Reddit reviews The Anthropic Cosmological Principle (Oxford Paperbacks)
We found 7 Reddit comments about The Anthropic Cosmological Principle (Oxford Paperbacks). Here are the top ones, ranked by their Reddit score.
Oxford University Press USA
We found 7 Reddit comments about The Anthropic Cosmological Principle (Oxford Paperbacks). Here are the top ones, ranked by their Reddit score.
-------------------------------------------
There are probably more points I forgot to mention, but that's mostly it.
This brief video cites a number of prominent physicists who weigh in on the idea. Here is Roger Penrose talking about it. If you want something more involved, here is a book: The Anthropic Cosmological Principle
I don't know if a poll has ever been taken to see how significant believers are from unbelievers, but from the literature I've read on the subject it seems to break down by discipline.
According to mathematical physicists and cosmologists Frank Tipler and John Borrow in their classic The Anthropic Cosmological Principle, extraterrestrial life is statistically improbable, and they've pointed out that advocates for SETI (for example) are typically astronomers and physicists, whereas many biologists including esteemed researchers like Ernst Mayr, G.G. Simpson, Peter Douglas Ward, and Leonard Ornstein had/have been very skeptical of the arguments for extraterrestrial life.
More recently, astrophysicist Edwin Turner and David Spiegel found that, while not discounting the existence of alien life completely, expectations are more likely to be built on optimism than evidence. You can read about their study here: http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S33/52/89I01/
In my opinion, it makes sense that believers/unbelievers would break down by discipline. A man or woman who grew up on Star Trek and Dune becomes passionate about far away planets and life on those planets and due in large part to that passion become astronomers. A biologist, on the other hand, who may or may not be a sci-fi fan may have the ability to distance themselves a bit and see the broader picture.
I also believe that people in general have an innate desire to believe that they're part of something bigger than themselves. That this isn't all there is. I'm reminded of that old Peggy Lee song Is That All There Is?
No, you don't have to be insane not to believe in any alien intelligent life. According to mathematical physicists and cosmologists Frank Tipler and John Borrow in their classic The Anthropic Cosmological Principle, extraterrestrial life is statistically improbable, and they've pointed out that advocates for SETI are typically astronomers and physicists, whereas many biologists including folks like Ernst Mayr, G.G. Simpson, Peter Douglas Ward, and Leonard Ornstein have been very skeptical of the arguments for extraterrestrial life.
regarding the improbability of mutation:
http://www.amazon.com/Anthropic-Cosmological-Principle-Oxford-Paperbacks/dp/0192821474
Regarding extrapolating "microevolution" to "macroevolution".
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/a-world-famous-chemist-tells-the-truth-theres-no-scientist-alive-today-who-understands-macroevolution/
From the above article, direct quote from Professor James M Tour (Ph.D, Synthetic Chemistry, Purdue University):
> I was in Israel not too long ago, talking with a bio-engineer, and [he was] describing to me the ear, and he was studying the different changes in the modulus of the ear, and I said, “How does this come about?” And he says, “Oh, Jim, you know, we all believe in evolution, but we have no idea how it happened.” Now there’s a good Jewish professor for you. I mean, that’s what it is. So that’s where I am. Have I answered the question?
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/2640607?uid=3739560&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21102531627637
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1420-9101.2002.00437.x/abstract
Here, a scientist tries to make a case for how microevolution can be extrapolated to macroevolution, something that would be unnecessary if the scientific community believed this to already be true. He admits:
> A persistent debate in evolutionary biology is one over the continuity of microevolution and macroevolution – whether macroevolutionary trends are governed by the principles of microevolution.
well said. Have you read this book? I just got it, need to find the time to read it... http://www.amazon.com/Anthropic-Cosmological-Principle-Oxford-Paperbacks/dp/0192821474