Abraham "Avi" Loeb - Philosophy of Fine-Tuning

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 9 сен 2024
  • Follow Closer To Truth on X (Twitter) for news, articles, and updates, plus connect with other viewers: shorturl.at/imHY9
    Assuming that the fine-tuning of our universe is real, what would it mean? Scientists, philosophers, even theologians weigh in, spinning the fine-tuning story to support their own worldviews. But philosophers have a higher calling here: they need to apply rigorous thinking and analytical methods to discern deep issues and implications.
    Get exclusive benefits with a free Closer To Truth membership: closertotruth....
    Abraham (Avi) Loeb is an American/Israeli theoretical physicist who works on astrophysics and cosmology. Loeb is the Frank B. Baird, Jr. Professor of Science at Harvard University. He serves as Chair of the Harvard Astronomy department and director of the Institute for Theory and Computation (ITC) within the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.
    Watch more videos on fine-tuning of the universe: shorturl.at/d2QpV
    Closer To Truth, hosted by Robert Lawrence Kuhn and directed by Peter Getzels, presents the world’s greatest thinkers exploring humanity’s deepest questions. Discover fundamental issues of existence. Engage new and diverse ways of thinking. Appreciate intense debates. Share your own opinions. Seek your own answers.

Комментарии • 76

  • @benjamintrevino325
    @benjamintrevino325 Месяц назад +3

    I see Earth as being fine tuned for ants mostly.

  • @mickeybrumfield764
    @mickeybrumfield764 Месяц назад +4

    If reality was designed around there being life, particularly human life, in what way should it make our life and the way we live different? It would seem we should continue to live our lives as we see fit regardless of if reality revolves around us or not. My hunch is that we would like to think and hope that reality revolves around us because we want to be special because by being special, it will allow us to live for eternity. The desire to not die and live forever is the most basic instinct in all living things, especially humans with our great self-consciousness. The fact is that even if reality revolves around human life, that does not guarantee that we will live forever. The only way guaranteeing a longer existence or living forever is through advances in the biological sciences, which are no doubt coming.

  • @bbouchan1
    @bbouchan1 27 дней назад

    As soon as this guy said we are special I zoned out.

  • @rosiekrupp
    @rosiekrupp Месяц назад

    To be honest I love prof Avi's smile unique

  • @angel4everable
    @angel4everable Месяц назад +6

    "The life of man is of no greater importance to the universe than that of an oyster".---David Hume

    • @MarkPatmos
      @MarkPatmos Месяц назад +1

      That may be true even if God exists

    • @mraarone
      @mraarone Месяц назад

      @@angel4everable says who?

    • @BM-ek4tt
      @BM-ek4tt Месяц назад

      Ya but oyster and man could be equally very important.

    • @angel4everable
      @angel4everable Месяц назад

      @@BM-ek4tt Da, oysters are underrated.

    • @BM-ek4tt
      @BM-ek4tt Месяц назад +1

      @@angel4everable 🤣Oysters are a crucial component of global ocean health. These animals filter and clean the surrounding water and provide habitat, food, and jobs. In some places, oyster reefs can serve as barriers to storms and tides, preventing erosion and protecting productive estuary waters.

  • @andromedahearme63
    @andromedahearme63 Месяц назад +3

    The universe was fine-tuned for us, whether intentionally or not. We know this because we are here. Sure, you can always turn that around and say we were fine-tuned for the universe by processes that are largely not understood by us, but you would be splitting hairs to do such. The reality is that the organism and the environment are all one process. We can break it up with notions of the mind, but there is only one great energy to the universe and we are a function of that.

  • @orver1
    @orver1 29 дней назад

    The “chances” of the universe being conducive to life are unknown. We simply don’t know the probability.

  • @robertm3561
    @robertm3561 29 дней назад

    Why the universe isn’t a “mess” is due to force(s), that create symmetry, thus for example intelligence

  • @jamesruscheinski8602
    @jamesruscheinski8602 Месяц назад +1

    laws of nature have energy and are mathematcal? might mathematics have something to do with development of energy?

  • @jamesruscheinski8602
    @jamesruscheinski8602 Месяц назад +2

    simpler for physical reality to follow a few rules than to go off on its own?

  • @undertalefanyay5728
    @undertalefanyay5728 Месяц назад

    I’ve watched many of your videos. This is the one that strikes closest to what I think about most often. Definitely want to study more Spinoza.

  • @ansleyrubarb8672
    @ansleyrubarb8672 Месяц назад +1

    ...You guys are marvelously special in saying, you have found your gifts & talents & are significant to our Time, respectfully, Chuck...captivus brevis...you tube...Blessings...

