Is the Universe Fine Tuned for Life? The Case FOR and AGAINST Fine Tuning

Get your SPECIAL OFFER for MagellanTV here: try.magellantv.com/arvinash - It's an exclusive offer for our viewers! Start your free trial today. MagellanTV is a new kind of streaming service run by filmmakers with 3,000+ documentaries! Check out our personal recommendation and MagellanTV’s exclusive playlists: www.magellantv.com/genres/sci...
Arguments for fine tuning: Physics has many constants like the charge of the electron, the gravitational constant, Planck’s constant. If any of their values were different, our universe, as we know it, would not be the same, and life would probably not exist.
0:00 - Defining fine tuning
2:20 - Gravitational constant
3:59 - Electromagnetic Force
5:02 - Strong force
6:13 - Weak force
7:51 - Philosophical Arguments against fine tuning
9:36 - Scientific arguments against fine tuning
11:59 - Sentient puddle
13:29 - Does fine tuning need an agent
15:14 - Louse on the tail a lion
Some say that it could not have occurred by chance, that there must be some agent, like a god that set up the constants to enable life.
Let's just look at the constants associated with the different forces. Gravity: If the gravitational constant was too small, gravity would be too weak, and planets wouldn’t form. If it was too large, then stars like the sun would burn up too fast.
Electromagnetism: The electromagnetic force is responsible for the distance at which electrons orbits in atoms. If the force was weaker, the atomic size would increase because electrons would be further away from the nucleus. This could impact chemistry, as it would change the strength of chemical bonds.
A higher constant would lead to cooler stars and a lower constant would lead to hotter stars. If the constant was bigger, atoms larger than hydrogen atoms could not form and stars may never ignite, because protons may not have been able to overcome the coulomb barrier to fuse in the first place.
Strong force: If the strong coupling constant were lower, then you wouldn’t have stable heavy atoms as it would not be enough to overcome proton-proton repulsion. If the strong nuclear force was only 1% weaker for example, atoms crucial for life like oxygen, carbon and nitrogen may not form in sufficient quantities.
If the strong force was 2% stronger the atoms might not form at all. We would be stuck with only hydrogen atoms. The reason for this is that the strong force would overpower the beta decay that is necessary for protons to be transmuted to neutrons.
If the weak force constant was bigger, too much hydrogen would have turned into helium during the big bang, so fewer stars. If the value was smaller, neutrons wouldn’t have changed into protons in significant numbers. This could result in a universe full of neutrons, and no atoms in the universe.
Arguments against fine tuning: It does not follow that fine tuning is unnatural. There would be no basis to make that judgement because unnatural would mean that other constants could or should exist naturally. That is not the case.
We can’t say that it’s improbable either because probability implies that other constants are possible. We don’t know that. No probability based on statistics can be calculated based only one data point.
Life is not necessarily limited to life as we know it or understand it. Life different than ours could evolve in a different universe with a different set of constants.
Other than philosophical arguments, are there any scientific ones? Yesm, the masses of the different fundamental particles. Although it is important that the down quark has a higher mass than the up quark to enable beta decay, which allows neutrons to transmute into protons and vise versa, the precise value of these quark masses appears arbitrary. They could have different values, but as long as the difference between them was about the same, not much would change.
The mass of the neutrino may be arbitrary too. The most important thing is just for the mass to be very close to zero, and the ratio of the masses of the three different neutrinos - electron, muon and tau neutrinos is important. But the precise number that the mass takes does not seem to make a difference.
This may be like the story of the sentient puddle that finds himself to fit very precisely into the hole he finds himself in. But there could be lots of holes with lots of sentient puddles with different dimensions of the hole that also believe the same thing.
If the universe was fine tuned for life, why doesn’t life play a central role in the universe? Why isn’t it everywhere? Why is most of the universe hostile towards life.
#finetuning
Even if the universe if fine tuned, it does not necessarily mean that there is an agent that created it because if he is outside the bounds of physics, then he could create life in any universe, even one that is not fine tuned.
Outro tune: "Cinematic Electronic Ambient" by Valentina Gribanova

[@haritinasakova4327]

One of the rare people on youtube I've found that knows how to explain complex things, without using fancy language, but focuses on the science itself. Amazing channel and content

[@Starfire777]

I'm surprised that people do NOT READ their BIBLE to learn how first MAN and WOMAN SINNED! that leads to death and sorrow but GOD SENT JESUS TO SAVE MANKIND and Promise us ETERNAL life!!! IF WE FOLLOW HIM!!!!

