Why is the Universe the way it is?

[modest]

Time Travel, you missed the point of what I said. The principle works with a ten-thousand-sided die. Read it again. Read the link I gave.

 

~modest

[Time_Travel]

 

Of course it just might be possible the universe is a one shot deal and the laws have to be the way they are for reasons we don't yet understand.

 

 

'we don't understand them yet' that's what i believed and still believing.

but was hoping for some perfect scientific answers though the Multiverse solution might solve it to some extent. And thank's for that Moontanman.

 

Don't know whether i asked a kindergarten type question since, some people think its a flawed question and some think it just happened because it happened because of probability.

[Time_Travel]

Time Travel, you missed the point of what I said. The principle works with a ten-thousand-sided die. Read it again. Read the link I gave.

 

~modest

 

Ah ok, with ten-thousand sided die, not smart enough to think of 10000 sided coin,sorry.

Every time a 10000 sided die is thrown only then you will get a result right?

So is the dice being thrown only once(during Big bang) or is it still being thrown( till now)?

If it is during big bang that probability might have happened then the probability theory might answer 'why the universe is the way it is in terms of physical properties' but it will be a very very tough for any statistician to agree with. Since it might need the property that an electron be have only this specific volt , an atom must consist of nucleus , and nucleus must consist of neutrons and protons, and electron should revolve around nucleus,electron be negatively charged, etc etc and all other 100's of thousands of known physics laws, and all these 1000's of properties must be present on the same side of the dice,and this happening might be one in million or a billion (i am not good at statistics ).

 

But there is one face of the die that still may contain all those properties, so not a bad first day for me to start finding my first answer, though not satisfactorily.

[Pyrotex]

Well, Time Travel, I guess the most general answer to your question is: we (humans) do not (yet) know how to interpret questions like that.

 

"Where did Natural Laws come from?" demands a stature of understandiing that could only be called "god-like" (if you believe in gods or not). We simply do not have the tools, the data, the wisdom, the experience to even address such questions in any meaningful way.

 

Oh, we can conjure up "explanations" like the multi-verse, and parallel-existence and manifold reality, etc, etc, etc, but they are rationalized figments of our imagination. That doesn't keep some folks from writing and selling books on such figments. :evil:

 

Perhaps the Laws could ONLY be exactly as we know them. Or perhaps the Laws initially came into a kind of ambiguous pseudo-existence and "evolved" in such a way that the "evolution" was self-reinforcing, the final set of Laws finally locking into place a nanosecond or a million years after the Big Bang. Perhaps the Big Bang itself is only an "optical illusion" created by the early Universe. Perhaps the Laws aren't "laws" at all, but only appear to our limited sensibilities to be "laws", as we once saw tornados and earthquakes to be the "lawful" responses of angry gods.

 

Perhaps the Natural Laws are only a manifestation of our total lack of understanding for what Time is. Or our delusion that Time is real. Or that Time is a dimension. What if every event in the Universe effects every other event, with a magnitude that is proportional to the "Q-distance" between them? And that this "Q-distance" is a function of actual spatial distance (X, Y & Z) and something else we could call, "Quortistat"? And that the "shadow" of "Quortistat", projected upon some invisible canvas of the Cosmos, at some "angle" of observation, obstructed by some engram of energy, folded by some ephemeral gradient of attraction, gives rise to properties, behaviors, effects, attributes that we, in our ignorance, call "time" and "entropy".

 

And what if we COULD understand "Quortistat" and see the Cosmos through eyes of understanding, in terms of distance and Quortistat (instead of distance and time)? It might be obvious to us then, why the Laws of Nature HAVE to be the way they are (here. at this time. at this quortistat. in this region of the Cosmos. at this particular angle of dimensional entropy.).

 

We would give ourselves head-slaps and say, "Well, duh!"

 

But until then... :)

[modest]

The die represents the possible outcomes of a physical law of nature. How many spatial dimensions does the universe have? If you roll a 10,000 sided die then there is a 1 in 10,000 chance that the universe will have 3 spatial dimensions. A good case can be made that there are very few such constants, for example google "Martin Rees's six numbers" for an argument that there are only six. But, that's beside the point.

 

Humanity needs these physical constants to be what they are (and, yes, they were what they were when the big bang started). If there were 2 spatial dimensions then biological life would be impossible. But, this does not mean that it is at all unlikely or fantastic that the universe is fit for biological life. It is just the logical consequence of the universe having the structure it has. And, if there is a universe then it needs some kind of structure of which ours is just as likely as any other. Beyond that you get into why is there something rather than nothing and... who knows?

 

You clearly didn't have time, so: read the link I gave in my previous post.

 

~modest

[Moontanman]

I once read in one of those imaginative but somewhat less than evidence based books ( I honestly do not remember either the author or title of the book) That in a truly infinite universe where the laws of nature are random and can be anything absolutely everything must happen, an infinite number of times, even those things that we think are impossible. Somewhere am infinite number of Star Ship Enterprises are real and battling the Borg, somewhere vampires really prey on people and somewhere dragons really do eat virgins. Somewhere there is nothing at all and somewhere there is significantly less than nothing. We just happen to be in one of the infinite number of space/times where none of these things are real and we are. It's kind of a cop out way to think of the universe but it just might be the real situation.

 

BTW, yes I know this is total nonsense, the truly infinite quickly becomes nonsensical when you try to quantify it.

