Unsere Existenz basiert auf einer feinen Abstimmung von Naturkonstanten. Wäre die Materiedichte zu Beginn des Urknalls ein wenig höher oder niedriger, so wären schwere Elemente und damit kohlenstoffbasiertes Leben nicht entstanden. Offensichtlich existieren wir dennoch. Welche Erklärung dafür scheint Ihnen am plausibelsten?
Our existence is based on a very precise combination of nature constants. If the density of the universe at Big Bang time were a little higher or lower, or if other constants were a little different, heavy elements and thus carbon based life could not exist. In fact 99,9..% of all possible combinations of nature constants would lead to bleak universes without stars, planets, and life. Obviously, we exist nevertheless. Which explanation for this paradox seems the most likely to you?
1. Gott - The universe was created this way by a God who does not require a further explanation for his existence (f.i. because he is eternal).
2. Unbekannter Prozess - The universe was created this way by a yet unknown process (f.i. a self-organizing process).
3. Viele Universen - The Big Bang is not a unique event. So many different universes are created that some of them have to be complex enough to produce life.
4. Zukünftige Theorie - There will be a simple explanation for the nature constants by a future physics theory (f.i. string theory).
5. Andere - Some other explanation I haven't thought of yet.
Please post your opinion.
