Faith-Nature

Anthropic Principle

Nearly a half a century after the introduction of the idea that humanity lives in a universe at the just-right location, the just-right time, and with the just-right physical constants, the anthropic principle continues to gain acceptance among astronomers and astrophysicists. The phrase "anthropic principle" was first Introduced by Brandon Carter in 1973.

The anthropic principle says that the universe appears “designed” for the sake of human life. Strong Anthropic Principle (SAP) states that the universe must have physical properties and constants that allow for humanity. The universe exists for life.

In 1953 Fred Hoyle's investigations of how stars generate heavy elements found the physical laws and values had to be incredibly precise for life to be possible anywhere in the universe.

In 1961, Robert Dicke found that life in the early universe is not possible due to biological constraints (lack of needed elements). He also found that life is not possible later in the history of the universe, do lack of any stable stars and planets.

In 1986, John Barrow and Frank Tipler published the Anthropic Cosmological Principle. The universe's fundamental constants and laws are "fine-tuned" for the existence of life. The physical constants (gravity, electromagnetic force, Strong nuclear force, Weak nuclear force and more) are precisely set for life to emerge later. Any slight variations would make life impossible anywhere in the universe. John Barrow and Frank Tipler conclusion: (one of three possibles)” 1) The universe is the work of intelligent agent, 2) The universe is a product of the observer, 3) Universe is one of many, multiverse

  1. The universe work of intelligent agent, God of the Bible, (Extra-dimensional)

  2. The universe product of the observer, is Against the law of causality

  1. Universe is one of many, multiverse, No evidence possible ever. Move problem, Explain Too Much

    Anthropic principle: Just right universe (mass and expansion), Just right location in universe (galaxy cluster-local group), Just right galaxy: Milky Way, Just right location in galaxy (Goldilock zone- local arm), Just right Star: Sun, Just right Planet: Earth (Plate tectonics, magnetic field, just right elements, Atmosphere), Just right moon, Just right Solar System (plants and asteroid belt)

    The Creator must be caring, powerful, loving, planned ahead, able to operate in many dimensions (space and time). Only the God of the Bible fits this.

    Romans 1:19-20 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.

Anthropic Principle Quotes

Space-time theorems establish that a Causal Agent beyond space and time created the space-time dimensions of the universe. One of the authors of these theorems, Alexander Vilenkin, wrote:

“With the proof now in place, cosmologists can no longer hide behind the possibility of a past eternal universe. There is no escape, they have to face the problem of a cosmic beginning.”

It is improbable that chance made the universe is the way it is. As it was precisely correct for life, before there was life. Only the God of the Bible is described as being extra-dimensional.

Fred Hoyle (British astrophysicist): “A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question.”

George Ellis (British astrophysicist): “Amazing fine tuning occurs in the laws that make this [complexity] possible. Realization of the complexity of what is accomplished makes it very difficult not to use the word ‘miraculous’ without taking a stand as to the ontological status of the word.”

Paul Davies (British astrophysicist): “There is for me powerful evidence that there is something going on behind it all….It seems as though somebody has fine-tuned nature’s numbers to make the Universe….The impression of design is overwhelming”. “There is now broad agreement among physicists and cosmologists that the universe is in several respects ‘fine-tuned’ for life … the conclusion is not so much that the universe is fine-tuned for life; rather it is fine-tuned for the building blocks and environments that life requires”

Leonard Susskind (Thoretical physicist): “can science explain the extraordinary fact that the universe appears to be uncannily, nay, spectacularly well-designed for our own existence? ….. to make the first 119 decimal places of the vacuum energy zero is almost certainly no accident.”

Roger Penrose: (Mathematical Physicist) “This now tells us how precise the Creator’s aim must have been: namely to an accuracy of . This is an extraordinary figure…. But why was the big bang so precisely organised...

Luke Barnes (theoretical astrophysicist and cosmologist): “a number of authors have noticed that very small changes in the laws, parameters and initial conditions of physics would result in a universe unable to evolve and support intelligent life…. In the set of possible physics, the subset that permit the evolution of life is very small.”

Martin Rees (British cosmologist and astrophysicist ): If we modify the value of one of the fundamental constants, something invariably goes wrong, leading to a universe that is inhospitable to life as we know it …The conditions in our universe really do seem to be uniquely suitable for life forms like ourselves.” “These six numbers constitute a ‘recipe’ for a universe. Moreover, the outcome is sensitive to their values: if any one of them were to be ‘untuned’, there would be no stars and no life.”

