Siirry offline-tilaan Player FM avulla!
#166 – What it takes to make a LIVING universe
Manage episode 431946941 series 2846752
It takes an incredibly finer level of fine-tuning to produce a universe that has carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, sodium, potassium, calcium, iron, copper, zinc, selenium, molybdenum and many other trace elements needed for life.
![](https://lukejjanssen.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/machine-god-animals-02.jpg?w=1024)
Last week, we explored the first of three meanings of the term “fine-tuning of the universe”: the delicate precision and balance of the fundamental constants and laws needed just to produce a universe full of simple atoms (like hydrogen and helium), planets and stars.
This week, we look at the second meaning of that term: how that delicate and precise balance has to be even more finely tuned so that a wide variety of different kinds of atoms are produced … including those that are absolutely essential for life. Not just the lighter ones that are necessary for making the basic structural components of cells (hydrogen, carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, sulfur) and the slightly heavier ones necessary for basic cell physiology like generating electrical signals and causing contraction (sodium, potassium, calcium), but also the much heavier and more complicated atoms that give many enzymes their core functionality that is so necessary for life (the iron in your blood cells, or the copper, zinc, selenium, and molybdenum in your liver enzymes).
We talked to Dr. Luke Barnes (PhD in astronomy from Cambridge University), who continued the conversation that Elie and Aaron started with us last week. He explained how those fundamental constants and laws of physics needed to be so very precisely tuned in order to produce the bewildering array of atomic elements (we have 118 of them here on earth) that are so necessary for intelligent life. He also told us how that precise tuning is so provocatively disturbing that even the staunchly atheistic astrophysicist Sir Fred Hoyle said more than once to his equally atheistic peers: “A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature.”
Dr. Barnes also talked at length about how the common atheistic response to this fine tuning is to appeal to the multiverse, and how those that do so don’t properly understand that the probabilities do NOT in fact substantiate their belief (that word “belief” is chosen carefully and deliberately), and this appeal is really not much more than a “luck-of-the-gaps.” Using the multiverse to “explain” the problem is not scientific, since it can’t ever be put to any kind of a scientific test. And, in one sense, it pushes back the goalposts, since even that multiverse would need to be incredibly fine-tuned in order to be capable of producing a finely tuned universe.
The episode concluded with the “so what?” question … What do we do with this idea of “fine-tuning”? How does it affect us? Does it say anything about the meaning of life, or whether God exists?
As always, tell us your thoughts on this topic …
Find more information about Dr. Barnes at his university faculty page and his personal web-site, and check out his book A Fortunate Universe: Life in a Finely Tuned Cosmos.
Episode image: once again a work of genius from Andrew! I asked him: “How about taking the iconic image of Michelangelo’s Creation of Adam, and have God manipulating a machine with buttons/dials/knobs etc., and that machine producing living animals?” And this is one of many images he came up with using his generative AI! Thanks Andrew!
To help grow this podcast, please like, share and post a rating/review at your favorite podcast catcher.
Subscribe here to get updates each time a new episode is posted...
Join our private discussion group at Facebook.
Back to Recovering Evangelicals home-page and the podcast archive
170 jaksoa
Manage episode 431946941 series 2846752
It takes an incredibly finer level of fine-tuning to produce a universe that has carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, sodium, potassium, calcium, iron, copper, zinc, selenium, molybdenum and many other trace elements needed for life.
![](https://lukejjanssen.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/machine-god-animals-02.jpg?w=1024)
Last week, we explored the first of three meanings of the term “fine-tuning of the universe”: the delicate precision and balance of the fundamental constants and laws needed just to produce a universe full of simple atoms (like hydrogen and helium), planets and stars.
This week, we look at the second meaning of that term: how that delicate and precise balance has to be even more finely tuned so that a wide variety of different kinds of atoms are produced … including those that are absolutely essential for life. Not just the lighter ones that are necessary for making the basic structural components of cells (hydrogen, carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, sulfur) and the slightly heavier ones necessary for basic cell physiology like generating electrical signals and causing contraction (sodium, potassium, calcium), but also the much heavier and more complicated atoms that give many enzymes their core functionality that is so necessary for life (the iron in your blood cells, or the copper, zinc, selenium, and molybdenum in your liver enzymes).
We talked to Dr. Luke Barnes (PhD in astronomy from Cambridge University), who continued the conversation that Elie and Aaron started with us last week. He explained how those fundamental constants and laws of physics needed to be so very precisely tuned in order to produce the bewildering array of atomic elements (we have 118 of them here on earth) that are so necessary for intelligent life. He also told us how that precise tuning is so provocatively disturbing that even the staunchly atheistic astrophysicist Sir Fred Hoyle said more than once to his equally atheistic peers: “A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature.”
Dr. Barnes also talked at length about how the common atheistic response to this fine tuning is to appeal to the multiverse, and how those that do so don’t properly understand that the probabilities do NOT in fact substantiate their belief (that word “belief” is chosen carefully and deliberately), and this appeal is really not much more than a “luck-of-the-gaps.” Using the multiverse to “explain” the problem is not scientific, since it can’t ever be put to any kind of a scientific test. And, in one sense, it pushes back the goalposts, since even that multiverse would need to be incredibly fine-tuned in order to be capable of producing a finely tuned universe.
The episode concluded with the “so what?” question … What do we do with this idea of “fine-tuning”? How does it affect us? Does it say anything about the meaning of life, or whether God exists?
As always, tell us your thoughts on this topic …
Find more information about Dr. Barnes at his university faculty page and his personal web-site, and check out his book A Fortunate Universe: Life in a Finely Tuned Cosmos.
Episode image: once again a work of genius from Andrew! I asked him: “How about taking the iconic image of Michelangelo’s Creation of Adam, and have God manipulating a machine with buttons/dials/knobs etc., and that machine producing living animals?” And this is one of many images he came up with using his generative AI! Thanks Andrew!
To help grow this podcast, please like, share and post a rating/review at your favorite podcast catcher.
Subscribe here to get updates each time a new episode is posted...
Join our private discussion group at Facebook.
Back to Recovering Evangelicals home-page and the podcast archive
170 jaksoa
Kaikki jaksot
×Tervetuloa Player FM:n!
Player FM skannaa verkkoa löytääkseen korkealaatuisia podcasteja, joista voit nauttia juuri nyt. Se on paras podcast-sovellus ja toimii Androidilla, iPhonela, ja verkossa. Rekisteröidy sykronoidaksesi tilaukset laitteiden välillä.