Of Gaps, Fine-Tuning and Newton’s Solar System

_{Cornelius Hunter

July 9, 2011

Intelligent Design}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

New research is providing a fascinating new perspective on fine-tuning and a three hundred year old debate. First for the context. When Isaac Newton figured out how the solar system worked he also detected a stability problem. Could the smooth-running machine go unstable, with planets smashing into each other? This is what the math indicated. But on the other hand, we’re still here. How could that be? Read more

Comments

That's interesting how the greater understanding gained through Einstein's General Relativity theory (4-D space-time), revealed a greater level of fine-tuning in the planet's orbits. Also of interest is the 'Observability correlation to fine-tuning' revealed by Gonzalez, Of particular interest are the 'perfect' solar eclipses which allowed General Relativity to be verified; Privileged Planet - Observability Correlation - Gonzalez and Richards - video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5424431 The very conditions that make Earth hospitable to intelligent life also make it well suited to viewing and analyzing the universe as a whole. - Jay Richards =============== Of 'spooky interest' to the fine-tuning of long term orbits, is this coincidental alignment of the eclipses of the moon to the proper Jewish Holy Days that may signify the return of Christ: Mark Biltz on Prophecy in the News part 1 - video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktEmeY9ztaQ ====================== Also of interest, it may surprise some to learn that the biblical 'prophetic' calender is at least as accurate than our modern day calender: Bible Prophecy Year of 360 Days Excerpt: The first series of articles will show the 360-day calendar to be at least as simple and as accurate as is our modern (Gregorian) calendar. In the second part of our discussion we will demonstrate how that the 360-day calendar is perfectly exact. http://www.360calendar.com/ Bible Prophecy Year of 360 Days http://www.360calendar.com/bible-prophecy-360-days-calendar-8.htmbornagain77_{July 9, 2011
July
07
Jul
9
09
2011
06:33 PM
6
06
33
PM
PDT}

That's interesting how the greater understanding gained through Einstein's General Relativity theory (4-D space-time), revealed a greater level of fine-tuning in the planet's orbits. Also of interest is the 'Observability correlation to fine-tuning' revealed by Gonzalez: Privileged Planet - Observability Correlation - Gonzalez and Richards - video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5424431 The very conditions that make Earth hospitable to intelligent life also make it well suited to viewing and analyzing the universe as a whole. - Jay Richards =============== Of 'spooky interest' to the fine-tuning of long term orbits, is this coincidental alignment of the eclipses of the moon to the proper Jewish Holy Days that may signify the return of Christ: Mark Biltz on Prophecy in the News part 1 - video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktEmeY9ztaQ ====================== Also of interest, it may surprise some to learn that the biblical 'prophetic' calender is at least as accurate than our modern day calender: Bible Prophecy Year of 360 Days Excerpt: The first series of articles will show the 360-day calendar to be at least as simple and as accurate as is our modern (Gregorian) calendar. In the second part of our discussion we will demonstrate how that the 360-day calendar is perfectly exact. http://www.360calendar.com/ Bible Prophecy Year of 360 Days http://www.360calendar.com/bible-prophecy-360-days-calendar-8.htmbornagain77_{July 9, 2011
July
07
Jul
9
09
2011
06:31 PM
6
06
31
PM
PDT}

Wiki discussion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stability_of_the_Solar_System Arxiv article: http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0804/0804.1946v1.pdfkairosfocus_{July 9, 2011
July
07
Jul
9
09
2011
04:54 PM
4
04
54
PM
PDT}

I'd say when 96 percent of the universe's observed effects (dark matter/dark energy) can be ascribed to no known (knowable?) causes, the word "gap" -- historically hoary though it may be -- hardly remains apropos. How about "gaping yaw"? Or maybe "unfathomalble abyss"? "Bottomless pit"??? (See Patricia Burchat's talk at TED.)jstanley01_{July 9, 2011
July
07
Jul
9
09
2011
03:01 PM
3
03
01
PM
PDT}

Einstein also recognized the stabilizing factor that Newton addressed. Newton called this force God. Einstein called it Lambda and stuck it in his equations. The value for Lambda was set to 0 by subsequent physicists and ignored, because such a stabilizing force, (or to use the sexier term) "cosmological constant," was never observed. The idea of the CC was loathed by many. As Brian Shmidt puts it, "Astronomers who talk about the cosmological constant are astronomers without many friends." However, the infamous CC was discovered in the 1990's and confirmed independently by ironically, a few separate teams, one headed by Brian Shmidt. The CC is now goes by the name ~~Darth Vadar~~ Dark Energy. Regardless of what you call it, Newton was, more or less, correct.junkdnaforlife_{July 9, 2011
July
07
Jul
9
09
2011
02:38 PM
2
02
38
PM
PDT}

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply