Well fine, Adrie. If you insist... > > > > Hawking, quote on fine tuning,.. > > Along with Thomas Hertog at CERN, in 2006 Hawking proposed a theory of > "top-down cosmology," which says that the universe had no unique initial > state, and therefore it is inappropriate for physicists to attempt to > formulate a theory that predicts the universe's current configuration from > one particular initial state.[20]
John: Ok, very interesting, yes. My problem? The same I have always with authoritative expertise. I'm sure the man himself would be thoughtful and careful in his formulation, offering his theories as just those - theories. But so often the expert's theories became the body politic's dogma. Hawking's ideas are interesting in contributing to a certain dialogue. They are not interesting when they bring the dialogue to a close. Like there is no philosophy anymore because it's all been figured out by the experts who are most quoted on tv, and we have no need for it. Thanks. We don't need to think, all we need to do is believe what they say on the discover history channel. Or in my ma's case, 3abn - the adventist broadcasting network. Lord save us. > [[[[ Top-down cosmology posits that in > some sense, the present "selects" the past from a superposition of many > possible histories. Which makes no difference at all, since all it tells us is what we already know - this is the universe we're stuck with. What possible pragmatic reality can "unrealized choices" offer? What possible difference can such speculations make to me? A man living in the realizable cosmos and asking simple questions? Lemme know about this one I'm in. Unrealized possibilites sounds like angels and pins to my ears. I don't care about possible histories. I want to know about real ones. I want the real story, not the blind alleys. In doing so, the theory suggests a possible resolution > of the fine-tuning question: It is inevitable that we find our universe's > present physical constants, as the current universe "selects" only those > past histories that led to the present conditions. ]]]]]]In this way, > I've heard tautologies before. I know what the solipsistic cosmos looks like. I've had it described to me many times. I ain't buyin'. Here's why. It's facile. Reality is the way it is because it just is... I admit it has a certain attraction to it, in its kindergarten way. But personally, I like my metaphysical formulation with just a bit more meat. For of course, one could reason that in a cosmos of infinite choice, and this (who we are) obvious outcome, then we only need postulate infinity going backwards, with just the slightest chance (probability rules!) and that postulated probability becomes well nigh inevitable. I've heard it before. I remember Krimel's Kreed. I know what the metaphysics of arising randomness gets you. For some people it's like a security blanket, protecting their tender little psyche from the cold. For others, a straitjacket, a prison, a downward spiraling hell of no return. shivers. I'm for sunnier climes, me. Give Steven H. my regards. > top-down cosmology provides an anthropic explanation for why we find > ourselves in a universe that allows matter and life, without invoking an > ensemble of multiple universes. > > I'm still quite fond of the biocentrism cosmology, which ties many of these loose ends together and makes sense in a practical and empirically sound way - that deep down, matter is tied to life - the whole universe is in fact, based upon a life principle or directional force. Space and time are animal constructs - meaningful in narrative relations. Value really is the whole story. > > the fine-tuning question, Answer by Hawking stephen. > TOTAL HARMONY WITH THE ANTROPIC PRINCIPLE, (not entropic) > > ISOLATED BETWEEN HOOKS > > > > Adrie, one has no obligation to accept it , but if you think of it , the > briljance in the line is just incredible. > and i have to give him credit for his black hole evaporation work. > > Greetz, Adrie > Well, I've been wheeling my ma around. I admire him for his snazzy chair. And I'm glad he agrees with the total harmony with the anthropic principle. I also agree completely. I just hope they keep the story straight, is all. John Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