 

In answer to the second part of your question, life is not a mysterious entity that leaves a body when you cut it in half. Even at the cellular level life is divisible into various chemical reactions. At no point can you say eureka, this is life or eureka this is dead.

[Time_Travel]

You clearly didn't have time, so: read the link I gave in my previous post.

 

~modest

 

 

Modest, i have read it many times before, just wanted others personal opinion.

Pyrtex, Moontanman and yours are informative but the question still remains.

[modest]

Modest, i have read it many times before, just wanted others personal opinion.

 

In that case I apologize. Since you are looking for the opinion of others can you tell us yours? Why does the universe look the way it does and why is it suited for human life?

 

~modest

[lemit]

Modest, i have read it many times before, just wanted others personal opinion.

Pyrtex, Moontanman and yours are informative but the question still remains.

 

I am sorry to see the question is still there. You have been given enough information. I will throw in my two cents too, although I now doubt they will make a difference.

 

The problem with asking why the universe works the way it does is that the laws of nature are not prescriptive nor proscriptive; they are descriptive. We gradually come to understand the movement of the various parts of the universe.

 

We understand how some things work, and we see why implicit in that how. The why in the case of the universe is often efficiency. Any other order would require expenditure of energy.

 

A way of putting it that might conform to your questions--and there were more than one of them--is that things work the way they do because they wouldn't work as well any other way. You cut a person in two and one of those halves will not have a heart. Have you tried this with earthworms? You have to be careful to cut on the band, where the hearts are. If you manage to get whole hearts in each half, both halves will be fine. We don't have that many hearts. Why? We developed our own efficiencies with a single heart, as most other creatures have. Why do earthworms have a bunch of hearts? That works for them. We work the way we work because that's what works for us.

 

--lemit

 

p.s. Why do you ask why?

[Time_Travel]

modest,

 

I couldn't think even a single opinion of my own. But now i know probability is one of them,Multiverse is one of them.

[Pyrotex]

Modest, i have read it many times before, just wanted others personal opinion.

Pyrtex, Moontanman and yours are informative but the question still remains.

Aha!

 

Well, since we cannot give you a definitive answer,

can we agree to allow the question to remain?

Hang it in an honored place on the wall.

Cogitate upon it each time you pass.

 

Reminds me of Isaac Asimov's short story, "The Ultimate Question".

;) :hihi: :eek_big:

[Time_Travel]

Aha!

 

Well, since we cannot give you a definitive answer,

can we agree to allow the question to remain?

Hang it in an honored place on the wall.

Cogitate upon it each time you pass.

 

Reminds me of Isaac Asimov's short story, "The Ultimate Question".

;) :hihi: :eek_big:

 

 

 

Sir,

I never needed a definitive answer , just wanted a discussion and all you people's views, which are extraordinary and amazing.

If the question sounds ordinary why not remove it from the forum, instead of hanging it on wall. Let the moderator remove it.

 

I like Moontanman and modest answer.

Others are like ,i don't like:shrug:

 

Oh Sir are you Hypography moderator, then you may want to delete this topic if the question is ordinary or not to the standards of the Forum

[Zythryn]

Time_Travel, generally in a discussion both parties share their own opinion on the subject.

Your question is a very good one, no one implied it wasn't.

You don't 'hang it on the wall' if it is ordinary. You hang things on the wall because they are special, beautiful to gaze upon or interesting.

[Time_Travel]

Time_Travel, generally in a discussion both parties share their own opinion on the subject.

Your question is a very good one, no one implied it wasn't.

You don't 'hang it on the wall' if it is ordinary. You hang things on the wall because they are special, beautiful to gaze upon or interesting.

 

Ah , That would be a nice way to end this Discussion. Will hang it on a wall since this has always amazed me.

[Phebe]

Though this isn't an answer (I wouldn't have one to give:D) I think it all boils down to that elusive 'God Particle'.

[Time_Travel]

Ah the ' God Particle'. That also might be an answer.

We can neither prove nor disprove the 'God Entity' like the MultiVerse and Probability theory.

[CraigD]

Welcome to hypography, Time_Travel! :)

Ah the ' God Particle'. That also might be an answer.

We can neither prove nor disprove the 'God Entity' like the MultiVerse and Probability theory.

The term “God particle” is just an informal jargon for the Higgs boson, the predicted, yet to be experimentally detected particle that gives other particles mass according to the Standard Model.

 

Though a very important predicted particle, there’s nothing supernatural or mysterious about the Higgs boson. As the lower and upper limits of its mass have been predicted with high confidence, and that range falls within the capabilities of LHC, which is expected to be operational again in about a month, so its existence may be proven soon. If it’s not, a more energetic accelerator, or improvements in predictions based on data from existing instruments, will be necessary to prove its nonexistence. If the Higgs boson is proven to not exist, a lot of particle physics will need to be rewritten!

 

Though many physicists and science enthusiasts have applauded Leon Lederman’s coining of the term because of the interest in physics it’s generated among the wider public, others are critical of it because they see it generating confusion and supernatural connotations.

OK here is my Question.

 

Why is the universe the way it is , why are planets rotating,starts shining,stars forming black holes, who gets what if they don't exist.

...

There are a lot of questions in this sentence and the ones following it. I recommend taking them one at a time – for example, learn enough classical mechanics to understand why rotating bodies in low to moderate eccentricity elliptic orbits are much more likely than other possibilities. This is a lot of work, but also a lot of fun :)