Quote:
Originally Posted by Time_Travel
Accordingly our Universe was 10^(-33) cm when it was 10^(-43) sec old.
Now what is the PROBABILITY that protons, neutrinos were created in less than 1 sec along with the properties when they were created??
|
You would have to explain why the existence of subatomic particles in the early universe is somehow improbable. Scientists are looking at the conditions of the universe today, projecting it backward, and deducting what it was like a very long time ago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Time_Travel
The 10,000 Faced die as suggested by Modest doesn't seems to work here because the Universe didn't had enough time to play that dice ( less than 1 sec)
|
You are not following what I mean. Your posts seem to assign improbability to things in the past that would change the present. This is not really appropriate and I will explain why.
According to chaos theory, and the
butterfly effect in particular, the initial conditions of a system are very sensitive to the system's long term evolution.
For example, something as small as a butterfly flapping its wings can be enough of a factor to determine if a tornado forms 100 years later or does not form. It's called the butterfly effect—they made a movie after it.
Now pretend that today Bob lives in Texas and a tornado does *not* hit Bob and does *not* kill him. But, if a butterfly had flapped its wings 100 years ago on a particular mountain top in Mexico then there would be a tornado today and Bob would die. Bob lives today because that butterfly didn't flap its wings. This is the butterfly effect and if you aren't following what I mean then stop here and read the link above then come back.
There are also a billion other things that could have happened in the distant past that would have changed conditions today sufficiently enough for Bob to be killed today by a tornado or not to have ever been born at all. But, none of those things happened and Bob does in fact live.
You seem to be looking at that kind of situation and saying "Wow, how very improbable that the butterfly didn't flap its wings". But, the only reason that looks improbable is because you are assuming that "Bob lives" is the desired outcome. There really is no reason to think that a butterfly flapping its wings or not would be probable or improbable. There's no reason to think that quarks and gluons existing a very long time ago in the early universe is probable or improbable. It is simply something that given the current state of the universe is the logical previous state of the universe.
That Bob lives today means that a number of very precise things had to happen in the past including some particular butterfly not flapping its wings and some particular quark existing in the early universe. Only by assuming that the quark had in mind the purpose of eventually letting Bob exist and the butterfly had in mind the purpose of affecting the weather in just such a precise way as to let Bob live on this day today do those things seem improbable.
~modest
