Your Federal Quarterly Tax Payments are due April 15th Get Help Now >>

Evidences of God - Anthropic Principle by dfhdhdhdhjr


									          “Is God Dead?”

    The Anthropic Principle


     Patrick Glynn, “God, The Evidence”, (1997)
     Gerald L Schroeder, “The Science of God” (1997)
     Newsweek magazine, July 27, 1998, “Science finds
     Time magazine, December 4, 1995, “Evolution’s Big
     Various articles from the Internet (Google produced
      2,553 articles when searching on “Anthropic
      Principle”) and CD-ROM encyclopaedias
      Evidences in Creation

     “For since the creation of the world, His
      invisible attributes are clearly seen, being
      understood by the things that are made,
      even His eternal power and Godhead, so
      that they are without excuse.” (Romans 1:20)
     “His eternal power”
      - as seen in the cosmos        The Anthropic
     “His Godhead”                  demonstrates both
      - as seen within man
     Man - the Final Cause
    “So God created man in His own image;
    in the image of God He created him;
    male and female He created them. . . . .Then God
    saw everything that He had made, and indeed it
    was very good. So the evening and the morning
    were the sixth day.” (Genesis 1:27, 31)

     Man made to reflect God’s glorious image
     Gave man dominance over His Creation
     Then God rested - man is the final cause,
4     the end product, the crowning achievement
    Man – the “centre” of Creation

    “What is man that You are mindful of him,
    Or the son of man that You take care of him?
    You have made                 him a little
    lower than the                 angels; You
    have crowned                  him with glory
    and honor, And set him over the works of
    Your hands. You have put all things in
    subjection under his feet.” (Hebrews 2:6-8)
     The Anthropic Principle

    First coined by Brandon            “Large
    Carter, an ex-student of         Coincidences
    Stephen Hawking at                 and the
    Cambridge, at the 1973            Anthropic
                                     Principle in
    International Astronomical       Cosmology”
    Union commemoration of
    the 500th birthday of
    “Anthropic”: Greek word meaning “tending
    to bring about the existence of human beings”
     What it is
     Carter’s paper does not specifically address the
      question of God or a Designer, but with the
      “coincidences” that led to Man’s existence
     Addresses the question of whether they are
      truly coincidences, and how they relate to
      man’s existence – and how to interpret them
     “When there are billions and billions and
      billions of coincidences, they are no longer
7        For theists, there really is no “random” universe
    A Problem of Paradigms
      The Atheist Paradigm       The Theist Paradigm

                 Large Number Coincidences
                  & the Anthropic Principle

    How to interpret the existence of Large Number Coincidences
    The Theist’s Paradigm

 What the “coincidences” show
  In order for life to occur, everything has to be
   pre-planned, all the right conditions and laws
   must be pre-determined before the beginning,
   before the “Big Bang”
  Otherwise far too little time during
   the event for the right combination
   to be struck through random
        Certain conditions have to be “known” by 10-43
         seconds into the “Big Bang” event
  No trial and error - no room for errors
     What the “coincidences” show

 Not only pre-planned but fine-tuned too
  All the laws in the universe have been fine-
   tuned for the universe and for life to occur -
   before they came into existence
  One tiny variation in any of thousands
   of factors would have prevented the
   universe from forming - and hence life itself
  In short, the “random universe” is expressly
   designed for life - more specifically, for man
     Amazing Precision

     “The precision is as if one could throw a dart
     across the entire universe and hit a bulls-eye one
     millimeter in diameter on the other side.”
12   (Michael Turner, Astrophysicist, University of Chicago)
     Amazing Precision
  “Life as we know it would be impossible if any
   one of several physical quantities had slightly
   different values.” (Steven Weinberg)

