The cosmic argument for the existence of the Creator
Fine-tuning of universe
The cosmological constant
Imagine that a very small ball is on top of a nail. It is balanced to a large extent Imagine that this small ball is a pingpong ball in this case the balance becomes impossible and the ball will inevitably fall.
Scientists say that the cosmic constants, which made our world a world fit for life, are tantamount to the whole universe standing at the tip of this nail .. The compatibility of the cosmic constants in surprising proportions has prompted physical physical scientists to call this compatibility the name of the carefully prepared universe.
Says Richard Dawkins in his interview with Stephen Weinberg on his official website
If you discovered this amazing universe that was actually carefully prepared ... I think you have only two explanations ... either a great creator or multiple universes.
If you discovered a really impressive fine-tuning ... I think you'd really be left with only two explanations: a benevolent designer or a multiverse.
VOICES OF SCIENCE .. Richard-Dawkins-Steven-Weinberg-Lawrence-Krauss-PZ-Myers-David-Buss
The cosmic constants have been carefully prepared to the point where it is impossible to say except with prior preparation and special care, for example:
The ratio between an electron and a proton is 1: 10 to the power of 37
The ratio between electromagnetic force and gravity is 1: 10 to the power of 40
The expansion ratio of the universe is 1: 10 to the power of 55
The mass of the universe's density is 1: 10 to the power of 59
The cosmological constant 1: 10 to the power of 122
These numbers define the physical values of the cosmic constants that if there had been any slight change in them, the universe would not have arisen
Leonard Suskind, the most famous physicist, professor of theoretical physics at Stafford University and founder of superstring theory, says:
The real problem in carefully preparing the universe is that these data that stand on the edge of the knife are all independent of each other and at the same time converge to allow only the occurrence of life and change any of these data that arose independently that did not allow them to converge as well as the possibility of creating a life or even a system Cosmic.
1- The lowest possible entropy in the moment of big bang
2- The inflation of the universe has been carefully prepared to solve the critical mass problem
3- The ratio between electric forces to the force of gravity
4- Power of strong nuclear forces
5- The relative mass of an electron, a proton, and a neutron
6- The ratio between dark matter and the entire universe
7- The ripple constant Q
8- The cosmological constant
9- Dimensions of space
10- The existence of quantum mechanics
11- The existence of the Pauli exclusion principle - which prevents the atom from shrinking on itself as soon as it is formed -.
12- disciplined chemistry
http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/smol..._susskind.html
This is in addition to the weights of the protons and electrons, which, if they changed very little, the atomic structure would be different, chemistry ceased, and existence would cease to exist.
This is in addition to the four main forces - gravity, electromagnetism, the weak nuclear forces, and the strong nuclear forces - that if they differed very little, the stars would not form, and these forces differ radically between them, for example the difference between the strong nuclear forces and the forces of gravity is the same as the difference between the weight of the sun and the weight of a grain of sand in the desert.
Therefore, scientists say if the Earth attracted one person with the same amount of strong nuclear forces - that is, if the force of gravity turned into a strong nuclear force - then the weight of this person would be equivalent to 1000 billion stars, the force of gravity is very weak and there is no physical justification for its weakness, as Leonard Susskind says, but it must be So weak, it is already finely tuned, so why is it so weak and why is the strong nuclear force so terrible, that if it were a little weaker with less than a billion billion parts of its strength, the atom would have collapsed and dispersed into pieces and the universe collapsed.
Be this degree of carefully preparing the universe that it is surprising to comprehend .. And for those who do not know the language of mathematics, 10 to the 37 is a value similar to placing an American dollar in a bundle of dollars spanning millions of meters and choosing any other dollar from among these trillions of trillions of trillions of dollars means the process is completely wrong, any choice. For a dollar that violates this dollar, it means completely wrong of the process - that is, another choice of cosmic constants other than this cosmic constant, which is defined with amazing and extremely careful, means the collapse of the universe before it begins -.
