Microsoft Word Kurzweil, Ray The Singularity Is Near doc

The Anthropic Principle Revisited.
We are struck with two possible applications of an anthropic principle, one for 
the remarkable biofriendly laws of our universe, and one for the actual biology of our planet. 
Let's first consider the anthropic principle as applied to the universe in more detail. The question concerning the 
universe arises because we notice that the constants in nature are precisely what are required for the universe to have 
grown in complexity. If the cosmological constant, the Planck constant, and the many other constants of physics were 
set to just slightly different values, atoms, molecules, stars, planets, organisms, and humans would have been 
impossible. The universe appears to have exactly the right rules and constants. (The situation is reminiscent of Steven 
Wolfram's observation that certain cellular-automata rules [see the sidebar on p. 85] allow for the creation of 
remarkably complex and unpredictable patterns, whereas other rules lead to very uninteresting patterns, such as 
alternating lines or simple triangles in a repeating or random configuration.) 
How do we account for the remarkable design of the laws and constants of matter and energy in our universe that 
have allowed for the increasing complexity we see in biological and technology evolution? Freeman Dyson once 

---

commented that "the universe in some sense knew we were coming." Complexity theorist James Gardner describes the 
question in this way: 
Physicists feel that the task of physics is to predict what happens in the lab, and they are convinced that string 
theory, or M theory can do this....But they have no idea why the universe should ... have the standard model, 
with the values of its 40+ parameters that we observe. How can anyone believe that something so messy is 
the unique prediction of string theory? It amazes me that people can have such blinkered vision, that they can 
concentrate just on the final state of the universe, and not ask how and why it got there.
92
The perplexity of how it is that the universe is so "friendly" to biology has led to various formulations of the 
anthropic principle. The "weak" version of the anthropic principle points out simply that if it were not the case, we 
wouldn't be here to wonder about it. So only in a universe that allowed for increasing complexity could the question 
even be asked. Stronger versions of the anthropic principle state that there must be more to it; advocates of these 
versions are not satisfied with a mere lucky coincidence. This has opened the door for advocates of intelligent design 
to claim that this is the proof of God's existence that scientists have been asking for.