Anthropic Principle Inequality:

It took the universe 13.7 billion years to make a home for mankind, yet mankind can only live in the universe for a short time span: tens of thousands of years.

Brandon Carter, a British mathematician, coined the Anthropic Principle Inequality in 1983.

Hope: The Bible correctly states the origins of the universe. Thus, the Bible gives us hope in stating that the universe is NOT all that there is. A decaying universe is a pathway to a new creation. (John 3:16) Revelation 21:1b: Then I saw “a new heaven and a new earth,” for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away”

Just Right:

Mankind arrived at just the right time:

The number and complexity of the astronomical, geological, chemical, and biological features recognized as essential to human existence and advanced civilizations have expanded within the past decade. View the history of the universe, Earth's rotation rate, not too fast or slow, have abundant fossil fuels, Solar stability, Correct solar luminosity, Correct plate tectonics, and much more. So we have for human life: Just right universe; Just right location in universe; Just right galaxy: Milky Way; Just right location in galaxy; Just right Star: Sun; Just right Planet: Earth; Just right moon; Just right Solar System; And many, many more just rights. The newest astronomical research shows careful design. From the complete universe to the smallest particles, every scale level is designed for an advanced civilization. More than 140 different 'exterior' features of the universe must be just right.

The Bible correctly explains the origins of the universe. Finite beginning in the past. (Gen1:1, Heb 11:3); Time also began at this event. (p127, 2Tim 1:9). Universe came from beyond the dimensions of the universe. (Hebrews 11:3). Spacetime theorems, general and special relativity all confirm the Bible's claim.

Also see Spacetime theorem

See the Life page, it is designed also

Short List of Fine-Tuning Parameters for the Universe

  1. strong nuclear force constant
    if larger: no hydrogen would form; atomic nuclei for most life-essential elements would be unstable; thus, no life chemistry
    if smaller: no elements heavier than hydrogen would form: again, no life chemistry

  2. weak nuclear force constant
    if larger: too much hydrogen would convert to helium in big bang; hence, stars would convert too much matter into heavy elements making life chemistry impossible
    if smaller: too little helium would be produced from big bang; hence, stars would convert too little matter into heavy elements making life chemistry impossible

  3. gravitational force constant
    if larger: stars would be too hot and would burn too rapidly and too unevenly for life chemistry
    if smaller    : stars would be too cool to ignite nuclear fusion; thus, many of the elements needed for life chemistry would never form

  4. electromagnetic force constant
    if greater: chemical bonding would be disrupted; elements more massive than boron would be unstable to fission
    if lesser: chemical bonding would be insufficient for life chemistry

  5. ratio of electromagnetic force constant to gravitational force constant
    if larger: all stars would be at least 40% more massive than the sun; hence, stellar burning would be too brief and too uneven for life support
    if smaller    : all stars would be at least 20% less massive than the sun, thus incapable of producing heavy elements

  6. ratio of electron to proton mass
    if larger: chemical bonding would be insufficient for life chemistry
    if smaller: same as above

  7. ratio of number of protons to number of electrons
    if larger: electromagnetism would dominate gravity, preventing galaxy, star, and planet formation
    if smaller: same as above

  8. expansion rate of the universe
    if larger: no galaxies would form
    if smaller    : universe would collapse, even before stars formed

  9. entropy level of the universe
    if larger: stars would not form within proto-galaxies
    if smaller: no proto-galaxies would form

  10. mass density of the universe
    if larger: overabundance of deuterium from big bang would cause stars to burn rapidly, too rapidly for life to form
    if smaller: insufficient helium from big bang would result in a shortage of heavy elements

  11. velocity of light
    if faster: stars would be too luminous for life support if slower: stars would be insufficiently luminous for life support

  12. age of the universe
    if older: no solar-type stars in a stable burning phase would exist in the right (for life) part of the galaxy
    if younger: solar-type stars in a stable burning phase would not yet have formed

  13. initial uniformity of radiation
    if more uniform: stars, star clusters, and galaxies would not have formed
    if less uniform: universe by now would be mostly black holes and empty space

  14. average distance between galaxies
    if larger: star formation late enough in the history of the universe would be hampered by lack of material
    if smaller: gravitational tug-of-wars would destabilize the sun's orbit

  15. density of galaxy cluster
    if denser: galaxy collisions and mergers would disrupt the sun's orbit
    if less dense: star formation late enough in the history of the universe would be hampered by lack of material

