Physics is crucial for life. Recent scientific discoveries prove that physics must be specific to support life. Certain numbers in physics play a vital role in maintaining life and must fall within a specific range.
■Key points of this article that can be understood in 3 lines
- The article criticizes the multiverse theory. This theory explains physical constants that support life. It’s like a reverse gambler’s fallacy.
- The idea that many universes cause fine-tuning is not backed by strong proof or logic.
- The writer suggests exploring other theories, such as cosmic purpose theory. This theory suggests there is a reason behind the creation of the universe.
Physicists find dark energy strength puzzling. It drives universe’s acceleration. If it were stronger, particles wouldn’t join to form matter. There would be no stars or planets and hence no life.
If the force was weaker, gravity would overpower it and the universe would collapse. This would mean no stars, planets or life. Dark energy has to be “just right” for the possibility of life. There are many other examples like this one.
Many think physics is fine-tuned because we live in a universe within many universes. If many people buy lottery tickets, someone may win. Similarly, if there are enough universes with different physics numbers, it’s likely that one universe has the right number for life.
For a while, I believed the best reason for fine-tuning was the multiverse. But, math experts say it’s wrong and I discuss this in my book Why?. This relates to “The Purpose of the Universe”. People who believe in the multiverse make the reverse gambler’s mistake.
A scientist played bingo alone and won all numbers within a minute. She thought many people must be playing in other halls for the quick win to happen. She concluded that many players across the country can make that possible. This is amazing!
This is called a reverse gambler’s fallacy. Probability theory suggests that even if many people are playing in other bingo halls, it is not more likely for a scientist himself to be so lucky.
When rolling dice, we may assume the chances of getting a six are lower if we get several sixes in a row. On the other hand, when we don’t get any sixes for some time, we assume there were many times in the past when we got them. However, each throw has an equal chance of getting any number, including a six (which has a probability of 1 in 6).
Multiverse theorists think that there are many universes with wrong numbers for life. This is because they see our universe has the right numbers for life. However, this is not true. It’s like a scientist thinking someone else playing bingo explains their luck. When this universe is created, it has a lower chance of getting the number right. Like rolling dice!
Multiverse theorists often introduce the “ethnoprinciple”. It suggests that since we exist, we can’t observe a universe that’s incompatible with life. However, it doesn’t mean other universes don’t exist.
Imagine a dangerous person with a gun hiding in a bingo hall and waiting to shoot a scientist when they call out a number that is not on her bingo card. This situation is like the real world, where scientists can only observe things that are correct, just like we cannot see what would happen if life were different.
Scientists believe in a multiverse, which means many universes. However, this belief is not based on scientific evidence. A connection between the reverse gambler’s fallacy and the scientific case for the multiverse is explored in the book. This is surprising and has never been done before.
Scientific inflationary theory suggests an expansion of the early universe. It supports the multiverse idea. Inflation could happen in different regions of space too. This would create their own universes. This might give us insight into some sort of multiverse.
There is some early proof, but no evidence that suggests different universes have various numbers in their nearby science.
Multiverse explanations fail because of probabilistic reasoning. We must use the most specific evidence, and for fine-tuning, the concrete evidence is that the universe is fine-tuned. If constants are shaped by chance, as multiverse suggests, then this universe is finely tuned like others, making odds small. Once we formulate evidence correctly, this theory cannot explain it.
Scientists believe that the numbers since the beginning of the universe are constant. We have two options – either our universe has the right numbers or nature was guided to develop life mysteriously.
In my view, the initial choice is unrealistic. However, there is a second option – cosmic purpose theory. It talks about how it affects human purpose and meaning. This is not typical of science because it’s akin to what happened in the 16th century. We found out that we were not at the center of the universe. Most people struggle to accept that their usual idea of reality cannot explain new information.
We are fine-tuning and may find out later that the universe helps life.
