Thoughts on Fine Tuning

Further comments made as part of my past discussions in an online group with a number of skeptics.  The comments are posted largely unchanged.

Thoughts on the Fine-Tuning of the Initial Conditions of the Universe:

I thought I’d offer some thoughts on the idea of the fine-tuning of the universe as an argument for the presence of a designer.  In a previous post, I noted how something as simple as a pattern of consecutive prime integers received by the monitoring devices of SETI in the movie “Contact” was enough to prove to the scientists that some intelligence was behind this pattern.  I asked the question how this could be seen as evidence for intelligence while the fine-tuning of the universe doesn’t also point to an intelligence.  The skeptical response (below) made me think that perhaps I need to provide a bit of information to back up the idea that the universe is fine-tuned.  I apologize in advance to Matt G. for this post, as it will likely be longer than he has said he prefers.

First, here is the email response that prompted my thoughts below:

The universe is not fine tuned though. Not at all. It is extremely hostile to life.

 

I.                     What do we mean by “fine-tuning”?

a.       First, a definition seems appropriate.  The definition I’m going to provide below is taken from William Lane Craig in his article “Does God Exist?”

b.       As Dr. Craig’s article states it: “During the last 40 years or so, scientists have discovered that the existence of intelligent life depends upon a complex and delicate balance of initial conditions given in the Big Bang itself. Scientists once believed that whatever the initial conditions of the universe, eventually intelligent life might evolve. But we now know that our existence is balanced on a knife's edge. The existence of intelligent life depends upon a conspiracy of initial conditions which must be fine-tuned to a degree that is literally incomprehensible and incalculable.”

II.                   Are the fine-tuning values required (in other words, is the fine tuning due to physical necessity)?

a.       In answer to this potential objection, the following information is offered (also from the article referenced above).

b.      There is just no physical reason why these constants and quantities should have the values they do. As P. C. W. Davies states,

Even if the laws of physics were unique, it doesn't follow that the physical universe itself is unique. . . . the laws of physics must be augmented by cosmic initial conditions. . . . There is nothing in present ideas about 'laws of initial conditions' remotely to suggest that their consistency with the laws of physics would imply uniqueness. Far from it. . . . it seems, then, that the physical universe does not have to be the way it is: it could have been otherwise.

For example, the most promising candidate for a T.O.E. (theory of everything) to date, super-string theory or M-Theory, fails to predict uniquely our universe. In fact, string theory allows a "cosmic landscape" of around 10⁵⁰⁰ different universes governed by the present laws of nature, so that it does nothing to render the observed values of the constants and quantities physically necessary.

III.                 What is the likelihood of the “fine-tuning” found in our universe occurring by chance?

a.       Once we have defined by what we mean by “fine-tuning”, the next question that arises is to ask “What are the chances that these initial conditions of the universe occurred just by chance?”

b.       Dr. Craig offers the following thought: The problem with this alternative is that the odds against the universe's being life-permitting are so incomprehensibly great that they cannot be reasonably faced. Even though there will be a huge number of life-permitting universes lying within the cosmic landscape, nevertheless the number of life-permitting worlds will be unfathomably tiny compared to the entire landscape, so that the existence of a life-permitting universe is fantastically improbable. Students or laymen who blithely assert, "It could have happened by chance!" simply have no conception of the fantastic precision of the fine-tuning requisite for life. They would never embrace such a hypothesis in any other area of their lives—for example, in order to explain how there came to be overnight a car in one's driveway.

c.       Additionally, Dr. Hugh Ross offers the following thought (from his book “Why The Universe Is The Way It Is”):  According to the research data, an astronomical body capable of supporting human beings and equipping them to launch and sustain a global high-technology civilization demands at least 10⁷⁰⁰ times more fine-tuning precision than is necessary for support of ephemeral simple life.  To put this number (10⁷⁰⁰) into perspective, the total number of protons and neutrons in the entire observable universe amounts to 10⁷⁹.

