User:CosmicHorizons/sandbox

A Fortunate Universe: Life in a finely tuned cosmos is a non-fiction book by the astrophysicists and cosmologists Geraint F. Lewis and Luke A. Barnes, published in October 2016 by Cambridge University Press. The book examines the apparent fine-tuning of the physical properties of the universe for the presence of complexity, and ultimately life. Exploring the impact of the fundamental particle masses, and the strengths of the forces that define their interactions, the authors demonstrate that alternate universes, those with even slightly different fundamental properties, would be dead and sterile. The book examines the potential solutions to this "fine-tuning" problem, considering those at the cutting-edge of physics and cosmology, as well more theological possibilities.

Publication
The book begins with a foreword by Brian P. Schmidt, winner of the 2011 Nobel Prize for Physics for his role in the discovery of dark energy. While the majority of the book presents the scientific argument for fine-tuning, the opening and closing chapters present a conversation between the two authors, firstly discussing the scientific nature of the issues of fine-tuning. Finally they debate the key proposed solutions to problem, from the suggestion that the forefront of cosmology and fundamental physics, and the notion of the multiverse, may naturally account for fine-tuning, as well as outlining how some see the hand of a creator to be a more compelling possibility.

Reception
In the New York Times, philosopher of science and physicist David Albert said the book failed to live up to its title; he claimed Krauss dismissed concerns about what Albert calls his "misuse" of the term nothing.

Commenting on the philosophical debate sparked by the book, the physicist Sean M. Carroll asked, "Do advances in modern physics and cosmology help us address these underlying questions, of why there is something called the universe at all, and why there are things called 'the laws of physics,' and why those laws seem to take the form of quantum mechanics, and why some particular wave function and Hamiltonian? In a word: no. I don't see how they could."

The physicist George F. R. Ellis, when asked whether Krauss has "solved the mystery of why there is something rather than nothing", noted that the "belief that all of reality can be fully comprehended in terms of physics and the equations of physics is a fantasy ... Krauss does not address why the laws of physics exist, why they have the form they have, or in what kind of manifestation they existed before the universe existed (which he must believe if he believes they brought the universe into existence)."

The mathematical physicist I. S. Kohli also analyzed the main technical arguments in Krauss' book, concluding that "many of the claims are not supported in full by modern general relativity theory or quantum field theory in curved spacetime".

Caleb Scharf, writing in Nature, said that "it would be easy for this remarkable story to revel in self-congratulation, but Krauss steers it soberly and with grace".

Samantha Nelson, writing for The A.V. Club, gave A Universe from Nothing a 'B' grade and commented that it "is solidly in the New Atheism camp, a cosmologist's version of Dawkins' The Blind Watchmaker," but noted that "the concepts he explores are so complex, and filled with so many factors that top physicists and cosmologists don't understand, expanding on them in print actually makes them more confusing".

In New Scientist, Michael Brooks wrote, "Krauss will be preaching only to the converted. That said, we should be happy to be preached to so intelligently. The same can't be said about the Dawkins afterword, which is both superfluous and silly."