I always liked Carl's Sagan's take(s) on this. Two para-quotes:
We are just the part of the universe which has been created so it can look upon itself and ask why?
We talk about communications with intelligent extra-terrestrials, why don't we start with intelligent communication with the terrestrial life first?
Hate to burst your bubble, but the Anthropic Principle is just, IMO, Junk Science! 🙄
I say this as a person with a hard-earned BSc (Lon) qualification in Physics.
WHY? Well, String Theory is just unscientific junk. Any attempts to patch up its lack of predictions just utterly fail.
Let me commend to you this magnificent Eulogy to Dick Feynman:
I am a great admirer of Sidney Coleman, Lenny Susskind and Dick Feynman. Dick is, of course, famous for QED. Autistic Sidney for proving that Quantum Mechanics is right. String Theorist Lenny is currently out on a limb! But a good Physicist.
My current understanding is that most Physics solutions lead to a workable Universe in which Stars provide Energy. After that, Life arises. This is us. All that matters for workable stars is G the gravitational constant, the fine structure constant, 1/137, and the speed of nuclear reactions. The other 23 of the 26 constants are largely irrelevant.
For instance, consider Epsilon Nought: Closely related to the Characteristic Impedance of Free Space. 376 Ohms when I last looked!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impedance_of_free_space
4 Pi Epsilon Nought = e^2 / Alpha x h bar x c as any antenna designer knows. E being the charge on the electron, H bar being the reduced Planck's constant, alpha the fine structure constant, and c the speed of light.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_permittivity
I am willing to further discuss the Anthropic Principle, and why it fails if you draw me out further. 🙂
I say this as a person with a hard-earned BSc (Lon) qualification in Physics.
WHY? Well, String Theory is just unscientific junk. Any attempts to patch up its lack of predictions just utterly fail.
Let me commend to you this magnificent Eulogy to Dick Feynman:
I am a great admirer of Sidney Coleman, Lenny Susskind and Dick Feynman. Dick is, of course, famous for QED. Autistic Sidney for proving that Quantum Mechanics is right. String Theorist Lenny is currently out on a limb! But a good Physicist.
My current understanding is that most Physics solutions lead to a workable Universe in which Stars provide Energy. After that, Life arises. This is us. All that matters for workable stars is G the gravitational constant, the fine structure constant, 1/137, and the speed of nuclear reactions. The other 23 of the 26 constants are largely irrelevant.
For instance, consider Epsilon Nought: Closely related to the Characteristic Impedance of Free Space. 376 Ohms when I last looked!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impedance_of_free_space
4 Pi Epsilon Nought = e^2 / Alpha x h bar x c as any antenna designer knows. E being the charge on the electron, H bar being the reduced Planck's constant, alpha the fine structure constant, and c the speed of light.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_permittivity
I am willing to further discuss the Anthropic Principle, and why it fails if you draw me out further. 🙂
Last edited:
Another gravity phenomenon sort of, soon live on YouTube, starts about 8 hours from this posting.
https://www.virtualtelescope.eu/webtv/
Near-Earth Asteroid 2023 BU extremely close encounter: online observation – 26 Jan. 2023
Further readings
https://science.nasa.gov/comet-2022-e3-ztf
https://earthsky.org/astronomy-essentials/new-comet-might-get-bright-enough-for-binoculars/
https://www.space.com/comet-c2022-e3-ztf-how-to-see-approach-earth
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C/2022_E3_(ZTF)
C/2022 E3 (ZTF)
https://www.virtualtelescope.eu/webtv/
Near-Earth Asteroid 2023 BU extremely close encounter: online observation – 26 Jan. 2023
Further readings
https://science.nasa.gov/comet-2022-e3-ztf
https://earthsky.org/astronomy-essentials/new-comet-might-get-bright-enough-for-binoculars/
https://www.space.com/comet-c2022-e3-ztf-how-to-see-approach-earth
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C/2022_E3_(ZTF)
C/2022 E3 (ZTF)
I've checked it out! 😎
Asteroid 2023 BU is known as an Apollo-type asteroid, which means its orbit crosses that of Earth but spends most of its time well outside the path of our planet.
NASA says the asteroid will come closer to Earth than satellites in geostationary orbit at 7.27pm US eastern time on Thursday (12.37am GMT on Friday).
https://www.space.com/asteroid-2023...o-type,to our planet again until Dec. 6, 2036.
The blue line in the above image represents geostationary orbit, while the red line represents the trajectory of asteroid 2023 BU.
Teh' Asteroid 2023 BU near-Earth encounter was the damp squib I expected. Missed by 2,000 miles.
The size of a minibus, it was not expected to render any serious damage even if it had hit any large rodents in distant Patagonia. which was considered unlikely, since it would break up long before attaining meteorite status.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-64411469
Anticipating little trouble, I instead started watching my new 14 episode boxed set of Firefly cult TV series:
A Space Western where anything can happen next!
Here wild man Jayne and the adorably nice Kaylee have just realised "The Reavers" are nearby. "The Reavers" worry me more than near misses by asteroids!
