Life is at the center of everything

[Chas]

Life falls in the center of all things. Not necessarily geographically, but in terms of scale.

http://scaleofuniverse.com/

Between zero and infinity, there is no center.

So, no, life doesn't fall in the middle of things except in the minds of those afraid of having to find their own place and purpose.

[Heywood]

You're missing the point. Since the choice of scale was arbitrary, where something falls on that scale is arbitrarily chosen as well. If I were to choose a scale based on the logarithm using base 80 instead of 10, then something else would show up as the item at the center.

I don't think this is correct. I think the midpoint would be the same regardless of which logarithmic scale was used and what would change is the total orders of magnitude. Admittedly I am not good with numbers and such so I could be wrong here.

---

Life falls in the center of all things. Not necessarily geographically, but in terms of scale.

http://scaleofuniverse.com/

Between zero and infinity, there is no center.

So, no, life doesn't fall in the middle of things except in the minds of those afraid of having to find their own place and purpose.

Please follow along Chas,

The scale we are talking about is bounded by what is theoretically observable.

---

My point was, though, is you're not explaining how this represents a "significant or special place."

Why should I see this as anything more than a mathematical curiosity?

There is only one midpoint on the scale among an infinite number of random points which makes the midpoint special or significant. Since life comes in a range of size, you cannot say it lies at the exact midpoint but the small range life comes in, does include the midpoint.

Why does the range of life include the midpoint? It calls for an explanation. I gave 2, a theistic one and a non theistic one.

[Chas]

You're missing the point. Since the choice of scale was arbitrary, where something falls on that scale is arbitrarily chosen as well. If I were to choose a scale based on the logarithm using base 80 instead of 10, then something else would show up as the item at the center.

I don't think this is correct. I think the midpoint would be the same regardless of which logarithmic scale was used and what would change is the total orders of magnitude. Admittedly I am not good with numbers and such so I could be wrong here.

---

Between zero and infinity, there is no center.

So, no, life doesn't fall in the middle of things except in the minds of those afraid of having to find their own place and purpose.

Please follow along Chas,

The scale we are talking about is bounded by what is theoretically observable.

---

My point was, though, is you're not explaining how this represents a "significant or special place."

Why should I see this as anything more than a mathematical curiosity?

There is only one midpoint on the scale among an infinite number of random points which makes the midpoint special or significant. Since life comes in a range of size, you cannot say it lies at the exact midpoint but the small range life comes in, does include the midpoint.

Why does the range of life include the midpoint? It calls for an explanation. I gave 2, a theistic one and a non theistic one.

And I don't agree with that premise. It is arbitrary.

[Heywood]

You're missing the point. Since the choice of scale was arbitrary, where something falls on that scale is arbitrarily chosen as well. If I were to choose a scale based on the logarithm using base 80 instead of 10, then something else would show up as the item at the center. Because the choice of scale is purely arbitrary and without sense, the result of what is at the center is without meaning or sense. We have ten fingers and use base ten math, so a base 10 logarithm seems natural. An animal with 80 tentacles might consider a logarithm using base 80 more natural. On top of that, depending on the size of the creature, it might be at the center of the scale using base 80, even though it's a different size than a human egg! So the fact that the scale can be fitted to the result rather than being a necessary choice makes it a second, deeper example of the Texas sharpshooter fallacy.

I boned up a little bit on logarithmic scales and I'm sure now that it would not matter what base you used or if you used a linear scale the midpoint would be the same.

The only way the scale gets fitted to the result is by arbitrarily choosing where it is bounded.

I'm afraid you are just plain wrong here.

[Alex K]

You're missing the point. Since the choice of scale was arbitrary, where something falls on that scale is arbitrarily chosen as well. If I were to choose a scale based on the logarithm using base 80 instead of 10, then something else would show up as the item at the center. Because the choice of scale is purely arbitrary and without sense, the result of what is at the center is without meaning or sense. We have ten fingers and use base ten math, so a base 10 logarithm seems natural. An animal with 80 tentacles might consider a logarithm using base 80 more natural. On top of that, depending on the size of the creature, it might be at the center of the scale using base 80, even though it's a different size than a human egg! So the fact that the scale can be fitted to the result rather than being a necessary choice makes it a second, deeper example of the Texas sharpshooter fallacy.

I boned up a little bit on logarithmic scales and I'm sure now that it would not matter what base you used or if you used a linear scale the midpoint would be the same.

The only way the scale gets fitted to the result is by arbitrarily choosing where it is bounded.

I'm afraid you are just plain wrong here.

I agree, changing the base just rescales everything on the log scale by a factor without changing relative proximity, because for arbitrary bases x and y, we have
log_x (number) = log_y (number) / log_y (x)

so the difference is just a factor of log_y (x)

edit: but it surely wouldn't work with a linear scale. The midpoint between the size of an atom and the size of the universe on a linear scale is simply half the size of the universe give or take a few angstroms.

[Faith No More]

There is only one midpoint on the scale among an infinite number of random points which makes the midpoint special or significant. Since life comes in a range of size, you cannot say it lies at the exact midpoint but the small range life comes in, does include the midpoint.

Why does the range of life include the midpoint? It calls for an explanation. I gave 2, a theistic one and a non theistic one.

You're essentially just repeating the same thing and not giving anyone any reason to think this is significant. Saying there is only one midpoint means nothing, because there is also only one point that is exactly 13/27 from the bottom of the scale. Every point is unique, and by not clarifying how this has any significance beyond human brains might find it interesting, you seem to be simply making an appeal to emotion

And what percentage of life falls onto that midpoint? It appears as if rasetsu was right and you're committing a Texas sharp-shooter fallacy.

[Heywood]

edit: but it surely wouldn't work with a linear scale. The midpoint between the size of an atom and the size of the universe on a linear scale is simply half the size of the universe give or take a few angstroms.

Alex, I think you are correct.....but I reserve the right to flip-flop and disagree with you on this point at a later date.

[Angrboda]

Here's a list of a few other things that are at the center of the universe: beach sand, mist, pollen, cayenne pepper, fertilizer, textile fibers, dust mites, coffee, hair, mold spores, ginger.

Amazing.

[Alex K]

The real question is: which things are at the golden ratios?

MIND BLOWN

[Chas]

This only works if you use a logarithmic scale rather than a linear one. Thus it is just an artifact of the scale chosen, not an actual result. On top of that, humans still aren't at the center, as the planck scale is at 10^-36, whereas the universe is at 10^27 (humans are roughly 2x10^0). The only place we're actually at the center of is where the designer of the app chose to put the scroll bar's midpoint.

At conception, human beings are 1.2 X 10^-4 meters which is almost the exact midpoint. Logarithmic scales are often used to compare size. This scale wasn't created or selected just because it fits the result desired by a theistic argument. The little scale of the universe game wasn't created to support a theistic argument.

And an adult human has 100,000,000,000,000 cells - that's 14 orders of magnitude. That's a pretty large 'midpoint'.