[@ericpowell96]

I really respect the fact that you are able to present both sides without bashing one or the other, it's all to rare today. It makes me really sad when people just tear into each other because of some minor viewpoint. Also, you have some of the coolest intro music on youtube :)

[@gillypuente1794]

This isn't a minor viewpoint. They're literally mutually exclusive, opposite positions on one of the biggest questions there is.

[@ericpowell96]

@@gillypuente1794 They are mutually exclusive, but it's not exactly a hot topic with a lot of coverage. Compare it to the debates on evolution or dark matter or climate change, it doesn't receive anywhere near as much attention.

[@gillypuente1794]

@@ericpowell96 Your response is immaterial to my point that these aren't minor viewpoints.

[@darrenmarney8577]

Mr Charles 😃 I like your summarisation 👌

[@caricue]

@@ericpowell96 I think Gilly Puente is illustrating your point by tearing into you over his minor point about it not being a minor point. Well played Gilly!

[@pyne1976]

You have fundamentally tailored your channel to my interests. Coincidence?

[@ArvinAsh]

In a universe with KZbin, there was bound to be at least one channel that was tailor made for your interests. haha.

[@AndreasHLux]

... lets make a covid...%

[@prt01]

Ancient astronaut theorists, say yes

[@mariejolene]

You are my favourite KZbinr.

[@mikebar42]

@@AndreasHLux let's not and say we did...

[@myaccountishacked6417]

I could sit around for a lifetime pondering about who what where when why and how life is. Whatever this thing called 'life' is, were all in this together at this very tiny moment of history. Lets all try our best to make it amazing for each and everyone of us. Have fun, spend lots of time smiling and laughing, Enjoy the short ride, have no regrets and ill catch y'all on the flipside ;)

[@umeshkhanna4896]

👍

[@joexer1]

If we are all one, does that mean we are all alone?

[@THE-X-Force]

@@joexer1 Nope. :)

[@Fecal_Eruptions]

Entp?

[@myaccountishacked6417]

@@Fecal_Eruptions I would assume so

[@MrBendybruce]

I have to give you credit Arvin, your content never ceases to feel fresh and interesting. Definitely one of my favorite science channels. ✨

[@ArvinAsh]

Glad you enjoy it!

[@NiToNi2002]

@@ArvinAsh Can only agree - superb and different from many other science channels. Physics is about understanding our universe and therefore ultimately also the big existential question, like whether there’s a creator or if we’re in a simulation etc. I don’t see how or why these ought to be separate concepts.

[@Comment27560]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/e3aaZ6GtntKoipI

[@ashley_brown6106]

I love that you give both approaches and leave it to the critical thought of the viewers to decide!

[@maheshiyer3430]

A new video on this channel makes my day. Absolutely love Arvin's Energy!

[@darkmatter6714]

I would have thought that every universe would be fine-tuned for the life that eventually gestates in it. In other words, no - it wasn’t fine-tuned for life...life was fine-tuned for IT.

[@rufusapplebee1428]

Live Forever and Prosper, Dark Matter.

[@nenzattibellece4459]

I agree with you. Life is just an additional constant. After all, we wouldn't know what would happen to the universe if this constant disappeared on a sudden, right?

[@pawnriot3269]

@@nenzattibellece4459 Lmao "life is a constant" what you been smoking bruh. Life is just a set of chemical reactions by chance generating something akin to a self-aware and self-replicating mechanism. You are falling in the same trap of considering ourselves more important than we are. We are merely spectators.

[@jakublizon6375]

Exactly, life adapts, and it adapted to the constants of our universe just like it adapted to it's local environment.