  • @keithwalmsley1830
    @keithwalmsley1830 Месяц назад

    I've always had my doubts about this guy since he proclaimed his belief that Oumuamua was an alien probe!! 🤔

  • @mraarone
    @mraarone Месяц назад +1

    When are we going to get interstellar meteorites larger than sand? This is super exciting!!!

  • @robertm3561
    @robertm3561 29 дней назад

    There is zero evidence of fine-tuning, but matter have been organizing exactly according to the laws, that governs certain location & time. Just a trivial misunderstanding to see it backwards imo.

  • @catherinemoore9534
    @catherinemoore9534 Месяц назад +1

    The fine tuning exists but there's also the 2nd law of themodynamic. They look like enemies.

    • @angel4everable
      @angel4everable Месяц назад +2

      Good point. but the two do not contradict each other if you consider that we live in a universe designed and destined to die. Heat death is and was built into the universe, fine-tuned to self-destruct.

  • @mrshankerbillletmein491
    @mrshankerbillletmein491 Месяц назад +2

    Like Fred Hoyle said it looks like a put up job, its hard to get away from it

  • @MarkPatmos
    @MarkPatmos Месяц назад

    I'm not a physicist but fine tuning isn't about likelihood of life in our actual universe, it is whether you change various numbers or constants slightly it makes the universe collapse in upon itself, expand too quickly, elements can't form, etc.

  • @jamesruscheinski8602
    @jamesruscheinski8602 Месяц назад

    mathematical laws of nature organize universe?

  • @heizensperg
    @heizensperg Месяц назад +1

    I wonder if harlequin babies think the universe is fine-tuned for life

  • @jamesruscheinski8602
    @jamesruscheinski8602 Месяц назад

    mathematics may come from more basic reality? from time? other?

  • @bruno5842
    @bruno5842 Месяц назад +3

    Isn't he the Oumuamua guy?

    • @Mentaculus42
      @Mentaculus42 Месяц назад +1

      I checked, and YES! 1/∞ = Cred Rating

  • @S3RAVA3LM
    @S3RAVA3LM Месяц назад +2

    Do not critize or especially denigrate unless you first reveal your position, explication and exposition, and giving demonstrations, good lamatta, reason and inference, followed by sources, books and quotes from universal texts.
    What is this judgement today in persons? They give little opinion. I may be harsh but i put it all on the line.
    If you want to level up you have to put the work in... not just quote Spinoza, hume and kant like anteodedi does thinking he's reached total enlightenment.

  • @NeuroScientician
    @NeuroScientician Месяц назад +3

    Avi is so full of Shlt it is hillarious.

  • @jjay6764
    @jjay6764 Месяц назад +3

    Jesus said,”You strain at a gnat and swallow a camel.” I think it’s the height of arrogance to deny God’s existence. If the universe is 13.8 billion years old and you’re 30, you’ve been alive .000002% of its existence. How can you think your limited mind is the alpha and omega of all that exists?? 🤔🤔

  • @JohnQPublic11
    @JohnQPublic11 Месяц назад +1

    If there is a God then we scientists cannot be God and we can't have that!

    • @orver1
      @orver1 29 дней назад

      There is no evidence of gods and goddesses.

  • @tedgrant2
    @tedgrant2 Месяц назад

    I think this topic has been thrashed to death.
    I would like to talk about Leviticus chapter 18
    Much more interesting.

  • @Homunculas
    @Homunculas Месяц назад +2

    Yeah, something is "off" with this guy.

    • @pondreezy
      @pondreezy Месяц назад +2

      Does anyone else want to eat mademoiselle craballeta with some butter??

    • @sujok-acupuncture9246
      @sujok-acupuncture9246 Месяц назад +1

      I figured it out... He is a businessman.

  • @Maxwell-mv9rx
    @Maxwell-mv9rx Месяц назад +4

    Important question is this guys figure out Universe though physic are answers about Universe ?No absolutetly. He found in his computer Universe 13 years ago. Absurd. Because what is saying It is Impossible figure out though emperism experience.

    • @anteodedi8937
      @anteodedi8937 Месяц назад +3

      You good not English is at. If wants you people what says you consider spell you should it the way right.

    • @sujok-acupuncture9246
      @sujok-acupuncture9246 Месяц назад +1

      Why English like that. You not English fluent. Which country you come.

    • @SeventyFive-gn9kh
      @SeventyFive-gn9kh Месяц назад

      Empiricism experience it is.

