Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Uniformitarianism and Fine Tuning
Woodsy
Member (Idle past 3374 days)
Posts: 301
From: Burlington, Canada
Joined: 08-30-2006


Message 1 of 9 (433486)
11-12-2007 8:02 AM


An argument:
We often read in these forums that one cannot claim that physical phenomena such as radioactive decay operated in the past as they do in the present. This is said to apply to even the recent past, during which there have been living organisms.
We also read that the physical constants of this universe are so finely tuned that any appreciable change would make life impossible.
Yet, we do find that living beings do exist. Therefore, if fine tuning is true, there cannot have been significant changes in the physics of the universe in the recent past. Otherwise, life would have become impossible and would not occur now.
A question:
How many creationist claims does all this invalidate?

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Discreet Label, posted 11-13-2007 11:46 PM Woodsy has not replied
 Message 6 by PaulK, posted 11-14-2007 2:06 AM Woodsy has replied
 Message 8 by Chiroptera, posted 11-14-2007 7:49 AM Woodsy has not replied

  
Woodsy
Member (Idle past 3374 days)
Posts: 301
From: Burlington, Canada
Joined: 08-30-2006


Message 7 of 9 (434060)
11-14-2007 7:48 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by PaulK
11-14-2007 2:06 AM


YECS need changing decay rates, to discard radiometric dating results that prove them wrong. They also like the fine tuning argument. They don't think about consistency. The arguments are useful to them therefore they are both good.
This is what I am really interested in. I don't see how one can honestly use both claims. Maybe one or the other.
To clarify a bit: Phenomena like radioactive decay and the speed of light are tightly connected to the fundamental physical constants, so one cannot vary the phenomena without messing up the constants.
As NosyNed pointed out, the fine tuning argument is probably overstated. I wonder if one could "turn the tuning knobs" to get from one set of useable fundamental constant values to another set without passing through life-hostile conditions, and whether life formed under one set could survive under another.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by PaulK, posted 11-14-2007 2:06 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by PaulK, posted 11-14-2007 6:35 PM Woodsy has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024