Nope, the Universe wasn’t born “ready for life”
"When the Universe was first born, the ingredients necessary for life were nowhere to be found. Only our "lucky stars" enabled our existence."
That is not the argument.
This:
“The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers [the constants of physics]
seem to have been very finely adjusted
to make possible the development of life.”
Stephen Hawking
That?
Is the argument.
Strawman much there Big Think?
Loosing more and more respect everyday there Ethan Siegel
(Writer of the piece).
You gonna try and tell me he didn't know what he was doing when he stated:
"...the universe wasn't ready for life."
He knows that is not the argument.
The information,
(That we all know by now is always a sign of a conscious, sentient intellect)
that was responsible
for the initial conditions
of the universe,
led to the formation of stars,
which produce carbon etc
which led to life.
So its splitting hairs as well as a strawman argument.
Awesome.
(Thats sarcasm btw.)
When intelligent people?
Start to use middle school gimmickry?
To support their arguments?
You know you got em on the ropes...
Extreme Fine Tuning-by Design?
P 147.
"Recall from the previous chapter that the inhomogeneous distribution
of mass-energy at the beginning of the universe accounted for the presense of galaxies in some parts of the universe and a dearth of matter in others. Physicists have determined that if the matter at the beginning of the universe had been configured even slightly differently, there would be either an extreme clumping of matter resulting in a universe in which only black holes would exist or, alternately, a highly diffuse arrangement of matter without any large-scale structures at all. Both of these alternatives would have prevented the formation of stable galaxies and stars in which life-friendly solar systems might later emerge.
Here is an illustration I have often used with students to explain the idea of initial-condition fine tuning. Before the invention of tunnel- boring machines, engineers who wanted to build a tunnel through a mountainside would use dynamite to blast a hole in its side. They would carefully plan how to "configure the charge," because they knew that tiny differences in the orientation and positioning of the explosives could make huge differences in the direction and shape of the hole left by the blast (Fig. 8.1). That is, they knew that the initial configuration of matter and energy together would determine the structure and shape of the resulting hole in the mountain.
In much the same way, the configuration of matter and energy at the beginning of the universe determined the distribution of matter and energy later in the history of the cosmos. Only the extreme fine tuning of that initial configuration enabled galaxies, stars, and planetary systems to form."
Where did the information necessary for the initial fine tuning of the universe come from? I got a chair at my table etc...
"...the ingredients necessary for life were nowhere to be found.
Only our "lucky stars" enabled our existence."
(100% incorrect. The "intellect" behind the initial constants of the universe, THAT LED TO STAR FORMATION enabled our existence.)
On to the article...
"All organisms rely on the same biochemical precursor molecules, which in turn are built out of the same atoms: primarily carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen, and phosphorus, with a number of less-abundant elements also being essential to life processes."
"Given that everything in the Universe arose from the same cosmic beginning — the hot Big Bang — you might think that the building blocks necessary for life were present from the start."
(There is your strawman,
he is making your argument for you so it is easier to attack.)
"The Big Bang, spectacular though it was, failed to put the proper ingredients in place for life to arise. Here’s how, for all its successes, the Big Bang failed to set the Universe up for the emergence of life."
(I'm here.
I'm alive.
So come again with:
"the Big Bang failed to set the Universe up for the emergence of life"
Were all here right?
So how is the above statement even close to the truth?)
"At very high energies, all of the known particles and antiparticles of the Standard Model are easy to create in large quantities. As the Universe cools, however, the more massive particles and antiparticles become more difficult to create, and they eventually annihilate away until there’s a negligible amount left. This winds up leading to a Universe filled with radiation, with just a tiny bit of leftover matter: protons, neutrons, and electrons, which somehow came to exist slightly more abundantly — about 1 extra matter particle per 1.4 billion photons — than antimatter. (How, exactly, that occurred is still an open area of research and is known as the baryogenesis problem.)"
(You can do all the research you want.
Some of us already know how it occurred.
Theism
(The head and shoulders
above
all other explanations
of the metaphysical
beginning to
and evolution of the cosmos)
belief in the existence of a god or gods, especially belief in one god as creator of the universe, intervening in it and sustaining a personal relation to his creatures.)
"With temperatures about ~1000 times hotter than the ones we find at the center of the Sun, conditions seem right for nuclear fusion, where elements can build their way up the periodic table in rapid succession."
(You cant haphazardly throw together ingredients in any amount you want
and put them in any container you want
and put it in the oven at any temp you want
for as long as you want
and reasonably expect to get a cobbler out of the mess,
but this ORDER:
Was Somehow an accident?
And doesn't show any signs of intelligence
behind the extreme fine tuning
of the initial configuration
of conditions of the universe?
Yeah...right...sure... go with that...)
This is why the practitioners of scientism are resorting to strawman and false equivalence arguments BTW. THEIR strict adherence to THEIR version of religious orthodoxly simply does not cut the mustard so to speak and they cant stand it.)
"If the Universe could do precisely this, then as soon as the Universe becomes cool enough to form neutral atoms and enough time passes so that the gravitational imperfections can attract enough matter to form stars and star systems, we’d have chances for life. The atoms necessary for life — the raw ingredients — can bind together into all sorts of molecular configurations all on their own, through natural, abiotic processes, just like we find today all throughout interstellar space.
