Three Roads To Quantum Gravity
Three Roads To Quantum Gravity
Three Roads To Quantum Gravity
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
WHAT CHOOSES THE LAWS OF NATURE?<br />
199<br />
have different sets of elementary particles which interact<br />
according to different sets of laws. If there are adjustable<br />
parameters, it is possible that they are set at random each time<br />
a new universe is created.<br />
So there is a simple answer to the anthropic question.<br />
Among all the possible universes, a minority will have the<br />
property that their laws are hospitable to life. Since we are<br />
alive, we naturally ®nd ourselves in one of them. And since<br />
there are a great many universes, we need not worry that the<br />
chance of any one of them being hospitable to life is small,<br />
because the chance of at least one of them being hospitable to<br />
life may not be small. There will then be nothing to explain.<br />
Martin Rees likes to put this in the following way: if one ®nds<br />
a bag by the side of the road containing a suit that ®ts one<br />
perfectly, that is something to wonder about. But if one goes<br />
into a clothing store and is able to ®nd a suit that ®ts, there is<br />
no mystery because the store carries lots of suits in many<br />
different sizes. We may call this the God of The Gap. It is also<br />
sometimes called the weak anthropic principle.<br />
The only problem with this kind of explanation is that it is<br />
dif®cult to see how it could be refuted. As long as your theory<br />
yields a very large number of universes, you only need there<br />
to be at least one like ours. The theory makes no other<br />
predictions apart from the existence of at least one universe<br />
like ours. But we already know that, so there is no way to<br />
refute this theory. This might seem good, but actually it is not<br />
because a theory that cannot be refuted cannot really be part<br />
of science. It can't carry very much explanatory weight,<br />
because whatever features our universe has, as long as it can<br />
be described by one of the large number of string theories, our<br />
theory will not be refuted. Therefore it can make no new<br />
predictions about our universe.<br />
Is it possible to have a theory which gives a scienti®c<br />
answer to the anthropic question? Such a theory may be<br />
framed around the possibility that the universe can make a<br />
physical transition from one phase to another. If we could<br />
look back into the history of the universe to before the big<br />
bang, it may be that we would see one or a whole succession<br />
of different phases in which the universe had different