  “The really amazing thing is not
   that life on Earth is balanced on a
   knife-edge, but that the entire universe is
   balanced on a knife-edge, and would be total
   chaos if any of the natural ‘constants’ were off
   even slightly.” (Dr Paul Davies, Professor of
     Physics, University of Adelaide)
      Precarious Balance
      Physical, chemical and biological
       laws of nature so fine-tuned that
       they could not have occurred by chance
          Delicate balance of nuclear forces that
           allowed nuclei of atoms to form
          Size of the sun is just right so that it
           supplies the right amount of energy
           at the right rate
          . . . . and many many more
 Astonishing “Luck”
On the likelihood of having usable energy in the
“This is an extraordinary figure. One could not
possibly even write the number down in full, in
our ordinary denary (power of ten) notation: it
would be one followed by ten to the power of 123
successive zeros!” (Roger Penrose, Professor of
Mathematics, University of Oxford)
 That is a million billion billion billion billion
 billion billion billion billion billion billion billion
 billion billion zeros.
     Unanswered Science Mystery

      The odds are heavily stacked against the
       occurrence of the entire universe and life if
       chance were the rule

      “How is it that so much matter managed to
       survive? . . . . Why is there something
       rather than nothing?” (Scientific American,

   in a

     Natural Constants
 Constant                           Symbol   Value (approximate)
 archimedes' constant                 π      3.1415926535897932385...
 natural logarithmic base             e      2.718281828...
 golden mean                          Φ      1.618033989...
 ramanujan-soldner constant           μ      1.4513692349...
 speed of light in a vacuum           c      2.99792458 × 10 8 ms -1
 gravitational constant               G      6.67259... × 10 -11 m 3 s -2 kg
 universal gas constant               R      8.314510... Jmol -1 K
 avogadro constant                    NA     6.0221367... × 10 23 mol -1
 boltzmann constant                   k      1.380658... × 10 -23 JK -1
 stefan-boltzmann constant            σ      5.67051... × 10 -8 Wm -2 K 4
 molar volume of ideal gas at STP     Vm     2.241409... × 10 -2 m 3 mol -1
 permittivity constant                ε0     8.85418781762 × 10 -12 Fm -1
 permeability constant                μ0     1.25663706143 × 10 -6 Hm -1
 elementary charge                    e      1.60217733... × 10 -19 C
 plank constant                       h      6.6260755... × 10 -34 Js
 electron mass                        me     9.1093897... × 10 -31 kg
 proton mass                          mp     1.6726231... × 10 -27 kg
 More Natural Constants
Constant                                 Symbol        Value (approximate)
ratio of proton mass to electron mass       m p /m e   1836.152701...
electron charge-to-mass ratio               e/m e      1.75881961... × 10 11 Ckg -1
neutron mass                                mn         1.6749286... × 10 -27 kg
muon mass                                   mμ         1.8835326... × 10 -28 kg
electron magnetic moment                    μe         9.2847701... × 10 -24 JT -1
proton magnetic moment                      μp         1.41060761... × 10 -26 JT -1
bohr magneton                               μB         9.2740154... × 10 -24 JT -1
nuclear magneton                            μN         5.0507866... × 10 -27 JT -1
bohr radius                                 rB         5.29177249... × 10 -11 m
rydberg constant                            R          1.0973731534... × 10 7 m -1
electron compton wavelength                 λC         2.42631058... × 10 -12 m
magnetic flux quantum                       Φ0         2.06783461... × 10 -15 Wb
fine-structure constant                     α          7.29735308... × 10 -3
classical electron radius                   re         2.81794092... × 10 -15 m
electron magnetic moment in bohr magnetons μ e /μ B    1.001159652193...
proton magnetic moment in nuclear magnetons μ p /μ N   2.792847386...
faraday constant                            F          96485.309... Cmol -1
     Amazing Constants
     Consider some of the physical constants
      Why are there so many natural constants?
       Why do they assume the values they have?
      Not invented by men, but are there in the
       natural order and discovered by men
          Consider the mathematical beauty in them
          Consider the diverse areas they appear in
          Consider the intelligence
20        Consider the chaos if they changed
      Constant “Coincidences”

      π (= 3.141……) is found in mathematics of
       circles, but it also appears in numerous
       equations unrelated to circles
      Φ (=1.618……) can be
       mathematically described and can
       be found in clouds, in the galaxies,        A
       in plants, in sea-life, in art, in man

            For more on π and Φ
                                                A:B = B:C
      Constant “Coincidences”

      Einstein’s famous “E = mc2” - matter
       and energy are inter-related and the speed
       of light determines that relationship!
      Forces binding certain particles are related
       mathematically to the age of the universe

     Why are these relationships there?

