Fundamental Numbers are Fine Tuned
U of T doctorate,
Hugh Ross comments:
accurately and extensively astronomers measure the universe, the
more finely tuned they discover it to be. ...the degree of fine
tuning is utterly amazing - far beyond what human endeavors can
accomplish." [The Creator..., p. 114]
What kind of fine
tuning are astronomers talking about? Consider the following examples:
order came out of chaos....God...is the explanation..." --
Dr. Allan Sandage
Dr. George Smoot,
the discoveror of 'wrinkles in time', the cosmic seeds of galaxies,
points out that: "Had the expansion rate of the universe one second
after the big bang been smaller by one part in a hundred
thousand trillion, the universe would have recollapsed
long ago." In that case the universal law of gravity would have
quickly overwhelmed the initial expansion, before any stars or galaxies
were formed. The big bang explosion would have immediately turned
into a big implosion! Conversely, says Dr Smoot: "An expansion more
rapid by one part in a million would have excluded
the formation of stars and planets." [Wrinkles in Time, p.
293] The formation of such concentrations of matter require the
delicate balancing of local gravitational attraction in the context
of a universal expansion.
minutest variation in the value of a series of fundamental
properties of the universe would have resulted in no universe
at all, or at least a very alien universe."
He illustrates this
point with the 'strong nuclear force' which holds quark particles
together to form protons and neutrons and binds these together to
if the strong nuclear force had been slightly weaker, the universe
would have been composed of hydrogen only; slightly stronger, and
all the hydrogen would have been converted to helium."
Instead, the strong
nuclear force has exactly sufficient power -- the 'knife-edge' value
-- so that the present universe is composed of both hydrogen and
variation in the excess of protons over antiprotons- one billion
to one and one billion- might have produced a universe with no baryonic
matter or a cataclysmic plenitude of it." says Dr Smoot.
Stephen Hawking gives
two other examples of crucial parameters:
In his best- selling
book A Brief History of Time, Hawking writes:
fact is that the values of these numbers seem to have been finely
adjusted to make possible the development of life. For example 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." [A Brief History of Time, p. 125]
A minor difference in the electron's charge and stars wouldn't burn.
There would be no burning sun at the centre of our solar system
to provide life-supporting heat and light. Also there would be no
supernova explosions to produce the raw materials for the formation
of planets like our earth." [Ferguson, p. 94]
from the Moon
Hawking's other example
relates to the law of gravity:
were less powerful than it is, matter wouldn't have congealed into
stars and galaxies, nor could galaxies and solar systems have formed
had gravity not been at the same time the weakest of the four forces.
No theory... can predict the strength of gravity or the electric
charge of the electron... but they seem minutely adjusted to make
possible the development of life..." [Stephen Hawking...,
Ferguson, p. 94]
fine-tuning of the universe..."
"...proof of the existence of God"
Cosmologist, Edward Harrison
use the term 'cosmological constant' in a different way than Einstein.
Scientists employ the term to describe how densely energy is packed
into a vacuum. Common sense suggests that a vacuum is 'empty' and
therefore contains no energy. However, even a true vacuum isn't
'empty'; it is seething with energy. In principle the energy density
of the vacuum ought to be enormous. Einstein's theory of relativity
implies that this should dramatically affect the universe [Ferguson,
p. 146]. Hawking points out that: "A large cosmological contant
either positive or negative would make the universe unsuitable for
the development of life." In practice the observed value of this
parameter in real universe is incredibly tiny. It is the nearest
thing to zero we can find! This may not surprise those of us who
think of a vacuum as being empty. It surprises many scientists and
exemplifies the fine-tuning of the universe.
Nobel laureate in
Physics, Steven Weinberg comments:
does... require an incredible fine-tuning: it is
the vacuum energy, or cosmological constant... The existence of
life of any kind seems to require a cancellation between different
contributions to vacuum energy accurate to about 120 decimal
places." [Weinberg, "Life in the Universe" in Scientific
American, Oct. '94, p. 49]
U of T Ph.D. Astronomer,
Hugh Ross summarizes the fine-tuning that characterizes our universe:
October 1993, twenty-five different characteristics of the
universe were recognized as precisely fixed.
If they were different by only slight amounts, [that] would spell
the end of the existence of... life... The degree of fine-tuning
necessary for... life supercedes by many orders of magnitude the
best human beings have ever achieved....That's supernatural!" [Creation
and Time..., p. 132]