[@jakublizon6375]

@@nenzattibellece4459 I don't think that's what he meant. Life is not a constant, it adapts to them. It's what life does, hence..... Well, life.

[@Paulkjoss]

“It’s possible we have not seen the lion that awaits at the end of the tail”… …I think we can safely remove “Its possible”… :D

[@kevintedder4202]

And if we continue to tickle and poke it, and finally discover what the lion looks like, don't be surprised when it bites back. Maybe we are meant to discover the truths of the universe. Remember the great Wizard of Oz. Dorothy was disappointed when she discovered what he really was.

[@MusicalRaichu]

i was a curious how you would treat this issue but i think you've done a great job. there are implicit assumptions in posing a fine tuning argument and in any case we really don't know enough to make the case convincingly.

[@protoword10]

Thank you Arvin, I don’t have any question, but your intelligent thinking and conclusions made me think deeper than I did ever before...

[@anywallsocket]

A lot of these "fine-tuning" arguments seem to share one fatal flaw: They use a hypothetical situation in which the constants were different, and then suggest that in our Universe, stars, life, etc., would not be able to form. But that's in relation to our Universe in-which the laws of physics are what they are, and are not different. To make the point more obvious, consider the fact that hypothetically changing the constants would have to change them as they emerged from the asymmetries in the bigbang, and therefore you are changing the the whole Universe, in-which you don't know whether or not these structures would or would not form. It is logically unsound to imagine a situation in-which only some aspects of the universe are different, since the interrelations of those aspects originated together. This can be proved by conservation of information.

[@MrSnapback52]

I love your videos! It’s the perfect balance between science and philosophy. Not ridiculing any dogma or leaning too far into skepticism. I really appreciate that!!

[@doggedout]

Me: Waits patiently for the video to finish to make the "puddle" comment. Arvin: Saves the "puddle" analogy for the end of the video. Me: Doh!

[@actsnfacts]

thank yourself for the "waits patiently" part... I sometimes won't, and then I make a fool of myself... lol 😆

[@robertinnit1367]

This is the best channel on KZbin I have come across that presents ideas so well thank you for your content

[@expchrist]

After watching lots of your episodes this was the one that impressed me the most.

[@drakezone5213]

Universe is not fine tuned for life,its life that is finetuning and adjusting itself to to suit in this universe,that's why we are alive in this harsh universe which we shouldn't at first place.

[@godq3]

Why do you think that life exists in the first place? Only expierience exists.

[@ArvinAsh]

Well, evolution shows that living things are a product of adaptations to suit their environment. So, you might say they are tuned to their environment. And the universe created the environment to begin with. But the universe also created the matter and forces to be such that living things could emerge. So life emerged due to the fine tuning that our universe has, but life was then also fine tuned by the forces of that same universe.

[@effectingcause5484]

Arvin please do a vid on the argument for and against an Ether!

[@bsfunskit]

Awesome contents as usual... Thank you Arvin...

[@musetube9015]

Keep up the great work! We all appreciate it!

[@Johnathan_wick442]

I love your videos ❤️❤️❤️

[@mohamedluqman6187]

Our existence in this universe can be reduced to nothingness and yet we have the audacity to say that this universe was fine tuned for us.

[@the13mas]

Think of it another way: the argument is not that it is fine-tuned for us earthlings, and volume is irrelevant here. The focus is on how the universe allows to many different levels of complexity. Think of it as a pyramid. The bottom layer is subatomic particles. The layer above it: molecules of all kinds. The layer above that: great structures (rocks, stars, planets, rivers, seas, mountains,...). The layer of that: biological machinery. The layer above that: creatures. The layer above that: highly intelligent creatures. The layer above that: advanced systems created by the intelligent creatures like the internet, AI, civilizations. The layer above that: who knows what the future holds for us. So again, it’s not about volume. We are significant in the universe because we are high up on that pyramid regardless of how small we are. We will learn of our insignificance when we meet aliens who way more advanced and have reached much higher layers on that pyramid. So how many combinations are there of the constants that allow for high pyramids? Very few is the answer. And that’s what makes us special.