     Finely Tuned Constants

      The “Butterfly Effect”
       demonstrates just how
       fine and delicate the
       balance is in Creation

      It states that even a seemingly negligible
       infinitesimal change of one factor in a stable,
       predictable system can lead to a very different
       state, even chaos

23    No room for error!
   nth Degree Precision

  Ratio of gravity to the weak nuclear force has
   to be adjusted to the precision of
   one part in 10100 for the cosmos not
   to suffer swift collapse or explosion.
  The sun's luminescence would fall sharply,
   and hence too cold, were electromagnetism
   very slightly stronger (Brandon Carter)
    Changes either in electromagnetism or in
     gravity “by only one part in 1040 would spell
24   catastrophe for stars like the sun.” (Paul Davies)
  nth Degree Precision
  Were gravity ten times less strong, it would
   be doubtful whether stars and planets could
   form (R Bruer, 1983)
  If the neutron-proton mass difference were
   not about twice the mass of the electron,
   elements would not exist (Stephen Hawking)
    An electron-proton charge difference of
     more than one part in ten billion would
     mean that no solid bodies could weigh
     above one gram. (Rozental)
     nth Degree Precision
      Atoms could not exist if the electromagnetic
       constant were not just
       a small fraction (Barrow & Tipler)
      If the electric charge of the electron
       had been only slightly different, stars
       would have been unable to burn hydrogen
       and helium, or else they would not have
       exploded (Stephen Hawking)
      The “fortuitous positioning of nuclear
       resonance levels in carbon and oxygen”
       (Fred Hoyle)
      nth Degree Precision
      Formation of carbon - another vital element
       for life - also due to astonishing coincidence
           If ratio of strong nuclear force to
            electromagnetism were just slightly off, its
            synthesis in an extremely short window of 10-17
            seconds would be impossible

     The list goes on . . . . literally endlessly!
     No universe today if any of these varied.
      A Delicate Balance
 Facts and observations supporting the
  Anthropic Principle
         Fine-tuned parameters in the universe that support
          life cannot have occurred by random
         These same parameters must be held constant in
          order to sustain the universe
         Who determined their fine-tuned values? Who is now
          holding these values absolutely constant to sustain the
     “But the heavens and the earth which are now
28   preserved by the same word” (2 Peter 3:7)
     Third Rock from the Sun

      Distance from the Sun

      Position from the sun is not where it ought
       to be if extrapolating from the positions of
       the other planets
      Position has great
       implications for life
       on this planet
      Perhaps other planets
       are there just to show us
       what it could have been like
     Distance from the Sun
      Mercury          58 million km from Sun
      Venus           110
      Earth           150
      Mars            230
      Asteroids       440
      Jupiter         780
      Saturn         1430
      Uranus         2880
     Take natural log of distances and plot
      Distance from the Sun
          Without Earth                         With Earth
 8                                 8

7.5                               7.5

 7                                 7

6.5                               6.5

 6            Earth is NOT where6 it is supposed to be!
5.5                               5.5

 5                                 5

4.5                               4.5

 4                                 4
      A   B   C   D   E   F   G         A   B    X   C   D   E   F   G

Including Earth’s position in the plot of planets’ distances
(natural log) from the sun upsets the linear pattern
      Just Right!

