Improbable Universe Part 2

[ryan]

The map of the cosmic microwave background radiation of the universe looks quite random. This would be expected since the map of radiation is a relic of quantum fluctuations of the very early universe.

But what could we see that would make the map look designed or improbable?

For example, what if there were a big word like "Hello" on the map. Would that be improbable? And assume only one universe.

Just like in my original thread, don't we also have to assume that this cmbr map is just one map out of an n number of equally likely maps?

For some reason we should see a map look like the one we have and not one with anything strange like a word.

 

[skepticalbip]

In my opinion the most improbable universe would be the one that many theists believe we live in today.

Say the right prayer and a loved one dying of some fatal disease will magically be cured. Pray, "Oh lord, want you buy me a Mercedes Benz" and in the morning a new Mercedes will be found in the driveway. Praying during a war for the defeat of some enemy will assure your nation's victory. etc. etc. In other words, a universe where a simple reverent prayer will alter the laws of nature and overcome any obstacle.

 

[steve_bank]

The map of the cosmic microwave background radiation of the universe looks quite random. This would be expected since the map of radiation is a relic of quantum fluctuations of the very early universe.

But what could we see that would make the map look designed or improbable?

For example, what if there were a big word like "Hello" on the map. Would that be improbable? And assume only one universe.

Just like in my original thread, don't we also have to assume that this cmbr map is just one map out of an n number of equally likely maps?

For some reason we should see a map look like the one we have and not one with anything strange like a word.

Ryan. mostly gibberish,.

The CMBR looks like a blackbody curve at several degrees Kelvin. It would be pointless to explain that, try searching blackbody radiation wiki. Simply any obkect above absolute zero radiates proportional to temperature. There is a peak wavelength and a characteristic distribution of wavelengths about the peak. The black body curve.

The interpretation is that cosmic background radiation looks like a blackbody at a specific peak temperature, very cold. What that means in detail in terms of the BB I can not cite off the top of my head, I'd have to look it up. It is seen as a consequence of the BB and part of the validation of the theory. Nothing about tuning.

Why is PI the ratio of a circle's circumference to diameter? Was it fine tuned to be that way or is it just the way the numbers work out?

 

[ryan]

The map of the cosmic microwave background radiation of the universe looks quite random. This would be expected since the map of radiation is a relic of quantum fluctuations of the very early universe.

But what could we see that would make the map look designed or improbable?

For example, what if there were a big word like "Hello" on the map. Would that be improbable? And assume only one universe.

Just like in my original thread, don't we also have to assume that this cmbr map is just one map out of an n number of equally likely maps?

For some reason we should see a map look like the one we have and not one with anything strange like a word.

Ryan. mostly gibberish,.

The CMBR looks like a blackbody curve at several degrees Kelvin. It would be pointless to explain that, try searching blackbody radiation wiki. Simply any obkect above absolute zero radiates proportional to temperature. There is a peak wavelength and a characteristic distribution of wavelengths about the peak. The black body curve.

The interpretation is that cosmic background radiation looks like a blackbody at a specific peak temperature, very cold. What that means in detail in terms of the BB I can not cite off the top of my head, I'd have to look it up. It is seen as a consequence of the BB and part of the validation of the theory. Nothing about tuning.

Why is PI the ratio of a circle's circumference to diameter? Was it fine tuned to be that way or is it just the way the numbers work out?

Did you read my OP carefully? This response does not seem to address what I was asking.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Yes, theoretically you could get an undersigned universe which supports life and has the CMBR spell out Hello in the language of the first people to discover it. In an infinite multiverse, the probability of that happening is one.

This would really fuck things up for scientists in that universe since they’d operate off of bad data from that point onwards.

 

[ryan]

Yes, theoretically you could get an undersigned universe which supports life and has the CMBR spell out Hello in the language of the first people to discover it. In an infinite multiverse, the probability of that happening is one.