  16. average distance between stars
    if larger: heavy element density would be too sparse for rocky planets to form
    if smaller    : planetary orbits would be too unstable for life

  17. fine structure constant (describing the fine-structure splitting of spectral lines) if larger: all stars would be at least 30% less massive than the sun
    if larger than 0.06: matter would be unstable in large magnetic fields
    if smaller: all stars would be at least 80% more massive than the sun

  18. decay rate of protons
    if greater: life would be exterminated by the release of radiation
    if smaller: universe would contain insufficient matter for life

  19. 12C to 16O nuclear energy level ratio
    if larger: universe would contain insufficient oxygen for life
    if smaller: universe would contain insufficient carbon for life

  20. ground state energy level for 4He
    if larger: universe would contain insufficient carbon and oxygen for life
    if smaller    : same as above

  21. decay rate of 8Be
    if slower: heavy element fusion would generate catastrophic explosions in all the stars
    if faster: no element heavier than beryllium would form; thus, no life chemistry

  22. ratio of neutron mass to proton mass
    if higher: neutron decay would yield too few neutrons for the formation of many life-essential elements
    if lower: neutron decay would produce so many neutrons as to collapse all stars into neutron stars or black holes

  23. initial excess of nucleons over anti-nucleons
    if greater: radiation would prohibit planet formation
    if lesser: matter would be insufficient for galaxy or star formation

  24. polarity of the water molecule
    if greater: heat of fusion and vaporization would be too high for life
    if smaller: heat of fusion and vaporization would be too low for life; liquid water would not work as a solvent for life chemistry; ice would not float, and a runaway freeze-up would result

  25. supernovae eruptions
    if too close, too frequent, or too late: radiation would exterminate life on the planet
    if too distant, too infrequent, or too soon: heavy elements would be too sparse for rocky planets to form

  26. white dwarf binaries
    if too few: insufficient fluorine would exist for life chemistry
    if too many: planetary orbits would be too unstable for life
    if formed too soon: insufficient fluorine production
    if formed too late: fluorine would arrive too late for life chemistry

  27. ratio of exotic matter mass to ordinary matter mass
    if larger: universe would collapse before solar-type stars could form
    if smaller: no galaxies would form

  28. number of effective dimensions in the early universe
    if larger: quantum mechanics, gravity, and relativity could not coexist; thus, life would be impossible
    if smaller: same result

  29. number of effective dimensions in the present universe
    if smaller: electron, planet, and star orbits would become unstable
    if larger    : same result

  30. mass of the neutrino
    if smaller: galaxy clusters, galaxies, and stars would not form
    if larger: galaxy clusters and galaxies would be too dense

  31. big bang ripples
    if smaller: galaxies would not form; universe would expand too rapidly
    if larger: galaxies/galaxy clusters would be too dense for life; black holes would dominate; universe would collapse before life-site could form

  32. size of the relativistic dilation factor
    if smaller: certain life-essential chemical reactions will not function properly
    if larger    : same result

  33. uncertainty magnitude in the Heisenberg uncertainty principle
    if smaller: oxygen transport to body cells would be too small and certain life-essential elements would be unstable
    if larger: oxygen transport to body cells would be too great and certain life-essential elements would be unstable

  34. cosmological constant
    if larger: universe would expand too quickly to form solar-type stars

Uniqueness of the Galaxy-Sun-Earth-Moon System for Life Support

  1. galaxy size (9) (p = 0.1)
    if too large: infusion of gas and stars would disturb sun's orbit and ignite deadly galactic eruptions
    if too small: infusion of gas would be insufficient to sustain star formation long enough for life to form

  2. galaxy type (7) (p = 0.1)
    if too elliptical: star formation would cease before sufficient heavy elements formed for life chemistry
    if too irregular: radiation exposure would be too severe (at times) and life-essential heavy elements would not form

  3. galaxy location (9) (p = 0.1)
    if too close to dense galaxy cluster: galaxy would be gravitationally unstable, hence unsuitable for life
    if too close to large galaxy(ies): same result

  4. supernovae eruptions (8) (p = 0.01)
    if too close: radiation would exterminate life
    if too far: too little "ash" would be available for rocky planets to form
    if too infrequent: same result
    if too frequent: radiation would exterminate life
    if too soon: too little "ash" would be available for rocky planets to form
    if too late: radiation would exterminate life

