morls
27-10-2019, 01:34 PM
This might be more of a philosphical post...
I've been reading a few quotes from Paul Davies - having read a few of his books years ago I wanted to catch up on things. One concept I remember very clearly from his explanations of the search for a grand unified theory of everything is that the numbers involved in calculating parameters such as the strong and weak nuclear force are very very very finely tuned to each other.
If I remember correctly the book I'm referring to is Superforce, published in 1985. Davies made a point that the tiniest deviation in any of these figures, operant at the subatomic level at the very earliest stages of the Big Bang () would result in a vastly different universe in terms of structure. It might have even self-destucted instantly due to the imbalance of forces.
Could it be that these figures are as they are because they cannot be anything else?
I realise there have been significant theoretical advances since this book was published. My question is, however, more related to the fact that we are part of this universe, and as far as we know are the only embodiment of self-consciousness in the universe. Maybe we are the consciousness of the universe, looking at itself. I know this is a metaphor Davies has employed, in a much more effective way than in this clumsy attempt...
Is it inevitable that the numbers used to formulate the standard model are so very very very finely tuned? Is it impossible for to arrive at anything other than these numbers, if we are to adequately describe the universe within which we exist?
I ask these questions because Davies has noted the extraordinary level of order suggested by these figures, and the standard model, and has gone on to investigate more questions raised by this.
Could it be that these figures are what they are because of the fact that we are in and of this universe - that they simply could not be anything else? That it is not a question of design (a term Davies has used) but of logic?
I've been reading a few quotes from Paul Davies - having read a few of his books years ago I wanted to catch up on things. One concept I remember very clearly from his explanations of the search for a grand unified theory of everything is that the numbers involved in calculating parameters such as the strong and weak nuclear force are very very very finely tuned to each other.
If I remember correctly the book I'm referring to is Superforce, published in 1985. Davies made a point that the tiniest deviation in any of these figures, operant at the subatomic level at the very earliest stages of the Big Bang () would result in a vastly different universe in terms of structure. It might have even self-destucted instantly due to the imbalance of forces.
Could it be that these figures are as they are because they cannot be anything else?
I realise there have been significant theoretical advances since this book was published. My question is, however, more related to the fact that we are part of this universe, and as far as we know are the only embodiment of self-consciousness in the universe. Maybe we are the consciousness of the universe, looking at itself. I know this is a metaphor Davies has employed, in a much more effective way than in this clumsy attempt...
Is it inevitable that the numbers used to formulate the standard model are so very very very finely tuned? Is it impossible for to arrive at anything other than these numbers, if we are to adequately describe the universe within which we exist?
I ask these questions because Davies has noted the extraordinary level of order suggested by these figures, and the standard model, and has gone on to investigate more questions raised by this.
Could it be that these figures are what they are because of the fact that we are in and of this universe - that they simply could not be anything else? That it is not a question of design (a term Davies has used) but of logic?