This would really fuck things up for scientists in that universe since they’d operate off of bad data from that point onwards.

First of all, unlike the others, thanks for actually addressing the OP.

But what if there were only one universe? Why is Hello in the cmbr improbable after the fact. Why would the scientists resort to it being improbable the same way they say that a fine-tuned universe is improbable in a single universe? This seems to be the same issue that I had with the first OP.

Since most people agreed with me in the first OP, I am interested to see if they say the same about this example.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Well, it’s a low probability event, so if there’s only one universe it would be very improbable.

It would pretty much be like saying a roll of dice would come up as 53553245532224543653345621 as opposed to looking at what comes up and having that result be the sequence. It may come up as the one you’re looking for, but the odds are low.

 

[ryan]

Well, it’s a low probability event, so if there’s only one universe it would be very improbable.

It would pretty much be like saying a roll of dice would come up as 53553245532224543653345621 as opposed to looking at what comes up and having that result be the sequence. It may come up as the one you’re looking for, but the odds are low.

What is driving me crazy is assume that Hello in the cmbr map had a 1 in 10^500 chance of happening. All other cmbr maps have an equal chance too. So why isn't the map that exists improbable in the same way since it too had a 1 in 10^500 chance of happening?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Well, it’s a low probability event, so if there’s only one universe it would be very improbable.

It would pretty much be like saying a roll of dice would come up as 53553245532224543653345621 as opposed to looking at what comes up and having that result be the sequence. It may come up as the one you’re looking for, but the odds are low.

What is driving me crazy is assume that Hello in the cmbr map had a 1 in 10^500 chance of happening. All other cmbr maps have an equal chance too. So why isn't the map that exists improbable in the same way since it too had a 1 in 10^500 chance of happening?

Because you have trouble with math? I don't know what can be said that wasn't said in the other one a dozen times because there's not a new answer or perspective to be given that you haven't already been given and any responses will be about as illuminating to you as rest. Honestly, at this point it's like you're waving around two signs which each have two on them and wondering why the hell everybody is screaming "four" at you.

If you are in a universe that can support life (which you are) then that universe is going to be one that has properties which allow for the development of life. It's not a situation where you're randomly throwing darts at a wall in order to hit the in in 10^500 chance, you would have needed to hit a large number of those already in order to have the dart in the first place. The improbable already happened.

What we don't know is what the word "improbable" actually means here. If we are in an infinite multiverse, the word means "Something that has a 100% chance of happening". If we are in an infinite series of expansions and contractions of universes that have different properties, the word means "Something that has a 100% chance of happening". If this is the one and only universe, then those 1 in 10^500 occurrences need to be weighed against all the possible combinations that would allow for some form of life to develop. If there are three possible combinations of cosmic factors which would create conditions that allow life, then it's really unlikely it happened by chance. If there are 10^345720425324524522345623452452452 possible combinations of these, then it would be weird if it didn't happen. Without knowing how large or small that second number is, you can't just point to the first number and say "Hey, it's large and therefore something weird is going on".

 

[bilby]

It is completely meaningless to discuss the probability of a single observation.

 

[steve_bank]

The map of the cosmic microwave background radiation of the universe looks quite random. This would be expected since the map of radiation is a relic of quantum fluctuations of the very early universe.

But what could we see that would make the map look designed or improbable?

For example, what if there were a big word like "Hello" on the map. Would that be improbable? And assume only one universe.

Just like in my original thread, don't we also have to assume that this cmbr map is just one map out of an n number of equally likely maps?

For some reason we should see a map look like the one we have and not one with anything strange like a word.

When I first stared applying staistics to large data sets I thought I could see patterns in random data, knowng that it was just probabilities. After enough experience the odd feeling went away.

There was a case of a dirt on a roadside looking like what people thought was Jesus or mary.

Ever daydream as a kid seeing dragons in clouds?

