It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Signs of God's Existence

page: 3
7
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 07:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: swanne
Well, some scientists say that this can be explained by the presence of a gradient of multiverses, each with their own constant. In such a hypothesis, the "right" universe (with the "right" constants) is bound to exist for life to occur.

BTW I am agnostic. So my personal opinion is not really biased towards any side on this God issue.


Yes, that's the multiverse theory that is often put forward by atheists as a response to the fine-tuning argument.

There are a couple of very grave (and likely insurmountable) problems with it.

The first is that there is no independent evidence for any other universe other than our own, and in fact it is in principle impossible that we could ever have any direct evidence of another universe.

Another problem is that it doesn't even remove the fine-tuning problem. Whatever it is that is generating the infinite number of universes (and what actually is generating them?) would have to be governed by a complex set of physical laws, and we have no reason to believe that they wouldn't also have to be fine-tuned.

What I find most interesting about the multiverse theory is just how desperate the atheists are getting in attempting to defend against the existence of fine-tuning. They're now forced to posit the most outrageous theories of infinite numbers of universes (for which we have no independent evidence) just to cling to their beliefs. But when you're desperate, basic principles of reasoning such as Occam's Razor and that little thing called "evidence" just get thrown out the door.




posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 12:09 AM
link   
Dreams,Imagination,Thought and Conversation!



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 03:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: Brighter
Incorrect. It's not just a 'small number', it's astonishingly small, precise and extraordinarily significant. The cosmological constant, lambda, was most recently calculated at 10^-122 in "The Value of the Cosmological Constant", by John D. Barrow and Douglas J. Shaw in a March 2011 issue of the journal _General Relativity and Gravitation_.
You're citing the guys who say there doesn't need to be any fine tuning to support your fine tuning argument?

Cosmological constant

Cosmologists John Barrow and Douglas Shaw of the University of Cambridge have now proposed a new approach to solve the cosmological constant problems, without any fine tuning involved.

The essence of their new approach is that the bare cosmological constant is promoted from a parameter to a field, making the entire Universe a quantum mechanical wave function...



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 05:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Oh, I most certainly agree with you, a 6,000 year old earth is ridiculous. But then again, not all creationists are young Earth believers. There are creationists (old Earth creationism) who believe in divine intervention yet who agree with scientism's assertion of the age of Earth, physics, and even evolution.

And, well, your cartoon is making fun of them too. It's prejudice to assume all creationists are young earth creationists.



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 06:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Brighter
there is no independent evidence for any other universe other than our own

The same can be said about God. No direct evidence for him either.


Whatever it is that is generating the infinite number of universes (and what actually is generating them?) would have to be governed by a complex set of physical laws

Actually I discovered what could very well be the precise mechanism of multiversial formation: www.abovetopsecret.com...

The mechanism far from complex. In fact, please allow me to explain it to you in only one sentence: Any faster-than-light particles (such as tachyons) would by definition have the capacity move back in time (STR), creating new histories in the past, that is, their own alternate universes.


What I find most interesting about the multiverse theory is just how desperate the atheists are getting in attempting to defend against the existence of fine-tuning. They're now forced to posit the most outrageous theories of infinite numbers of universes

I am agnostic.

Just think - do you not realize that an infinite set of probabilities would by definition validate the probability of the existence of a God?

You are digging your own grave, here.



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 06:28 AM
link   
a reply to: swanne
The OP video denies evolution. I don't apologize for MacFarlane's cartoon in this context.

edit on 29-1-2015 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 06:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

I cannot watch the video on my device.

And the OP made no mention of denying evolution in his post.

In which case, I concede your point would be justified.

But the cartoon? Still unfair - it portays ALL creationists as stupid, including old earth creationists who are making the efforts to be compatible with scientism.

(I am done editing
)
edit on 29-1-2015 by swanne because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 06:41 AM
link   
a reply to: swanne
www.merriam-webster.com...

cre·a·tion·ism

the belief that God created all things out of nothing as described in the Bible and that therefore the theory of evolution is incorrect
If they don't believe in evolution I fail to see what problem you'd have with the cartoon. Evolution is a scientific fact.

If you aren't happy about the OP breaking the site terms and conditions by not describing the content of the video, report the OP, don't complain to me, I'm not happy about the lack of description either.



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 07:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur


If they don't believe in evolution I fail to see what problem you'd have with the cartoon.

Because not ALL of them "don't believe in evolution".

This is just a common misconception which gave birth to prejudice.

Let me explain:

Old Earth Creationism


Old Earth creationism is an umbrella term for a number of types of creationism, including gap creationism, progressive creationism, and evolutionary creationism.[1] Old Earth creationism is typically more compatible with mainstream scientific thought on the issues of physics, chemistry, geology and the age of the Earth, in comparison to young Earth creationism.



