This thread is for the more intelligent, any intelligent thoughts can be posted here by the more intelligent amongst us.
The thread is dedicated to bosley (bos) who only wants the more intelligent thoughts posted here.

Imagination is more important than knowledge; Einstein

You told Kivver I needed his help!!!!!!
It's you thats stuck for a response!!!!!!!!!!!!
Alan

Youre having a laugh stuck for a response, go and sell your BBC.

"Why are we here?" with the answer ;"Where the hell else should we be?"

Al thats probably the most intelligent thing ive ever read , thanks for sharing that , now iv'e just got to sit down and get my head round it ,this could change the meaning of life for me, ,and anything i have ever believed in ..

Al
I have thought about it, I think that the anthropic cosmological principle asserts that the laws, constants and basic structure of the universe are not completely arbitrary. Instead they are contrained by the requirement that they must allow for the existence of intelligent observers, ourselves.
Example: Why is the visible universe about 15 Billion light years in diameter? Because that means the universe is about 15 billion years old. Our sun is at least a second generation star because it contains Carbon, Oxygen, Silicon and other elements. It had to get them from earlier stars that had exploded--they were not available just after the big bang (which could only have produced Hydrogen and Helium). Hence the sun as we know it could not have existed much earlier in the history of the universe. Since we in turn require those elements, we could not have existed in a much earlier phase of the universe. You also have to allow a few billion years for evolution. We see a universe that is 15 billion light years across because the universe had to grow to that size to permit us to exist. We could not, incidentally, observe a universe that was a lot older, since by that time the stars will have burned out and there will be no available energy to support life. Many other examples are discussed in the following references.

There are lots of other facts in physics, astronomy, and chemistry, that can be interpreted in this manner. You can argue that this is all coincidence, and some of these observations have been referred to as "cosmic coincidences". You can also argue that this is obvious--nothing else would be possible. The subject is very controversial.

One aspect of this is that the Principle asserts that there is something special about our place in the universe. The example above shows that we must live in a particular segment of cosmic history. This goes against the general trend of science since Copernicus; that there is nothing special about our place. This makes a lot of scientists uncomfortable, but I think it is hard to dispute, THIS SHOWS HOW WRONG YOU ARE..

The Anthropic principle actually argues that there is nothing special in our place and time in cosmic history. It argues that in a series of universes (either cronographically a series or as the multiverse theory), conditions must arise at some place and time that are suitable for intelligent life like ours and that the intelligent life should not therefore be suprised that the conditions at this point are perfect for them.
The part of cosmic history we reside in therefore becomes irrelevant. It must exist at some point, and that is the only point we could possibly observe, so the only sense in which it becomes special, is that it has observers.
It becomes even less special when you take into account the number of states in which intelligent life, and therefore observers, could exist.
We are not equipped to understand any other dimensions than the 4 we posses, but there is nothing to say intelligent life cannot exist in a greater number of dimensions.
If this is held to be true, then our current position in space and time become even less remarkable, as others may have existed before or after us or in other universes, and we are not, after all, a one off.
Alan

Al
Shall we call it a draw?

Go on then.
Due to the uncertainty principle we could never be sure who had won anyway.
Alan ;-)

:-)

Al, no wonder your posts on the NOP thread are so laconic - you spend most of the day arguing quantum physics on here!!

Its much more fun tearing holes in the fabric of the universe than making money.
Anyway if I make any more money, I will breach the Chandheskhar limit (think I spelled it right) and all the cash in my wallet will rush exponentially into a collapse that will create a black hole, from which nothing, not even the price of a pint, can escape.
Then what would I do????
Alan

Perhaps start taking your tablets again.

Can't afford 'em, fred, since I put my money in YOO!!! I know less about investing than I do about Physics, and I know nowt about Physics!!
Alan

Al
You can say that again.

Did you know that today would be Albert Einsteins 127th birthday???
Of course, he still has a bit to do to prove himself worthy of posting on this thread.
Alan

Ive eaten all the cake.

I think the caption should be "Any Essex girls here? I'm on the pull"

Are you sure David Essex has any daughters Al?

Kims getting all Metaphysical again.

Not into heavy metal Al, more soft rock me.

PapalPower
pp's interpretation of cusp

The transitionary point perhaps, on the cusp of something means, it nearer than near but not actually happened yet, but it will in a very short space of time :