     Just the right temperature
      Position from the sun is just right
      Orbit is within 3% of being a circle, unlike
       other planets’ elliptical orbits - thus producing
       consistent planet temperatures
      The tilt of the earth’s axis ensures that climate
       for the large part of the surface is just right
      Earth’s crust just at the right thickness so that
       temperatures are just right
  Just Right!
 Just the right internal radioactivity to maintain
  a molten iron core - produces the magnetic
  field that protects life from deadly solar winds
 Just the right size so that gravitational pull is
  also just right
      Enough to hold needed gases but weak enough to
       allow harmless gases to escape into space
      Produce the right weight
  Just the right atmosphere to shield us
   from countless meteorites
     The Essence of Life

      A Life Necessity

      Life is carbon-based, but it is also water-based
          Water covers 70.8% of the earth
          60-90% of cell mass is water
          Seeds remain dormant until watered

     The Water Molecule

     Consists of two atoms of oxygen and one
     atom of hydrogen - H2O


       H                    H

           Take note of this!
     A Unique Liquid
      V-shape angle and molecular structure of
       H2O give rise to inter-molecular bonds
      Bonds in turn give water special properties
       so essential to life
          Ice density
          Thermal properties
          Universal solvent
          Water molecules can form weak bonds with
           other molecules – very important for stability in
38         bio-molecules
     One More “Coincidence”

  Anomalous behaviour of water -
   its solid state (ice) floats on the liquid
         First noted by Harvard biologist Lawrence
          Henderson in the 19th century

      The Unique Property of Ice

      Vast majority of matter expand in volume
       when temperature is raised. Hence, solid
       state is more dense than liquid state. Hence,
       solid sinks in liquid.
      If above were true for water,
       what happens to the oceans,
       seas, lakes, rivers in winter?
       What happens to life?
      “Fortunately” for life, ice floats on water.
       i.e. the solid floats on the liquid
   The Unique Property of Ice
    Structure of molecular
    bonding in ice

    Inter-molecule bonding occurs - bond is
     stronger at lower temperatures
    But bond creates rigid structures. From 0o C
     to 4o C water density actually decreases
     instead of increases like other fluids.
    Hence ice floats - and life in water is safe!
     The Thermal Properties

  Hydrogen bonding also affects specific heat.
   Because of bonds, heat required to raise
   temperature of water is relatively high.
  Important for biochemical processes
   sensitive to temperatures
  It absorbs five times more heat than soil -
   oceans keep the planet at the cool temperature,
   providing a stable living environment to
   sustain life
     The Thermal Properties

      Heat for vapourising water is
       also higher than for other
       liquids - also because of
       need to break hydrogen
       Hence, serve as a good
       coolant to absorb heat from
       the body through
     The Electrical Properties

      Overall electrically neutral, but
       uneven charge distribution in
       O-H bond produces a permanent
      Gives it properties of being the
       universal solvent

     Why so many important – and different –
     life-supporting properties in the essence of
     life? Coincidental?
     The Anthropic Principle

     Ample evidence found in large numbers in:
      The Cosmos
      The Earth
      The Essence of Life

     And still more . . . .
      In Medical Science
      In Human Philosophies
  All Coincidences?

 Far too many coincidences to be random -
 Brandon Carter’s “large number coincidences”
 Confirms what has long been revealed to man
  Creation is the product of Intelligence, of
   Design - of an Intelligent Designer
  Humanity is the final cause of the universe

  The Anthropic Principle is a science-based
  principle that supports the belief in God
     Words of a convert
     Dr Paul Davies, a former leader of
     the atheistic, materialistic worldview, who now
     believes in the Creator:
     “There is for me powerful evidence that there
     is something going on behind it all. . . It seems
     as though somebody has fine-tuned nature’s
     numbers to make the Universe. . . The
     impression of design is overwhelming.”
     The laws of physics themselves seem “to be the
     product of exceedingly ingenious design.”
Man – “centre” of Creation
      Attention once again turned to
       “final cause” - a return to teleological
       arguments concerning God?
      Similar, but not a re-hash - now backed by
       scientific methods, data and observations,
       and not merely philosophical discussions
      Restores man to the “centre” of the cosmos -
       directly contradict the Copernican theory
      Spells the end of the Copernican revolution?
48     - Don’t hold your breath!
     The Atheist’s Paradigm

