Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Dirac's hypothesis that gravity varies with time is unnec... — Carmelics
    Home/Natural Theology
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Dirac's hypothesis that gravity varies with time is unnecessary to explain the large number coincidence.

    Natural Theology
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    0 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The large number coincidence can be accounted for by observer-selection effects without positing time-varying gravity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A hypothesis that is unnecessary to explain an observation should not be assumed.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Natural Theology

    Related

    A hypothesis that is unnecessary to explain an observation should not be assumed...The large number coincidence can be accounted for by observer-selection effects ...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Similar

    The large number coincidence can be accounted for by observer-selectio...87%Standard cosmology with time-independent gravity suffices to account f...85%These conditions for life's existence only obtain during a specific co...70%A hypothesis that is unnecessary to explain an observation should not ...70%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: fine-tuning
    View source passageHide passage
    Dicke (1961), criticizing Dirac, argues that standard cosmology with time-independent gravity suffices to account for the coincidence, provided that we take into account the fact that our existence is tied to the presence of mainline stars like then sun and of various chemical elements produced in supernovae. As Dicke shows, this requirement dictates that we could only have found ourselves in that cosmic period in which the coincidence holds. Accordingly, contrary to Dirac, there is no reason to
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    1 (0 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit