Hi, rceently there was a media released by NASA which says the cosmological constant values are observed to have been changing over time. As I learnt about intelligent design argument for God, why I have understood is that the values are finely tuned and unchanging, however, upon stumbling across this NASA’s release, i’m unsure how to make sense of intelligent design with the claim that NASA makes, saying the values of the cosmological constant isn’t fixed but changing. Please help me. thank you
@Dylan_Flow_Ang A few things to keep in mind:
- intelligent design does not rely on only one piece of evidence - the cosmological constant - it claims that the whole universe shows evidence of design - where did information come from if not an intelligence? How did things evolve simultaneously that rely on each other? Why is it that the conditions necessary for life are also the conditions necessary for discovery / exploration?
- simply because a value is changing over time does not mean that it does not show evidence for design - a value could be finely tuned to shift over time as well - a changing value does not do anything to knock over the intelligent design argument per my understanding
One impressive case is that of the fine-tuning of the cosmological constant. The fine-tuning is estimated to be at least one part in 1053, that is, one part in a one hundred million, billion, billion, billion, billion, billion. To get an idea of how precise this is, it would be like throwing a dart at the surface of the earth from outer space and hitting a bull’s-eye one trillionth of a trillionth of an inch in diameter — less than the size of an atom! Weinberg himself admits that the fine-tuning of the cosmological constant is so impressive that it merits invoking a “many-universes” hypothesis to explain it.
thank you for your prompt respond. I understand the part when you explain intelligent design can also be seen in the changing of the value over time to ensure the universe’s constant state. My concern is that the theory of ID claims that the value of Cosmological constant for example, has to be fine tuned to only a very precise value, not any other values. how do we reconcile this claim with a changing value over time? the same can be said for other constants. thanks
@Dylan_Flow_Ang Do you have a link to the article from NASA? I would need to understand their claim better to respond in detail.
I think you may be misunderstanding the nature of their report. I believe that the cosmological constant does have to be finely tuned. Simply because it shifts some does not actually mean it is not tuned. I’m curious to see what they actually said. Need to phone a friend to Hugh Ross to assess the validity of the claim…haha