What would a designed universe look like?

[RandFan]

simple in this context referred to a God without the baggage......... though, if you buy into a computer simulation argument, maybe one day we will all have the chance to be gods, and I'm pretty simple

Ok, I understand what you mean. Yes, this is a fair point IMO.

 

[Hokulele]

Option five is not unacceptable, but it is the equivalent of throwing one's hands up in the air, when faced with a difficult question. Surely we should attempt an answer based on what we do know, rather than the Rumsfieldian known unknowns and unknown unknowns that we don't?

Mmmm, yes and no. If I have a choice between accepting the fact I do not know and making an assumption that exists only to make me happy, I would rather wait and see. However, I can accept that other people would prefer to fill in the blank with something.

And please, Rumsfeld? * Shudder*

With regards to one, it is the role of science to look at the reasons why.... so it seems only right to question why an astronomical fluke would apparently happen........ though I'm not sure what science can do about your rock

Well, to be a bit pedantical (shut UP, Tricky!), there is a bit of difference between causes and reasons or meanings. For me personally, I am not only unsure about what science can do regarding my rock (although it may be able to explain how it got there), I am also unsure about what science (or religion or philosophy) can do regarding the universe (although any of the three can explain how it got there, with varying degrees of accuracy).

Maybe I just have more interesting questions to lose sleep over.

I wouldn't say that fine-tuning does exist to support human life...

Here we are in complete agreement. Unfortunately, not everyone agrees.

... it is possible that it does, it is possible that exists to support a universe like our own in which we are happy byproducts, it is possible that universal fine-tuning exists because of multi-verses, it is possible that it exists purely as an astronomical fluke, or it is possible that universal fine-tuning does not really exist and we only think it does due to insufficient scientific understanding.

I tend to agree with the last option you listed, but as I said earlier, I can accept that not everyone sees it this way.

 

[bokonon]

If the proton to electron ratio were much smaller there would be no stars, if it were much larger, there would be no ordered structures like crystals or DNA, if protons were 0.2% heavier they would decay into neutrons and thus there would be no stable atoms, the list goes on. We can pretend that actually this isn't so, but it is.

And if my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.

Okay, if gravity were repulsive rather than attractive, stars and planets could not form. But does that mean it is physically possible for gravity to be repulsive rather than attractive? Or are such speculations merely meaningless thought experiments?

And even if such physics was a possibility, would that mean life would be impossible? Or would it perhaps be the case that if the physics was different than any we have seen, the kinds of life that might be possible would also be different?

With the Goldilocks enigma we are faced with the following choices;

1) our universe as it exists is an astronomical fluke
2) our universe is explained through multiverse models
3) goddidit
4) our universe is explained through CS (computer simulation)
5) our universe can be explained without recourse for (1)-(4) but human knowledge is insufficient to do so now.

Is it possible to make the "heavy protons" you allude to above? If not, it may be that the universe as it exists is no more "fluke" than the fact that all circles are round.

with regards to cosmic fine tuning, selection effects and anthropic reasoning,
http://anthropic-principle.com/preprints/spacetime.pdf
is well worth a read...

I tried, but it made my eyes glaze over.

With regards to Bostrom's computer simulation argument
http://www.simulation-argument.com/simulation.html
is also worth looking at

Even the title of this one seems so comic-book sci-fi that it makes my eyes glaze over.

In any case, you seem to be discussing design at the elementary particle level, rather than at the level of galaxies and solar systems. Even if life needs atoms like the ones we have, I still don't see the "design" element in making so many places so hostile to life as we know it. If the universe was "designed for life," it wasn't designed very well.

To ACS - it pains me that you dismissed my discussion of the design flaws I perceive in this universe as "silly." I'm inclined to suspect that the only answer you wouldn't dismiss as "silly" is one that comes with a dawning realization and the words, "My God, it would look just like THIS one!"

 

[A Christian Sceptic]

Then answer mine as well:

Why does evidence of design equate to evidence of god, as opposed to evidence of a virtual universe or simulation which we all inhabit?

Why don't you start your own thread. Maybe someone will show you something. I'd be interested in hearing what they say too.

 

[Tricky]

Why? That seems like a somewhat arbitrarily chosen constraint.
If, as seems likely, life is robust in its ability to survive, then life will likely be found in an astronomical number of places across the universe. But in any case, i'm not sure why design necessitates a given percentage of occupation by life.

Not at all arbitrary. In fact it would be a direct consequence of a life-desiring designer. If the universe were constructed by a "life designer", then it would seem obvious that there would be more life in it. Otherwise it would appear that life were not an important criterion, but just "happened" here (or perhaps, in a few places).