The ripples in the universe are lit at the moment of the cosmic explosion. They are determined by the ratio of 1: 100000. If the ripple was reduced by the smallest amount, the universe would remain in its gaseous form, and the planets would not form. If the ratio increased by the smallest amount, the universe would become just a large black hole.
Also, when two hydrogen atoms coalesce, 0.7% of the hydrogen mass is transformed into energy. If this mass was 0.6% instead of 0.7%, the proton would not fuse with the neutron and the universe would remain just hydrogen and the rest of the elements were not formed. If the mass converted to energy was 0.8% instead of 0.7%, the fusion would become very fast, hydrogen ends immediately from the universe, life is impossible, and it is impossible for a solar system to emerge, so the number must be between 0.6% and 0.8%.
Source: Martin Rees, Just Six Numbers
Lee Smolin, one of the world's leading theoretical physicists, says in his book The Life of the Cosmos
In fact, the very existence of our star system lies under several very delicate balances between many different forces in nature
In fact the existence of stars rests on several delicate balances between the different forces in nature. These require that the parameters that govern how strongly these forces act be tuned just so. In many cases a small turn of the dial in one direction or another results in a world, not only without stars, but with much less structure than our universe. "
For example, the force of gravity, if it were a little stronger than it is now, would not have taken the life of the sun more than ten thousand years
For example, the mass of each of the electron, proton and neutron according to The Standard model of physics has the mass of each of these three particles formed in complete independence, however the masses between them differ radically, allowing the formation of the nuclei of atoms and without that the universe collapses upon itself as soon as it is formed. . For example, the mass of an electron represents 0.2% of the mass of a neutron, and this is the standard mass for an atom.
Max Tegmark, an American cosmologist, says:
If the electromagnetic force was only 4% weaker than it is, the sun would have exploded immediately after its formation, and the result will be the same if the electromagnetic force is greater than it is. The constants of nature appear to be carefully prepared at some level.
If the weak nuclear force is less than it is now, hydrogen will not be formed, thus the universe will remain just cosmic dust, and if it is a little stronger, the neutrinos will be unable to leave the giant supernovae - the supernovae - and thus the elements necessary for life will not transfer outside the supernovae.
If the proton is 0.2% heavier than it is now, it will immediately decay into a neutron and will be unable to hold electrons, and the atom will collapse before it is formed and the entire universe collapses as soon as it is formed
If the mass ratio between a proton and an electron was a little less than it was, when the sun was stable, and if it was a little larger than it is, then a molecule such as DNA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Tegmark
Thus, astrophysicist Martin Rees says in his book Just Six Number, a book that talks about only six cosmological constants, he says, mocking the position of those still in doubt: I honestly admire the metaphor presented by Canadian philosopher John Leslie, who assumed you were facing a firing squad. With bullets and archers fifty, and everyone is targeting you, and with that, everyone mistakes you, and if they did not mistake you, and if life was just a coincidence, you would not have been standing now and wondering, but it is amazing that you are now alive and demanding more evidence of your good fortune.
And when the physicist Victor Stenger made very slight modifications to some of the cosmic constants and then simulated a computer program, he completely failed and admitted that they are constants at the most carefully prepared, but surprisingly, that these constants exist together. If one of them was lacking rather, there would be no universe besides their numbers. Fully punctual it is very complicated.
The cosmological constant
The cosmological constant constitutes an anti-gravitational factor. If its value differs by less than one part of zero, followed by 123 zeros, then 1 of one, the entire universe collapses moments after its formation or expands at a tremendous speed preventing the formation of basic particles.
According to the information provided by the supernova A1, according to which the researchers won the Nobel Prize for Physics in 2011, it was found that there is a speed in the expansion of the universe that is not provided by the physical equations nor the mass of material available in the universe, and therefore it became clear that the value of the cosmological constant determines exactly the required expansion.
Leonard Suskind, the famous physicist, says in his book The Cosmic Landscape: The cosmological constant 10 to the 122nd is impossible to arise a priori from chance.
Stephen Hawking says in his book A Brief History of Time p. 125: The clear truth about the cosmic constants confirms that they have been carefully designed to allow life and with the utmost amazing precision.
The cosmological constant is written like this
0.0000000000
0000000000 0000000000 0000000000 0000000000 0000000000
0000000000 0000000000 0000000000 0000000000 0000000000
0000000000
000
1
- And for those who do not know the meaning of the word 123 zero .. This word means that we need a hard disk of 15 billion light years, that is, larger than the size of the entire universe, to get out of it with this possibility, and of course this is the height of mathematical madness because the mathematical impossible does not exceed 50 zeroes as well as 123 zeros. -
122 zeros and then one assumption of this cosmological constant with this amazing number that scientists kept assuming that it was zero for a long time until studies showed in 1998 that it is not zero and it is impossible to be zero, but it is very, very, very, very close to zero, but it must be slightly greater than zero. To the extent that it becomes a decimal number and in front of it 122 zeros and then one.
Why is this number so surprising when it allows the universe to expand rather than shrink on itself after a period of its formation? Physicists have failed to figure out why this number is so close to amazingly zero and yet it has not become zero. Therefore, many physicists consider this problem the deepest unsolved problem in physics and call it the cosmological constant problem.
If we assume that this cosmological constant was a little less than that, the universe would collapse and shrink in itself after less than billions of fractions of a second, i.e. it was not formed.
If we assume that the cosmological constant is a little larger than this number, everything in the universe will be swollen as soon as it is formed, and matter will be scattered, and nothing will hold together and the universe collapses. This cosmological constant is indeed one of the finest evidence of carefully prepared physics.
This is one of the most precise fine-tunings in all of physics
Leonard Suskind says in his book The Cosmic Landscape, p. 88: The cosmic constant is so dreadful that it becomes in such a magnitude that it does not allow the destruction of stars, planets and atoms, but what is this mysterious and wondrous force that was able to calculate this very complex situation
The laws of physics are balanced on the edge of a very sharp knife and if so it raises big questions
The cosmological constant is impossible to arise by chance ... physicist Leonard Sucksind
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnuxCZrtxq4
criticism :-
In front of the cosmological constant argument, there are only two possibilities before an atheist
1- Belief in God the Creator
2- Belief in chance
Coincidence is as mathematically, scientifically and physically impossible as we have separated.
But there are only two alternatives to the atheist, and each of them revolves around the framework of anthropic selection
1- The cyclic universe: that is, the eternal universe where a Big Bang occurs, then a Big Crunch, and so on.
In an explosion of these infinite explosions, this alignment of physical constants occurs, and then planets and orbits form, and life appears.
2- Multiverse: that is, infinite universes and every universe that differs from the other is a slight physical difference until we reach our very distinct and amazing universe, which allowed our universe to establish the emergence of life.
Responding to criticism: -
1- The cyclic universe
Recently, scientists do not talk about the cyclic universe, as it almost went outside the circle of science because those who were talking about the cyclic universe were ignoring the second law of thermodynamics, which requires re-adjusting the entropy in every new formed universe, otherwise the entropy degree increases with each universe and thus the temperature becomes Infinite as long as the contraction and explosion are infinite, but our scientific data says that the temperature of the universe is now 3.5 absolute degrees, so the theory of the big bang remains a function of the occurrence and beginning of the universe, and there are no previous shrinkage
Science has recently proven that there was a minimum amount of entropy at the moment of the universe’s emergence, which confirms that the universe was not preceded by contractions, and there is no such thing as a cyclic universe.
Moreover, every explosion will require the same amazing cosmic constant and the same carefully prepared in every cosmic model formed, otherwise nothing will be formed and this is new evidence of the scientific error of this theory.
the model "entails the same degree of tuning required in any cosmological model
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_constant
2- The multiverse
The idea of the multiverse is an idea produced to carefully solve the pre-preparation dilemma of our universe. As a solution, it assumes that there are trillions of trillions of trillions of trillions of other universes 10 to the 500 universe according to Stephen Hawking in his recent book - The Great Design - but in fact we have not seen any universe other than our own as well as trillions of trillions. Trillions of other universes.
