Why Probability Models in Physics are Probably Wrong

[RArvay]

.
While I cannot say that the probabilistic models of universal parameters are wrong, it seems certain that probability cannot operate except within the context of nonrandom parameters. If so, then this presents some challenges to explaining the Fine Tuning problem.

One proposed solution to the Fine Tuning problem is that there are vast (or perhaps infinite) numbers of universes, each with its constants (and other parameters) determined at random. Therefore, according to this proposal, no matter how unlikely it is that chance alone could produce a universe as finely tuned as ours, the sheer weight of numbers makes the likelihood a certainty, or at least extremely likely.

IMO this proposed solution has a fatal flaw. A simple, trick question can be used to illustrate that flaw. The trick question (you have been warned) is this: what is the likelihood that an unbiased die roll will result in the “six” side landing face up?

The reflexive answer would be, “one chance in six,” but as was stated, it is a trick question. The question did not specify how many sides the die has. It could be as few as four, or any integer greater than four.

While the chances of a six-sided die-roll resulting in six, is one in six, based on pure chance, the die itself is not the product of chance. The parameters of the die are predetermined in a nonrandom process.

In like manner, while the specific values of each of the universe’s twenty-six (or more) physical constants may be determined by chance, the question arises, why are there twenty-six constants, and why are their ranges what they are?

Even if one proposes that the number of constants (and their ranges) in each universe is determined at random, there will always remain nonrandom parameters to be explained. For example, what parameters cause the multi-verse to produce universes?

One possible proposal is that with infinite numbers of universes, every possibility must be realized. This proposal cannot be definitively debunked, but it still requires some nonrandom definition of what is possible or impossible. If science is to have integrity, it must conform to some limits. An infinity of unbounded possibilities, each of which must be realized, would seem to take physics beyond the realm of plausibility.
.