     Rare Agreement

      “Coincidences” cannot be satisfactorily
       explained by random probabilistic processes
      “Coincidences” appear to be directed to
       bring about the existence of man (hence,

      But no agreement concerning Design –
       much less, God – a paradigm issue
  The Controversy

  Inevitable implications concerning the
   Designer - pose great difficulty for atheists
      Disliked by many physicists because of this
      Yet cannot deny “coincidences” and need to
       explain them
      Attempt to argue that life results not by design,
       but from what happened before
    Arguments gaining wide circulation
     with atheists accusing theists of
51   abusing the Anthropic Principle
     Carter’s View

      Carter’s interpretation of the large number
      “what we can expect
      to observe [in the
      universe] must be
      restricted by the conditions
      necessary for our presence
      as observers.”
      In effect, anti-theistic
     That’s the way things are

     Barrow & Tipler, The
     Anthropic Cosmological
     Principle, 1986
      We are amazed at Creation, of the very fact
       that we exist – but we should not be
          Analogy:
           Should we be amazed at the way a river runs its
           course? Why it twists here or turns there? Why
           its mouth is here, not there? Why it is this wide
           and not that? No need - all merely natural
53         outcomes of how it had developed – no design.
     That’s the way things are

     “An attitude of surprise at the delicately
     balanced features of the universe essential to
     life is inappropriate; we should expect the
     universe to look this way. While this does
     not explain the origin of those features, it
     shows that no explanation is necessary.
     Hence, to posit a divine Designer is
     The way things are not

      We can never observe conditions in the
       Universe that is incompatible with our
       existence; if these conditions existed, we
       would not be here – hence no explanation

          Appears to imply if things had taken a different
55         course, we would not be here. If so, so what?
     We don’t see what we don’t know

  We observe what we can observe –
   but we are unable to observe
   everything; hence, we must not
   conclude that there is a Designer
   because of what we do not yet know
         “It is essential to take into account the limitations
          of one's measuring apparatus when interpreting
          one's observations.” (Barrow & Tipler)
          Eg A ratcatcher who caught no rats may say that
          all rats are bigger than six inches
56        because that is the size of his traps
Just One Natural Outcome

  All these “coincidences” are not to
   be seen as such, but the conditions
   resulting from the actual, natural course
   the Universe has taken
  These eventually led to our very existence.
  Outcome could have been something else very
   different. This one just happened that way!
    So, no need to assume there was something
     moving the Universe this way or that, or that
     Man is the “final cause”
     But we should be amazed

     “If anyone claims not to be surprised by the
     special features that the universe has, he is
     hiding his head in the sand. These special
     features ARE surprising and unlikely.”
     (Dr. David D. Deutch, Institute of Mathematics,
     Oxford University)

      Basis for Amazement

     Serious questions exist against such
     atheistic interpretations.
      Why should there be any physical laws?
          Some scientists consider laws to be “first cause” –
           like God – not explainable
      Why should there be any constants in the first
       place? And so many? Who dictated this?
      Why should one constant exist, but affect
       multiple yet unrelated areas? (Eg π or Φ)
  Basis for Amazement

  Why should constants continue to be
   constants? Why should laws or constants not
   evolve like everything else? Why not change
   in properties and values?
       If law or constants do change, even just one, life
        would vanish and the universe would collapse
  Implication: there IS an end-point, a final
   cause – because critical changes are absent
    Hence, we must be amazed at what – or Who
     – brought us here
     More Atheistic Variations

      Several variations have arisen
          Weak Anthropic Principle
          Strong Anthropic Principle
          Final Anthropic Principle
      Including some very weird science – eg the
       Participatory Anthropic Principle, and the
      All attempt to argue life did not result by
       design – and hence deny God
 Weak Anthropic Principle

      “The observed values of all
       physical and cosmological quantities
       are not equally probable, but they take on
       values restricted by the requirement that
       there exist sites where carbon-based life can
       evolve and by the requirement that the
       Universe be old enough for it to have already
       done so.”
 Strong Anthropic Principle
  The Universe must have those
   properties which allow life to develop
   within it at some stage in its history. Because:
        There exists one possible Universe designed with
         the goal of generating and sustaining 'observers'.
        Observers are necessary to bring the Universe into
         being (John Wheeler's Participatory Anthropic
         Principle).                            Or...
        An ensemble of other different universes is
64       necessary for the existence of our Universe
     Final Anthropic Principle

