This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.


← Untrue Reason -- re Naturalism

JoxerTheMighty's Avatar Jump to comment 21 by JoxerTheMighty

Comment 20 by foundationist :

Comment 19 by JoxerTheMighty :

If you don't mind explaining, isn't the Multiverse(which many accept as plausible) the hypothesis that there are indeed "knobs", and that each twist of each knob produces another universe/reality, according to our model? How come the multiverse then isn't considered a fallacy?

The multiverse hypothesis was not primarily considered as a solution to the fine tuning problem, the existence of many universes follows form certain theories about the nature and the beginning of our universe, its a consequence of certain aspects of quantum field theory. And the footing of this hypothesis is rather poor compared to the attention it gets. I think the best answer to the question why the fundamental constants are the way they are is "We don't know. Yet."

Yes, I know the Multiverse hypothesis wasn't developed as an asnwer for Fine-Tuning. But I'm under the impression that it does say that our model can predict other universes/realities which are also real, no? Which quine seems to say that it's a fallacy(the model driving the reality).

Wed, 21 Mar 2012 17:36:18 UTC | #929340