely-created" to imply that God established in
> his initial creation a confluence of orderliness brought about his purposes
> in genesis of the cosmos, our solar system, earth, and its creatures. I
> don't think God had to adjust things (i.e., fine-tune) later.
>
> In practice, how do philosophers and apologists of the AP use the term
> "fine-tuning"? What do you folks think?
>
> I seem to remember that Howard Van Till addressed aspects of the AP at the
> Waco conference. If so, perhaps he has some wisdom here.
>
> Doug
-- George A. Andrews Jr. Physics/Applied Science College of William & Mary P.O. Box 8795 Williamsburg, VA 23187-8795
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 19 2000 - 14:20:51 EDT