no... this has nothing to do with someone believing in God. this is just a few crazy atheists denying science and I enjoy finding all the science that shows they are wrong because I love the science. I don't care if they don't believe in God. If God wanted them to believe, he could choose to make them believe.
http://www.simpletoremember.com/articles/a/creatorfacts/ 1) Professor Steven Weinberg, a Nobel laureate in high energy physics (a field of science that deals with the very early universe), writing in the journal “Scientific American”, reflects on how surprising it is that the laws of nature and the initial conditions of the universe should allow for the existence of beings who could observe it. Life as we know it would be impossible if any one of several physical quantities had slightly different values. Although Weinberg is a self-described agnostic, he cannot but be astounded by the extent of the fine-tuning. He goes on to describe how a beryllium isotope having the minuscule half life of 0.0000000000000001 seconds must find and absorb a helium nucleus in that split of time before decaying. This occurs only because of a totally unexpected, exquisitely precise, energy match between the two nuclei. If this did not occur there would be none of the heavier elements. No carbon, no nitrogen, no life. Our universe would be composed of hydrogen and helium. But this is not the end of Professor Weinberg’s wonder at our well-tuned universe. He continues: One constant does seem to require an incredible fine-tuning—The existence of life of any kind seems to require a cancellation between different contributions to the vacuum energy, accurate to about 120 decimal places. This means that if the energies of the Big Bang were, in arbitrary units, not: 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000, but instead: 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000001, there would be no life of any sort in the entire universe because as Weinberg states: the universe either would go through a complete cycle of expansion and contraction before life could arise, or would expand so rapidly that no galaxies or stars could form. 2) Michael Turner, the widely quoted astrophysicist at the University of Chicago and Fermilab, describes the fine-tuning of the universe with a simile: The precision is as if one could throw a dart across the entire universe and hit a bulls eye one millimeter in diameter on the other side. 3) Roger Penrose, the Rouse Ball Professor of Mathematics at the University of Oxford, discovers that the likelihood of the universe having usable energy (low entropy) at the creation is even more astounding, namely, an accuracy of one part out of ten to the power of ten to the power of 123. This is an extraordinary figure. One could not possibly even write the number down in full, in our ordinary denary (power of ten) notation: it would be one followed by ten to the power of 123 successive zeros! (That is a million billion billion billion billion billion billion billion billion billion billion billion billion billion zeros.) Penrose continues, Even if we were to write a zero on each separate proton and on eachseparate neutron in the entire universe—and we could throw in all the other particles as well for good measure—we should fall far short of writing down the figure needed. The precision needed to set the universe on its course is to be in no way inferior to all that extraordinary precision that we have already become accustomed to in the superb dynamical equations (Newton’s, Maxwell’s, Einstein’s) which govern the behavior of things from moment to moment. Cosmologists debate whether the space-time continuum is finite or infinite, bounded or unbounded. In all scenarios, the fine-tuning remains the same. It is appropriate to complete this section on “fine tuning” with the eloquent words of Professor John Wheeler: To my mind, there must be at the bottom of it all, not an utterly simple equation, but an utterly simple IDEA. And to me that idea, when we finally discover it, will be so compelling, and so inevitable, so beautiful, we will all say to each other, “How could it have ever been otherwise?
Yes you've been lying for years about what scientists have been saying. Your so called truth comes from religious apologists -partially quoting here and there in order to mislead - websites like creatorfact That's not science. No one knows, yet, why a certain parameter appears to be at an infinitesimally tiny number and not some other value, say zero for instance as Einstein said. So you conclude it must have been Tuned by a so called Creator Tuner. That's not science. It's religion. A superstitious conclusion for wherever scientific explanations are incomplete. God of the gaps. It's no explanation and it's not science.
no moron liar. that is not what I say. first of all if you read the articles or wikipedia or anything else I have provided you would understand the scientists know this precision as fine tuning. Its their phrase. so A you are an asshole for calling me a liar. b... I have given you videos from Susskind and Penrose and others explaining... that as of now there are a few candidates to explain the fine tuning. 1. almost infinite universes.. or a multiverse is preferred by some. 2. but... a Tuner is also a possible answers. That you continue to deny science... really is disgusting. That you pretend I tell you, you must conclude there is a Tuner... is spineless troll garbage.
You mean preferred by those doing science. That's no kind of a scientific answer. By Tuner you mean god. There's your deceit. If by Tuner you meant gravity, that would be a scientific answer. "Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing." Stephen Hawking You take an idiomatic expression used in science, (due to certain parameters it's as if the universe appears fine tuned), change it to say something it doesn't (the universe is fine tuned) then add a so called supernatural Tuner into it (tuning requires a Tuner, one possible explanation is a Tuner). Religious explanations are not scientific explanations. Religious explanation is no explanation at all. Through all your deceit, the untruthfulness you mislead yourself with and the lies you peddle, it's clear you no longer know what you're saying.
Why is there such a law as gravity? Did that law create itself? How did it do it? By mere chance or luck?
In non scientific matters like religion those questions don't matter. Gravity can simply be eternal. The point is, unlike god it is observed to exist and is the Creator which makes the universe inevitable.