dipper@utastro.UUCP (Debbie Byrd) (10/21/84)
Some cosmologists are wondering whether our universe came into being just so people could. More -- right after this. October 21 The Anthropic Principle Cosmologists are astronomers who study the whole universe. They wonder how the universe came into being -- and where it's going from here. A question in cosmology today is, why IS our universe the way we observe it to be? One answer -- which has been debated by cosmologists over the last decade -- may be that the universe evolved the way it did just so people could come along later -- to turn around and observe the universe. In other words, maybe consciousness is central to the universe. This idea even has a name in cosmology -- it's called the anthropic principle, which just means a principle relating to people. The anthropic principle came about when cosmologists began wondering how the orderly structure of our universe could have evolved from the chaos of the Big Bang -- the primordial explosion thought to have marked the birth of the universe. The anthropic principle can be stated in a mild way -- saying that if the universe were any different, we wouldn't be here to observe it. If, for example, the universe expanded outward from the Big Bang at a different rate -- or if the strength of gravity were slightly altered -- then intelligent life couldn't have evolved. Or the anthropic principle can be stated in a strong way -- perhaps intelligent life is a natural result of the universe -- that people are in fact the universe observing itself. So that's the anthropic principle -- the idea that people are necessary to the universe. And if this all sounds more like philosophy than astronomy -- well, many astronomers think so too. Script by Deborah Byrd. (c) Copyright 1983, 1984 McDonald Observatory, University of Texas at Austin
crs@lanl-a.UUCP (10/23/84)
I *HOPE* that the "creationists" won't invade net.astro in response to this article. *** Please *** Folks, if you want to discuss "The Anthropic Principle" from a creationist viewpoint, do it in net.creation where such discussion belongs. Thank you. Charlie
robison@eosp1.UUCP (Tobias D. Robison) (10/29/84)
Deborah Byrd's script on the Anthropic Principle contained a correct statement of it, I think, bit also several misleading and incorrect corollaries. The theory does not require one to assume that the universe was created FOR people. One might state it in terms of probability thus: It may be that there have been many universes, but this is the only one that could nurture the development of beings within it that can observe it and think about it. Universes with different physical constants couldn't develop such creatures, so no one gets to observe universes that are noticeably different from this one. I think this theory is much more noteworthy for its humorous underpinnings, than for any degree of observation (!!) or speculation to support it. A very dear friend of mine put it this way: If the strength of the gravitational force were weaker, the earth would not have sustained life. If the gravitational force were stronger, the apple would have killed Newton. - Toby Robison (not Robinson!) allegra!eosp1!robison or: decvax!ittvax!eosp1!robison or (emergency): princeton!eosp1!robison