If the universe was fine tuned for our life...

[Smaug]

How about....a procedural generation.

Then how do you prove that this definition actually allows to produce a model that adequately describes our universe? How do you prove that our universe is a 'procedural generation'?

[Jenny A]

No, just suggesting that the complexity you want to get to is life and that life is much more complex than star formation.

I am not suggesting that the goal of all this emergent complexity is life. I am suggesting that our reality is an emergent complex system. Sustained emergent complexity is the goal of this fined tuned system we call the universe....not life.

Citation please. In what way is our universe more likely to lead to complexity, and why is it less likely that universes that are not?

By the way, there is broader problem with the complex universe argument. That is that it is only in a universe that encourages enough complexity to allow the development of conscious life that the question of complexity can be discussed. Thus if there are other possible universes, it is of no great improbability that we should be in one which allows complexity as we couldn't be in one that doesn't.

[The Grand Nudger]

Wewt, points for anthropic principle.

[The Grand Nudger]

How about....a procedural generation.

Then how do you prove that this definition actually allows to produce a model that adequately describes our universe? How do you prove that our universe is a 'procedural generation'?

It describes what we know of the universe...namely...

procedural generation is generating content algorithmically rather than manually.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procedural_generation

That there is a set of conditions and a mechanism for interaction - the result of which seems to have proceeded in an arguably orderly fashion -from those initial conditions-. Heywood sees ghosts when he considers this...despite there being no requirement.

[Minimalist]

These fellows dispute the point.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/11/cosmi...omers-say/

Cosmic rays render 90 percent of the universe a lifeless desert, astronomers say

Which would make 'god' a pretty shitty designer.

[Smaug]

Speaking of hypotheses, I myself am inclined towards the Weak Anthropic Principle (Cosmological Natural Selection is fine too). But even the Strong Anthropic Principle doesn't imply any creators.

[Heywood]

By the way, there is broader problem with the complex universe argument. That is that it is only in a universe that encourages enough complexity to allow the development of conscious life that the question of complexity can be discussed. Thus if there are other possible universes, it is of no great improbability that we should be in one which allows complexity as we couldn't be in one that doesn't.

All you are doing here is positing the existence of a multiverse to explain the apparent fine tuning.

I consider the possibility of a multiverse and the possibility of purposeful fine tuning. I lean toward one more than the other because in my experience realities cannot come into existence unless there is the involvement of an intellect.

---

Because this hypothesis has reasons to be believed.....namely the observation that sub-realities need intellects to come into existence/ our reality appears to be a sub reality of a larger reality....it is a much more reasonable proposition than there is no God.

Is it? It appears wholly fallacious from here.

Do you think causality is also a fallacy of composition?

[LastPoet]

Look up chaos theory in mathematics and you will see how much complexity can arise from very simple rules. Bask in the work of Mandelbrot.

[The Grand Nudger]

-Your flirting with a comp fallacy (I don't think you've quite put it out there, personally, it's just an unstated implication).

-Even if I accept your premises...which are demonstrably wrong.....

-The accepted premises and definitions that you have chosen argue against the conclusion -and- your other assumptions.


Now, I have to go make the hot pockets for a few hours - crack the whip...but I absolutely love this conversation....so I'll be back after I make some christmas money, lol.

[Smaug]

Define reality and sub-reality. Your previous definition isn't enaugh (read my previous responce). You postulate that a computer game is a sub-reality that is in some way equivalent to our universe while such a statement is far from trivial.