Replies

And that brings me to the central point of the anthropic principle, the notion that the balance of fundamental forces, so finely tuned at such improbable ratios, is essential to our intelligent life manifesting in the universe and that manifestation may be the reason the forces are so tuned ... so the universe may become aware or be sensed. Cosmologists apply the anthropic notion as a means to shortcut their search for a unifying theory of everything, kind of like peaking at the answer to a calculus problem then backing up in the calculations to find the proper equational flow.

They will not find a unifying theory in a closed universe. That is precisely what drove Di Vinci bananas - and Kant - and Nietszche. Starting from Man (rationalism), the only conclusion one can come to is that men are mere machines (time+matter+energy+chance). If men are machines, then the mannishness of man is excluded; if the mannishness of man is excluded, then all of our thoughts, emotions, desires, hopes, dreams - are mere meaningless matter in motion, and nothing has any value or meaning. Nietszhe had to come to this conclusion and went insane as a result. You see, naturalists live lives of hopeless contradiction and endless dichotomy. Naturalists/atheists/rationalists insist that men are machines, but then they go home and hug their wives and love their children...as if a wife or children have intrinsic value - which they can't possibly within their worldview! It's a hopeless inescapable dichotomy! Indeed, if men are machines, then cruelty and non-cruelty must be equal! Yes, there is a God and only God can give meaning to this universe and this life.

There is a fanscinating concept contained within the notion of 'the collapse of the wave function': For the many to collapse into the one, in what realm of the universe does the 'communication' occur which allows for the many to coalesce into one? The spacetime for this communication is by definition outside our sensing and we merely receive the results and can calculate the occurrence statistically. einstein touched on this notion with his questioning of action at a distance relating to quantum theory.

It's always been interesting to me how little capacity or personal insight atheist etc. folk have at seeing such inherent contradictions.

We put food in one end instead of the other because it make sense. It is life giving, productive etc.

time plus chance microseconds later would always [given the evident time considered] turn into

tim)&)(*&^$YDKJH(_&( KJHLKIUYRO)*(&Y)(DFHhl;

or some such.

which is back to giving you roses = shooting you.

Well said post. Thanks.