Teleological Cosmological Argument

Do you know the story of Goldilocks and the Three Bears? A cute little girl with severe behavior problems. What was that little girl's problem? She was a squatter with no ownership or rights whatsoever. Seriously, going to a stranger's house, walking in without an invite, helping herself with food and furniture, and ensuring everything was perfect: food, chair, and bed. And she was so picky. 

Everything in this girl's life had to be just right. The soup couldn't be too hot or cold; it had to be just right. The chair could not be too soft or hard; it had to be just right. The bed could not be too soft or to hard. Getting things just right tired her to the point that she needed a nap. The nap led to her downfall.

Why couldn't the poor girl make the correct choice on her first try? The chance of picking the correct porridge the first time was 33% or 1/3. Same with the chair and the bed: one out of three. So, what is the chance of making the correct choice three times in a row? The chance of this was less than 4%. The math is simple: multiply  1/3 X 1/3 X 1/3 or 1/27 (1 in 2.7 X10^1). 

Picking just the right conditions in our local part of the universe—galaxy, sun, Earth, and moon—had to be just right to support intelligent life. In his book "The Creator and The Cosmos,"  Hugh Ross lists 66 conditions that had to be just right or it would not support life. DO YOU BELIEVE THAT? PROBABLY NOT. Perhaps after one condition was right, all other conditions had to fall into place. NOT REALLY. Picking the just-right conditions 66 times in a row is 3.09 X 10^31 or 0000000000000000000000000000003.09. 

Below is a partial list of Ross's conditions:

"galaxy cluster type 

If too rich, galaxy collisions and mergers would disrupt solar orbit. If too sparse, there is insufficient infusion of gas to sustain star formation for a long enough time.

galaxy type

 if too elliptical, star formation would cease before sufficient heavy element build-up for life chemistry. If irregular in formation, radiation exposure on occasion would be too severe, and heavy elements for life chemistry would not be available.

galaxy location

 if too close to a rich galaxy cluster: galaxy would be gravitationally disrupted if too close to very large galaxy(ies): galaxy would be gravitationally disrupted.

parent star distance from the center of the galaxy

 if farther away, the quantity of heavy elements would be insufficient to make rocky planets. If closer, galactic radiation would be too great; stellar density would disturb planetary orbits.

number of stars in the planetary system

 if more than one, tidal interaction would disrupt the planetary orbit of life support planet. If less than one, the heat produced would be insufficient for life.

parent star birth date

 if more recent, the star would not yet have reached a stable burning phase; the stellar system would contain too many heavy elements if less recent, stellar system would not contain enough heavy elements

parent star mass 

if greater, the luminosity of the star would change too quickly; the star would burn too rapidly. If less, the range of planet distances for life would be too narrow; tidal forces would disrupt the life planet's rotational period; UV radiation would be inadequate for plants to make sugars and oxygen.

parent star color 

if redder, the photosynthetic response would be insufficient. If bluer, the photosynthetic response would be insufficient.

surface gravity (escape velocity)

 if stronger, the planet's atmosphere would retain too much ammonia and methane. If weaker, the planet's atmosphere would lose too much water.

distance from parent star

 if farther away, the planet would be too cool for a stable water cycle. If closer, the planet would be too warm for a stable water cycle.

axial tilt

 if greater, surface temperature differences would be too great; if less, surface temperature differences would be too little.

rotation period

 if longer, diurnal temperature differences would be too great; if shorter, atmospheric wind velocities would be too great.

planet age

 if too young, planet would rotate too rapidly. If too old, planet would rotate too slowly

magnetic field 

if stronger, electromagnetic storms would be too severe; if weaker, the ozone shield would be inadequately protected from hard stellar and solar radiation.

oxygen to nitrogen ratio in atmosphere

 if larger, advanced life functions would proceed too quickly. If smaller, advanced life functions would proceed too slowly.

oxygen quantity in atmosphere

 if greater, plants and hydrocarbons would burn up too easily. If less, advanced animals would have too little to breathe.

gravitational interaction with a moon

 if greater, tidal effects on the oceans, atmosphere, and rotational period would be too severe. If less, orbital obliquity changes would cause climatic instabilities; movement of nutrients and life from the oceans to the continents and vice versa would be insufficient; magnetic field would be too weak.