  5. white dwarf binaries (8) (p = 0.01)
    if too few: insufficient fluorine would exist for life chemistry
    if too many: orbits of life-supportable planets would be disrupted; life would be exterminated
    if too soon: insufficient fluorine would exist for life chemistry
    if too late: fluorine would arrive too late for life chemistry

  6. proximity of solar nebula to a supernova eruption (9)
    if farther: insufficient heavy elements would be attracted for life chemistry
    if closer: nebula would be blown apart

  7. timing of solar nebula formation relative to supernova eruption (9)
    if earlier: nebula would be blown apart
    if later: nebula would not attract enough heavy elements for life chemistry

  8. parent star distance from center of galaxy (9) (p = 0.2)
    if greater: insufficient heavy elements would be available for rocky planet formation
    if lesser: radiation would be too intense for life; stellar density would disturb planetary orbits, making life impossible

  9. parent star distance from closest spiral arm (9) (p = 0.1)
    if too small: radiation from other stars would be too intense and the stellar density would disturb orbits of life-supportable planets
    if too great: quantity of heavy elements would be insufficient for formation of life-supportable planets

  10. z-axis range of star's orbit (9) (p = 0.1)
    if too wide: exposure to harmful radiation from galactic core would be too great

  11. number of stars in the planetary system (10) (p = 0.2)
    if more than one: tidal interactions would make the orbits of life-supportable planets too unstable for life
    if fewer than one: no heat source would be available for life chemistry

  12. parent star birth date (9) (p = 0.2)
    if more recent: star burning would still be unstable; stellar system would contain too many heavy elements for life chemistry
    if less recent: stellar system would contain insufficient heavy elements for life chemistry

  13. parent star age (9) (p = 0.4)
    if older: star's luminosity would be too erratic for life support
    if younger: same result

  14. parent star mass (10) (p = 0.001)
    if greater: star's luminosity would be too erratic and star would burn up too quickly to support life
    if lesser: life support zone would be too narrow; rotation period of life-supportable planet would be too long; UV radiation would be insufficient for photosynthesis

  15. parent star metallicity (9) (p = 0.05)
    if too little: insufficient heavy elements for life chemistry would exist
    if too great: radioactivity would be too intense for life; heavy element concentrations would be poisonous to life

  16. parent star color (9) (p = 0.4)
    if redder: photosynthetic response would be insufficient to sustain life
    if bluer: same result

  17. H3+ production (23) (p = 0.1)
    if too little: simple molecules essential to planet formation and life chemistry would never form
    if too great: planets would form at the wrong time and place for life

  18. parent star luminosity (11) (p = 0.0001)
    if increases too soon: runaway green house effect would develop
    if increases too late: runaway glaciation would develop

  19. surface gravity (governs escape velocity) (12) (p = 0.001)
    if stronger: planet's atmosphere would retain too much ammonia and methane for life
    if weaker: planet's atmosphere would lose too much water for life

  20. distance from parent star (13) (p = 0.001)
    if greater: planet would be too cool for a stable water cycle
    if lesser: planet would be too warm for a stable water cycle

  21. inclination of orbit (22) (p = 0.5)
    if too great: temperature range on the planet's surface would be too extreme for life

  22. orbital eccentricity (9) (p = 0.3)
    if too great: seasonal temperature range would be too extreme for life

  23. axial tilt (9) (p = 0.3)
    if greater: surface temperature differences would be too great to sustain diverse life-forms
    if lesser: same result

  24. rate of change of axial tilt (9) (p = 0.01)
    if greater: climatic and temperature changes would be too extreme for life

  25. rotation period (11) (p = 0.1)
    if longer: diurnal temperature differences would be too great for life
    if shorter: atmospheric wind velocities would be too great for life

  26. rate of change in rotation period (14) (p = 0.05)
    if more rapid: change in day-to-night temperature variation would be too extreme for sustained life
    if less rapid: change in day-to-night temperature variation would be too slow for the development of advanced life

  27. planet's age (9) (p = 0.1)
    if too young: planet would rotate too rapidly for life
    if too old: planet would rotate too slowly for life

  28. magnetic field (20) (p = 0.01)
    if stronger: electromagnetic storms would be too severe
    if weaker: planetary surface and ozone layer would be inadequately protected from hard solar and stellar radiation

  29. thickness of crust (15) (p = 0.01)
    if greater: crust would rob atmosphere of oxygen needed for life
    if lesser: volcanic and tectonic activity would be destructive to life

