------------------------------------------------------------
SZ: Pim, it is a causal necessity that "we are the result of the =
universe".
What on earth would it mean that "the universe is the result of us"?
Pim: The argument that the universe is delicately balanced to support life is =
such an argument.
Was the universe so delicately balanced to support us or are we merely a =
consequence of
the parameters of this universe.
SZ: In my view there is no merit in the suggestion that somehow human
observers "cause" the universe. Such drivel is sometimes seen in
poor quality popular-level presentations of the anthropic principle,
or in Tipler's way-out "Participatory Anthropic Principle". =20
Nice strawman you are attacking and with such convincing logic.
SZ: So I fail to see how your "logical alternative" is an alternative
at all. We (life forms of any kind, not specifically humans) are
indeed the result of the unfolding development of the universe from
the initial creation event to the present time. The point in question
is how to interpret the extensive evidence that the physical laws
(their mathematical form as well as their coupling constants) and
the initial conditions of the universe are "finely-tuned" to allow
the development of an environment hospitable for life.
You are still confusing a fine tuning(which suggests that the universe =
was tuned to us) with the alternative
that we are finely tuned to the universe.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Pim, I don't know if I'm the only one (perhaps), but I REALLY
don't understand what you mean. Can you explain please? The
usual "fine-tuning" argument goes something like this:
(1) The physical laws, coupling constants, and initial conditions
of the universe must have a very narrow range of forms and values
in order to permit the evolution of a universe in which life could
one day appear. This gives the powerful impression that these
parameters and conditions were intentionally "tuned" in order to
produce life.
Your stated alternative is that:
(2) "We are finely-tuned to the universe."
Can you please explain this in detail in a couple of paragraphs?
Perhaps I'm dense, but I don't understand what you mean and I
would really like to.
Thanks in advance,
Stan Zygmunt