There are other explanations for "fine-tuning" than God.

Let's continue down the path of the universe being a "dream": in a dream, everything makes perfect sense. One of mine once ended with Lenin singing the International on top of a wreck pile and I thought it was the most natural thing for him to do.

Okay, bad example. That actually does make metaphorical sense.

Still, dreams follow their own, subjective logic. They are governed by laws perfectly fitting to advance the dream's "plot". Again: Unless outside circumstances intervene (that's a horror story for another day), the events and characters involved will progress in your mind smoothly, without violating any local laws of physics or logic. Depending on your level of immersion, the plot-line can change and evolve. And yet, at no point will the fabric of your dream "tear", unless you suddenly wake up. Almost like it was all "fine-tuned"...

I suppose one could claim that a single mind being responsible for the universe is God by default. Okay then.



Personally, I don't view the laws of physics as fine-tuned to us. More like we're fine-tuned to them; of course we are, otherwise we wouldn't be here. All "fine-tuning" is retrospective: that is, once a person becomes self-aware, they understand (or at least have the chance to) the myriad events that had to happen in just the right way for their specific personality to be created. Mind-blowing, but not suspect.

This is very true. One explanation is that Unverses (Universi?) pop into existence all the time and each one has different physical constants determined strictly by chance. It just so happens that this universe ended up with physical constants benefitial for the creation of life. No Guiding Hand was involved, just chance.

But I like the idea of the Guiding Hand better.

-Blast

Google "Drake's Equation" as to those odds.

It seems to me that not only is the Universe stranger than we imagine, it must be stranger than we CAN imagine.

It also seems to me that there is more to this realm than that which fits neatly within our present understanding of logic and reason, and that there may be forces acting on or in our physical and temporal universe that we are wholly unequipped to sense, detect or measure. Likewise, I beleive that life in its broader sense is more than a complex assembly of organic biological and neuroelectric processes.

Ghosts, UFOs and such? I dunno, but I've seen some mighty strange stuff in my day, that's fer sure!

Jeff

I guess I just find it amusing that some people would readily accept the concept that we may exist only the computer of some aliens yet scoff at the idea that we exist in the mind of God.

Reminds me of and interview with a scientist who was developing a robotic fish. He expounded at lenght on the complexity of a real fish and trailed off saying "...and it's almost as if, as if, well, as if someone errr, someTHING, well, err, designed it..."

Most orbits are unstable. Entire galaxies are colliding. Supernovas, gamma rays, and black holes are destroying anything close to them (and in terms of the universe, "close" is a few thousand lightyears). And, oh yeah, there are countless comets and asteroids speeding around without a thought or care as to what they crash into.

I wouldn't call the universe "fine tuned" at all.

My father happened to be a scary brilliant man and he spent his career doing very highly classified design and engineering work involving space surveillance radars and satellite communications (as I understood it). He never, ever, discussed anything at all about his work at home, of course. But some offhand comments he once made left me with the distinct impression that HE took UFOs of the alien origin variety to be a more or less established fact, and he was mo'definitely in a position to KNOW.

For whatever thats worth.

PS: He could also design and build kick-ass antennas. We had the best TV reception in town, CBs that could routinely talk hundreds of miles, etc.

Jeff

Confidence is no substitute for empirical evidence. There are too many people claiming to know something, but no one proving it.

Order is not death. It is life.

A lot of people know a lot of things in as near an absolute manner as a person can, and we'll be none the wiser until they feel it's necessary to prove it to us.

If they ever feel it's necessary at all...

[/quote]Confidence is no substitute for empirical evidence. There are too many people claiming to know something, but no one proving it. [/quote]

It's all part of a multi-national, multi-generational conspiracy, you see. I hear the Bilderburgers and the Trilateral Commission are behind it. ;-)

"Proof" is a slippery thing. I'm a lawyer, I should know. Some things that have been proved to pretty much everyone's satisfaction in the past dsiplayed a nasty habit of suddenly getting unproved at a later date. Moreover, I'm claiming no particular state of facts, merely citing the apparent opinion of a well-qualified expert in the field, which is, indeed, a credible form of evidence.

As for "empirical evidence," of UFOs, I submit that that is about all we have, at least in the sense of evidence gained by operation of human sensory organs.

Many things now commonly accepted as proved in the scientific community began as someone's "nutty, whacko" and certainly minority-view theory.

What quantum of proof is required? There are many who believe the Apollo Moon landing were faked on a sound stage, and the Flat-Earth Society is still out there (It's turtles, turtles all the way down) How many otherwise bright, sane people don't "believe" in evolution?

In any case, it's the sort of thing that sparks the imagination, and the concept of UFOs is fun to play with,

Now, returning, sort of, to the general theme of this forum, what should we do and say when the aliens land?

We will know nothing but waht they want to tell us of their motives and intentions, and of the civilization from whence they came. They could be pirates, or mercantilists, out to exploit us. They could be official representatives of a benevolent civilization, who only want to help us, or the opposite. Or they could represent a losing side in a galactic conflict, seeking refuge or aid. But we won't KNOW.

I submit that the only thing we can, or should, say to them is "please go away for, say, 100 years. We aren't ready to deal with you yet. But please feel free to leave an Encyclopedia Galactica and a communications device behind. We'll call you; don't call us."

Either they will comply, or they won't. But their response will tell us pretty much everything we need to know their nature and intentions, won't it?

Comments?

Jeff