Crisis

So you think you are special!

Posted in comment, Philosophy, Philosophy of Science, Physics, Science by e1saman on September 23, 2010

special According to Lee Smolin in “The trouble with Physics” the standard model of Physics was based on Natures symmetries and the spontaneous symmetry breaking;

Spontaneous symmetry breaking is the process by which a system described in a theoretically symmetrical way ends up in a non symmetrical state. For spontaneous symmetry breaking to occur, there must be a system in which there are several equally likely outcomes. The system as a whole is therefore symmetric with respect to these outcomes (if we consider any two outcomes, the probability is the same). However, if the system is sampled (i.e. if the system is actually used or interacted with in any way) a specific outcome must occur. Though we know the system as a whole is symmetric, we also know that it is never encountered with this symmetry, only in one specific state. Because one of the outcomes is always found with probability 1, and the others with probability 0, they are no longer symmetric. Hence, the symmetry is said to be spontaneously broken in that theory.

This mechanism is the basis for the unification of the three forces in Nature; electromagnetism,weak force, strong force. According to this view, and my understanding  the laws of physics that we experience are just an outcome of a random choice. There were other possibilities for this world; for example a possibility that the strong force is not so strong to hold the nucleus of the atoms together. In this case life, as we know it, is not possible. If you take this idea a little more further you can easily assume that there can be worlds that they are completely different from this one. These worlds cannot develop the same chemistry that our life is based on, but nothing forbids them from developing some other kind of life which we cannot even imagine.

I was reading the following post about the fine-structure constant;

the observer effect

fine-structure constant variation; If confirmed, this revelation could reshape physicists’ understanding of cosmology from the ground up. It may even help solve a major conundrum: Why are all the constants of nature perfectly tuned for life to exist?

As you can see the writer thinks that we are very very lucky that we live in a ‘place’ that is “life friendly”. I will not comment on the tautology of the view, but I am surprised that people are interested in science just to find the same answers rephrased; We know that we are here and this is the mystery, we want to know why and how. Learning again that we are here because the laws of Nature are ‘so well tuned’ does not add any kind of knowledge and does not answer something more! Maybe people like to think in this way because they just love to be reminded that they are special nothing more.