Many-World Theories and Anthropic Cosmological Principle
Ralte, Rodinmawia. The Interface of Science and Religion: An Introductory Study. New Delhi: Christian World Imprints, 2017.
Berry, R J. True
scientists, true faith: some of the world's leading scientists reveal the
harmony between their science and their faith. Oxford: Monarch, 2015.
The Many-Worlds Interpretation (MWI) of quantum mechanics holds that there are many worlds that exist in parallel at the same space and time as our own. The existence of the other worlds makes it possible to remove randomness and action at a distance from quantum theory and thus from all physics. Physicist Young Hugh Everett and Niels Bohr had suggested the quantum world. Many-World Theory consists of two parts:
1. A mathematical
theory that yields the time evolution of the quantum state of the (single)
Universe.
2. A prescription that
sets up a correspondence between the quantum state of the Universe and our
experiences.
Part (i) is essentially summarized by the Schrödinger equation or
its relativistic generalization. It is a rigorous mathematical theory and is
not problematic philosophically. Part (ii) involves “our experiences” which do
not have a rigorous definition. An additional difficulty in setting up (ii)
follows from the fact that human languages were developed at a time when people
did not suspect the existence of parallel worlds.
Remarks
If Everett’s Many Worlds Theory is true, it holds many ramifications
that completely transform our perceptions of life. Any action that has more
than one possible result produces a split in the universe. Thus, there are an infinite number of parallel universes and infinite copies of each person.
While some hail this interpretation as the only serious contender for an interpretation of the quantum theory, capable of incorporating quantum mechanical consideration into cosmology. Few working physicists take it seriously, and even one of its most influential erstwhile supporters has withdrawn his support. Part of the explanation for this lack of consensus is no doubt a failure to agree on precisely what the Many-Worlds Interpretation is that the interpretation itself needs interpreting.
Anthropic cosmological principle
The Anthropic Cosmological Principle was
proposed by John D. Barrow, a cosmologist, and Frank J. Tipler, a cosmologist , and mathematical physicist. Its main focus is considering the structure of the
universe, the values of the constants of nature, or the laws of nature that have
a bearing upon the existence of life. Their works are mainly of theoretical
astrophysics, it also touches on quantum physics, chemistry, and earth science.
They argue that Homo sapiens is, with high probability, the only intelligent
species in the Milky Way. The anthropic perspective is also important in
evaluating the predictions of quantum cosmological models that make only
probabilistic predictions about the structure of the universe.
Patrick A. Wilson also states- “in light
of these and countless other ‘cosmic coincidences’, the universe seems
remarkably finely tuned for mankind. This extremely fine edge on which our
presence in the universe balances cries out for an explanation. The explanation
is that there is this cosmic principle known as “Anthropic Principle” (from
Greek anthropos- human, meaning ‘human centered’) working in the universe so that there is the possibility of life in general and human life in
particular.
Different Types of Anthropic Principles
John Barrow and Frank Tipler in their
book, ‘The Anthropic Cosmological Principle’ mention three different types of
Anthropic Cosmological Principle, which they describe as follows:
1.
Weak Anthropic Principle: The observed values of all physical and
cosmological quantities are not equally probable but they take on values
restricted by the requirement that there exist sites where carbon-based life
can evolve and by the requirement that the universe be old enough for it to
have already done so.
2.
Strong Anthropic Principle: The universe must have those properties which
allow life to develop within it at some stage in its history. An implication of
the Strong Anthropic Principle is that the constant and laws of Nature must be
such that life can exist. This leads to several interpretations: (a) There exist
one possible universe designed with the goal of generating and sustaining
observers, (b) Observers are necessary to bring the universe into being, and
(c) an assemble of other different universes is necessary for the existence of
our universe.
3.
Final Anthropic Principle: Intelligent information-processing must come
into existence in the universe, and, once it comes into existence for the existence
of our universe.
Remarks
Anthropic Principle is the idea that the universe possesses narrowly defined characteristics that permit the possibility
of habitat for humans. Theoretical physicist Tony Rothman concludes on
Anthropic Principle by stating that, “the medieval theologian who gazed at the
night sky through the eyes of Aristotle and saw angels moving the spheres in
harmony has become the modern cosmologist who gazes at the same sky through the
eyes of Einstein and sees the hand of God not in angels but in the constants of
nature. . . . When confronted with the order and beauty of the universe and the
strange coincidences of nature, it’s very tempting to take the leap of faith
from science into religion. I am sure many physicists want to. I only wish they
would admit it.”
The Anthropic Principle itself does not
talk about the role of God in the whole process of the fine-tuning of the universe for life to happen. However, it cannot be difficult to infer that if
there are such contrivances in the universe for the possibility of life by an
intelligence co-coordinator, there must be God or Intelligent Ultimate Reality who
acts behind all these contrivances so as to make the universe suitable for life
in general and human life to sustain and for the existence of the universe, “A
Just Right Universe” and Fine-Tuning of the Galaxies to exist as it is.
0 comments:
Post a Comment