Evolutionary creationism, or theistic evolution, asserts that "the personal God of the Bible created the universe and life through evolutionary processes."[3] According to the American Scientific Affiliation:

"A theory of theistic evolution (TE) — also called evolutionary creation — proposes that God's method of creation was to cleverly design a universe in which everything would naturally evolve. Usually the "evolution" in "theistic evolution" means Total Evolution — astronomical evolution (to form galaxies, solar systems,...) and geological evolution (to form the earth's geology) plus chemical evolution (to form the first life) and biological evolution (for the development of life)"



The Genesis account is then interpreted as an account of the process of cosmic evolution, providing a broad base on which any number of theories and interpretations are built. Proponents of the day-age theory can be found among theistic evolutionists and progressive creationists.
The day-age theory tries to reconcile these views by arguing that the creation "days" were not ordinary 24-hour days, but actually lasted for long periods of time—or as the theory's name implies: the "days" each lasted an age. Most advocates of old Earth creationism hold that the six days referred to in the creation account given in Genesis are not ordinary 24-hour days, as the Hebrew word for "day" (yom) can be interpreted in this context to mean a long period of time (thousands or millions of years) rather than a 24-hour day.[9] According to this view, the sequence and duration of the creation "days" is representative or symbolic of the sequence and duration of events that scientists theorize to have happened, such that Genesis can be read as a summary of modern science, simplified for the benefit of pre-scientific humans.



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 03:43 PM
link   
a reply to: swanne
What you wrote doesn't change the dictionary definition of creationists, as well as the common usage in language that creationists tend to deny evolution, which is why the dictionary says what it says.

If people who believe in theistic evolution choose to call themselves "creationists" for some unfathomable reason, which then associates them with the evolution deniers, don't find this behavior to be that intelligent. Why not call themselves "theistic evolutionists"?

For theistic evolutionists who refer to themselves as theistic evolutionists, the cartoon doesn't say "theistic evolutionists" and thus is not applicable to those with such beliefs. For theistic evolutionists who refer to themselves as creationists, this seems to be an extremely silly thing to do so I still fail to see how the cartoon wouldn't be applicable, especially given the way the dictionary defines creationist as a denier of evolution.



posted on Jan, 30 2015 @ 07:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

What you wrote doesn't change the dictionary definition of creationists, as well as the common usage in language that creationists tend to deny evolution, which is why the dictionary says what it says.

Well, the dictionary definition is wrong. Perhaps it has been written by secularists who had only a partial knowledge of creationism.

"Creationism" only refers to the belief that God created some parts or some force of the Universe. Since there exist creationists who believe that God created evolution, the sentence "all creationists deny evolution" is false.


If people who believe in theistic evolution choose to call themselves "creationists" for some unfathomable reason, which then associates them with the evolution deniers, don't find this behavior to be that intelligent. Why not call themselves "theistic evolutionists"?

Because although theistic evolutionists do acknowledge that things such as physics, geology and evolution are true, they nevertheless believe that God is the orignal creator of all these forces. Hence the name "creationists".



posted on Jan, 30 2015 @ 07:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Brighter

I'll give you a refutation of the fine tuning argument, there is no valid evidence for god either. Everything you JUST said about the infinite universe theory holds true for the god argument as well. At least the infinite universe theory is something considered after extrapolating physical laws and effects within the universe to outside the universe (admittedly a huge jump in logic, I'll give you that). The god argument starts with the premise that god exists then created the evidence to support it. In fact, that IS the fine tuning argument in a nutshell. The confirmation bias that god exists.



posted on Apr, 18 2015 @ 01:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Sorry it's taken me so long to respond. Real life gets in the way sometimes.

You actually misunderstood my response. As I clearly indicated, I was citing their paper as evidence for the *value* of the cosmological constant.

By the way, the cosmological constant is just a single physical constant that is fine-tuned. Here are 92 more:

