F
fire
Paul. Are you a resident in a retirement home?I'm not sure why energy and mass are an issue. I don't know what formal information is.
~~ Paul
Paul. Are you a resident in a retirement home?I'm not sure why energy and mass are an issue. I don't know what formal information is.
~~ Paul
Not yet. Why do you ask?Paul. Are you a resident in a retirement home?
http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/culturelab/2010/05/looking-for-god-in-the-cosmic-details.htmlShould the fine-tuning turn out to be real, what are we to make of it? There are two widely-discussed possibilities: either God fine-tuned the universe for us to be here, or there are (as string theory implies) a large number of universes, each with different laws of physics, and we happen to find ourselves in a universe where the laws happen to be just right for us to live. After all, how could we not?
http://www2.asa3.org/archive/evolution/199806/0130.htmlBut the main reason for believing in an ensemble of universes is that it could explain why the laws governing our Universe appear to be so finely turned for our existence ... This fine-tuning has two possible explanations. Either the Universe was designed specifically for us by a creator or there is a multitude of universes -- a multiverse.
anything that can happen will happen; in fact, it will happen an infinite number of times. Thus, the question of what is possible becomes trivial -- anything is possible, unless it violates some absolute conservation law.
Just as Darwin and Wallace explained how the wonderful adaptations of living forms could arise without supernatural intervention, so the string landscape may explain how the constants of nature that we observe can take values suitable for life without being fine-tuned by a benevolent creator.
The simplest and most popular cosmological model today predicts that you have a twin in a galaxy about 10^1028 meters from here. This distance is so large that it is beyond astronomical, but that does not make your doppelgänger any less real...
The Mathematical Theory of Communication would be a formal way to measure information. Chaitin / Kolmogorov Complexity would be another.I'm not sure why energy and mass are an issue. I don't know what formal information is.
~~ Paul
I don't know, can you? If you are clinging to standard-state physical proof as your path to "knowledge" I'd guess that at this point, you can't.Can we point to something that makes it a fact?