Teleological Cosmological Argument

You remember Goldilocks and the Three Bears, right? That charming children’s story about a tiny home-invading criminal who breaks and enters, steals food, trashes the furniture, and then naps on private property like she pays the mortgage? Yes, that one.

Goldilocks had one major flaw—she was picky. Not normal picky. NASA-level picky.
Everything had to be “just right”:

Porridge? Too hot, too cold, blah blah blah.

Chairs? Too hard, too soft—Goldilocks, pick a cushion and move on.

Beds? Don’t get me started.

I mean, imagine having standards so high you collapse from exhaustion before finishing your crime spree. Iconic, really.

But here’s the thing: Goldilocks isn’t nearly as picky as the universe.

🎲 The Probability Problem

 Goldilocks had a 33% chance of choosing correctly each time. The chances of her making the decision three times in a row are rather low. The math is (1/3)^3 = 1/27 \approx 3.7\%

(1/3)3=1/27≈3.7%. Its possible.

Now picture the universe playing the same game, but instead of three “just right” choices, it has to nail sixty-six of them just in our own galaxy. According to astrophysicist Hugh Ross, there are at least 66 things that must be tuned for intelligent life to exist. Instead of looking at how precise these need to be, lets just consider three choices with too much, too little or Goldilox approved The chance of all 66 being the correct choice is

That’s like Goldilocks walking into the Bears’ house and needing the curtains, thermostat, humidity, Wi-Fi strength, and bear-attitude level to be just right too. If each condition had three possible states—too high, too low, or Goldilocks-approved—the probability of getting all 66 correct by chance is:(1/3)^{66} \approx 6.14 \times 10^{-32) or 0.0000000000000000000000000000000614 Just in our galaxy and just considering three possibilities the chance of those being correct enough for intelligent life is slim.

Here are just a few of the 66 on Hugh Ross lists:

Galaxy type (must be the cute spiral one. , The spirals are more attractive than Goldillocks hair)

Star mass and color (sun can’t be too red, or too blue: apparently the color of Goldilocks hair)

Magnetic field strength (Earth demands just the right amount of magnetism. 

Atmospheric pressure (too much and we’d be pancakes, too little and we’d be space jerky)

Distance from Jupiter (because Jupiter is basically Earth’s savior from the falling debrie; without it we would have more holes on the surface than swiss cheese.)

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,"  

You can see a longer list of Hugh Ross l 66 conditions that had to be just right or it would not support life. 

"

If you think our little galaxy was fickle when requiring just the right conditions for intelligent life 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. 

’m not a gambler or a poker player, but poker is a game of chance, often involving the risk of money. In this case, let’s imagine you and I are in a high-stakes game with $100 on the line. There are four players—Sean, Richard, you, and me. Now, imagine something unbelievable happens...
 

If you think our galaxy was picky about the just-right conditions in our universe for intelligent life, it seems to lack a dazical compared to the universe as a whole. 

Perhaps the strongest argument for the existence of God is the teleological argument. Scientists agree that the laws of nature contain constants and quantities that must be very precise. These constants and quantities appear in mathematical equations that express the laws of nature. There are over 100 of these values. Therefore, these numbers are not due to necessity,

The constants and quantities must fall within a very narrow range or intelligent life would not exist. 

One constant is the gravitational constant, which must be within 1 X 10^60  for intelligent life to exist.   Another constant is the universe's expansion rate; it must be accurate within 1 X 10^120. This number is 10^80 or 10^0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000. This number is so large you could put a zero on each proton, neutron, and electron in our universe. 

As enormous as that number is, it is small compared to the entropy value at the beginning of our universe. Entropy refers to the organization of heat and mass in the initial conditions of our universe. At first, the energy conditions were very organized (low entropy), and as time goes by, the universe becomes less organized until it dies of heat death (high entropy). This number is so unlikely that chance is not reasonable; it is beyond comprehension. The value at the initial is expressed as 10^10^123. or 10^I00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000. This is not due to chance it is due to design.

For additional detail, I cover a short example of Goldilocks and her choices, the local universe, including the galaxy, earth, sun, and moon, the four forces of the universe: gravity, weak force, strong force, and electromagnetic force, and constants and quantities throughout our universe.