  30. albedo (ratio of reflected light to total amount falling on surface) (9) (p = 0.1)
    if greater: runaway glaciation would develop
    if less: runaway greenhouse effect would develop

  31. asteroid and comet collision rates (9) (p = 0.1)
    if greater: ecosystem balances would be destroyed
    if less: crust would contain too little of certain life-essential elements

  32. mass of body colliding with primordial earth (9) (p = 0.002)
    if greater: Earth's orbit and form would be too greatly disturbed for life
    if lesser: Earth's atmosphere would be too thick for life; moon would be too small to fulfill its life-sustaining role

  33. timing of above collision (9) (p = 0.05)
    if earlier: Earth's atmosphere would be too thick for life; moon would be too small to fulfill its life-sustaining role
    if later: Earth's atmosphere would be too thin for life; sun would be too luminous for subsequent life

  34. oxygen to nitrogen ratio in atmosphere (25) (p = 0.1)
    if greater: advanced life functions would proceed too rapidly
    if lesser: advanced life functions would proceed too slowly

  35. carbon dioxide level in atmosphere (21) (p = 0.01)
    if greater: runaway greenhouse effect would develop
    if less: plants would be unable to maintain efficient photosynthesis

  36. water vapor quantity in atmosphere (9) (p = 0.01)
    if greater: runaway greenhouse effect would develop
    if less: rainfall would be too meager for advanced land life

  37. atmospheric electric discharge rate (9) (p = 0.1)
    if greater: fires would be too frequent and widespread for life
    if less: too little nitrogen would be fixed in the atmosphere

  38. ozone quantity in atmosphere (9) (p = 0.01)
    if greater: surface temperatures would be too low for life; insufficient UV radiation for life
    if less: surface temperatures would be too high for life; UV radiation would be too intense for life

  39. oxygen quantity in atmosphere (9) (p = 0.01)
    if greater: plants and hydrocarbons would burn up too easily, destabilizing Earth's ecosystem
    if less: advanced animals would have too little to breathe

  40. seismic activity (16) (p = 0.1)
    if greater: life would be destroyed; ecosystem would be damaged
    if less: nutrients on ocean floors from river runoff would not be recycled to continents through tectonics; not enough carbon dioxide would be released from carbonate buildup

  41. volcanic activity (26)
    if lower: insufficient amounts of carbon dioxide and water vapor would be returned to the atmosphere; soil mineralization would be insufficient for life advanced life support
    if higher: advanced life would be destroyed; ecosystem would be damaged

  42. rate of decline in tectonic activity (26) (p = 0.1)
    if slower: crust conditions would be too unstable for advanced life
    if faster: crust nutrients would be inadequate for sustained land life

  43. rate of decline in volcanic activity (9) (p = 0.1)
    if slower: crust and surface conditions would be unsuitable for sustained land life
    if faster: crust and surface nutrients would be inadequate for sustained land life

  44. oceans-to-continents ratio (11) (p = 0.2)
    if greater: diversity and complexity of life-forms would be limited
    if smaller: same result

  45. rate of change in oceans-to-continents ratio (9) (p = 0.1)
    if smaller: land area would be insufficient for advanced life
    if greater: change would be too radical for advanced life to survive

  46. distribution of continents (10) (p = 0.3)
    if too much in the Southern Hemisphere: sea-salt aerosols would be insufficient to stabilize surface temperature and water cycle; increased seasonal differences would limit the available habitats for advanced land life

  47. frequency and extent of ice ages (9) (p = 0.1)
    if lesser: Earth's surface would lack fertile valleys essential for advanced life; mineral concentrations would be insufficient for advanced life.
    if greater: Earth would experience runaway freezing

  48. soil mineralization (9) (p = 0.1)
    if nutrient poorer: diversity and complexity of lifeforms would be limited
    if nutrient richer: same result

  49. gravitational interaction with a moon (17) (p = 0.1)
    if greater: tidal effects on the oceans, atmosphere, and rotational period would be too severe for life
    if lesser: orbital obliquity changes would cause climatic instabilities; movement of nutrients and life from the oceans to the continents and vice versa would be insufficient for life; magnetic field would be too weak to protect life from dangerous radiation

  50. Jupiter distance (18) (p = 0.1)
    if greater: Jupiter would be unable to protect Earth from frequent asteroid and comet collisions
    if lesser: Jupiter�s gravity would destabilize Earth's orbit