Strong nuclear force constant
Weak nuclear force constant
Gravitational force constant
Electromagnetic force constant
Ratio of electromagnetic force constant to gravitational force constant
Ratio of proton to electron mass
Ratio of number of protons to number of electrons
Ratio of proton to electron charge
Mass density of the universe
Baryon (proton and neutron) density of the universe
Space energy or dark energy density of the universe
Ratio of space energy density to mass density
Entropy level of the universe
Velocity of light
Age of the universe
Uniformity of radiation
Homogeneity of the universe
Average distance between galaxies
Average distance between galaxy clusters
Average distance between stars
Average size and distribution of galaxy clusters
Numbers, sizes, and locations of cosmic voids
Electromagnetic fine structure constant
Gravitational fine-structure constant
Decay rate of protons
Ground state energy level for helium-4
Carbon-12 to oxygen-16 nuclear energy level ratio
Decay rate for beryllium-8
Ratio of neutron mass to proton mass
Initial excess of nucleons over antinucleons
Polarity of the water molecule
Epoch for hypernova eruptions
Number and type of hypernova eruptions
Epoch for supernova eruptions
Number and types of supernova eruptions
Epoch for white dwarf binaries
Density of white dwarf binaries
Ratio of exotic matter to ordinary matter
Number of effective dimensions in the early universe
Number of effective dimensions in the present universe
Mass values for the active neutrinos
Number of different species of active neutrinos
Number of active neutrinos in the universe
Mass value for the sterile neutrino
Number of sterile neutrinos in the universe
Decay rates of exotic mass particles
Magnitude of the temperature ripples in cosmic background radiation
Size of the relativistic dilation factor
Magnitude of the Heisenberg uncertainty
Quantity of gas deposited into the deep intergalactic medium by the first supernovae
Positive nature of cosmic pressures
Positive nature of cosmic energy densities
Density of quasars
Decay rate of cold dark matter particles
Relative abundances of different exotic mass particles
Degree to which exotic matter self interacts
Epoch at which the first stars (metal-free pop III stars) begin to form
Epoch at which the first stars (metal-free pop III stars cease to form
Number density of metal-free pop III stars
Average mass of metal-free pop III stars
Epoch for the formation of the first galaxies
Epoch for the formation of the first quasars
Amount, rate, and epoch of decay of embedded defects
Ratio of warm exotic matter density to cold exotic matter density
Ratio of hot exotic matter density to cold exotic matter density
Level of quantization of the cosmic spacetime fabric
Flatness of universe's geometry
Average rate of increase in galaxy sizes
Change in average rate of increase in galaxy sizes throughout cosmic history
Constancy of dark energy factors
Epoch for star formation peak
Location of exotic matter relative to ordinary matter
Strength of primordial cosmic magnetic field
Level of primordial magnetohydrodynamic turbulence
Level of charge-parity violation
Number of galaxies in the observable universe
Polarization level of the cosmic background radiation
Date for completion of second reionization event of the universe
Date of subsidence of gamma-ray burst production
Relative density of intermediate mass stars in the early history of the universe
Water's temperature of maximum density
Water's heat of fusion
Water's heat of vaporization
Number density of clumpuscules (dense clouds of cold molecular hydrogen gas) in the universe
Average mass of clumpuscules in the universe
Location of clumpuscules in the universe
Dioxygen's kinetic oxidation rate of organic molecules
Level of paramagnetic behavior in dioxygen
Density of ultra-dwarf galaxies (or supermassive globular clusters) in the middle-aged universe
Degree of space-time warping and twisting by general relativistic factors
Percentage of the initial mass function of the universe made up of intermediate mass stars
Strength of the cosmic primordial magnetic field

Keep in mind that only a single one of these values needs to be fine-tuned in order for the argument to work. All the rest are just icing on the cake. In other words, you'd have to prove that all of the above are *not* fine-tuned.

Do you have any such evidence?

Also, did you even *read* the paper that you posted? It's just a *proposal*. Can you cite a single published study in a peer-reviewed journal that contains multiple independent empirical verifications of their proposal?



posted on Apr, 18 2015 @ 01:15 AM
link   
a reply to: swanne

"The same can be said about God."

This is quite simply false. There is an enormous amount of evidence that the universe was designed. See the 93 fine-tuned physical constants that I mentioned above.

Looking forward to you 'debunking' each and every one.


I could even simply point out the very existence of the laws of logic, set theory and mathematics as evidence for a Designer. So where did these laws come from? Out of thin air? Blind chance? Sorry, but that's unintelligible. The only thing that humans have ever observed to have created any law is a mind.

Unless you have evidence to the contrary?

And how about the laws of physics themselves?

And as to your 'theory', how many independently verifiable experiments directly support it?

Which peer-reviewed journal or journals was your theory published in?

Also, does this mechanism involve any laws? If so, where did the laws come from?

Check mate



posted on Apr, 18 2015 @ 01:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

"I'll give you a refutation of the fine tuning argument, there is no valid evidence for god either"

Hahaha, what? Please elaborate this argument.

"The god argument starts with the premise that god exists then created the evidence to support it. In fact, that IS the fine tuning argument in a nutshell. The confirmation bias that god exists."

