(July 30, 2013 at 11:57 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: The multiverse is not really comparable to a pack of cards. You have to have the order first before you can have an orderly result. A pack of cards already has a set number 52 or 54 if you count the Jokers, specific suites, etc. You start with system so structured that it will eventually yield an ace on the first cut.
On the other hand, the theoretical multiverse has no initial order to even determine the possible types of universes it could create. It would be more like playing a slot machine and having an ace pop out when you get three cherries. Moreover, if this universe can just pop into a viable existence, I don't see any reason why it couldn't just fall apart randomly too. Why should constants stay constant?
I opt for the card shark as being the simpler explanation for the player that keeps drawing aces.
You've completely misread and misunderstood the analogy. I'm not actually comparing multiverse to a pack of cards.
The basis of the fine-tuning argument - the premise one has to accept for any further discussion, is "The constants of the universe could've been otherwise, but took the known values in this universe."
I'm comparing this premise to "The card I drew from the pack could've been anything but an ace, but this time, it was an ace". I'm comparing the existence of this universe to drawing an ace and the 52/54 cards represent other possible constants' values, not alternate universes. The other hypothetical universes here are comparable to other hypothetical instances of drawing a card.
Now, all we actually know is that we drew an ace this time. We have no actual knowledge of any other instances of the draw or the potential outcomes. We assume that there are different cards in the pack (the basis of fine tuning). Given these limits of knowledge which one would be the simpler solution - that someone engineered drawing of an ace or that it was simply a function of probability and we could just as easily have gotten a different card?
