In the beginning

RJM Corbet said:
I extrapolated.
If that's too many syllables to understand, I'm sorry, you'll have to look it up :)
Click to expand...
Extrapolated? You mean inserted a false premise? A fallacy? If in order to discount the theory it requires you to use hyperbole, make stuff up or thinly veiled insult on my intelligence...it is an indication that you feel your argument no longer holds water...

PS...everyone here knows my formal education is lacking, barely having made it through high school over four decades ago... So it doesn't take much for someone to use a word I have to look up!
 
wil said:
Extrapolated? You mean inserted a false premise? A fallacy? If in order to discount the theory it requires you to use hyperbole, make stuff up or thinly veiled insult on my intelligence...it is an indication that you feel your argument no longer holds water...
Click to expand...

I meant extrapolating from the odds of 10 to the power 500 other universes, which of course we will never be able to see or test in any way.

Did you even read the fine-tuning document I posted?

We are talking about odds far greater than all the atoms in the universe. Not actual monkeys on typewriters.

Also:
- the electron to proton ratio standard deviation of 1 to 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 (37 0s)
- the 1-to-1 electron to proton ratio throughout the universe yields our electrically neutral universe
- the electron to proton mass ratio (1 to 1,836) perfect for forming molecules
- the electromagnetic and gravitational forces finely tuned for the stability of stars
- the gravitational and inertial mass equivalency
- the electromagnetic force constant perfect for holding electrons to nuclei
- the electromagnetic force in the right ratio to the nuclear force
- the strong force (which if changed by 1% would destroy all carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, and heavier elements)
- all electrons in the universe are identical as are all instances of each fundamental particle

The fine tuning of the cosmological constant to one part in 10 to the 120th is so precise that if the entire universe had as much additional mass as exists in a single grain of sand, it would all collapse upon itself.

New Scientist: "A large chunk of modern physics is precariously balanced on a whopping coincidence" for, regarding gravitational and inertial mass, "these two masses are always numerically exactly the same. The consequences of this coincidence are profound..."

etc...

EDIT: My apologies. How would I know anything about anyone's education? This is a discussion about scientific facts, which I happen not to be making-up.

And I promise not to flog this dead horse any more.
:)
 
Last edited:
Yes read the article...

And many know the monkey theory...

But like many things many folk take metaphor literally and think there is actually Monkees!
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJM
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top