No, no, just...no. You're just misunderstanding the argument. In fact, the beauty of the fine-tuning argument is just that it *doesn't* presuppose a fine-tuner. And there is plenty of independent scientific evidence for the fine-tuning of each of the constants that I mentioned (see the end of my post). In fact, no sane physicist (atheist or otherwise) *denies* the fine-tuning of all of these constants. They *have* to accept them based on the scientific data (again, see the articles at the end of my post). What atheists are now forced to do is to posit insane theories to try to explain it away, such as the multiverse theory, for which there is no (and never will be) any real evidence. To get an even better idea of just how desperate atheists are getting in trying to get around the fine-tuning problem, you have Stephen Hawking releasing his latest book "The Grand Design" in which he attempts to argue that the universe will create itself from nothing because the law of gravity exists (cue laughter). I hope you can see that this isn't even science. It's complete nonsense. In fact, in one of my posts above I've already demonstrated the problem that the existence of *any* law gives an atheist. Not to mention that Hawkings 'theory' has been *thoroughly* debunked by Oxford University Professor John Lennox in "God and Stephen Hawking: Whose Design Is It Anyway?".

Evidence for fine-tuning of distinct physical constants:

John Leslie, editor, Physical Cosmology and Philosophy (New York: Macmillan, 1990), pp. 121-180.
Weihsueh A. Chiu, Nickolay Y. Gneden and Jeremiah P. Ostriker, "The Expected Mass Function for Low-Mass Galaxies in a Cold Dark Matter Cosmology: Is There a Problem?" Astrophysical Journal, 563 (2001), pp. 21-27.
Martin Elvis, Massimo Marengo, and Margarita Karovska, "Smoking Quasars: A New Source for Cosmic Dust," Astrophysical Journal Letters, 567 (2002), pp. L107-L110.
Martin White and C. S. Kochanek, "Constraints on the Long-Range Properties of Gravity from Weak Gravitational Lensing," Astrophysical Journal, 560 (2001), pp. 539-543.
P. P. Avelino and C. J. A. P. Martins, "A Supernova Brane Scan," Astrophysical Journal, 565 (2002), pp. 661-667.
P. deBernardis, et al, "Multiple Peaks in the Angular Power Spectrum of the Cosmic Microwave Background: Significance and Consequences for Cosmology," Astrophysical Journal, 564 (2002), pp. 559-566.
A. T. Lee, et al, "A High Spatial Resolution Analysis of the MAXIMA-1 Cosmic Microwave Background Anisotropy Data," Astrophysical Journal Letters, 561 (2001), pp. L1-L5.
R. Stompor, et al, "Cosmological Implications of MAXIMA-1 High-Resolution Cosmic Microwave Background Anisotropy Measurement," Astrophysical Journal Letters, 561 (2001), pp. L7-L10.
Andrew Watson, "Cosmic Ripples Confirm Universe Speeding Up," Science, 295 (2002), pp. 2341-2343.
Anthony Aguirre, Joop Schaye, and Eliot Quataert, "Problems for Modified Newtonian Dynamics in Clusters and the Ly Forest?" Astrophysical Journal, 561 (2001), pp. 550-558.
Chris Blake and Jasper Wall, "A Velocity Dipole in the Distribution of Radio Galaxies," Nature, 416 (2002), pp. 150-152.
G. Efstathiou, et al, "Evidence for a Non-Zero L and a Low Matter Density from a Combined Analysis of the 2dF Galaxy Redshift Survey and Cosmic Microwave Background Anisotropies," Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 330 (2002), pp. L29-L35.
Susana J. Landau and Hector Vucetich, "Testing Theories That Predict Time Variation of Fundamental Constants, " Astrophysical Journal, 570 (2002), pp. 463-469.
Renyue Cen, "Why Are There Dwarf Spheroidal Galaxies?" Astrophysical Journal Letters, 549 (2001), pp. L195-L198.
Brandon Carter, "Energy Dominance and the Hawking-Ellis Vacuum Conservation Theorem," a contribution to Stephen Hawkingís 60th birthday workshop on the Future of Theoretical Physics and Cosmology, Cambridge, UK, January, 2002, arXiv:gr-qc/0205010v1, May 2, 2002.
Joseph F. Hennawi and Jeremiah P. Ostriker, "Observational Constraints on the Self-Interacting Dark Matter Scenario and the Growth of Supermassive Black Holes," Astrophysical Journal, 572 (2002), pp. 41-54.
Robert Brandenberger, Brandon Carter, and Anne-Christine Davis, "Microwave Background Constraints on Decaying Defects," Physics Letters B, 534 (2002), pp. 1-7.
Lawrence M. Krauss, "The End of the Age Problem, and the Case for a Cosmological Constant Revisited," Astrophysical Journal, 501 (1998), pp. 461-466.
Q. R. Ahmad, et al, "Measurement of the Rate of e + d  p + p + e- Interactions Produced by 8B Solar Neutrinos at the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory," Physical Review Letters, 87 (2001), id. 071301.
R. E. Davies and R. H. Koch, "All the Observed Universe Has Contributed to Life," Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 334B (1991), pp. 391-403.
George F. R. Ellis, "The Anthropic Principle: Laws and Environments," in The Anthropic Principle, edited by F. Bertola and U. Curi (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993), p. 30.
H. R. Marston, S. H. Allen, and S. L. Swaby, "Iron Metabolism in Copper-Deficient Rats," British Journal of Nutrition, 25 (1971), pp. 15-30.
K. W. J. Wahle and N. T. Davies, "Effect of Dietary Copper Deficiency in the Rat on Fatty Acid Composition of Adipose Tissue and Desaturase Activity of Liver Microsomes," British Journal of Nutrition, 34 (1975), pp. 105-112;.
Walter Mertz, "The Newer Essential Trace Elements, Chromium, Tin, Vanadium, Nickel, and Silicon," Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 33 (1974), pp. 307-313.
Bruno Leibundgut, "Cosmological Implications from Observations of Type Ia Supernovae," Annual Reviews of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 39 (2001), pp. 67-98.
C. L. Bennett, et al, "First Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations, Preliminary Maps, and Basic Results," Astrophysical Journal Supplement, 148 (2003), pp. 1-27.
G. Hinshaw, et al, ""First Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Angular Power Spectrum," Astrophysical Journal Supplement, 148 (2003), pp. 135-159.
A. Balbi, et al, "Probing Dark Energy with the Cosmic Microwave Background: Projected Constraints from the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe and Planck," Astrophysical Journal Letters, 588 (2003), pp. L5-L8.
A. Vikhlinin, et al, "Cosmological Constraints from the Evolution of the Cluster Baryon Mass Function at z = 0.5," Astrophysical Journal, 590 (2003), pp. 15-25.
Frank Thim, et al, "The Cepheid Distance to NGC 5236 (M83) with the ESO Very Large Telescope," Astrophysical Journal, 590 (2003), pp. 256-270.
Kazuhide Ichikawa and M. Kawasaki, "Constraining the Variation of the Coupling Constants with Big Bang Nucleosynthesis," Physical Review D, 65 (2002), id 123511.
Eubino-Martin José Alberto, et al, "First Results from the Very Small Array-IV. Cosmological Parameter Estimation," Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 341 (2003), pp. 1084-1092.

