What is the Anthropic Principle?
There are various versions of the anthropic principle. The “weak” version accepts the laws of nature and the values of the physical constants as given and claims that the existence of life then imposes a selection effect on where and when we observe the universe. For example, the current age of the universe cannot be less than the nuclear-burning time of a massive star – otherwise there would not have been enough time for the chemical elements that are essential for life to have been generated by stellar nucleosynthesis. On the other hand, the universe cannot be much older than this because the stars would have all burned out. This means that life can only exist when the universe has roughly its observed age. This is a logical consequence of our existence and is relatively uncontroversial. The “strong” version of the anthropic principle suggests that the presence of observers imposes constraints on the physical constants themselves. In other words, life could only arise if the constant
The Anthropic Principle is the simple fact that we live in a universe set up to allow our existence. If the universe were any other way, we would not exist, and would hence be unable to make any observations. Since it was introduced by the theoretical physicist Brandon Carter in 1973, the Anthropic Principle has progressively come into vogue among the physics and philosophical communities, providing a simple explanation for some otherwise very perplexing coincidences. For example, why are certain physical constants so oddly fine-tuned? While some people view this as evidence for a supernatural creator, materialists simply observe that if it were any other way, we wouldn’t be here. Due to the Many Worlds Interpretation of quantum mechanics, many physicists have come to view our universe as one among many–possibly an infinite number, or superset of universes sometimes called “the multiverse.” Though we know nothing about the underlying process which could generate such universes, presum
This currently popular term in astronomy comes from the Greek word for man, anthropos. For any principle of science to be acceptable, there must be experimental results with general validity. The Anthropic Principle which states that the universe is especially suited for the well-being of mankind, is one such assumption. As just one of hundreds of examples, consider the tides that the moon causes on earth. If the moon was closer to the earth, tides would be greatly increased. Ocean waves could sweep across the continents. The seas themselves might heat to the boiling point from the resulting friction. On the other hand, a more distant moon would reduce the tides. Marine life would be endangered by the resulting preponderance of stagnant water! Mankind would also b e in trouble because the oxygen in the air we breathe is replenished by marine plants. We can conclude that the moon is in the “correct” position for man’s well-being. Even such details as the mass of protons and the strength
” Answer: Anthropic means human or human existence. Principle means law. The Anthropic Principle is the Law of Human Existence. It is well known that our existence in this universe depends on numerous cosmological constants and parameters whose numerical values must fall within a very narrow range of values. If even a single variable were off, even slightly, we would not exist. The extreme improbability that so many variables would align so auspiciously in our favor merely by chance has led some scientists and philosophers to propose instead that it was God who providentially engineered the universe to suit our specific needs. This is the Anthropic Principle: that the universe appears to have been fine tuned for our existence. Consider protons for example. Protons are the positively charged subatomic particles which (along with neutrons) form the nucleus of an atom (around which negatively charged electrons orbit). Whether by providence or fortuitous luck (depending on your perspective
. Some scientists have posited that there may be many universes, and in fact emerging cosmological theories about the “Big Bang” are consistent with there having been many such events in the infinity of space and time, with each “Big Bang” resulting in a different universe. Theoretically, each universe could have slightly different fundamental constants and suit a quite different evolution of stars, planets and life forms, if any. Any intellignet life on another universe would probably also be asking the same questions about the anthropic coincidences as we do.
