3. Too
Fine-tuned for Chance
There is a general view amongst
physicists that the laws of nature that have allowed our creation
are accidental. They are simply a property of mathematical principles
that have nothing to do with our existence, or the existence
of anything else for that matter. Life, the universe and everything
exists by pure accident. Another
view emerged as the laws of nature came under increasingly
detailed mathematical scrutiny and it became apparent that
tinkering with them just slightly could make life impossible.
It looked as though the laws of nature had been accurately
set purposely to encourage the evolution of life.
The laws of nature can be defined by a set
of numbers that provide the parameters for the evolution of
the universe as we know it. One of these numbers in particular,
the so-called cosmological constant has to be very tiny if
the universe is to grow old enough and big enough to contain
stars, and life.
The cosmological constant can be considered
as the intrinsic mass and volume of empty space, which Einstein
had suggested was not zero. It turns out that this number
needs to be set to an accuracy of one part in a trillion,
trillion trillion, trillion trillion, trillion trillion, trillion
trillion, trillion. Any minuscule variation and life is a
non-starter.
This raises all kinds of dilemmas
for physicists who understandably shrank from the conclusion
that pointed toward Intelligent Design. Martin Rees has remained
steadfast: ‘Some people are satisfied with a religious
explanation, whereas I think it is a scientific question,
which deserves to be addressed by cosmologists.’
< PREVIOUS
| 1 | 2
| 3 | 4 | 5
| 6 | NEXT
PAGE >
|