[@mohamedluqman6187]

@@the13mas in terms of complexity, we are indeed special.

[@vitovittucci9801]

@@plotinus393 So, according to you, the universe is the result of a design, in other words of a will....

[@sierrabianca]

@@plotinus393 "That's why everything leads from the big bang to the stars to the planets and finally to lifeforms....so through them it can have ever evolving degrees of conscious experiences" This is a purely anthropocentric claim and as far as we currently understand everything leads from the big bang, through a "brief" era of star formation and life to a *final* state of entropic decay over a potentially infinite future. Given that the era of low entropy which gives rise to life is limited and that of high entropy will overshadow it by vast cosmological aeons it'd much more accurate to say that the Universe is fine-tuned to be maximally disordered and devoid of life, no?

[@vitovittucci9801]

@@sierrabianca One can say as well that even this brief era of low entropy is turned for life. Life doen't have necessarily last for billions of years. So you don't escape from antropic principle

[@maquinaghost389]

These vids are on another level. Kudos to the graphic department too

[@aljohnson3717]

This gave me chills. Thank you Arvin!

[@ShinySephiroth1]

Me listening to the puddle analogy: "No... no, I don't like this... stop it! Nooo!" *existential dread sets in*

[@mikloscsuvar6097]

Why do you have existential dread?

[@ShinySephiroth1]

@@mikloscsuvar6097 the thought of never thinking again is haunting. One of the reasons I hate going to sleep, haha. I love consciousness.

[@ivyreece9925]

Joe V I know how you feel. I love being conscious. The thought of never thinking again is terrifying. Like we have this great ability to exist and have awareness of reality and then suddenly we don’t.

[@bradbadley1]

@@ivyreece9925 you and joe are my people!! You have the same grasp and dread as I do about soon not existing for all time! Yikes!!!!!

[@MrLoerch]

We as humans don't mean s*** to the universe. We are of utterly no importance to it. It's all about us on this planet, nothing more. The sooner we get that thinking to everyone, the sooner we can have peace and solidarity as a life form and not think of skin color or heritage as a way of measuring the value of somebody. We are all equal, we are one.

[@rufusapplebee1428]

Live Forever and Prosper, Arvin Ash.

[@ArvinAsh]

🖖🖖🖖🖖🖖

[@thorout8377]

You are so good with life and beyond. My reasoning; There were a maker of life, that steps of fine tuning were implemented to correct the balance of the cosmos as we humans make the mistakes of life!

[@redpower6956]

Amazing video as usual and interesting topic, easily one of the best science channels I have ever seen.

[@giuffre714]

The vast majority of the universe would kill us very quickly. Heck, you could die of exposure on Earth in most places : )

[@picksalot1]

Our brains/minds seem to be "fined tuned" to come up with explanations whether or not they are applicable. Excellent video, very well thought out and produced. Thanks 👍

[@Comment27560]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/e3aaZ6GtntKoipI

[@garyshanklin9972]

Po

[@CoachDale_TopNotchMuayThai]

You have the voice that just pulls you in, love your videos ! Thank you 🙏🏼

[@blackbear92201]

Awesome video - thanks for posting!

[@bibleredpill]

I am one of Jehovah’s Witnesses and I love science. This is one of my all-time favorite channels. I choose to believe in the creator. Thanks for the great videos.

[@MichaelAntonFischer]

My parents became JW. I studied the Bible with them and this made me an Atheist. I can’t understand how one can live science and be JW? I mean you must deny evolution… and you must gloss over the fact how often JW publications directly lie about science.

[@PetraKann]

How many seats are there in Heaven again?

[@mikloscsuvar6097]

@@MichaelAntonFischer Catholicism accept evolution.

[@MichaelAntonFischer]

@Bible Red Pill just read the articles on Evolution. They are riddled with lies, misrepresentions and straw man arguments. If you deny evolution, you are denying one of the most well proven theories that science has, you are thus a science denier, not a lover of science. Other publications that lie in the JW library are e.g. on Tyre. There in the quotes the article in the JW library deletes one sentence „and will never be rebuilt“ (quoting from the top of my head) from a paragraph, because that sentence contradicts the whole article and the prophecy.

