Talk:Fine-tuned universe

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fine-tuned universe article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7: 3 months

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

Creationism Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Creationism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Creationism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CreationismWikipedia:WikiProject CreationismTemplate:WikiProject CreationismCreationism
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Physics Mid‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Astronomy Low‑importance

	Astronomy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The content of Puddle thinking was merged into Fine-tuned universe on 29 January 2010. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. For the discussion at that location, see its talk page.

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

Article needs a history section

I was brought here from the page for Averroes, who argued for a fine tuned universe based on the properties of Earth, as a teleologic proof of God. (Plenty of water, rivers, temperature, etc.) Others in the past have used the physical chemistry of water as evidence. (High melting point, freezing point, and the density of ice, as well as its overall abundance.)

Merger proposal Fine-tuning (physics)

I propose we should merge the Fine-tuning (physics) article into this one. Uwsi (talk) 13:44, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Puddle thinking" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Puddle thinking has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 June 26 § Puddle thinking until a consensus is reached. Tea2min (talk) 09:22, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not very encyclopedic to include Doug Adams as the conclusion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.198.143.30 (talk) 21:15, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Add link to Scientism

The same way that there is a link to God of the Gaps. I know Wikipedia mods don't like it when science is 'challenged' so I chose to write this in the Talk section first. Wokspoon (talk) 16:10, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why? What is the connection? The connection to God of the Gaps is clear. --Hob Gadling (talk) 10:28, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why is "fine tuning" a hypothesis?

The universe is fine-tuned, Stephen Hawking state it was. It is not a hypothesis, it is a mathematically observable reality, and it is on those who think reality is wrong to find reasons to disprove it. The only hypotheses supporting a random result of fine-tuning are those who accept probability theory as an explanation (i.e., the multiverse theory). Meh130 (talk) 02:13, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, many worlds is a very popular interpretation.

Personally I think part of the problem involves the word "tuned." It implies a tuner or a teleology. If there were a subtler term (and MWI were less popular), maybe scientists and reliable sources would be more likely to refer to it as an observable reality. -Jordgette [talk] 16:34, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We describe it as a hypothesis because that is how science describes it. Science rarely asserts that anything is 'observable reality', and I can't for the life of me figure out what a 'mathematically observable reality' would consist of since you can't observe reality through mathematics. AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:29, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]