Jayne will doubtless shoot them. He often finds satisfyingly violent solutions to problems. 😀
The size of a minibus, it was not expected to render any serious damage even if it had hit any large rodents in distant Patagonia. which was considered unlikely, since it would break up long before attaining meteorite status.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-64411469
Anticipating little trouble, I instead started watching my new 14 episode boxed set of Firefly cult TV series:
A Space Western where anything can happen next!
Here wild man Jayne and the adorably nice Kaylee have just realised "The Reavers" are nearby. "The Reavers" worry me more than near misses by asteroids!
Jayne will doubtless shoot them. He often finds satisfyingly violent solutions to problems. 😀
Thank you. I get tired of being the one to point out blatant quackery and lies.
"Anthropic principle" is one of the favorites of christian apologetics (aka liars for Jesus). It really, really gets my goat.
Okay, so stop it then. Be the one not to. The Anthropic Principal makes perfect sense. If he was still around you could ask Stephen Hawking, or perhaps Albert Einstein. What would the Universe look like if you never observed it in any way or were never born to be asked this question?
would it exist?
would it exist?
Anthropic principle is 100% BS and the exact opposite of reality. Einstein and Hawking did not promote such quackery.
"Would it exist?" 100% yes.
Things to know about String Theory....
1) 95% of (funded) tenures (aka Professorships in Physics) at American Universities are teaching posts on String Theory. No, I don't know why either...
2) People with alternative interesting ideas like the Loop Quantum Gravitists or Gravistar folks feel they are underfunded...
3) Quantum Mechanical Spin (like the Electron Spin) can be derived from the more Classical Special Relativity, although Quantum Field Theory (The Standard Model of Physics), is preferred. Solutions to Einstein's General Relativity are extremely difficult, and only a few have been found, being multi-dimensional..
4) String Theorists reckon there are 10^47 Universes possible with various Physical Constants. Only one of which supports our lives. This has been seriously questioned by people who have thought about it more deeply. 50/50 chance might be closer to the mark.
5) Why would you build a Multiverse of 10^47 Universes just to create our one? It is far too complicated, aka Occam's Razor.
6) I say this as someone who has read Brian Greene's "elegant Universe", which is the seminal popular book on String Theory:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Greene
7) I have also read Peter Woit's critique of String Theory "Not even Wrong":
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Not-Even-Wrong-Continuing-Challenge/dp/0099488647
https://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/
So don't look at me Disco-Pete, I think String Theory and the Anthropic Principle is a very long shot. 😀
1) 95% of (funded) tenures (aka Professorships in Physics) at American Universities are teaching posts on String Theory. No, I don't know why either...
2) People with alternative interesting ideas like the Loop Quantum Gravitists or Gravistar folks feel they are underfunded...
3) Quantum Mechanical Spin (like the Electron Spin) can be derived from the more Classical Special Relativity, although Quantum Field Theory (The Standard Model of Physics), is preferred. Solutions to Einstein's General Relativity are extremely difficult, and only a few have been found, being multi-dimensional..
4) String Theorists reckon there are 10^47 Universes possible with various Physical Constants. Only one of which supports our lives. This has been seriously questioned by people who have thought about it more deeply. 50/50 chance might be closer to the mark.
5) Why would you build a Multiverse of 10^47 Universes just to create our one? It is far too complicated, aka Occam's Razor.
6) I say this as someone who has read Brian Greene's "elegant Universe", which is the seminal popular book on String Theory:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Greene
7) I have also read Peter Woit's critique of String Theory "Not even Wrong":
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Not-Even-Wrong-Continuing-Challenge/dp/0099488647
https://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/
So don't look at me Disco-Pete, I think String Theory and the Anthropic Principle is a very long shot. 😀
Going back to the topic of gravity, why is gravity so weak compared to electromagnetic forces?
Gravity is a real weakling: 10^40 times weaker than the electromagnetic force that holds atoms together.
Does string theory have the answer?
Yes, gravity is so weak because it leaks in and out of extra dimensions and we only get to experience a dribble of the true strength of gravity.
Mystery solved?
Gravity is a real weakling: 10^40 times weaker than the electromagnetic force that holds atoms together.
Does string theory have the answer?
Yes, gravity is so weak because it leaks in and out of extra dimensions and we only get to experience a dribble of the true strength of gravity.
Mystery solved?
Anthropic principle doesn't explain anything in the real world, and it is the epitome of arrogance.
Probably 80% of Americans believe some form of the anthropic principle, along with a whole bunch of magical BS.
Probably 80% of Americans believe some form of the anthropic principle, along with a whole bunch of magical BS.
Tell it to Einstein or Hawking. 😉
btw, seems a bit stupid for the sculpted piece to ask the sculptor why he made it thus, no?
It's funny that "anthropic principle" in wikipedia is part of a series on... "intelligent design", the epitome of religious BS and 100% not science. It is a philosophical position, not a scientific position.
Nuff said.
Nuff said.
