| Re: Is our universe fine-tuned for life? |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Group: alt.philosophy · Group Profile
Author: SolomonWSolomonW Date: Aug 3, 2008 03:13
> About a quarter of the resulting universes turned out to be populated by
> energy-generating stars.
A quarter still means that it is not likely the question is how
unlikely.
> "You can change alpha or the gravitational constant by
> a factor of 100 and stars still form," Adams says, suggesting that stars can
> exist in universes in which at least some fundamental constants are wildly
> different than in our universe.
I like to know the formula he used to vary the factors.
> And though some universes were filled with things we might not usually think of
> as stars - radiating black holes or bodies formed of dark matter - they all gave
> out enough energy to power some form of life, and lasted long enough for life to
> evolve.
>
> That may not necessarily be life as we know it, however. Since the simulations
> didn't rely on the stars producing carbon, Adams points out that very different
> life forms to ours might be better suited to some of the universes. Because life
> depends on chemistry, and chemistry depends on alpha, varying alpha changes the
> nature of life. "You have no idea what life would be like in a universe with
> different constants," Adams says.
>
|