Is there a God?
Do you know the world does not have to be like it is? For example, it could be
nonexistent!
Astrophysicists discover
numerous evidences of design in our world.
Since the later half of the 20th century,
scientists has discovered that the world has a beginning. It happened
roughly 15 billion years ago when matter, energy, space and time were
created. It is called Big Bang .
Most recent scientific discoveries also affirm that not only does the
universe has a beginning, it is also "running away". As a
result of the Big Bang, the universe is expanding and this expansion is
accelerating. That means there is only one beginning, and the universe
is neither oscillating nor a self-caused event. The world was indeed created.
"In the Beginning, God created heavens and earth." Genesis
1:1 |
|
-------------------------------------- +
--------------------------------------
But
a Big Bang does not necessarily result in a world like ours! If
subatomic particles created at the Big Bang do not stick together, there
will only be gas in the universe, thus no stars or galaxies and no
Earth. If such nuclear force is too strong, all matter created at the
Big Bang will be compressed, consumed and become black holes, and there
will be no chance for life.
Scientists discovered that for the world as we know it to exist,
many parameters have to fall into very narrow range. Just like listening
to a radio station, you must turn the dial to a specific frequency. Not
just any arbitrary numbers will do. In fact, there are more than 70 such
parameters. Scientists call our universe a fine-tuned
universe. The astronomic and cosmological evidences overwhelmingly
point to the design of the universe.
The world is not an accident. It was created and fine-tuned to
exist. |
-------------------------------------- +
--------------------------------------
The following are some examples of more than 70 parameters, which enable our world
to exist today...
Fine-tuned Parameter |
What happens if larger.... |
What happens if smaller... |
strong nuclear force constant |
if larger: no hydrogen; nuclei essential for life would be
unstable |
if smaller: no elements other than hydrogen |
weak nuclear force constant |
if larger: too much hydrogen converted to helium in big
bang, hence too much heavy element material made by star burning; no
expulsion of heavy elements from stars |
if smaller: too little helium produced from big bang, hence
too little heavy element material made by star burning; no expulsion of
heavy elements from stars |
gravitational force constant
|
if larger: stars would be too hot and would burn up quickly
and unevenly |
if smaller: stars would be so cool that nuclear fusion would
not ignite, thus no heavy element production |
electromagnetic force constant
|
if larger: insufficient chemical bonding; elements more
massive than boron would be unstable to fission |
if smaller: insufficient chemical bonding |
ratio of electron to proton mass |
if larger: insufficient chemical bonding |
if smaller: insufficient chemical bonding |
ratio of number of protons to number of electrons |
if larger: electromagnetism dominates gravity preventing
galaxy, star, and planet formation |
if smaller: electromagnetism dominates gravity preventing
galaxy, star, and planet formation |
expansion rate of the universe |
if larger: no galaxy formation |
if smaller: universe collapses prior to star formation |
age of the universe
|
if older: no solar-type stars in a stable burning phase in
the right part of the galaxy |
if younger: solar-type stars in a stable burning phase would
not yet have formed |
initial uniformity of radiation |
if smoother: stars, star clusters, and galaxies would not
have formed |
if coarser: universe by now would be mostly black holes and
empty space |
12C to 16O nuclear energy level ratio |
if larger: insufficient oxygen
|
if smaller: insufficient carbon |
ground state energy level for 4He |
if larger: insufficient carbon and oxygen |
if smaller: insufficient carbon and oxygen |
mass excess of the neutron over the proton |
if greater: neutron decay would leave too few neutrons to
form the heavy elements essential for life |
if smaller: proton decay would cause all stars to rapidly
collapse into neutron stars or black holes |
For complete list of characteristics of fine-tuned universe, visit www.reasons.org |
-------------------------------------- +
--------------------------------------
 |
With
billions of stars and galaxies in the Universe, it makes one wonder if
there is complex life like us on other planets? What conditions would
allow for and sustain life? Scientists have defined a galactic "habitable
zone". Although there are countless of galaxies and stars, each
galaxy has only a narrow ring where the physical properties would allow
life to form and that they are habitable for life as we know it.
