Toontown
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2010
- Messages
- 6,595
No most of us use the common meaning of the word but I see you prefer Humpty Dumpty's method.
[/I]
I don't know what you mean by "common meaning". What you've been arguing against is the theistic meaning, which has not been supported here, so there is no good reason for you to be arguing against it here.
What I mean is exactly the scientific meaning, and nothing else.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-tuning
Quote:
"In theoretical physics, fine-tuning refers to circumstances when the parameters of a model must be adjusted very precisely in order to agree with observations. Theories requiring fine-tuning are regarded as problematic in the absence of a known mechanism to explain why the parameters happen to have precisely the needed values. Explanations often invoked to resolve fine-tuning problems include natural mechanisms by which the values of the parameters may be constrained to their observed values, and the anthropic principle.
The necessity of fine-tuning leads to various problems that do not show that the theories are incorrect, in the sense of falsifying observations, but nevertheless suggest that a piece of the story is missing. For example, the cosmological constant problem (why is the cosmological constant so small?); the hierarchy problem; the strong CP problem, and others.
An example of a fine-tuning problem considered by the scientific community to have a plausible "natural" solution is the cosmological flatness problem, which is solved if inflationary theory is correct: inflation forces the universe to become very flat, answering the question of why the universe is today observed to be flat to such a high degree."
Last edited: