“Why is gravity fine-tuned? If gravity were a tiny bit stronger, the universe as we know it would not exist”
That one is kinda circular. Why is a cup in the shape of the water inside it? It’s not. The water takes the shape of the cup.
If gravity wasn’t fine tuned we wouldn’t be here to notice how fine tuned gravity it is to our existence which is the way it is because of the way gravity is fine tuned.
Whoever wrote that assumes that we know everything there is to know about everything. We obviously don’t. There’s also a lot of misinformation there, theorizing and guesswork. If the opposite of light is dark, then the opposite of gravity is not-gravity.
What? The whole point of the article was that theorizing and guesswork are pretty much all we have to go on at this point, which also directly contradicts your “know everything about everything” accusation, so how in the world is that misinformation?
All the other forces in nature have opposites: False. . Gravity is the weakling among the fundamental forces: False. Ever talk to a black hole? . Why is gravity fine-tuned? It’s not. It just is what it is like everything else. . From plants to quail, life of all stripes seems to need gravity to work properly. How do we know this? All we know is what is here on our little ball. I’m quite certain there are beings out there who would think this statement quite silly. . Can we counter gravity? The only good point in this article. . Will we ever have a quantum theory of gravity? Acedetect answered this today in a Tweet. Things are much simpler than we humans make them out to be. . I’ve got Kepler blood in me so I’m always philosophizing & thinking about this stuff.
“All the other forces in nature have opposites: False.” Actually they are right if you consider that they are talking about the Strong, Weak and Electromagnetic forces. These three and the gravity force is what physicists refer to as the only four forces in the universe.
“Gravity is the weakling among the fundamental forces: False. Ever talk to a black hole?” If you were it pit the Strong, Weak or Electromagnetic forces of the same mass against a Black Hole they would own the black hole and suck this whole section of the universe in. Think about it this way. A magnet that you can hold in your hand will attach to metal using the Electromagnetic force. But it has a virtually undetectable gravity pull on you. The Electromagnetic force is much stronger.
At Lowly One, A good analogy I heard is that by lifting a book off a table, you’re resisting the entire planet’s gravitational pull. That’s how weak it is.
I’m starting to think you didn’t even actually read the whole article (or even read past the headliners).
“From plants to quail, life of all stripes seems to need gravity to work properly. How do we know this?” We know life on Earth needs gravity to function properly because we’ve tested this outside of Earth’s gravity, as stated in the article.
“Why is gravity fine-tuned? It’s not. It just is what it is like everything else.” Gravity IS remarkably fine-tuned, since if it were only slightly weaker, stars wouldn’t be able to form, and if it were any stronger, most mass in the universe wouldn’t be very stable for long, black holes would form much more quickly and our entire cosmic existence would probably have been over by now.
For a self-proclaimed philosopher of quantum mechanics and theory, you seem to pretty much not know shit.
“We know life on Earth needs gravity to function properly because we’ve tested this outside of Earth’s gravity, as stated in the article.”
But the life we have tested in space, where is it from? Earth. So what kind of environment has it evolved and adapted to? That of the Earth.
It’s like taking an ice cube out of the freezer, letting it melt and evaporate, and declaring that the freezer is necessary for the existence of water. It is, but only for a certain form: ice.
“Gravity IS remarkably fine-tuned, since if it were only slightly weaker, stars wouldn’t be able to form, and if it were any stronger, most mass in the universe wouldn’t be very stable for long, black holes would form much more quickly and our entire cosmic existence would probably have been over by now.”
But like the first post says, this argument is circular. If gravity had been any less fine tuned it’s entirely possible that the universe would have ended long before there was life, or certainly life that evolved to the point where it could question the hows and whys.
i read one interesting argument that as proof of a multi-verse, was that out universe was soo fine tuned..
the analogy they used was that if you were in a hotel, and you saw the door number 204, you could guess that there were more than one room in this hotel, not because you saw them, but because you were able to interpolate this from the evidance at hand.
so, if everything is perfect in this universes, than there had to be a countless number in which it was off….
Does this mean i’m officially in the smart category? I’ve been hanging around the doldrums that is the “hardly clever” and “barely witty” categories for awhile now
“Why is gravity fine-tuned?
If gravity were a tiny bit stronger, the universe as we know it would not exist”
That one is kinda circular. Why is a cup in the shape of the water inside it? It’s not. The water takes the shape of the cup.
If gravity wasn’t fine tuned we wouldn’t be here to notice how fine tuned gravity it is to our existence which is the way it is because of the way gravity is fine tuned.
