Hilbert's Hotel

Diskussionsforum zur Unendlichkeit: Theismus, Atheismus, Primzahlen, Unsterblichkeit, das Universum...
Discussing Infinity: theism and atheism, prime numbers, immortality, cosmology, philosophy...

Gamestudio Links
Zorro Links
Newest Posts
EntryDelay Clarification
by Ger1
Yesterday at 22:11
strf length-limitation
by Grant
Yesterday at 18:49
Deformers struct in MDL7 abspeichern.
by tagimbul
Yesterday at 17:41
Compiling Trading Strategies with C++
by pascalx
Yesterday at 12:18
global breakeven of a portfolio inside tmf function
by kmerlo
08/19/17 12:21
AUM Magazine
Latest Screens
AckCon'17: Lotter vs The World
Triton Wing
ZeaL
Computer Repair Simulator
Collider (working title)
Who's Online
11 registered (3dgamelight, Grant, alibaba, Iglarion, jrath, JoFo, jyd, tagimbul, mk_1, 1 invisible), 447 Guests and 4 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
mqo, Aimak, Grant, Marce, pascalx
17719 Registered Users
Page 5 of 5 < 1 2 3 4 5
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#63686 - 05/19/06 08:21 Re: Das Anthropische Prinzip / The Fine-Tuning Par ***** [Re: Damocles]
Pappenheimer Offline
Senior Expert

Registered: 09/11/03
Posts: 5900
Loc: Bielefeld, Germany
Sorry, I answer in german, because I don't know the relating english terms.

Das anthropische Prinzip zielt nicht zwingend auf die Beliebigkeit von Logik und Naturgesetzen. So wie ich es bislang verstanden hatte, hebelt es die Gesetze überhaupt nicht aus.

Es geht vielmehr darum, die Unwahrscheinlichkeit der Erde und des biologischen Lebens zu erklären.
Und da sagt das anthropische Prinzip, daß wir gerade deshalb im Stande sind diese unwahrscheinliche Konstellation von Bedingungen zu bezeugen, weil unsere Zeugenschaft gerade nur unter diesen Bedingungen möglich ist.
Die unendlich vielen anderen Universen können wir gerade deshalb nicht bezeugen, da sie nicht die Bedingungen bereitstellten, die wir für unsere Existenz benötigen.

Es geht beim anthropischen Prinzip also um die Perspektive, die es uns erscheinen läßt, daß die höchst unwahrscheinlichen Lebensvoraussetzungen von einem intelligenten Wesen geschaffen sein müßten.
Daß dieses lediglich auf Zufall unter der Bedingung von Unendlichkeit basiert, wird durch diese Perspektive verschleiert.

Top
#63687 - 06/01/06 08:02 Re: Das Anthropische Prinzip / The Universe Parado [Re: Damocles]
yung Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 01/10/03
Posts: 71
Loc: central US
I have a quite different belief to offer: the integral whole.

If one insists on the conditions under which things develop and searches
for the cause therof, such searching and insistence will never end until one
comes to something that is unconditional. Then the principles of self-transformation will become clear.
There are those who say that the semi-shadow penumbra is conditioned by the
shadow, the shadow by the body, and the body by the creator. However, the creator is uncreated and all forms materialize by themselves, just as the great
T'ai Chi is 'self-so.' Throughout the entire realm of existance, one will see that there is nothing, not even the semi-shadow, that does not transform itself
beyond the phenomenal world. Hence everything creates itself through the integration of yin and yang, without the direction of any creator. Since all things create themselves, they are self determined. This is the immortal model of the universe.

Top
#63688 - 11/16/07 18:33 Re: Das Anthropische Prinzip / The Universe Parado [Re: Irish_Farmer]
bupaje Offline
Expert

Registered: 08/29/02
Posts: 2692
Loc: California, USA
I favor number 1, while recognizing that I do not understand the ultimate nature of God. As far as I am concerned there is only one Truth, and if we honestly seek it, science, religion and philosophy all have the possibility of bringing us to a point of confluence where that Truth is evident.