  51. Jupiter mass (19) (p = 0.1)
    if greater: Jupiter�s gravity would destabilize Earth's orbit 9
    if lesser: Jupiter would be unable to protect Earth from asteroid and comet collisions

  52. drift in (major) planet distances (9) (p = 0.1)
    if greater: Earth's orbit would be destabilized
    if less: asteroid and comet collisions would be too frequent for life

  53. major planet orbital eccentricities (18) (p = 0.05)
    if greater: Earth's orbit would be pulled out of life support zone

  54. major planet orbital instabilities (9) (p = 0.1)
    if greater: Earth's orbit would be pulled out of life support zone

  55. atmospheric pressure (9) (p = 0.1)
    if smaller: liquid water would evaporate too easily and condense too infrequently to support life
    if greater: inadequate liquid water evaporation to support life; insufficient sunlight would reach Earth's surface; insufficient UV radiation would reach Earth's surface

  56. atmospheric transparency (9) (p = 0.01)
    if greater: too broad a range of solar radiation wavelengths would reach Earth's surface for life support
    if lesser: too narrow a range of solar radiation wavelengths would reach Earth's surface for life support

  57. chlorine quantity in atmosphere (9) (p = 0.1)
    if greater: erosion rate and river, lake, and soil acidity would be too high for most life forms; metabolic rates would be too high for most life forms
    if lesser: erosion rate and river, lake, and soil acidity would be too low for most life forms; metabolic rates would be too low for most life forms

  58. iron quantity in oceans and soils (9) (p = 0.1)
    if greater: iron poisoning would destroy advanced life
    if lesser: food to support advanced life would be insufficient
    if very small: no life would be possible

  59. tropospheric ozone quantity (9) (p = 0.01)
    if greater: advanced animals would experience respiratory failure; crop yields would be inadequate for advanced life; ozone-sensitive species would be unable to survive
    if smaller: biochemical smog would hinder or destroy most life

  60. stratospheric ozone quantity (9) (p = 0.01)
    if greater: not enough LTV radiation would reach Earth's surface to produce food and life-essential vitamins
    if lesser: too much LTV radiation would reach Earth's surface, causing skin cancers and reducing plant growth

  61. mesospheric ozone quantity (9) (p = 0.01)
    if greater: circulation and chemistry of mesospheric gases would disturb relative abundance of life-essential gases in lower atmosphere
    if lesser: same result

  62. frequency and extent of forest and grass fires (24) (p = 0.01)
    if greater: advanced life would be impossible
    if lesser: accumulation of growth inhibitors, combined with insufficient nitrification, would make soil unsuitable for food production

  63. quantity of soil sulfur (9) (p = 0.1)
    if greater: plants would be destroyed by sulfur toxins, soil acidity, and disturbance of the nitrogen cycle
    if lesser: plants would die from protein deficiency

  64. biomass to comet-infall ratio (9) (p = 0.01)
    if greater: greenhouse gases would decline, triggering runaway freezing
    if lesser: greenhouse gases would accumulate, triggering runaway greenhouse effect

  65. quantity of sulfur in planet's core (9) (p = 0.1)
    if greater: solid inner core would never form, disrupting magnetic field
    if smaller: solid inner core formation would begin too soon, causing it to grow too rapidly and extensively, disrupting magnetic field

  66. quantity of sea-salt aerosols (9) (p = 0.1)
    if greater: too much and too rapid cloud formation over the oceans would disrupt the climate and atmospheric temperature balances
    if smaller: insufficient cloud formation; hence, inadequate water cycle; disrupts atmospheric temperature balances and hence the climate

  67. dependency factors (estimate 100,000,000,000)

  68. longevity requirements (estimate .00001)

Total Probability = 1:1099

Ref:

  • 7) Cowen, R. 1992. Were spiral galaxies once more common? Science News 142: 390.
    Dressler, et al. 1994. New images of the distant rich cluster, CL 0939+4713 with WFPC2. Astrophysical Journal Letters 435: L23-L26.

  • 8) Davies, R.E. and R. H. Koch. 1991. All the observed universe has contributed to life. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, series B 334: 391-403.

  • 9) Ross, H. 1995. The Creator and the Cosmos. NavPress, Colorado Springs, CO, chapters 14 and 15
    10) Ross, H. 1998. Big Bang Refined by Fire. Reasons To Believe, Pasadena, CA.

god-and-nature.org Home Topics: Bible Faith Nature History Cults World Religions News-N-Bible Links About

Founded 2026 Facebook and x.com TBA