Scientists have uncovered more than 150 parameters that any planet,
which is a candidate for sustaining life, must meet in order for life to
have any chance of success. These parameters, which describe the planet
itself, its planetary companions, moon, mother star, and the galaxy it
resides in, must have values that fall within narrowly
defined ranges for physical life of any kind to exist.
|
-------------------------------------- +
--------------------------------------
The following are some examples of more than 150 parameters, which enable
any kind of life to exist...
Fine-tuned Parameter |
What happens if .... |
What happens if ... |
galaxy cluster type |
if too rich: galaxy collisions and mergers would disrupt
solar orbit |
if too sparse: insufficient infusion of gas to sustain star
formation for a long enough time |
galaxy size |
if too large: infusion of gas and stars would disturb sun's
orbit and ignite too many galactic eruptions |
if too small: insufficient infusion of gas to sustain star
formation for long enough time |
galaxy type
|
if too elliptical: star formation would cease before
sufficient heavy element build-up for life chemistry |
if too irregular: radiation exposure on occasion would be
too severe and heavy elements for life chemistry would not be available |
galaxy mass distribution
|
if too much in the central bulge: life-supportable planet
will be exposed to too much radiation |
if too much in the spiral arms: life-supportable planet will
be destabilized by the gravity and radiation from adjacent spiral arms |
parent star distance from center of galaxy |
if farther: quantity of heavy elements would be insufficient
to make rocky planets; wrong abundances of silicon, sulfur, and magnesium
relative to iron for appropriate planet core characteristics |
if closer: galactic radiation would be too great; stellar
density would disturb planetary orbits; wrong abundances of silicon,
sulfur, and magnesium relative to iron for appropriate planet core
characteristics |
magnetic field |
if stronger: electromagnetic storms would be too severe; too
few cosmic ray protons would reach planetˇ¦s troposphere which would
inhibit adequate cloud formation |
if weaker: ozone shield would be inadequately protected from
hard stellar and solar radiation |
surface gravity (escape velocity) |
if stronger: planet's atmosphere would retain too much
ammonia and methane |
if weaker: planet's atmosphere would lose too much water |
For complete list of characteristics of fine-tuned universe, visit www.reasons.org |
-------------------------------------- +
--------------------------------------
Scientists also discover unique attributes of Earth that allow life
to exist...
- Proper distance from the star. If a planet orbits its sun too
closely or too far away, liquid water would not exist. There isn't much
margin for error here: a change of 5 to 15 percent in Earth's
distance from the Sun would lead to the freezing, or boiling, of all
water on Earth.
- Proper distance from the center of the galaxy. The density of
stars near the center of the galaxy is so high, that the amount of
cosmic radiation in that area would prevent the development of life.
|

ˇ@
|
- A star of a proper mass. A too-massive star would emit too
much ultra-violet energy, preventing the development of life. A star
that is too small would require the planet to be closer to it (in
order to maintain liquid water). But such a close distance would
result in tidal locking . In this case one side becomes too hot, the
other too cold, and the planet's atmosphere escapes.
- A proper mass. A planet that is too small will not be able
to maintain any atmosphere. A planet that is too massive would
attract a larger number of asteroids, increasing the chances of
life-destroying cataclysms.
- Oceans. The ability to maintain liquid water does not
automatically imply that there will be any on the planet's surface.
Too much water (i.e., a planet with little or no land) will lead to
an unstable atmosphere, unfit for maintaining life.
- A constant energy output from the star. If the star's
energy output suddenly decreases, even for a relatively short while,
all the water on the planet would freeze. This situation is
irreversible, since when the star resumes its normal energy output,
the planet's now-white surface will reflect most of this energy, and
the ice will never melt. Conversely, if the stars energy output
increases for a short while, all the oceans will evaporate and the
result would be an irreversible greenhouse-effect, preventing the
oceans from reforming.