(continued below)



posted on Apr, 18 2015 @ 01:35 AM
link   
Evidence for fine-tuning of distinct physical constants (continued):

Takuji Tsujimoto and Toshikazu Shigeyama, "Star Formation History of  Centauri Imprinted in Elemental Abundance Patterns," Astrophysical Journal, 590 (2003), pp. 803-808.
Santi Cassissi, Maurizio Salaris, and Alan W. Irwin, "The Initial Helium Content of Galactic Globular Cluster Stars from the R-Parameter: Comparison with the Cosmic Microwave Background Constraint," Astrophysical Journal, 588 (2003), pp. 862-870.
Naoki Yoshida, et al, "Early Structure Formation and Reionization in a Warm Dark Matter Cosmology," Astrophysical Journal Letters, 591 (2003), pp. L1-L4.
Robert R. Caldwell, et al, "Early Quintessence in Light of the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe," Astrophysical Journal Letters, 591 (2003), pp. L75-L78.
V. Luridiana, et al, "The Effect of Collisional Enhancement of Balmer Lines on the Determination of the Primordial Helium Abundance," Astrophysical Journal, 592 (20030, pp. 846-865.
Y. Jack Ng, W. A. Christiansen, and H. van Dam, "Probing Planck-Scale Physics with Extragalactic Sources?" Astrophysical Journal Letters, 591 (2003), pp. L87-L89.
J. L. Sievers, et al, "Cosmological Parameters from Cosmic Background Imager Observations and Comparisons with BOOMERANG, DASI, and MAXIMA," Astrophysical Journal, 591 (2003), pp. 599-622.
R. Scranton, et al, "Physical Evidence for Dark Energy," submitted July 20, 2003 to Physical Review Letters, xxx.lanl.gov...
Pablo Fosalba, Enrique Gaztanaga, and Francisco Castander, "Detection of the Integrated Sachs-Wolfe and Sunyaev-Zeldovich Effects from the Cosmic Microwave Background-Galaxy Correlation." Astrophysical Journal Letters, 597 (2003), pp. L89-L92.
M. R. Nolta, et al, "First Year Wilkinson Anistropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Dark Energy Induced Correlation with Radio Sources," submitted May 7, 2003 to Astrophysical Journal, xxx.lanl.gov...
Stephen Boughn and Robert Crittenden, "A Correlation Between the Cosmic Microwave Background and Large-Scale Structure in the Universe," Nature, 427 (2004), pp. 45-47.
T. Jacobson, S. Liberati, and D. Mattingly, "A Strong Astrophysical Constraint on the Violation of Special Relativity by Quantum Gravity," Nature, 424 (2003), pp. 1019-1021.
Sean Carroll, "Quantum Gravity: An Astrophysical Constraint," Nature, 424 (2003), pp. 1007-1008.
D. J. Fixsen, "The Spectrum of the Cosmic Microwave Background Anisotropy from the Combined COBE FIRAS and WMAP Observations," Astrophysical Journal Letters, 594 (2003), pp. L67-L70.
John L. Tonry, et al, "Cosmological Results from High-z Supernovae," Astrophysical Journal, 594 (2003), pp. 1-24.
Jean-Pierre Luminet, et al, "Dodecahedral Space Topology as an Explanation for Weak-Angle Temperature Correlations in the Cosmic Microwave Background," Nature, 425 (2003), pp. 593-595.
George F. R. Ellis, "The Shape of the Universe," Nature, 425 (2003), pp. 566-567.
Charles Seife, "Polyhedral Model Gives the Universe an Unexpected Twist," Science, 302 (2003), p. 209.
Neil J. Cornish, et al, "Constraining the Topology of the Universe," astro-ph/0310233, submitted to Physical Review Letters, 2003.
David Kirkman, et al, "The Cosmological Baryon Density from the Deuterium-to-Hydrogen Ratio in QSO Absorption Systems: D/H Toward Q1243+3047," Astrophysical Journal Supplement, 149 (2003), pp. 1-28.
Jeremiah P. Ostriker, et al, "The Probability Distribution Function of Light in the Universe: Results from Hydrodynamic Simulations," Astrophysical Journal, 597 (2003), pp. 1-8.
M. Tegmark, et al, "Cosmological Parameters from SDSS and WMAP," preprint, 2003 posted at xxx.lanl.gov...