Moreover, this does not solve the problem of carefully preconceiving our universe, but rather may, over time, raise deeper philosophical questions as the physics sciences advance.
And one might wonder why making a hypothesis so strange, surprising and far from experimentation, testing and utter despair in observation such as that hypothesis only to escape from the data of our universe that raise deep philosophical questions.
Cosmologists like Leonard Suskind believe that observing another universe is scientifically and logically impossible, and the reason for this is due to what is known as the particle horizon, which is the maximum distance from those information-carrying particles that once it reaches the observer, the age of the universe will be over billions ago. Light years and any other universe is inevitably outside the particle horizon
And since the hypothesis of the multiverse according to the horizon of the particle is impossible to observe or even to test its existence, it goes outside the circle of theoretical material science - because the cornerstone of science is observation, testing and experiment - and it turns into a philosophical hypothesis that does not go outside this framework.
Thus cosmologist George Ellis says that the multiverse hypothesis is not from science and does not exist within the circle of science, but within the framework of philosophy.
It seems that, as Aristotle said in the past, that he who denies metaphysics is also philosophizing metaphysics.
Then we need to observe a universe that differs from us in the laws of its physics and is short in its data in order to be proud of our universe and that it is a distinct universe, and this raises much deeper problems as it is necessary to design precisely before these universes emerge with all these data. In his book Great Design Stephen Hawking states that the idea of the multiverse is an idea Too troublesome.
Moreover, the process of creating multiple universes is a very amazing process and it needs its own laws as well and its special physical constants that may surpass our astonishment and grandeur our constants trillions of trillions of trillions of times. Is this multiverse a mother universe then from where did this mother universe come from and therefore we may discover that those who assumed universes They will one day be confronted with much greater meta-obligations than if they abandoned that idea .. We move some metaphysical step higher by saying multiple universes.
So the multiverse did not solve the problem of preparation carefully, but rather presented the problem of preparation carefully, but on other dimensions the human mind may not dare to comprehend it in the foreseeable future.
Then the equations of theory M, which Stephen Hawking adopted in his last book, assume five completely different endings and five equations of the same degree of strength, and each equation ends in millions of different ways.
In addition to the question of dimensions, string theory suffered from another awkward issue: There appeared to be at least five different theories and millions of ways the extra dimensions could be curled up
String theorists are now convinced that the five different string theories and supergravity are just different approximations to a more fundamental theory, each valid in different situations. That more fundamental theory is called M-theory p.174
So Hawking admits that we are so far trying to untangle the mysteries of M theory, but it appears that this is impossible
People are still trying to decipher the nature of M-theory, but that may not be possible
This philosophical method for escaping from the problem contradicts Occam's razor code, according to Occam's razor code, the simplest analyzes of a complex problem are correct and the simplest theory should be chosen that fits the truths of the dilemma, but these physicists choose the most complex theory. They choose 10 to the power of 500 universe and five correct equations and millions of methods for each equation. All this until In front of these trillions of trillions of trillions of universes, they can assume the coincidence of the emergence of a very special universe, such as ours.
Conclusion :-
The old atheist saying that the universe sufficed itself and atheists needed themselves to get out has fallen Outside the universe to search for multiple universes to break the deadlock of cosmic constants, which they themselves called fine-tuning.
Now that it has become clear that there is no convincing practical or physical solution to the cosmic constants in which we live in the shadows and on its tributaries, there is no longer a material, physical or mental possibility for them to accept the great Creator who mastered everything and brought him in the most wonderful way that amazes every physical scientist searching in the universe He acknowledges the greatness of creation, the splendor of creativity, and the amazement of the physical constants .. God who has mastered everything has done it. The most wonderful picture .. Who created everything well and began creating man from clay [As-Sajdah: 7]
And He, the Glory be to Him, ordered us directly to think about His signs, the greatness of His creation, and how creation began .. Say, “Walk on the earth, and see how the creation began. Then God creates the creation [20] the next generation.
We were pleased and looked at how the creation began and we bear witness that there is no god but God and that Muhammad is the Messenger of God.