So yes—Goldilocks might be picky, but compared to the cosmos, she’s practically carefree. We live in a universe with more non-negotiable requirements than a celebrity’s backstage rider. And the fact that all of them ended up just right?

T

’m not a gambler or a poker player, but poker is a game of chance, often involving the risk of money. In this case, let’s imagine you and I are in a high-stakes game with $100 on the line. There are four players—Sean, Richard, you, and me. Now, imagine something unbelievable happens...
 

Example:

The best hand in "Texas Hold 'em" poker is a royal flush, which, as luck would have it, has a chance of appearing only about 1 in 649,739 hands. You might think that's impossible... but guess what? I got one on my first hand.
 

• The transition between your royal flush and the dialogue with Sean and Richard could be smoothed out. Maybe you could add a brief description of the atmosphere or their reactions.
   

Example:

Everyone stared at the cards in disbelief. Sean, always the optimist, gave me a high five and said, "You gotta be one of the luckiest people I know."
 

• Richard’s reaction to the first royal flush could be fleshed out a bit more. The line "I'm still a little surprised" feels like it could be expanded with more of a reflective tone.
   

Example:

Richard, ever the realist, raised an eyebrow and said, "I'm not surprised. I knew it was bound to happen eventually, though I didn’t expect it on the first hand."
 

• The conversation about the probability of getting a second royal flush is funny, but there’s a mix-up in the math. Sean says the odds are 1 in 4.22162067600 X 10^11, but you don't explain how this number was arrived at. It might be more natural to just stick to "astronomical odds" for humor's sake.
   
• The "1 in 649,739 to 1" could also be written as “about 1 in 649,739,” which sounds a little smoother.
   

• The "constipation" joke is a bit random. Maybe rephrase this to make it more in line with Richard's growing disbelief or frustration.
   

Example:

Richard’s expression darkened, and I could swear he muttered something about me being a “cheater” under his breath.
 

• The transition from getting a third royal flush to the 20th royal flush feels a bit rushed. Perhaps you could include more of the players' reactions as your streak continues.
   

• The numbers like “1.798 X 10^116” are humorous, but they can feel overwhelming without a bit of context. A quick mention that the odds are "so astronomical that even the laws of physics might start questioning their own existence" could help soften it.
   

• The final exchange with Sean is great and funny! I think it could be tightened up for clarity:
   

Example:

"Don't worry, guys," I said with a grin. "I'll let you win your money back."
Sean stood up, looking at me like I had just told him I could levitate. "How big a fool do you think I am?" he said, shaking his head before walking out.
 

• “Cheetas” should be “cheetahs” (the animal).
   
• The sentence “Richard says, ‘I'm not surprised in the slightest; I knew if given enough time, I would see a royal flush. I'm still a little surprised.’” could be restructured for clarity. It reads as if Richard is both surprised and not surprised at the same time. You might want to adjust the wording to make his reaction clearer.
   

Example:

Richard says, “I’m not surprised you got a royal flush, but I’ll admit, getting it on the first hand? That’s something.”
 

You’ve got a solid foundation for a fun, humorous essay. Just a few tweaks here and there will help improve clarity and flow. I love the playful banter between the characters, and the absurdity of getting 20 royal flushes in a row is perfect for the tone of the piece.

Let me know if you'd like help revising any specific sections!

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'm not surprised in the slightest; 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, " Wouldn't surprise me in the least; If given enough time, of course.

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

Sean confidently 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

Lo 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 under his breath, 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, 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 constipation is getting worse. I don't want to quit when I'm on this good a run, but if he suffers a blowout, I'm out of here.

Sean proclaims: "Well, given enough time, all possible configurations will be realized. You have a better chance of stealing Taylor Swift from Travis Kelce." 

"Well, thank you, Sean, for your encouragement. Even though you give me great confidence, I'm gonna stick with my wife. But, so nice of you." 

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. 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.

"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

Faith can provide strength and comfort during difficult times. It can help people find hope and meaning in their struggles, and give them the courage to keep moving forward.

Rituals and ceremonies can be a powerful way to connect with our spirituality and deepen our sense of meaning and purpose. They can help us mark important milestones, honor our ancestors, and connect with the divine.

While science and spirituality may seem like opposing concepts, they can actually complement each other. Many scientists and spiritual leaders believe that science can help us understand the physical world, while spirituality can help us understand the deeper meaning and purpose of life.