(Key word here is:
"precisely".
"and enough time passes
so that the gravitational imperfections
can attract enough matter to form stars and star systems
we’d have chances for life"
He means:
Like it was designed to do from the beginning.
But who is the designer?
:-).
"The atoms necessary for life — the raw ingredients — can bind together into all sorts of molecular configurations all on their own, through natural, abiotic processes, just like we find today all throughout interstellar space."
( "all on their own"
Maybe they were designed to do so from the onset?
Huh?
Maybe?
Perhaps?
I mean:
If people honestly think that the periodic table shown above is the result of an accident?
(My strawman argument :-)
Then surely I can make the assertation that:
"The atoms necessary for life — the raw ingredients — can bind together into all sorts of molecular configurations all on their own, through natural, abiotic processes, just like we find today all throughout interstellar space."
WOULD NOT
have been doing so
if not for the
intellect
behind the information
that was present in the:
"extreme fine tuning of that initial configuration"
of the universe.
And besides;
WHERE DID THE INFORMATION PRESENT IN DNA COME FROM?)
"The inability of the cosmos to maintain deuterium in the early Universe for long enough periods to build up to heavier elements is the primary reason that the Big Bang can’t create the ingredients for life on its own."
Oh...So maybe it needs a force outside it acting upon it then? :-).
Theism
(The head and shoulders
above
all other explanations
of the metaphysical
beginning to
and evolution of the cosmos)
belief in the existence of a god or gods, especially belief in one god as creator of the universe, intervening in it and sustaining a personal relation to his creatures.
Where did the information in DNA come from?
:-).
"Even though we’re talking about cosmic scales, it’s actually the laws that govern subatomic particles — nuclear and particle physics — that prevent the Universe from forming the heavy elements required for life in the early stages of the Big Bang. If the rules were a little bit different, like deuterium was more stable, there were much greater numbers of protons and neutrons, or there were fewer photons at high energies, nuclear fusion could have built up large quantities of heavy elements in the first few seconds of the Universe.
(And what is the intelligence behind the information contained in those laws?
"it’s actually the laws that govern subatomic particles — nuclear and particle physics — that prevent the Universe from forming the heavy elements required for life in the early stages of the Big Bang."
"If the rules were a little bit different
like deuterium was more stable
there were much greater numbers of protons and neutrons
or there were fewer photons at high energies"
But they are not and we have no evidence to suggest that they are any different anywhere else either besides what we can observe. This goes right to the point of the matter that:
"these numbers [the constants of physics]
seem to have been very finely adjusted
to make possible the development of life."
"But the easily-destroyed nature of deuterium, combined with the enormous numbers of photons present in the early Universe, kills our dreams of having the necessary raw ingredients right at the beginning."
(It's simply not the way the intellect behind the initial blueprint of the universe was designed yo...)
"That’s the key step: we need to wait for stars to form before we build up any substantial quantities of any heavier elements, such as carbon, oxygen, and the other elements essential for life."
(Yeah...we know this...it's why:
"Nope, the Universe wasn’t born “ready for life”"
is a strawman argument.)
"The Big Bang was a great start to our Universe, but it couldn’t set us up for life all on its own. For that, we needed generations of stars to live, die, and enrich the interstellar medium with the heavier elements that all biochemical processes require. When it comes to your existence, the Big Bang absolutely isn’t enough to give rise to you. For that to occur, you can literally thank your lucky stars: the ones that lived, died, and created the essential elements still inside of you today."
"The Big Bang was a great start to our Universe, but it couldn’t set us up for life all on its own"
(Thanks for making my point for me:
Theism
(The head and shoulders
above
all other explanations
of the metaphysical
beginning to
and evolution of the cosmos)
belief in the existence of a god or gods, especially belief in one god as creator of the universe, intervening in it and sustaining a personal relation to his creatures.)
"For that, we needed generations of stars to live, die,
and enrich the interstellar medium
with the heavier elements
that all biochemical processes require."
(Biochemical processes
do not generate
the INFORMATION
found in any DNA.
So where did the information come from?)
"When it comes to your existence, the Big Bang absolutely isn’t enough to give rise to you. For that to occur, you can literally thank your lucky stars: the ones that lived, died, and created the essential elements still inside of you today."
You can worship the sun if you want to.
Tons of former generations before us have.
But I'm not goanna give gratitude to anything besides
the cognizant
sentient
intellect
that designed the information
contained in the initial conditions
that led to the stars formation
(and hence us)
in the first place.
And?
Genesis 2:7
Then the Lord God formed a man
from the dust of the ground
(Firmament,
Earth)
and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life,
and the man became a living being.
It's not "dust" like you think it might be.
it's all the subatomic 'soup" we are still walking around in.
Think of it this away:
Genesis 3:19
"...till thou return unto the ground;
for out of it wast thou taken:
for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return."
The earth will one day be swallowed up by the cosmos.
Either one day the milky way will be swallowed up by the Andromeda Galaxy, or "something could perturb spacetime"
In either event?
The subatomic "dust"
of the earth
that we came from?
We shall return to one day.
No comments:
Post a Comment