Way back when I was studying statistics I spent hours doing basic experiments like flipping coins and tossing dice. Flipping coins can actualy be instructive.

Toss a coin 200 times and record heads or tails one after the other, a string of Hs and Ts on papwer. When you look at the sequence you are bound to see what you think are patterns in the sequence, but in the end the nuber of heads and tails will be close to 50/50.

If the underlying statistical distribution of a phenol,ema is know the probability of a combination of occureces can be predicted.

Put 10 each balls colored red, green, bkue, blackm white.m

The odds of picking a sequence of black black white blue can be predicted.

Better yet Put Scrabble tiles with 10 each of the alphabet in a box. Start picking samples of 4 replacing each sample tile in the box and shaking.

The probability of picking 'ryan' in sequence is predicable and will happen given enough trials.

We call patterns of stars constellations which look like something. Can you pick out the Big Dipper in the night sky?

 

[DBT]

An improbable Universe? How probably is a Creator of a Universe?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Also, what are some examples of these improbable occurrences that you're talking about?

 

[ryan]

It is completely meaningless to discuss the probability of a single observation.

That's what I think, but apparently an outcome after the fact can somehow be improbable.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

It is completely meaningless to discuss the probability of a single observation.

That's what I think, but apparently an outcome after the fact can somehow be improbable.

True of every lottery winner ever. An improbable thing happening doesn't mean that it was somehow less improbable for it to have happened.

 

[ryan]

Well, it’s a low probability event, so if there’s only one universe it would be very improbable.

It would pretty much be like saying a roll of dice would come up as 53553245532224543653345621 as opposed to looking at what comes up and having that result be the sequence. It may come up as the one you’re looking for, but the odds are low.

What is driving me crazy is assume that Hello in the cmbr map had a 1 in 10^500 chance of happening. All other cmbr maps have an equal chance too. So why isn't the map that exists improbable in the same way since it too had a 1 in 10^500 chance of happening?

Because you have trouble with math? I don't know what can be said that wasn't said in the other one a dozen times because there's not a new answer or perspective to be given that you haven't already been given and any responses will be about as illuminating to you as rest. Honestly, at this point it's like you're waving around two signs which each have two on them and wondering why the hell everybody is screaming "four" at you.

If you are in a universe that can support life (which you are) then that universe is going to be one that has properties which allow for the development of life. It's not a situation where you're randomly throwing darts at a wall in order to hit the in in 10^500 chance, you would have needed to hit a large number of those already in order to have the dart in the first place. The improbable already happened.

It seems like you agree with me. The reason why I don't like what we are saying is because scientists claim there needs to be something, a multiverse for example, to account for the improbable way that the laws, constants and boundary conditions are fine-tuned for life.

What we don't know is what the word "improbable" actually means here. If we are in an infinite multiverse, the word means "Something that has a 100% chance of happening". If we are in an infinite series of expansions and contractions of universes that have different properties, the word means "Something that has a 100% chance of happening". If this is the one and only universe, then those 1 in 10^500 occurrences need to be weighed against all the possible combinations that would allow for some form of life to develop. If there are three possible combinations of cosmic factors which would create conditions that allow life, then it's really unlikely it happened by chance. If there are 10^345720425324524522345623452452452 possible combinations of these, then it would be weird if it didn't happen. Without knowing how large or small that second number is, you can't just point to the first number and say "Hey, it's large and therefore something weird is going on".

Okay, so by "second number" do you mean what these possibilities are out of? If it is,

Imagine a multiverse with 10^500 universes (an actual value in string theory). One universe get's the Hello in the cmbr because it's inevitable. They would be surprised in some sense, but they shouldn't be if they knew how many universes there are.

Now imagine a universe without a multiverse that gets the Hello. I don't know why this would be improbable either. Afterall it had the same chance as any of the other possible cmbr maps, specifically 1/10^500.

 

[skepticalbip]

It is completely meaningless to discuss the probability of a single observation.