[@MichaelAntonFischer]

@Bible Red Pill well, you just showed me that you not only know the lies, you even regurgitate them. 1. countless „links“ have been found 2. we have millions of Fossils. But do you know what’s never been proven? In fact not even hinted at? Creation. If your creation myth is true, then surely you can name both the created Kind and the kind that Noah took on the ark?

[@conrmckocoa9352]

Please don't ever change "that's coming up right now"

[@andycopeland7051]

This was a fun video man. Great summarizations of both arguments

[@davidfain1454]

Thank you again Arvin. Your presentation and production values are EXCELLENT. To you and your team, Keep up the good work!

[@ArvinAsh]

Much appreciated!

[@BlueFrenzy]

Some years ago someone made a few universes' simulations with random constants. The result of the experiment was that in almost half of the universes you can find stars with a lifetime large enough to support life. And that's talking about life as we know it. Maybe in a radically different universe different type of life may emerge. Fine tuning argument doesn't hold its water.

[@tahirsiddiqui9480]

They are not random God created the universe believe it or not

[@BlueFrenzy]

@@tahirsiddiqui9480 Truth doesn't care about your beliefs or mine. If there's no god, nothing there is as nothing there was. I am glad that your faith based narrative will help you to simplify you life choices, but I am not interested in your tales for grown ups, so please, don't make me waste more time and keep your ideology for you.

[@tahirsiddiqui9480]

@@BlueFrenzy did i? I said believe or not but judgment day will come and if you are curious I'm Sunni Muslim my faith Islam and the truth

[@acdude5266]

​@BlueFrenzy Do you want to suppress other people's opinions, irrespective of their inductive probability? If you don't want to waste your time, just say you do not agree instead of being so highbrow.

[@wntu4]

The water in the puddle marvels at how the depression was tailor made for it.

[@andersjjensen]

Yes. Right down to the minutest of crinkles, it just fits the shape of the water. Heck, right down to the atomic level. RIGHT where the water ends the hole begins. You can't POSSIBLY tell me this wasn't by design!

[@skeebo6885]

Well that puddle of water didn't think things through very well. Due to it's fluid properties it will adopt to whatever size and shape the depression is. You can't say that about life with regard to the values of physical laws and constants.

[@skeebo6885]

@@andersjjensen The water will fit exactly in the depression due to its fluid nature. The physical boundries of the depression determines the shape of the water. A physicist could explain it better, but thats basically why a puddle of water doesn't require design.

[@wntu4]

@@skeebo6885 If you think life doesn't do the same thing you're delusional. Where physics permits, life finds a way. This principle has been proven repeatedly in my lifetime after scientists discovered life existing or had existed under circumstances previously thought impossible.

[@andersjjensen]

@@skeebo6885 This answer has got to be the biggest woooosh moment I've ever witnessed. Like I couldn't have spelled out the sarcasm any more clearly without literally ending with the tag.

[@oscopin74]

Love your videos. Glad I found you. ALWAYS interesting.

[@meneeRubieko]

I love the new more philosophical existential vibe of your videos man

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks. But it's not a change. I've always tried to do videos that ask big questions. The nature of those questions usually has an element of philosophy in it.

[@TonyP9279]

I just noticed something when you were talking about the mass of particles: What gives the Higgs boson it's mass?

[@ArvinAsh]

HIggs interacts with itself. See my video on the Standard model Lagrangian: kzbin.info/www/bejne/l6SopYGAbtiFmbM

[@Nuovoswiss]

Is there a reason you didn't cover the anthropic principle? (for those who aren't familiar, it states that life can only develop in a universe/environment which is fine tuned to support it, so no sentient being will ever observe a universe/environment which isn't fine tuned)

[@mobuildsstuff]

Some kind of survivorship bias? It might be possible to observe different configurations by using simulations but i am not sure whether it would be worth the price.

[@ethancntower8850]

I was wondering about that. I didn't know what it was called but it makes sense that we would only exist in a universe and a planet where its actually possible for life to thrive.