Whoever wrote that assumes that we know everything there is to know about everything. We obviously don’t.
There’s also a lot of misinformation there, theorizing and guesswork. If the opposite of light is dark, then the opposite of gravity is not-gravity.
I just liked the photo Scott chose to link to the article. Heh.
Best. Pic. Evar!
@Darrel
What? The whole point of the article was that theorizing and guesswork are pretty much all we have to go on at this point, which also directly contradicts your “know everything about everything” accusation, so how in the world is that misinformation?
I for one found the article quite fascinating.
I too found the article fascinating and the comments even more so. But now my brain hurts…too much theory for a Friday morning
All the other forces in nature have opposites: False.
.
Gravity is the weakling among the fundamental forces: False. Ever talk to a black hole?
.
Why is gravity fine-tuned? It’s not. It just is what it is like everything else.
.
From plants to quail, life of all stripes seems to need gravity to work properly. How do we know this? All we know is what is here on our little ball. I’m quite certain there are beings out there who would think this statement quite silly.
.
Can we counter gravity? The only good point in this article.
.
Will we ever have a quantum theory of gravity? Acedetect answered this today in a Tweet. Things are much simpler than we humans make them out to be.
.
I’ve got Kepler blood in me so I’m always philosophizing & thinking about this stuff.
Darrell
“All the other forces in nature have opposites: False.” Actually they are right if you consider that they are talking about the Strong, Weak and Electromagnetic forces. These three and the gravity force is what physicists refer to as the only four forces in the universe.
“Gravity is the weakling among the fundamental forces: False. Ever talk to a black hole?” If you were it pit the Strong, Weak or Electromagnetic forces of the same mass against a Black Hole they would own the black hole and suck this whole section of the universe in. Think about it this way. A magnet that you can hold in your hand will attach to metal using the Electromagnetic force. But it has a virtually undetectable gravity pull on you. The Electromagnetic force is much stronger.
What’s will all this talk about the grabbity. Isn’t this an article about Wayne?
At Lowly One,
A good analogy I heard is that by lifting a book off a table, you’re resisting the entire planet’s gravitational pull. That’s how weak it is.
@The Critic:
By the same token, when you can’t lift up an automobile, you can see how strong it is.
Lifting a book demostrates the weak pull the earth has on the book, not the pull in general.
@Darrell
I’m starting to think you didn’t even actually read the whole article (or even read past the headliners).
“From plants to quail, life of all stripes seems to need gravity to work properly. How do we know this?”
We know life on Earth needs gravity to function properly because we’ve tested this outside of Earth’s gravity, as stated in the article.
“Why is gravity fine-tuned? It’s not. It just is what it is like everything else.”
Gravity IS remarkably fine-tuned, since if it were only slightly weaker, stars wouldn’t be able to form, and if it were any stronger, most mass in the universe wouldn’t be very stable for long, black holes would form much more quickly and our entire cosmic existence would probably have been over by now.
For a self-proclaimed philosopher of quantum mechanics and theory, you seem to pretty much not know shit.
“We know life on Earth needs gravity to function properly because we’ve tested this outside of Earth’s gravity, as stated in the article.”
But the life we have tested in space, where is it from? Earth. So what kind of environment has it evolved and adapted to? That of the Earth.
It’s like taking an ice cube out of the freezer, letting it melt and evaporate, and declaring that the freezer is necessary for the existence of water. It is, but only for a certain form: ice.
“Gravity IS remarkably fine-tuned, since if it were only slightly weaker, stars wouldn’t be able to form, and if it were any stronger, most mass in the universe wouldn’t be very stable for long, black holes would form much more quickly and our entire cosmic existence would probably have been over by now.”
But like the first post says, this argument is circular. If gravity had been any less fine tuned it’s entirely possible that the universe would have ended long before there was life, or certainly life that evolved to the point where it could question the hows and whys.
@Tim
Understood, but those aren’t the points Darrell was trying to make. What he said was just silly.
Really, assume it’s really 8 things, because the picture of Wayne is one of them.
i read one interesting argument that as proof of a multi-verse, was that out universe was soo fine tuned..
the analogy they used was that if you were in a hotel, and you saw the door number 204, you could guess that there were more than one room in this hotel, not because you saw them, but because you were able to interpolate this from the evidance at hand.
so, if everything is perfect in this universes, than there had to be a countless number in which it was off….
Does this mean i’m officially in the smart category? I’ve been hanging around the doldrums that is the “hardly clever” and “barely witty” categories for awhile now
More importantly, does that mean I’m not smart because I don’t get it? And all this time I was walking around thinking I was intelligent.