That's what I think, but apparently an outcome after the fact can somehow be improbable.

That seems to be a confusion of tenses. Any specific outcome that hasn't yet occured can be improbable if there are many other possible outcomes, a certainty if it is the only possibility, and a certainty after that outcome occurs regardless of how many other possible outcomes there were.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

It seems like you agree with me. The reason why I don't like what we are saying is because scientists claim there needs to be something, a multiverse for example, to account for the improbable way that the laws, constants and boundary conditions are fine-tuned for life.

OK, have you ever actually mentioned which scientists it is that you're talking about or which conditions they're referencing? Because I can't see an interpretation of my comments which translate into agreeing with you.

What we don't know is what the word "improbable" actually means here. If we are in an infinite multiverse, the word means "Something that has a 100% chance of happening". If we are in an infinite series of expansions and contractions of universes that have different properties, the word means "Something that has a 100% chance of happening". If this is the one and only universe, then those 1 in 10^500 occurrences need to be weighed against all the possible combinations that would allow for some form of life to develop. If there are three possible combinations of cosmic factors which would create conditions that allow life, then it's really unlikely it happened by chance. If there are 10^345720425324524522345623452452452 possible combinations of these, then it would be weird if it didn't happen. Without knowing how large or small that second number is, you can't just point to the first number and say "Hey, it's large and therefore something weird is going on".

Okay, so by "second number" do you mean what these possibilities are out of? If it is,

Imagine a multiverse with 10^500 universes (an actual value in string theory). One universe get's the Hello in the cmbr because it's inevitable. They would be surprised in some sense, but they shouldn't be if they knew how many universes there are.

Now imagine a universe without a multiverse that gets the Hello. I don't know why this would be improbable either. Afterall it had the same chance as any of the other possible cmbr maps, specifically 1/10^500.

Two things.

Number one, having an equal chance as every other possibility doesn't mean it's somehow less improbable. That is so unrelated to the definition of improbable that I really can't even expand upon it.

Number two, if the value of a condition is going to be somewhere between 1 and 10^500, what is it that makes you think that every value along that continuum must be equally likely? Why wouldn't there be factors involved in the creation of that condition which cause the outcome of that condition to group around the value of 20 10^499 times and only rarely have a value which comes up as higher than 21?

 

[ryan]

It is completely meaningless to discuss the probability of a single observation.

That's what I think, but apparently an outcome after the fact can somehow be improbable.

True of every lottery winner ever. An improbable thing happening doesn't mean that it was somehow less improbable for it to have happened.

Yes, but in order to make this an analogy to my issue of scientists calling life in a single universe improbable is to make it so only one person buys the ticket. The one person that bought the ticket wins and in some sense I agree that there would have had to be someone tampering with the lottery.

Imagine only 2 universes exist, one with life and one without life. Suppose we figured out a way to observe the other universe and we found that it had a strange substance S in a very small part of that universe and does not exist in our universe. Would we still say that it was improbable that the other universe were fine-tuned for S?

I am missing something, but I have no idea what.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

True of every lottery winner ever. An improbable thing happening doesn't mean that it was somehow less improbable for it to have happened.

Yes, but in order to make this an analogy to my issue of scientists calling life in a single universe improbable is to make it so only one person buys the ticket. The one person that bought the ticket wins and in some sense I agree that there would have had to be someone tampering with the lottery.

Imagine only 2 universes exist, one with life and one without life. Suppose we figured out a way to observe the other universe and we found that it had a strange substance S in a very small part of that universe and does not exist in our universe. Would we still say that it was improbable that the other universe were fine-tuned for S?

I am missing something, but I have no idea what.

No, that would be an experiment based on little to no data, so no valid conclusions could be seen at all, but I see what it is that you're getting at. If we were to observe a large number of universes and found that all the ones which don't have life contain S and none of the ones which do have S, then you could make a correlation between lack of S and conditions for life.