- The universe appears to be fine-tuned to allow for creatures like us, or intelligent creatures in general - This fine-tuning may suggest our importance to whatever processes brought forth our universe, including personal processes - For example: - we may be part of the universe's reproductive process - our creator may have created our universe to bring forth children - our universe may be a simulation, designed to simulate certain kinds of life ### Selection Effects and Fine-Tuning A counterpoint to fine-tuning arguments is *Selection Effects*. For example, if there are an infinite number of universes, with varying suitability for life, we will only observe ourselves to be in universes that are suitable for life. Etc Yet, this is not a complete answer to fine-tuning: 1. Statistical objection - When we model selection effects statistically, we would expect to find a great number of variables *just barely* fine-tuned for observers like us. - If instead, we find a great number of variables *in the center* of the range suitable for observers like us, this suggests that it is not selection effects at work. 2. Multiverse objection - David Deutsch points out that the quantum multiverse does not provide variation across important physical laws and constants. Therefore, the selection effect cannot be at play with regards to those. - Only if *every mathematically possible* universe is actually instantiated, do selection effects come into play. - The claim that *every mathematically possible* universe actually exists is a much bolder claim than anything suggested by current physics. - This is called [[mathematical universe hypothesis]], and is held by [[Max Tegmark]] - But it is speculative, to say the least ### Evidence of possible fine-tuning - Physical constants - Conditions within the universe - Events in history. See [[Miracles and the Anthropic Principle]]