Wolfram Freudling, Michael R. Corbin, and Kirk T. Korista, "Iron Emission in z ~ 6 QSOs," Astrophysical Journal Letters, 587 (2003), pp. L67-L70.
Lennox L. Cowie and Antoinette Songaila, "The inconstant constant?" Nature 428 (2004), pp. 132-133.
H. Chand, et al., "Probing the cosmological variation of the fine-structure constant: Results based on VLT-UVES sample," Astronomy and Astrophysics, 417 (2004), pp. 853-871.
Thibault Damous and Freeman Dyson, "The Oklo bound on the time variation of the fine-structure constant revisited," Nuclear Physics B, 480 (1996), pp. 37-54.
Anton M. Koekemoer, et al, "A Possible New Population of Sources with Extreme X-Ray/Optical Ratios," Astrophysical Journal Letters, 600 (2004), pp. L123-L126.
Henry C. Ferguson, et al, "The Size Evolution of High-Redshift Galaxies," Astrophysical Journal, 600 (2004), pp. L107-L110.
Charles Seife, "Light from Most-Distant Supernovae Shows Dark Energy Stays the Course," Science, 303 (2004), p. 1271.
Jonathan C. Tan and Christopher F. McKee, "The Formation of the First Stars. I. Mass Infall Rates, Accretion Disk Structure, and Protostellar Evolution," Astrophysical Journal, 603 (2004), pp. 383-400.
Charles Seife, "Galactic Stripling Gives a Glimpse of the Universe's Raw Youth," Science, 303 (2004), p. 1597.
Alan Heavens, et al, "The Star Formation History of the Universe from the Stellar Populations of Nearby Galaxies," Nature, 428 (2004), pp. 625-627.
Pavel D. Naselsky, et al, "Primordial Magnetic Field and Non-Gaussianity of the One-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe Data," Astrophysical Journal, 615 (2004), pp. 45-54.
Gang Chen, et al, "Looking for Cosmological Alfvén Waves in Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe Data," Astrophysical Journal, 611 (2004), pp. 655-659.
Tommaso Treu and Léon V. E. Koopmans, "Massive Dark Matter Halos and Evolution of Early-Type Galaxies to z = 1," Astrophysical Journal, 611 (2004), pp. 739-760.
B. Aubert, et al (the BaBar Collaboration), "Observations of Direct CP Violation in B0® K+pi- Decays," preprint, August, 2004, high energy physics - experiment.
Mark Peplow, "The Bs Have It," Nature, 430 (2004), p. 739.
Peter Bond, "Hubble's Long View," Astronomy & Geophysics, volume 45, issue 3, June 2004, p. 328.
A. C. S. Readhead, et al, "Polarization Observations with the Cosmic Background Imager," Science, 306 (2004), pp. 836-844.
Nickolay Y. Gneidin, "Reionization, Sloan, and WMAP: Is the Picture Consistent?" Astrophysical Journal, 610 (2004), pp. 9-13.
Amr A. El-Zant, et al, "Flat-Cored Dark Matter in Cuspy Clusters of Galaxies," Astrophysical Journal Letters, 607 (2004), pp. L75-L78.
J. R. Lin, S. N. Zhang, and T. P. Li, "Gamma-Ray Bursts Are Produced Predominantly in the Early Universe," Astrophysical Journal, 605 (2004), pp. 819-822.
Timothy P. Ashenfelter and Grant J. Mathews, "The Fine-Structure Constant as a Probe of Chemical Evolution and Asymptotic Giant Branch Nucleosynthesis in Damped Lya Systems," Astrophysical Journal, 615 (2004), pp. 82-97.
Naoki Yoshida, Volker Bromm, and Lars Hernquist,, "The Era of Massive Population III Stars: Cosmological Implications and Self-Termination," The Astrophysical Journal, 605, (2004), pp. 579-590.
YesheFenner, Jason X. Prochaska and Brad K. Gibson, "Constraints on Early Nucleosynthesis from the Abundance Pattern of a Damped Lyα System at z = 2.626," The Astrophysical Journal, 606 (2004), pp. 116-125.
Andreas Heithausen,, "Molecular Hydrogen as Baryonic Dark Matter," The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 606 (2004), pp. L13-L15.
Douglas Clowe, Anthony Gonzalez, and Maxim Markevitch, "Weak-Lensing Mass Reconstruction of the Interacting Cluster IE 0657-558: Direct Evidence for the Existence of Dark Matter," Astrophysical Journal, 604 (2004), pp. 596-603.

