[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 22 KB, 280x390, 1265830944716.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1278964 No.1278964 [Reply] [Original]

Sup, /sci/, explain to me the anthropic principle(strong and weak). Also how does it fit with modern physics?

>> No.1278986

weak-any other universe not capable of supporting life wouldnt have life to ask such silly questions

strong-there are a lot of other universes some capable of supporting life like ours some not. it is by chance not divine providence that we exist in a hospitable one

>> No.1278987

Anthropic principle: Ask any question about why the universe is such a way that organisms which can ask that question exist. Answer: Because if you assume through multiple universe interpretation of QM or multiple big bangs any and all universes are possible that's a stupid question. Like asking why the question "am I alive" and wondering why the answer is always yes.

Strong vs Weak: Pseudo intellectual bullshit. Might as well say strong vs weak Newton's laws of motion.

>> No.1279000

It basically states that we see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to observe it.

>> No.1279018

Honestly, the anthropic principle is a cheap way out of answering the actual questions. It's like the God argument: Why do we exist? "I dunno lol, God did it." But how did he do it? Same goes for the anthropic principle. It gives us no insight on how life could have emerged.

>> No.1279052

>>1279018
No it isn't, it explains it away using basic statistics and multiverse hypothesis.

>> No.1279066

>>1279018
It's not meant to answer questions.

It's only meant to show that the "look at how lucky we are! there must be a creator!" argument is bullshit, because we wouldn't be here to comment on how lucky we are if we weren't that lucky.