WORLD: The Case for "Intelligent Design" (aka G*d) Has Been Made

The Wall Street Journal makes the scientific and mathematical case for the "intelligent design" of our universe and life on our planet, which you can read by clicking here. I'll give you the "Reader's Digest" version below:

In 1966, no less a world-famous astronomer than Carl Sagan announced that there were 2 important criteria for life on a planet: the right kind of star, and a planet the right distance from that star. Given that there were believed to be 1 octillion (1 with 24 zeroes after it) planets in our universe, there should be about 1 septillion (1 with 21 zeroes after it) planets capable of supporting some sort of life.

Above (click to enlarge): The Waag Clan enjoys an odd Christmas/Chanukah Tradition - a fun day at Magic Mountain on Christmas eve. We've executed this fun tradition at least 5 or 6 times, and it continues today. Why put a photo in here? Because text-only articles are boring, and I like pictures. In fact, how about one more? (below).

Above (click to enlarge): Andrew and James gettin' ready to rock on Magic Mountain's INSANE X2 Roller Coaster. We were able to ride it 4 times (a fact only meaningful to roller coaster fans).
Given such good odds, the US government's project SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) was born. As the years passed at SETI, they found ZERO life elsewhere. SETI as a government project ended in 1993, but the baton was passed to private interests who have continued to search for life elsewhere up to this day - with - you guessed it: nada - nothing - zilch - zip - no other life besides our own. 

As our knowledge of the universe increased, we became aware that there were more than 2 factors necessary for life than Sagan originally proposed - much more. The 2 parameters grew to 10, then 20, then 50, then more than 200! As the necessary conditions increased, the probability of planets meeting the criteria decreased from Sagan's original 1 septillion to a few thousand, and then eventually, zero. Yep - that's right - zero chance of a planet that could support life, including our own. Our life-swirling planet should not have a chance in h*ll that it could or should exist - yet it does - hence, the most logical explanation, scientists say, is intelligent design.

Each of the more than 200 known parameters necessary for a life-supporting planet to exist must be perfectly met, or the whole thing fails. Just one interesting example: without a massive planet like Jupiter nearby to draw away and absorb killer asteroids, a thousand times more would hit the earth, and just like the dinosaur-killing asteroid from 65 million years ago, life would be ceaselessly disrupted by collisions and never have a chance to get started here. 

Could we have perfectly met each of these parameters by chance? One more fascinating example: The 4 fundamental physical forces of our universe: 
1) gravity, 
2) electromagnetivity, 
3) strong nuclear forces, 
4) weak nuclear forces, 
were determined less than one millionth of a second after the big bang. Alter any 1 of the 4 in the tiniest way, and our universe does not exist. Just one example: the ratio between 3) and 2) above must be perfect - off by the tiniest fraction of a fraction of a percent, one part in 100,000,000,000,000,000 to be precise, then no stars would ever be formed in our universe. 

Multiply that times the more than 200 conditions needed to be met, and the odds of our universe existing at all is comically, astronomically, absurdly impossible. Consider this - the chance that our Earth was created is about the same as the odds of tossing a quarter and having it come up "heads" 10 quintillion times in a row. And we are just talking about our universe existing - never mind the odds that "life" would develop on our planet, created from a swirling ball of dirt, water and gas. Staggering. Unimaginable. But here we are - G*d, anyone?

But wait! The statistical calculations don't lie (I have a BS and MS in Math, after all), but what about the physics? That's not an area of my expertise (not even close - I sucked at physics), so I can't comment. However, there is the distinct possibility that among these 200 parameters required for life to exist, many or most are theories that might later be proven or disproven. Therefore, I would have to say that the conclusion reached here should be considered tentative and subject to change.

One More Question! Interestingly enough, at my son's prodding, I just got through reading Isaac Asimov's 1956 short story, "The Last Question". It is only 8 pages and you can read it online for free, so I suggest that you do so by clicking here. In it, Asimov, a science fiction writer (okay - one of the greatest science fiction writers of all time) deals with planets supporting life, the big bang, and a fictional accounting of how and why we exist. Asimov always said that "The Last Question" was his favorite short story of all time - good enough reason for me read it. Fascinating times we are living in, and an ever more fascinating world as well.

Click Here to go back to "Tim Waag Blog" Home Page!