(continued below)



posted on Apr, 18 2015 @ 01:36 AM
link   
Evidence for fine-tuning of distinct physical constants (continued):

Sean T. Prigge, et al, "Dioxygen Binds End-On to Mononuclear Copper in a Precatalytic Enzyme Complex," Science, 304 (2004), pp. 864-867.
H. Jakubowski, Biochemistry: Chapter 8: Oxidative-Phosphorylation, A: The Chemistry of Dioxygen, November 17, 2005, employees.csbsju.edu... Accessed 02/06/06.
Robert H. Abeles, Perry A. Frey, and William P. Jencks, Biochemistry (Boston: Jones and Bartlett, 1992), pp. 655-673.
P. Caresia, S. Matarrese, and L. Moscardini, "Constraints on Extended Quintessence from High-Redshift Supernovae," Astrophysical Journal, 605 (2004), pp. 21-28.
AmrA. El-Zant, et al, "Flat-Cored Dark Matter in Cuspy Clusters of Galaxies," Astrophysical Journal Letters, 607 (2004), pp. L75-L78.
Kyu-Hyun Chae, et al, "Constraints on Scalar-Field Dark Energy from the Cosmic Lens All-Sky Survey Gravitational Lens Statistics," Astrophysical Journal Letters, 607 (2004), pp. L71-74.
Max Tegmark, et al, "The Three-Dimensional Power Spectrum of Galaxies From the Sloan Digital Sky Survey," Astrophysical Journal, 606 (2004), pp. 702-740.
Adrian C. Pope, et al, "Cosmological Parameters from Eigenmode Analysis of Sloan Digital Sky Survey Galaxy Redshifts," Astrophysical Journal, 607 (2004), pp. 655-660.
YunWang and Pia Mukherjee, "Model-Independent Constraints on Dark Energy Density from Flux-Averaging Analysis of Type Ia Supernova Data," Astrophysical Journal, 606 (2004), pp. 654-663.
Adam G. Riess, et al, "Type Ia Supernova Discoveries at z>1 from the Hubble Space Telescope: Evidence for Past Deceleration and Constraints on Dark Energy Evolution," Astrophysical Journal, 607 (2004), pp. 665-687.
A. Kashlinsky, et al, "Detecting Population III Stars Through Observations of Near-Infrared Cosmic Infrared Background Anisotropies," Astrophysical Journal, 608 (2004), pp. 1-9.
Nickolay Y. Gneidin, "Reionization, Sloan, and WMAP: Is the Picture Consistent?" Astrophysical Journal, 610 (2004), pp. 9-13.
Paul Martin and Luis C. Ho, "A Population of Massive Globular Clusters in NGC 5128," Astrophysical Journal, 610 (2004), pp. 233-246.
L. Pasquini, et al, "Beryllium in Turnoff Stars of NGC6397: Early Galaxy Spallation Cosmochronology and Cluster Formation," Astronomy and Astrophysics, in press, 2004.
Peter Bond, "Hubble's Long View," Astronomy & Geophysics, volume 45, issue 3, June 2004, p. 328.
T. Harko and K. S. Cheng, "Time Delay of Photons of Different Energies in Multidimensional Cosmological Models," Astrophysical Journal, 611 (2004), pp. 633-641.
I. H. Stairs, S. E. Thorsett, and Z. Arzoumanian, "Measurement of Gravitational Soin-Orbit Coupling in a Binary Pulsar System," Physical Review Letters, 93 (2004), id. 141101.
Daniel B. Zucker, et al, "Andromeda IX. A New Dwarf Speroidal Satellite of M31," Astrophysical Journal Letters, 612 (2004), pp. L121-L124.
J. Patrick Henry, "X-Ray Temperatures for the Extended Medium-Sensitivity Survey High-Redshift Cluster Sample: Constraints on Cosmology and the Dark Energy Equation of State," Astrophysical Journal, 609 (2004), pp. 603-616.
S. W. Allen, et al, "Constraints on Dark Energy from Chandra Observations of the Largest Relaxed Galaxy Clusters," Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 353 (2004), pp. 457-467.
Ruth A. Daly and S. G. Djorgovski, "Direct Determination of the Kinematics of the Universe and Properties of the Dark Energy as Functions of Redshift," Astrophysical Journal, 612 (2004), pp. 652-659.
Ruth A. Daly and S. G. Djorgovski, "A Model-Independent Determination of the Expansion and Acceleration Rates of the Universe as a Function of Redshift and Constraints on Dark Energy," Astrophysical Journal 597 (2003), pp. 9-20.
E. Peik, et al, "Limit on the Present Temporal Variation of the Fine Structure Constant," Physical Review Letters, 93 (2004), id # 170801.
I. Ciufolini and E. C. Pavils, "A Confirmation of the General Relativistic Prediction of the Lense-Thirring Effect," Nature, 431 (2004), pp. 958-960.
Timothy P. Ashenfelter and Grant J. Mathews, "The Fine-Structure Constant as a Probe of Chemical Evolution and Asymptotic Giant Branch Nucleosynthesis in Damped Lya Systems," Astrophysical Journal, 615 (2004), pp. 82-97.
Signe Riemer-Sorensen, Steen H. Hansen, and Kristian Pedersen, "Sterile Neutrinos in the Milky Way: Observational Constraints," Astrophysical Journal Letters, 644 (2006), pp. L33-L36.
D. G. Yamazaki, et al, "Constraints on the Evolution of the Pimordial Magnetic Field from the Small-Scale Cosmic Microwave Background Angular Anisotropy," Astrophysical Journal, 646 (2006), pp. 719-729.