[@vibaj16]

There’s a name for that? I’ve always used that as the flaw with any argument of the universe being fine-tuned for life.

[@Nuovoswiss]

@@vibaj16 Yup. Stephen Hawking talked about it a fair bit in his books, so I thought it would be more well known. That's why I was surprised when Arvin didn't mention it. There's also two different versions of it: "Strong" and "Weak".

[@PAULSWorld131]

Great to have found this channel. Extremely good and fascinating content.

[@hanssacosta1990]

Wowwww what a video this was , thank u so much Arvin 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏❤️❤️❤️❤️

[@FactTalkOfficial]

The universe gets more stranger as more we explore!!

[@sayyamzahid7312]

I live in Karachi Pakistan and I like your comment thanks

[@epitome641]

@@inquiry-TZ I am a part of divinity or its thought

[@paultorbert6929]

@@guff9567 the proper term would be cannabis.....

[@Starfire777]

I got NEWS for you many scientist make mention of "GOD" as being real ,Like EINSTEIN said "I DONOT BELIEV "GOD" Plays DICE with the UNIVERSE, because of the tremendous power we see on Display, BLACK HOLES< SUPER NOVA Stars that EXPLODE sending GAMMA RAYS throughout the Universe!!! ETC. MATTER and ANTIMATTER etc.How they work together to create UNIVERSE!!

[@russchadwell]

It's as fine tuned as freddy's quick pick lotto ticket was when he hit the jack pot.

[@caricue]

russchadwell, I thought the same thing. In fact, after a thing has happened it doesn't really make sense to obsess over the probability. Now that it is a reality, the odds are 100%. In a weird way, you could say that Freddy had 100% chance of winning and everyone else had zero, but no one knew this until the end.

[@russchadwell]

@@caricue in a way, it's as though people can be too "dumb" to fully appreciate dumb luck. (Just a play on words, I don't necessarily think people are truly dumb)

[@caricue]

@@russchadwell The lottery is kind of dumb if you think about it. There are really only two players, there's you and "not you". If "not you" wins, it really doesn't matter who this nameless person is, because it's not you. So you can buy as many tickets as you like, but "not you" will buy pretty much every number, so they will always win. I think that counts as dumb.

[@Radonatos]

Underrated comment, as it is the anthropic principle in a nutshell. Freddy is also likely to be affected by survivorship-bias, and will assume he has been chosen to win by the fine-tuner.

[@russchadwell]

@@Radonatos I sometimes actually pity lotto winners for just this reason... soon destined to lose everything, thinking they can win again... and, of course, there are those lucky few who actually do win an additional time... just to make me sound stupid

[@michaelpudney]

The universe wasn't made for us. We were made for the universe to observe itself. That means any universe, whatever it's constants, might also find different ways to look at itself. Observation, after all, does play a roll in how this universe operates.

[@Kickex]

Yes. That puddle analogy was rather comforting. 😂👍❤️

[@rrashi4484]

What if the head of the lion is a realization "we are in a simulation"

[@InfamoussDBZ]

I died for fifteen minutes and when I was revived I remember nothing after seeing the airbags inflate in my car for a split second. Out of all the things you do in life, death is the easiest.

[@Sasoon2006]

I guess if it is quick. But dying of cancer for months, in pain, does not sound easy.

[@InfamoussDBZ]

@@Sasoon2006 That's definitely true. Maybe my comment wasn't the best.

[@djalmamartins1772]

Being dead is the easiest...

[@Sasoon2006]

@@djalmamartins1772 Yep, just getting there is the issue

[@mobilemarshall]

nice thorough video, well done

[@Nawwar1980]

It's the best channel on youtube, thanks Arvin Ash.

[@priyanshujoshi6057]

Universe is fine tuned, Arvin ash making video on it, now that's called fine tuning....

[@nivekvb]

No fine tuning, no video.