If you had a clothes designer, then it would be obvious that the objects they designed would all (or at least mostly) be items you could wear. If it turned out that only a tiny percentage of their designs were wearable, then you could hardly call them a "clothes designer".

As Ambrose Bierce defined:

OCEAN, n. A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man -- who has no gills.

The problem is, that when talking about design the baggage of God automatically gets dragged in. And all at once it is the God that people don't believe in that has to be imposed upon the process. It is possible to have a designer without a God, or indeed a simple God merely as cosmic originator, about whom no claims are made.

True, but this concept of God is totally indistinguishable from "no god". In order to be called a "designer", then the designer must do something that can be identified as design. If no claims about God are made, then it would be incorrect to call that God a designer. That would be a claim.

If this were the kind of God you were talking about, then the original question would need to be more like:
"What would a designed universe look like if no designing were done?"

 

[A Christian Sceptic]

To ACS - it pains me that you dismissed my discussion of the design flaws I perceive in this universe as "silly." I'm inclined to suspect that the only answer you wouldn't dismiss as "silly" is one that comes with a dawning realization and the words, "My God, it would look just like THIS one!"

Where'd I do that?

The only posts I labeled silly, questionable or good were the first 6 or so.

 

[Gate2501]

Why don't you start your own thread. Maybe someone will show you something. I'd be interested in hearing what they say too.

I do not need to be shown anything. I am only interested in the responses of those who would say that design is evidence of god as opposed to evidence of VR. I think that it is a question that you cannot answer, because any rational person would have to conclude that even if there were signs of design, they would not necessarily equal signs of a god, especially not signs of a specific god.

If you are seeing some sort of design in our universe, then please explain what your evidence is, and why it is attributable to your god or gods and not some other phenomena such as VR. If you cannot, then please stop this line of inquiry; Your mind is shutting out any other possibilities for reasons of faith.

 

[AkuManiMani]

What would a designed universe look like?

An MMO or the Sims.

 

[Denver]

...
To ACS - it pains me that you dismissed my discussion of the design flaws I perceive in this universe as "silly." I'm inclined to suspect that the only answer you wouldn't dismiss as "silly" is one that comes with a dawning realization and the words, "My God, it would look just like THIS one!"

I think that is the fate of this thread. Since the original poster doesn't seem to want to clarify the question with any kind of purpose or requirements behind the design, then one possible 'correct' answer will always be that the universe would look exactly like it does now. And if that is all the OP was hoping for, then mission accomplished.

 

[A Christian Sceptic]

I think that is the fate of this thread. Since the original poster doesn't seem to want to clarify the question with any kind of purpose or requirements behind the design, then one possible 'correct' answer will always be that the universe would look exactly like it does now. And if that is all the OP was hoping for, then mission accomplished.

Since apparently the question is so vague - here's another try:

In a different thread someone said that the universe does not show signs of being a designed universe. SO - if you have that same opinion - what would a designed universe look like? And since you have that opinion you apparently know what "designed" in this context means to you. So answer accordingly.

****ALERT ****
If the above question is not applicable to you - then feel free to move on to the next appropriatly suitable thread.
****END ALERT****

 

[ImaginalDisc]

What would a designed universe look like?

Isn't design to do what an important question we have to ask first?

The earliest stars burned hot and clean, and filled the universe with heavy elements, leading to a greater and still greater variety of strange stars, some far bigger than our own, some with with incidental objects around them, some that swallowed themselves up and eat their own light. Some burn for ages, dimly, others roar and rage in a final spurt that outshines all their millions of brethren around them.

I suppose a universe designed to be a beautiful play, where the four universal forces take their turns on stage would look, or at least could look, like this one. However, this a poor universe for the purpose of making people.

Our basic parts are as common as dirt - more common even. Helium aside, one for one, each of the most common elements in a human is equally common in the universe, but only because the stars in the prelude of the universe made them as waste products as they desperately fused them into being before they bowed out. Our sizes are measured in feet, but we live on a planet thousands of miles across. Most of it is molten rock and we flicker across the cold skin of it. We can see across the vastness of space, but almost everything we can see is a star in our local neighborhood. There are billions of neighborhoods of stars that not only can we not see, we could never reach, even if we were as swift and inerrant as beams of light. Even more insultingly, we're getting late reports and old recordings. Midnight movie serials and reruns of shows from generations past are our fare in a universe where no one could ever have a live performance of everything.

We are just smart enough to laugh, and cry, and wonder, and hope, but in a universe full of such incredible vistas, we're too stupid to ever intuitively grasp its immensity. We're just not smart enough to ever entirely appreciate the splendor and age of the universe. Our creator might be able to appreciate the cosmic play we're in, but none of us could ever imbibe it like that hypothetical connaisseur.

