Universe : design or necessity? - Page 3

Well what exactly are you asking about life in relation to existance and design?

I am just saying, that even if my reasoning is true, god is still possible if someone can prove that there is apparent design beyond life.

Because, like I've just shown why the universe has life even though, if the universe is random (godless) then there would be a infinitely small chance of having life.

Hence, if someone there is apparent design, without reffering to life, then there must be god.

Perhaps I should try to make my reasoning clear in one short post :
- feelings and impressions are the only existence, the universe is only explanation to those feelings and impressions, the universe is not existence itself
- existence is necessary
- feeling/impressions must have laws governing them
- life is necessary to having feelings and impressions
- the laws (universe) must therefore necessarily have life
- everything apart from the universe's life giving properties, are random without God

I guess what I was talking about or questioning is the relevance of life, that I don't think the odds are quite so stacked against it as you posts suggests, there are a lot of odds in a big universe, and that goes into my talking about how life may not be quite what people think, whatever people think life is, which could be a thread I guess.

What I mean about the likelihood of life, is not about the odds of it happening on a particular planet (as you said, the universe is soooo big it doesnt matter). But, rather, 99% of universes would have no particles heavier then helium (hence life is impossible), or otherwise heavy particles would have very short half-lives, all this due to the properties of said universe. Or we can imagine a huge number of problems, from 1 dimensional universes to ones with too weak gravity.

What this means is that a universe even capable of having life, that is, some naturally occuring machines with the "purpose" of perpetuating themselves, is incredibly low. That is why, without the necessity of both existence and life for existence to be possible, it is very likely there is a God.

Where do you get 99% with no particles heavier than helium? And what is your insistance with the idea that perpetuated life machines is low in "possibility"? If you are saying that the chances are low and unlikely, you might very well be mistaken, what evidence do you have for such thoughts or as it seems, claims?

There is a certain constant, which name eludes me right now, whose value determines how much atoms hold together. Below a certain value all matter heavier then helium disintegrates too quick, above a certain value you can't make anything heavier then Helium.

Either way, it doesn't work out, there ends up being a very slim margin which allows heavy particles and thereby life.

But this is just one aspect, I'm sure you can imagine innumerable properties of the universe which, if changed would make life impossible. A 1 dimensional universe for example, a universe with low gravity (no planets), a universe with too strong gravity (black holes everywhere) etc.. You get the idea.

Life may be very adaptable today, but the original self-replicating proteins were not. There were ideal conditions necessary, and more likely then not, the vast majority of possible universes would not allow them to exist.

This is speculation of speculation that is very restricted by what we know, don't know, can't fathom and can't detect, I have come to see that most likely, anything is possible, and everything is probable, in some way some place at some time, all while being unimaginable, unthinkable, noncomprehendable, so such statistics seem very untrustworthy and no better than most religious documents, I would be quicker to place relavence to scientific findings than with religious, but always with the notion that it can only apply in terms of what is currently "known".

Well I am not basing myself on anything religious.

Lets go from here, machines by default, don't work. Lives are just fancy machines, its far easier to break them then to make them. Hence if you do something random to a machine 99% of the time, it is a bad or neutral thing.

Hence, a random universe would most likely not give you life. There needs to be something which ensures that the universe can indeed have life, I have chosen the necessity of existence, others pick God.

Ya ok, thats where I disagree, I see life like the snowball effect, It just takes the right elements and forces like a growing snowball needs snow and gravity, once these forces and elements combine its just another type of forward motion.

Its complicated sure, but so is existance to begin with, and just because my answer doesn't sound complicated enough to fit such a complicated theory or reality, doesn't mean it can't work.

Is it easier to break something then make something?

The first spark of life is like that. Granted IF life starts, then it snowballs, it spreads, its everywhere and devellops rapidly. But without that first spark, and you could make slight changes to the universe that would make the spark impossible, then there is no life.

I have given you examples, I dont see how life would be possible with only helium and hydrogen, I dont see how life would be possible without planets or with only 1 dimension. I'm no physicist, but I am sure there are hundred more variables which if changed would make life impossible.

Sure this is quite possible, but so is the opposite that life is so much more possible and plentiful and likely than you could ever imagine. But, it is irrelevant because what we know of life does exist.

Its not irrelevant. Of course life exists, but I am saying that in the vast majority it would not have. Unless something, like God, made only universes with life exist. Although I don't think it is God, I think it is the necessity of existence.

ok so what is you relevant tie between god, intelligent or design based creator and life?

Well since life is extremly unlikely to simply appear on its own. Unless an intelligence (God) was there to ensure the universe would have it.

UNLESS, existence is necessary (which it appears to be) and life is necessary to existence.