[@petersonjeudy]

We might not be here but life could still exist, just not in a way we recognize

[@NiToNi2002]

@@Smp_lifting Why does a universe need an observer? If you’re referring to collapsing the wave function, this is old school thinking, nowadays only perpetuated by the quantum snake oil vendors. No “consciousness” needed, just an unobserved measurement. What sort of life form would you envisage in a universe full of only neutrons?

[@kyjo72682]

@@Smp_lifting Yep. The regions of universe which don't allow observers are probably vastly more numerous than those which do, such as ours. There probably aren't many "puddles" in the universal desert, and they are very far apart.

[@NiToNi2002]

@@Smp_lifting “We will never observe an universe that doesnt allow life”.... If you assume that we can’t observe any other universe than our own, which is reasonable, we won’t be observing any other universe at all, whether it allows for life or not. In its early beginning, our own universe did not allow for life either, i.e no observer.

[@NiToNi2002]

@@kyjo72682 Are you talking about environments hostile to life or the fundamental physical constants? If the former, you’re right, although many scientists believe life may be more common and widespread in our universe than we (yet ) know and realise. As a matter of fact, it may be teeming with life. If you mean the latter however, the constants are obviously the same across the whole universe and not “fine tuned” just here on earth and other life-friendly planets/environments.

[@vibaj16]

Samuel Paré THANK YOU. This is what I’ve always thought about the fine-tuned argument

[@stefaniasmanio5857]

Hi dr. Ash. This is one of the most astonishing, interesting, clear and complete explanation of this subject I’ve ever listened to… you are a super teacher. Your students should be grateful for every lesson…. Thank you so much! Wonderful animations and graphs! 😍😍😍😍👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻❤️

[@ArvinAsh]

Thank you. Glad you enjoyed it!

[@stevenschilizzi4104]

Arvin, you are as captivating and amazingly interesting as always! Thank you for all your efforts to make things understandable to us mere humans!

[@30l0l3]

Am I a sentient puddle ? 🤔

[@ArvinAsh]

It's possible you are...metaphorically.

[@coder_gogeta]

Watching this video during my online class

[@jeancorriveau8686]

11:55 "Our anthropic bias may be constraining our imagination." Well said as well as everything that followed that statement!

[@joseluisfernandez7117]

I think that the answer to this question is that life appeared, not only in this planet but probably in many other planets around the Universe, as a cosmic imperative due to the laws of Physics and Chemistry.

[@ThePawel36]

"If the universe was fine tuned for life, why doesn't life play central role in it ? " Lot of ideas come to mind. 1) Life Does Not playing a central role in the Universe is as good as life doing it, whatever instance you focus on you will always have doubts about opposite one. 2) If life was playing the central role in the Universe then possible life on different planets could not develop independently because it would be immediately influenced or dominated more precisely, by more advanced ones, in this case there would not be, genuine, self-developed civilizations around. It is possible that life would then consist only of the conquest of other planets without giving them time to reach technological and psychological maturity. 3) Or maybe it's just that if life was so usual everywhere, there would be no room for the development of faith and religion, (I write this from the point of view of a believer). The point is that the religion on each planet would not develop independently, but would be imposed by civilizations more advanced. 5) Having Earth as only one known life sustainable planet make people believe. The Universe is so huge, empty and scary, so we gonna be better of believing 6) Or maybe, more life around, would mean more blood, violence, wars, injustice, human tragedies, deaths etc, etc- may even include a threat to destroy the entire planet if the invaders' conditions are not met .

[@SteveStrummerUK]

"Astro-biologist", or 'biologist' as I prefer to call them 😁

[@darrenmarney8577]

Thank you Alvin for providing such fundamentals of verifiable information 👌 I have shared this with friends & hopefully they have gained some insight & potential understanding of this awesome universe 👍

[@Gonzihh]

hey, your videos are always amazing, thanks for the great content!

[@raghunathan9026]

survivor bias

[@KaiseruSoze]

It's surprising the number of ppl who only see the "pro" side of "intelligent design" ( oops I mean "fine tuning" ).

[@DavidBaronStevensPersonal]

I love your approach to the big questions in Science

[@bombdottcom111]

Interesting topic, Arvin, thanks!

