1 of 87

Big Bang

Write now Article Tools

Considering the depth which theoretical scientists must often explore in their efforts to gain that deeper understanding of the fundamental nature of reality it is refreshing to note that discussion of the anthropic principle is yet ongoing. Lisa Zyga writes in her Physorg.com article (see link below) "What Anthropic Reasoning Can Really Tell Us" that anthropic reasoning is losing credibility as a viable explanation for the existence of our Universe because anthropic conclusions reflect mostly our biases rather than our knowledge. I don't share her point of view. Insomuch that it is possible to bury our heads in too much mathematics (Einstein did it to support his static universe theory - he was wrong) it is also possible to demand too much of empiricism to explain what cannot be tested. Sometimes we really do need a leap of faith.

The conventional description of the anthropic principle states that the Universe is the way it is because we are here to observe it. The notion that if it were any other way than that is the way that it would be and we would still be here to observe it is as much a contradiction of the anthropic principle as supportive of it. That amended description does not sit well with physicists studying it. In essence, anthropocentrism holds that the Universe could only exist as it does to support life. To most theorists this is all just a little too pretty and fortuitous to merit title to viable theory. And therein lies the problem with it. Even if things were so, it is just too difficult to fit it into the context of Big Bang Theory. Life can not be determined to exist so it must be purely coincidental. But the anthropic principle is still too attractive and tempting to dismiss entirely. It is still the only scientific reasoning for the emergence and evolution of life. What is missing in the debate is the perception of a coherent framework to support anthropic reasoning.

Quantum theory can help. If we were to reduce the temperature of the entire Universe and everything in it to absolute zero than everything would condense into a single colossal atom. Thermal dynamics prevents this from happening. But, philosophical as it may sound, we are still essentially all one. Imagining the entire history of the Universe compressed to the time frame of a split second helps us to appreciate the role that time plays in differentiating existence. Nevertheless, everything could be perceived as happening at the same time. Same place, same time. Temporarily

• 1
• 2
• 3
• next page >>

Add your voice

Know something about Big Bang or Big Man: How in the heck did we get here??
We want to hear your view. Write now!