As for 1+1=2 - I'm not sure that is true. In a certain light 1+1=11. When we view reality through the lens of our human understanding we filter, group and categorize that information with inherent limits imposed by our nature, intellect, and senses. I'm betting that in the process we discard, or simply fail to notice, a lot of what is real. As a result a true understanding of the nature of the universe might only be achievable when the seemingly divergent lenses of science, philosophy and religion are unitedly focused on the question.
_________________________
Find me at: |Stormvisions| Twitter|

Top
#295168 - 10/23/09 11:51 Re: Das Anthropische Prinzip / The Universe Parado [Re: Irish_Farmer]
PadMalcom Offline
Serious User

Registered: 03/08/06
Posts: 1987
Loc: Karlsruhe
@JCL: In my eyes you forget an important possibility that might be well known for all the programmers beneath us: Try and error! Who said we were the first try of nature to create life?
Science has proven that nature is able to adopt to given conditions and I'm pretty sure that the same happened to us!

Top
#364477 - 03/18/11 16:35 Re: Das Anthropische Prinzip / The Universe Parado [Re: Damocles]
AlbertoT Offline
Serious User

Registered: 10/27/06
Posts: 1245
In my opinion this is not a phylosofical problem or a sort of circular reasoning
This is a serious scientific question

First of all statistics clearly show that it can not be just a matter of chance
Should our universe be the only one then the probability that all the parameters assume the right value, by chance, is ridicously low ( we are not talking about 1 % )

The probability of exixtance of other form of life is also extremely low
Should some parameters be slightly different than the universe should be a ball of fire or a cloud of thin dust
Hard to believe that life can exist in these conditions

The multiuniverse is the only solution
Our universe is just a bubble in a boiling pot of billion and billion bubbles
It is the only solution unless you dont believe in God

Even though I am not a religious person I must admit I was embarassed , reading some scientific articles on this topic
Scientists claimed " Since God does not exist then multiuniverse is the solution "
It seems to me that Science use , in this csse,a dogmatic approach

Top
#365201 - 03/24/11 13:53 Re: Das Anthropische Prinzip / The Universe Parado [Re: AlbertoT]
PHeMoX Offline
Senior Expert

Registered: 09/19/02
Posts: 8177
Loc: Netherlands
Originally Posted By: AlbertoT
In my opinion this is not a phylosofical problem or a sort of circular reasoning
This is a serious scientific question

First of all statistics clearly show that it can not be just a matter of chance
Should our universe be the only one then the probability that all the parameters assume the right value, by chance, is ridicously low ( we are not talking about 1 % )


The funny thing about those statistics is that it's pure speculation and theory. Following a similar same kind of logic one might assign some sort of chance to impossible events which eventually should be possible as long as enough time would have passed. To some extent such speculations do not make much sense. Don't forget that we do not actually know whether life can exist in other forms than currently exist on our planet. We assume life will be linked to planets that more or less have the same conditions as ours, but that assumption might be wrong. Perhaps there's nothing inevitable about the coming into existence of life.

Quote:
The multiuniverse is the only solution
Our universe is just a bubble in a boiling pot of billion and billion bubbles
It is the only solution unless you dont believe in God

Even though I am not a religious person I must admit I was embarassed , reading some scientific articles on this topic
Scientists claimed " Since God does not exist then multiuniverse is the solution "
It seems to me that Science use , in this csse,a dogmatic approach


They do not use a dogmatic approach, they simply are aware of how all deities are invented by mankind itself with no substantial proof to back their existence up. The good old Spaghetti Monster God argument is valid, until whichever God has been scientifically proven to exist.

'God' is really just one of many invented deities and why would Shiva, Ra or Allah be any more of a fictional God than Yahweh? At some point it really makes no sense to be overly respectful towards one religion in particular or religions as a whole. They're a cultural trait.

Also note how encountering more intelligent and more culturally and technologically developed life forms than us humans could easily be mistaken for Gods in comparison.

With that in mind encountering God-like entities might not have an actual chance of zero, but I'm convinced we're not going to find any of the currently 'described and popular' deities. Simply because they really do not exist. It's like trying to find Frodo. wink
_________________________
PHeMoX, Innervision Software (c) 1995-2008

For more info visit: Innervision Software

Top
Page 5 of 5 < 1 2 3 4 5


Moderator:  jcl, Lukas, old_bill, Spirit 

Kompaktes Wörterbuch des UnendlichenCompact Dictionary of the Infinite