  • @anteodedi8937
    @anteodedi8937 Месяц назад +1

    If you follow Spinoza's route, then fine-tuning is necessary. Everything flows from the necessity of nature/god as he equates the two. There is no transcendent God that creates the world by some act of free will.
    There are no alternatives to the actual world-no other possible worlds-and there is no contingency or spontaneity within the world.

    • @simonhibbs887
      @simonhibbs887 Месяц назад

      I agree that seems to be the extrapolation of Spinoza's position, although I'm not familiar enough with his ideas to be sure what he may have thought about transcendence. Marvin Minsky used to say that our world is a possible world, and that asking whether it or any other possible universe or state of affairs is 'real' or whether it 'exists', or any conceivable answer to those questions, add no further information. I think that's more or less compatible with a Spinozan approach. Thoughts?
      BTW ignore S3RAV3LM, he only ever posts lists of stuff he's read and snooty slurs against other posters, usually me. Welcome to the club!

    • @anteodedi8937
      @anteodedi8937 Месяц назад

      @@simonhibbs887 Spinoza was a full-blown necessitarian. Per Spinoza everything actual is necessary. The actual world is the only possible world.
      Now you can maintain that a world different from ours in some respect is possible but not actual. Or you can maintain it is possible and actual. That's what modal realism suggests, that other possible worlds exist.
      If I got it right, Minsky seems to suggest that a world different from ours is possible, but he takes no stance on whether it is actual or not??
      If so, it is incompatible with Spinozism because it allows for contingencies while Spinozism allows no such things.
      Personally, I tend to think that a world different from ours is possible, but our world is the only actual world. Nevertheless, I think reality must have some initial necessary segment that is to say all possible worlds share an initial segment with the actual world, but in my view, possible worlds are not real, they are alternative ways that the actual world could have gone or could go.
      As a side note, I usually ignore S3rava3lm or laugh at him. The dude has issues, lmao.

    • @simonhibbs887
      @simonhibbs887 Месяц назад

      @@anteodedi8937 So Spinoza thinks there is one universe and it is contiguous but infinite in space and time, that it exists necessarily and is necessarily the way it is?
      Minsky didn’t think that. He thought that what made a state of affairs possible is that it is not impossible; I.e. that it does not entail any contradiction. Beyond that, for him the terms possible, actual, real, exist, etc are redundant.

    • @anteodedi8937
      @anteodedi8937 Месяц назад

      @@simonhibbs887 Then Minsky seems to be talking about logical possibility. Given that logically impossible things cannot exist and given that our world exists, then our world is logically possible.
      But Spinoza was concerned about ontological necessity and possibility, which is about being. A world different from ours is logically possible, i.e., it entails no contradictions/is conceivable, but as far as Spinoza was concerned, it is ontologically impossible. There are no other actual/real possible worlds, and there are no alternatives ways that the actual world could have gone or could go, or could one day go.
      And for example, I see nothing redundant about discussing whether there are alternative ways the actual world could have gone or could go or could one day go. It's something that doesn't concern mere logical possibility.

    • @simonhibbs887
      @simonhibbs887 Месяц назад

      @@anteodedi8937 Spinoza argued that that nature must be infinite in extent. Every substance is necessarily infinite. In an infinite universe that varies with space and time every possible way the world could go will occur.
      However this assumes a universe infinite extent because “It does not exist as finite, for (by Def. ii.) it would then be limited by something else of the same kind”. This seems to assume a “flat” Cartesian space, but it may be that our universe is an enclosed finite spacetime manifold. That idea didn’t come along until Minkowski so we can’t hold it against Spinoza that he didn’t consider it. Anyway, spacetime might actually be infinite in extent. I suppose in modern physics terms the one substance would be something like Energy.

  • @MasterK-hv4ws
    @MasterK-hv4ws Месяц назад

    avi loeb is a clown

  • @nml5536
    @nml5536 Месяц назад +2

    Loeb is a fraud, dislike. Still like the channel but wont watch this one.

    • @S3RAVA3LM
      @S3RAVA3LM Месяц назад

      A whimsical opinion. The only fraud here is you, buddy.

    • @MasterK-hv4ws
      @MasterK-hv4ws Месяц назад

      @@S3RAVA3LM no he is correct. loeb is a charlatan

  • @robertm3561
    @robertm3561 29 дней назад

    There is zero evidence of fine-tuning, but matter have been organizing exactly according to the laws, that governs certain location & time. Just a trivial misunderstanding to see it backwards imo.