      Intelligent information-processing must
       come into existence in the Universe, and,
       once it comes into existence, it will never
       die out.
                          There is really no
                          Anthropic Principle – all
                          along, it has always been the

                          “e-thropic” Principle!!!
   And A Very Weird Science
 Atheists recognise that a “fine-tuned” universe
  cannot occur randomly – which would imply a
 Yet, some adamant to cling on to paradigm of a
  “random” cosmos which has no place for God
   Hence, postulate the “multiverse”
    cosmos (a.k.a. world ensemble) –
    billions of universes – all random,
    of course – and each has its own
    set of physical constants
      A Tale of the Multiverse

     “If the Universe contains an
     exhaustively random and
     infinite number of
     universes, then anything
     that can occur with non-
     vanishing probability will
     occur somewhere.”

  A Tale of the Multiverse
  Hence, by chance not by design, one of these
   countless universes contain a right
   combination of physical constants with the
   right values to permit life – that universe being
   our own
   Not limited by how many universes
    can possibly exist – since none can
    be observed or measured.
    Therefore, overcome the limits that the laws of
    probability place on what random processes
    may or may not produce
      A Tall Tale

      How many universes must there be before
       one such as our own can occur by random?
          Consider the large number of physical constants
          Consider all the other “large number
      How scientific can it get if the rule is that
       we cannot observe or measure any one of
       these other billions of universes in
     Another Very Weird Science
  John Wheeler’s Participatory Anthropic
   Principle (PAP): the universe creates man, but
   man through his observations of the universe
   brings the universe into real existence
  “the universe brought forth life in order to exist
   ... that the very cosmos does not exist unless
   (George Greenstein)

   Pure Sci-fi
 Problems:
      Time never observed to travel backwards
      Topsy turvy cause/effect relationship
 Fiction due to misapplication of the laws of the
  quantum world to the macro world where
  Newtonian laws operate – and plenty of
  The wisdom of the world, blinded to the true
   Wisdom, resorts to fables instead – just so as to
71 avoid acknowledging their Creator
      Science is based on facts, observations and
       experiments (Bertrand Russell, 1935) –
       hence, “superior” to medieval theology
      But atheistic interpretations not based on
       fact, observations and experiments
          More of a philosophical argument
          More akin to the Ontological
           Argument of medieval theology
          Even mythical!
     What happened to the “scientific objectivity”?
     An Objective Scientific View
     “Barrow and Tipler's attempt to stave off the
     inference to divine design by appealing to the
     Weak Anthropic Principle is demonstrably
     logically fallacious unless one conjoins to it
     the metaphysical hypothesis of a World
     Ensemble. But there is no reason for such a
     postulate. Their misgivings about the
     alternative of divine design are shown to be of
     little significance.”
     (Source: British Journal for the Philosophy of
73   Science 38 (1988): 389-395)
     Words of another convert

     Fred Hoyle, a British astrophysicist,
     so impressed by the string of
     “coincidences” that exist between
     particular numerical values of
     dimensionless constants of Nature
     without which life of any sort would
     be excluded:

     Words of another convert

     “I do not believe that any scientist who
     examined the evidence would fail to draw the
     inference that the laws of nuclear physics
     have been deliberately designed with regard
     to the consequences they produce inside the
     stars. If this is so, then my apparently
     random quirks have become part of a
     deep-laid scheme.”
     Which Paradigm for you?
     Response once again shows the fundamental issue
     is not concerning science – it concerns whether
     one adopts a theistic paradigm or an atheistic one
           The Atheist Paradigm

                                          The Theist Paradigm

                   Facts & Observations

     You make your choice of your paradigm BY FAITH.

     What is your choice? Which is more objective?

To top