[@JarodM]

This video was highly informative and easy to grasp, thank you~👍

[@manuelmartinez-gq4ij]

Your passion is appreciated and listening to these theories wakes my brain up on a lovely Saturday morning. Hope the beanie is just a fashion statement and not something else.thank you.

[@jeanchauvus3337]

Very interesting Thank u Arvin

[@rkdeka-jg8wf]

Explained very very nicely, thankyou sir.

[@johnathanmiller3033]

Wow ... that was a great presentation . Good job sir .

[@SalmonBoa420]

This was a really good one... just like all your content 👍🤘

[@williamwhitehead374]

Wow, great video! Mind opening stuff

[@nerdexproject]

Love this channel!!

[@mahaveerjanagouda77]

it can be seen in 2 ways 1. if we gave life more importance tht would be one scenario 2.leaving aside life and thinking about other things ,and life may be the byproduct i paused the video at 5 min and thought abt this and thought that different combinations of these constants may form other universes and further in video arvin also talks about it. but every time i think abt this ,my thought process only consider life as main product

[@echonabin]

So glad that we can make some great story with some of the greatest achievements of all time, proud to be on this century 😊.

[@rogerruiz1801]

awesome job, thanks a lot !

[@chiroo2]

someone somewhere said 'this universe lifes just like an apple tree apples' and I find that very beautiful :)

[@TheFinagle]

I love that you brought in Douglas Adams sentient puddle into this video. I like how you cover a lot of side some other videos either ignored or just straight rejected as an option, like what about life NOT of the 'As We Know It' variety. 'As we know it' is a very very small view of things. There is so much we dont know that we know is out there to learn (like what causes the effects we attribute to dark mater and dark energy) and still more beyond that we cant even theorize about yet.

[@sravyasarathy1094]

A fantastic video guide for the question which I have in my mind even after a decade of research. It is still not the answer, but definitely a good guide. Thanks @Arvin Ash for fueling the question inside me. On a side note: How many of you reminded about "The Architect" from THE MATRIX movie when Arvin mentions about "The Agent"

[@Z3ROWOLFHD]

Great video Arvin.

[@blacksama_]

13:30 brilliant deduction.

[@sahadatkhan6912]

Wonderfull explanation

[@joshuaforbus5853]

My God. It's so just dam fascinating. Amazing. Love you're videos and thanks. Semper Fi and God bless

[@anishashee8511]

Well explained as always 👍

[@Jim0i0]

Sweeeet. You continue to be the MAN, Arvin.

[@aviii1098]

great as always 😊

[@idahogreen2885]

Hey, idk about all the super heavy comments. Or what makes this whole universe work. But i know for a fact im enjoying the Show. Ty arvin for all your good work.

[@bigblukiwi]

Excellent summary and one which demolishes any idea that the universe is 'fine tuned'.

[@lenroddis5933]

Nice to see variations of 2% and 5% being mentioned. So many times I read creationist claims e.g. that a variation in the order of 10^-50 in the value of G would be catastrophic.

[@Shaqoneil81-ci7dr]

2-5% is very significant especially when you put that against 26 constants.

[@rajendrakhanvilkar9362]

Great video

[@johnroemeeks_apologetics]

"There is not a shred of evidence that the universe is logically necessary. Indeed, as a theoretical physicist I find it rather easy to imagine alternative universes that are logically consistent and therefore equal contenders of reality" -Paul Davies (Agnostic Physicist)

[@tommyvictorbuch6960]

The pothole argument is very strong. Very convincing,

[@davopotato7012]

Great videos

[@cremasca]

You are the best !!! 👍❤️👍❤️👍

[@johnsullivan4025]

Fascinating... I was always leaning towards the notion that there was no need for fine-tuning from a divine deity for us to exist. However, after this presentation all I can say for certain is that I like that cap.

[@uweschwarz1760]

Thank you for another really science based video. And by calling it scientific I also mean calling other aspects like philosophy by name. Showing that there are many points of view which can be taken and would often lead to just a different picture of the same thing.

[@brainbulb92]

The new intro is amazing