posted on Apr, 18 2015 @ 05:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Brighter
a reply to: Brighter
a reply to: Brighter

As these videos point out there are severe flaws with using fine-tuning arguments to support theistic viewpoints, which Carroll addresses specifically and the other two videos more broadly:

Is the Universe Fine Tuned for Life?


In short, NO. Do we need to invoke an intelligent designer to explain why the natural forces are the way they are? NO. Science is still researching how the laws of physics are determined, but everything that we know today tells us its not the universe that is fine-tuned for life, but life, through evolution, that has fine-tuned itself for the universe.


Fine Tuned Universe ? (Neil Tyson,Leading Astrophysicist)


Tyson talks about all the things that cause death and destruction of humans which probably wouldn't be there if the universe was really fine tuned for human life, and how most of the universe isn't habitable by humans



Responding to the "Fine Tuning" Argument for God (Sean Carroll)


Carroll explains 5 reasons why theism doesn't offer a solution to the fine tuning problem



posted on Apr, 18 2015 @ 05:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: jeep3r
a reply to: itsallgonenow

I was intrigued by the title of this thread, but I think you should add a brief abstract of the video content to this OP. Not everyone on here has the time to watch a 2h documentary in order to post a reply or discuss.
Here's what it says at 1m38s:

"It's so amazing that creationists were right all along".

To put this in context, here is Seth McFarlane's assessment of creationists and their understanding of science:



I didn't see anything scientific in the video, it's theistic propaganda saying essentially that science doesn't understand 100% of the universe therefore we can make up whatever we want to fill in the gaps, which must of course be God.

They say abiogenisis must be impossible so life can't come from nothing but fail to see the irony that's exactly what they seem to be claiming for God.

This is a religion video, not a science video.


Geez, science really doesn't actually say anything much about God, and God doesn't say much about science, either.

Since such is the case, your opposition to the opinions of those who believe differently than you is not representative of any science but merely your opinion.

But I doubt that you will see that.



posted on Apr, 18 2015 @ 06:42 AM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut
So I take it you didn't watch the video in the OP? Your comment suggests you didn't, and you don't even know what the topic of the thread is.

The video is arguing against things well-founded in science, like evolution. Evolution is not considered opinion but scientific fact, or are you denying evolution too and calling it an opinion?
edit on 18-4-2015 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join