HackerPapers

arXiv:1202.4359physics.pop-ph

Defending The Fallacy of Fine-Tuning

Victor J. Stenger

Early discovery. Linked by one identifiable commenter. This paper is outside the main ranking; a mention is not an endorsement.

Abstract

In 2011, I published a popular-level book, The Fallacy of Fine-Tuning: Why the Universe is Not Designed for Us. It investigated a common claim found in contemporary religious literature that the parameters of physics and cosmology are so delicately balanced, so "fine-tuned," that any slight change and life in the universe would have been impossible. I concluded that while the precise form of life we find on Earth would not exist with slight changes in these parameters, some form of life could have evolved over a parameter range that is not infinitesimal, as often claimed. Postdoctoral fellow Luke Barnes has written a lengthy, highly technical review [arXiv:1112.4647] of the scientific literature on the fine-tuning problem. I have no significant disagreement with that literature and no prominent physicist or cosmologist has disputed my basic conclusions. Barnes does not invalidate these conclusions and misunderstands and misrepresents much of what is in the book.

arXiv comments
Journal reference
DOI
Subjects
physics.pop-phPopular Physics astro-ph.COCosmology and Nongalactic Astrophysics physics.hist-phHistory and Philosophy of Physics

On Hacker News

Linked by 1 identifiable commenter in 1 comment across 1 thread, from Dec 2021 to Dec 2021.

Comments linking this paper, per year.

Discussed in comments1 thread

    • On the topic of fine-tuning I found this book from 2011 and subsequent debate quite thought-provoking: >The Fallacy of Fine-Tuning: Why the Universe Is Not Designed for Us (by Victor J. Stenger) https://www.amazon.com/Fallacy-Fine-Tuning-Why-Universe-Desi... >The Fine-Tuning of…

      spzxView on HNParent context

Submitted to Hacker News

Connected through shared HN threads, not inferred similarity or a recommendation.