- Avoiding disasters. Any number of disasters can lead to the
complete extinction of all life on a planet. This include the
supernova of a nearby star; a massive asteroid impact ; drastic
changes of climate; and so on.
- The existence of a Jupiter-like planet in the system.
Apparently, Jupiter's large mass attracted many of the asteroids
that would have otherwise hit Earth. But if Jupiter is too large, it
could lead to a non-stable solar system, sending the smaller planets
into the central sun or ejecting them into the cold of space.
ˇ@
|
The existence of a large, nearby moon. Earth's moon, is
atypically large and close. Both of Mars's moons, for example, are minor
rocks by comparison. The Moon kept (and still keeps) Earth's tilt
stable. Without our right size Moon, the tilt would have changed
drastically over time, and no stable climate could exist. If the tilt
would have stabilized on a too-large or too-small value, the results
could also be disastrous; Earth's tilt is "just right".
|
What
does this mean? We come face to face with
the fact that the Earth is an extremely unique environment in that it
can supports life. Scientists discovered that less than 1 chance in 10282(million
trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion
trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion
trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion) exists
that even one such life-support body would occur anywhere in the
universe without invoking divine miracles. And here it is: the Earth. Earth
is not an accident, nor are we.
|
-------------------------------------- +
--------------------------------------
ˇ@ What
is more? Recently, scientists noticed even Earth's position in the
universe is not an accident. Earth is precisely positioned in the
Milky Way-not only for life, but also to allow us to find answers to
the greatest mysteries of the universe.
For example, we have total solar
eclipses on earth, and this made it possible for us to learn a great
deal about the sun because just the very outer layer of the sun shows
around the moon during an eclipse. It's not ordinarily possibly to
observe this layer because the sun is too bright, but, when we can
observe this layer, we can determine the composition of the sun.
Additionally, because these total eclipses happen, we can easily conform
Einstein's theory of General Relativity. What
if the moon were slightly larger? Then we wouldn't be able to see even
this outer layer of the sun during an eclipse, and so would not be able
to determine its composition (at least in this way). And if the moon
were slightly smaller? Enough of the sun would show that the bright
light from the main body of the sun would still swamp out observations
of the outer layer. Thus, this sort of observation is only possible
because the sun and the moon appear almost exactly the same size in the
sky; the ratio is exactly 1:1. which happens only because their sizes
and distances happen to be just right. The earth is the only planet in
the solar system where such eclipses happen.
Another example, the atmosphere admits
visible light, which, of all the possible frequencies in the
electromagnetic spectrum, is the most informative about what's going on
elsewhere. Also, our planet happens to be situated in a spot in our
galaxy where there is remarkably little "dust", making it
possible to see a great deal in outer space. And, we are able to see out
of the plane of our galaxy because we're in a ring region, making it
possible to easily see other galaxies and other objects very far away.
If we were elsewhere in our galaxy, this would likely be very difficult.

Why is it that the
conditions for the possibility of life and the conditions for scientific
discovery happen to coincide so exactly? Why are we able to
see into the stars, or see anything even outside their own solar system,
or even determine the composition of their own sun, or confirm General
Relativity?
We live in a universe where a designer
-- an intelligent agent -- wanted us to be able to make scientific
discoveries about His creation, and so He created a planet ideal for
both life and scientific discovery.
More on this subject: www.privilegedplanet.com
|
-------------------------------------- +
--------------------------------------
"When
I look at the night sky and see the work of your fingers, the moon and the
stars you have set in place, what are mortals that you should think of us,
mere humans that you should care for us? For you made us only a little
lower than angels, and you crowned us with glory and honor."
(Psalm 8:3-5 NLT)
|
Human experience reveals supernatural realm. Read
the scientific report.
|