Re: anthropic principle

Moorad Alexanian (
Thu, 26 Aug 1999 08:59:57 -0400

I think the Anthropic principle is a sort of bootstrap theory where a deep
insight of the workings of nature can be used to generate the whole of
nature. Theories of origins are awfully difficult to conceive and develop
mathematically. Newton never attempted to explain where planets come from,
he was satisfied with explaining their motions. A theory that did make some
predications about the existence of something not yet discovered was Dirac's
theory of the electron that indicated the existence of the positron. [Dirac
thought that the positively charged particle that the theory required was
the proton, which was a known particle at the time.] Theories that predict
the existence of particles are hard to come by. I know of no theory that
predicts the fundamental constants of nature. Now physics is the easiest of
all the sciences--it deals with the simplest things in nature, viz., dead
things. Imagine a theory to predict living things!!!! We do not know what
life is, how can be come about a theory to explain how living things, say,
come from nonliving things. A deep mystery indeed.

-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Kouchoo <>
To: <>
Cc: <>
Date: Thursday, August 26, 1999 12:43 AM
Subject: Re: anthropic principle

>"We will show that if assumptions (a-c) are true, then the observation that
>our universe is "life-friendly" can never be evidence against the
>hypothesis that the universe is governed solely by naturalistic law.
>Moreover, "fine-tuning," in the sense that "life-friendly" laws are claimed
>to represent only a very small fraction of possible universes, can even
>undermine the hypothesis of a supernatural origin of the universe; and the
>more "finely-tuned" the universe is, the more this hypothesis can be
>Yes and the more universes they begin to 'imagine' the more unscientific
>their ideas begin to sound. This is pure fantasy.