IV.                What are some examples of “fine-tuning” that scientists have uncovered?

a.       In “Does God Exist?”, Dr. Craig reports the following:  For example, the physicist P. C. W. Davies has calculated that a change in the strength of gravity or of the atomic weak force by only one part in 10¹⁰⁰ would have prevented a life-permitting universe. The cosmological constant which drives the inflation of the universe and is responsible for the recently discovered acceleration of the universe's expansion is inexplicably fine-tuned to around one part in 10¹²⁰. Roger Penrose of Oxford University has calculated that the odds of the Big Bang's low entropy condition existing by chance are on the order of one out of 10 ^{10 (123)}.  Penrose comments, "I cannot even recall seeing anything else in physics whose accuracy is known to approach, even remotely, a figure like one part in 10^{10 (123)}."5 And it's not just each constant or quantity which must be exquisitely finely-tuned; their ratios to one another must be also finely-tuned. So improbability is multiplied by improbability by improbability until our minds are reeling in incomprehensible numbers.

b.       This points to extraordinary fine-tuning, even if we’re only talking about the strength of gravity, the atomic weak force, and the low entropy condition.  But these are nowhere close to the only fine-tuned values that have been discovered. Dr. Hugh Ross, in his book “Why the Universe Is The Way It Is” reports that in 1998, only 15 different cosmic features had been identified that required fine-tuning.  As of 2006, that number had grown to 140, and the number is growing still.

c.       Additional (but not all) fine-tuned values include:

                                                               i.      The velocity of light

                                                             ii.      The age of the universe

                                                           iii.      The mass density of the universe

                                                           iv.      The decay rate of protons

                                                             v.      The average distance between stars

                                                           vi.      The expansion rate of the universe

                                                          vii.      The polarity of the water molecule

                                                        viii.      The entropy level of the universe

                                                            ix.      The gravitational force constant

                                                             x.      The electromagnetic force constant

d.       For those wanting a more detailed list of some of the cosmic elements that appear fine-tuned for life, the following links can provide you with additional information:

                                                               i.      The Teleological Argument and the Anthropic Principle

                                                             ii.      The Incredible Design of the Earth and Our Solar System

                                                           iii.      Evidence for the Fine Tuning of the Universe

V.                  What are the scientists saying about these “fine-tuning” discoveries?

a.       Because of space considerations, I am merely providing a link to the quotes of various scientists (astrophysicists, mathematicians, astronomers and physicists, etc.) who have been sufficiently impressed with the “fine-tuning” data that they are beginning to postulate that some sort of supernatural agency may be behind the creation of the universe after all.  These scientists, for the most part, are agnostics.  They are all at the top of their respective fields, and several of them are Nobel Prize winners.

b.       The link to check out their quotes is: Quotes from Scientists Regarding Design of the Universe

VI.                Answering the Anthropic Principle (the argument and its response are, again, taken from the article “Does God Exist?” by William Lane Craig)

a.       Some people attempt to explain away the fine-tuning of the universe by saying something like the following:

                                                               i.      “We really shouldn't be surprised at the finely-tuned conditions of the universe, for if the universe were not fine-tuned, then we wouldn't be here to be surprised about it! Given that we are here, we should expect the universe to be fine-tuned.”

                                                             ii.      Dr. Craig answers this claim as follows: But such reasoning is logically fallacious. We can show this by means of a parallel illustration. Imagine you're traveling abroad and are arrested on trumped-up drug charges and dragged in front of a firing squad of 100 trained marksmen, all with rifles aimed at your heart, to be executed. You hear the command given: "Ready! Aim! Fire!" and you hear the deafening roar of the guns. And then you observe that you are still alive, that all of the 100 trained marksmen missed! Now what would you conclude? "Well, I guess I really shouldn't be surprised that they all missed. After all, if they hadn't all missed, then I wouldn't be here to be surprised about it! Given that I am here, I should expect them all to miss." Of course not! You would immediately suspect that they all missed on purpose, that the whole thing was a set-up, engineered for some reason by someone. While you wouldn't be surprised that you don't observe that you are dead, you'd be very surprised, indeed, that you do observe that you are alive. In the same way, given the incredible improbability of the fine-tuning of the universe for intelligent life, it is reasonable to conclude that this is not due to chance, but to design.