Home » Fine tuning, News » Many of Victor Stenger’s “no fine-tuning” claims dubbed “highly problematic”

Many of Victor Stenger’s “no fine-tuning” claims dubbed “highly problematic”

In “The Fine-Tuning of the Universe for Intelligent Life” (History and Philosophy of Physics, submitted on 20 Dec 2011), Luke A. Barnes offers,

The fine-tuning of the universe for intelligent life has received a great deal of attention in recent years, both in the philosophical and scientific literature. The claim is that in the space of possible physical laws, parameters and initial conditions, the set that permits the evolution of intelligent life is very small. I present here a review of the scientific literature, outlining cases of fine-tuning in the classic works of Carter, Carr and Rees, and Barrow and Tipler, as well as more recent work.

To sharpen the discussion, the role of the antagonist will be played by Victor Stenger’s recent book The Fallacy of Fine-Tuning: Why the Universe is Not Designed for Us. Stenger claims that all known fine-tuning cases can be explained without the need for a multiverse. Many of Stenger’s claims will be found to be highly problematic.

We will touch on such issues as the logical necessity of the laws of nature; objectivity, invariance and symmetry; theoretical physics and possible universes; entropy in cosmology; cosmic inflation and initial conditions; galaxy formation; the cosmological constant; stars and their formation; the properties of elementary particles and their effect on chemistry and the macroscopic world; the origin of mass; grand unified theories; and the dimensionality of space and time. I also provide an assessment of the multiverse, noting the significant challenges that it must face. I do not attempt to defend any conclusion based on the fine-tuning of the universe for intelligent life. This paper can be viewed as a critique of Stenger’s book, or read independently.

  • Delicious
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feed

One Response to Many of Victor Stenger’s “no fine-tuning” claims dubbed “highly problematic”

  1. of note: Here is a cool picture with a caption that reads,,

    Current Jackpot – A perfectly arranged universe containing at least one habitable planet that sustains a wide variety of complex living things; There’s a Chance. Sure, Just Not a Good One*

    *Current Odds Of Winning??? – 1 in 10^1054
    http://salvomag.typepad.com/.a.....8d4970d-pi

    notes

    Hugh Ross – Evidence For Intelligent Design Is Everywhere (10^-1054) – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4347236

    Hugh Ross – Four Main Research Papers
    https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1Sl5SCBtcO6xMjwgrkKysBYIOJzjZEcXX68qZ9rwh85s

    off topic note:

    (Paley’s Watch revisited) Cells can influence their own destiny, research finds – January 2012
    Excerpt: Professor Hodgkin said the cells behaved as though there were internal machines that governed the cells’ fates. “Each of these internal machines is like a little clock or timer for division, death, what type of antibody they make and whether they become antibody secreting cells,” he said.
    http://medicalxpress.com/news/.....stiny.html

Leave a Reply