Jupiter distance

 if greater: too many asteroid and comet collisions would occur on Earth if less: Earth's orbit would become unstable

Jupiter mass 

if greater, Earth's orbit would become unstable if less, too many asteroid and comet collisions would occur on Earth

atmospheric pressure

 if too small, liquid water would evaporate too easily and condense too infrequently. If too large, liquid water would not evaporate easily enough for land life; insufficient sunlight would reach the planetary surface; insufficient UV radiation would reach the planetary surface. 

atmospheric transparency 

if smaller: insufficient range of wavelengths of solar radiation would reach planetary surface if greater: too broad a range of wavelengths of solar radiation would reach the planetary surface."

            Hugh Ross

The above section involves conditions in our little part of the universe (galaxy, sun, moon, and earth). Let's look at the constants and quantities expressed in mathematical equations of the laws of nature in our universe (not just in our galaxy). Instead of chance being 1/3 for one pick, these values are dramatically less than one chance in three. 

Gravity We know that if gravity is too weak or too strong, intelligent life would not exist. However, this does not mention how exact accuracy needs to be. The mathematical  equation is 

F = G X  M1 X M2 / R ^2. In this equation, which expresses the force of gravity, the constant G must be accurate within one part in 10 to the 60th power (1 in 10^60; otherwise, life could not exist. 

The electromagnetic force of nature, which involves positive and negative forces of charged particles, must fall within 1 part in 10^37. If not, intelligent life could not exist. Perhaps gravity forced electromagnetic force to be what it is. No! They are not related. Is that hard to believe?

Our universe is expanding; its expansion rate is 1 part in 10^55. If not, the universe would collapse on itself or expand too quickly, and our universe would run out of energy too soon. Is that hard to believe? No, it is not dependent on gravity or the electromagnetic force.

Cosmological constant: 1 part in 10^120. This counteracts gravity, and instead of the universe collapsing, it is expanding ( the universe is expanding in size). If the expansion was greater, no suns or galaxies would have formed.

How do you explain away over 100 very precise numbers? It must be due to necessity, chance, or design. It is not necessity; the constants and quantities are not related to each other. The incomprehensible precision is not due to blind luck, so the answer must be designed. Who designed it? It must be a powerful mind that is immaterial and can create. The best explanation is God.

I'm not a gambler or a poker player, but it is a game of chance that often involves winning or losing money. Put yourself in my game, where if you don't win the hand, you lose $100.00. Four players are in the game, including two imaginary players named Sean and Richard and you and me. Would you believe I was lucky or cheating in some manner?

The best hand in "Texas Hold 'em" poker is a royal flush. The chance of getting this hand is 0.000154%, which could also be expressed as 1 in 649,739 to 1. 

Well, what do you know, I got a royal flush on my first hand. Although surprised, everyone was happy for me. Sean gave me a high five and said, " You gotta be one of the luckiest people I know."

Richard says, "I knew if given enough time, I would see a royal flush. I'm still a little surprised." Then he says your chance was 1 in 649,739  1 in 6.49739 X 10^5. 

"What are my chances of getting a second royal flush in a row?" I ask. 

Sean says, "You have a better chance of  stealing Taylor Swift from Travis Kelsi."

"Oh, so you're saying I do have a chance?" I say with excitement.

Sean says, "Well, of course, 'given enough time, all possible configurations will be realized.'" He pauses, looks at his calculator app, and says, "Sure, your chance is 1 in 4.22162067600 X10^11

Low and behold, I get a royal flush; "sorry guys, I'm as surprised as you."

Richard looks a little upset, or maybe he's just constipated. He stares at me. I think he called me a "Cheeta." I don't understand biologists. Cheetas don't play poker.

"Sorry guys, what's the chance of me getting a third royal flush?" 

Richard says, "You have a better chance of playing shortstop for the Yankees."

"Oh," I say. "so you're saying I have a chance." I say with glee."

Then I get my third royal flush in a row. The chances of this are one chance in 2.74x10^17. I can't believe it. I'm so happy. Unfortunately, I'm the only one happy. Richard's mood or constipation is getting worse. 

Sean says, well, 'given enough time, all possible configurations will be realized.

"Guys," I say, "don't look so disappointed. The numbers are not that large. Seriously, the universe's expansion rate is three times larger than that. 

On we play, and my luck continues. Now I get 20 royal flushes in a row. The chance of that is 1.798 X 10^116. I mention the cosmological constant is much larger than that, but it doesn't help. Some brown stuff is coming out of Richard's ears, and the veins in Sean's forehead are bulging. 

"Don't worry, guys," I say. "I'm gonna let you win your money back."

Sean gets up and asks, "How big a fool do you think I am?" and walks out the door.

"Good question, Sean." 

Chance and necessity are hard to believe, but I must have designed a cheating scheme.