If this universe is designed, it's certainly not designed for us. Even if that creator does clap his hands in self-approval at our meager lives, our sufferings, our faults, our diseases, disorders, and distempers, we're just a side show in a universe made for stars.

 

[AkuManiMani]

Since apparently the question is so vague - here's another try:

In a different thread someone said that the universe does not show signs of being a designed universe. SO - if you have that same opinion - what would a designed universe look like? And since you have that opinion you apparently know what "designed" in this context means to you. So answer accordingly.

****ALERT ****
If the above question is not applicable to you - then feel free to move on to the next appropriatly suitable thread.
****END ALERT****

Okay, then lets end this farce right now.

A designed universe looks like however it was designed to be.

 

[Denver]

Since apparently the question is so vague - here's another try:

In a different thread someone said that the universe does not show signs of being a designed universe. SO - if you have that same opinion - what would a designed universe look like? And since you have that opinion you apparently know what "designed" in this context means to you. So answer accordingly.

I did not express that opinion. I am pointing out, however, that if you are going to ask what a design of ANYTHING looks like, you should include what you mean it was designed to do. And if you mean "designed to do exactly what this one does", then of course one answer is that it would look exactly like this one does. But then again, it's not a very meaningful question when you use that requirement.

I think a clearer question would be: What signs are there that shows that this was a designed universe?

 

[Hokulele]

Since apparently the question is so vague - here's another try:

In a different thread someone said that the universe does not show signs of being a designed universe. SO - if you have that same opinion - what would a designed universe look like? And since you have that opinion you apparently know what "designed" in this context means to you. So answer accordingly.

It would show some clear intent or purpose. As there is no objective evidence of such (or even consensus amongst those claiming evidence), it does not show signs of being designed.

For example, if the universe were designed simply to nurture humankind, it wouldn't be so dangerous. If the universe were designed simply to force individuals to choose between god existing or god not existing, the consequences of such a decision would be clear to all humans at some point in their life.

So now that I have honestly and sincerely answered your question, please answer just two of mine. Do you believe the universe as we know it was designed? If so, what purpose do you see in this universe?

I will refrain from asking for evidence to support your answers.

At this time.

 

[AkuManiMani]

I think a clearer question would be: What signs are there that shows that this was a designed universe?

What would it matter if no ones comes to take credit for it and theres no tech support?

 

[bokonon]

each of the most common elements in a human is equally common in the universe, but only because the stars in the prelude of the universe made them as waste products as they desperately fused them into being before they bowed out.

Cue ethereal synthesizer...
[Sagan]We are, all of us, star poop.[/Sagan]

 

[A Christian Sceptic]

I did not express that opinion. I am pointing out, however, that if you are going to ask what a design of ANYTHING looks like, you should include what you mean it was designed to do. And if you mean "designed to do exactly what this one does", then of course one answer is that it would look exactly like this one does. But then again, it's not a very meaningful question when you use that requirement.

I was asking for someone who is making the claim that this is not what a designed universe would look like for what a designed should look like. I'm not the one who is claiming this is one or the other for this OP. But someone making that claim must have an idea of what they mean the same way someone making the opposite claim should have an idea of what they mean.

I think a clearer question would be: What signs are there that shows that this was a designed universe?

Again - that means you know what a designed universe should look like. And that's my question.

 

[A Christian Sceptic]

It would show some clear intent or purpose. As there is no objective evidence of such (or even consensus amongst those claiming evidence), it does not show signs of being designed.

For example, if the universe were designed simply to nurture humankind, it wouldn't be so dangerous. If the universe were designed simply to force individuals to choose between god existing or god not existing, the consequences of such a decision would be clear to all humans at some point in their life.

So now that I have honestly and sincerely answered your question, please answer just two of mine. Do you believe the universe as we know it was designed? If so, what purpose do you see in this universe?

I will refrain from asking for evidence to support your answers.

At this time.

I'll PM you - since what I think isn't meant to be the purpose of this thread.

 

[Hokulele]

Cue ethereal synthesizer...
[Sagan]We are, all of us, star poop.[/Sagan]

 

[fuelair]

There are countless examples of Intelligently Designed universes, many of which are in the form of science fiction novels.

By examining sci/fi novels we might be able deduce some characteristics that would apply to a Designed universe, and see if they apply to ours. Maybe.

For example:
Sci-fi novels tend to have main characters for which the "Universe" was contrived to work around. Are there any such "main characters" in our real Universe?

No, but there seem to be a goodly number who think they are.