Welcome to Logos Associates
Exploring Creation & History

What does Astronomy say about Design Science?

New Astronomical Proofs for the Existence of God

by Hugh Ross, Ph.D.

Is the Universe Fine Tuned for Life?

Based upon all of the scientific research to date, it appears that the evidence is telling us that the universe – the myriad of galaxies, the solar system, and our earth – are uniquely suited to support complex life.  Now, there are only three possible explanations to account for this:

  • This situation is the product of blind chance
  • That this universe happens to be part of a “multiverse“, and we just happen to be living the in universe that was best suited for life
  • That the universe was and is designed on purpose for life

The Evidence for a Universe Fine Tuned for Life

The Right “Building Blocks” Problem

Most non-believers start with the notion that given enough time, and enough space, and just the right environment, that even complex life could evolve by itself without the help of a divine, all powerful Creator.  One big problem with this approach is the assumption.  There simply isn’t enough time.*  But setting this issue aside, there must be four major “building blocks” designed just so to provide for life.*

1. The Right Molecules

For life to be possible, more than 40 different elements must be able to bond together to form molecules.  This bonding depends on two factors: the strength of the force of electromagnetism, and the ratio of the mass of the electron to the mass of the proton.  According to Dr. Hugh Ross, if the electromagnetic force were significantly larger than it is, atoms would “hang on” to electrons so that no sharing would be possible  But if the force was significantly weaker, then atoms would not hang on to electrons at all – and again, the sharing of electrons among atoms, which makes molecules possible, would not take place.

In addition, the size and stability of electron orbits about the nucleus of atoms depends on the ratio of electron mass to the proton mass.  This ratio must be delicately balanced in order for the chemical bondings essential for life to take place.*

2. The Right Atoms

In order for life to be possible, sufficient quantities of essential elements must be available – which means atoms of various sizes must be able to form.  For that to occur, other delicate balances must exist among the constants of physics – the strong and weak nuclear forces, gravity, and nuclear ground state energies.*

The strong nuclear force is the force which governs he degree to which protons and neutrons “stick together” in atomic nuclei.  If this force was weaker that it is, protons and neutrons would not stick together.  In that case only one element would exist in the universe – hydrogen (the hydrogen atom has only one proton and no neutrons in its nuclei).  If this force were too strong, however, protons and neutrons would have such an affinity for each other that not one would remain alone.  In such a universe, there would be no hydrogen – only heavy elements.  And life chemistry is impossible without hydrogen.

How delicate is the balance for the strong nuclear force?  If it were just 2% weaker, or .3% stronger than it actually is, life would be impossible – and not just our form of life.  We are talking about any form of life, at any time, anywhere in the universe.

There is also the weak nuclear force – the force that, among other things, governs the rate of radioactive decay.  If this force were much stronger than it is, all matter in the universe would quickly be converted into “heavy” elements.  On the other hand, if it were much weaker, then all matter in the universe would remain in the form of just the lightest elements.  To have the elements that are essential for life chemistry – carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, phosphorus, for example – these forces must be delicately balanced.

The strength of gravity is responsible for determining how hot the nuclear furnaces in the cores of stars will burn.  If the force of gravity were any stronger, then stars would be so hot tht they would burn up too quickly and too erratically for life to form.  In addition, a planet that is capable of sustaining life (such as earth) must be supported by a start that is stable, and long burning.  On the other hand, if the gravitational force weaker than it is, stars would never become hot enough to ignite nuclear fusion.*

3. The Right Nucleons

The universe is also fine tuned to the extent that there is just enough nucleons (protons and neutrons) to form the elements essential for life. After the “big bang”, all of the galaxies and stars that make up the universe today were form from left over nucleons from this initial singularity.  Turns out that if the initial excess of nucleons over anti-nucleons were any smaller, there would not be enough matter for galaxies, stars and the heavy elements to form. If the excess were any greater, galaxies would form, but they would condense to the point that none of them would fragment to form stars and planets.*

4. The Right Electrons

Not must the universe have just the right number of nucleons – a precise number of electrons must also exist. Unless the number of electrons is equivalent to the number of protons to an accuracy of one part in 10(37) or better, electromagnetic forces in the universe would have so overcome gravitational forces that galaxies, stars, and planets never would have formed. *

Fine Tuned Combination of Settings for Life


* Speed of Light: c=299,792,458 m s-1


* Planck’s Constant: 1.05457148 x 10-34 m2 kg s-2

* Planck Mass-Energy: 1.2209 x 1022 MeV

* Mass of Electron, Proton, Neutron: 0.511; 938.3; 939.6 MeV


* Ratio of Electron to Proton Mass: (1836.15)-1

* Gravitational Coupling Constant: 5.9 x 10-39

* Cosmological Constant: (2.3 x 10-3 eV)

* Hubble Constant: 71 km/s/Mpc (today)

* Higgs Vacuum Expectation Value: 246.2 GeV

Scientists have come to the shocking realization that each of these numbers have been carefully dialed to an astonishingly precise value – a value that falls within an exceedingly narrow, life-permitting range. If any one of these numbers were altered by even a hair’s breadth, no physical, interactive life of any kind could exist anywhere. There would be no stars,no planets, no chemistry, and no life. (Source:  Reasonable Faith,org)

A Presentation on the Fine Tuning of the Universe


Which is the Most Reasonable Explanation?

Option 1:  Its All a Product of Blind Chance

Is is “possible” that the fine tuning of the universe, the solar system, and our planet are all the product of blind evolutionary chance processes, but the probability of this being true is beyond belief.

According to Dr. Hugh Ross, noted astrophysicist: “To place one’s confidence in neo-Darwinist cosmology (ie., blind chance) and the unknowable existence of a virtually infinite number of universes is to commit a form of the gambler’s fallacy”.  Not a reasonable option.

Option 2:  We Just Happen to Be Living in the Right Universe of a Multiverse

This explanation requires that we have a vast number of universes (a multiverse), and that odds are,a life-permitting universe will exist among this myriad of universes. Now, it is true that a number of scientists postulate the existence of a “multiverse”, based on assumptions and mathematical theory. The problem is, there is no scientific evidence for the existence of this multiverse – nor can there be. It cannot physically be detected, observed, measured, or proved.

Furthermore, small patches of order are far more probable than big ones. So the most probable, observable universe would be a small one, inhabited by a single, simple observer (Boltzmann brain). But what we actually observe is the very thing we should least expect: a vast, spectacularly complex, highly ordered universe, inhabited by billions of other observers. So even if the multiverse existed (which is a moot point), it wouldn’t do anything to explain the fine-tuning.  Also not the best explanation.  (Source:  Reasonable Faith,org)

Option 3:  The Universe is Designed for Life by an All Powerful Designer

Given that chance as a reasonable explanation is unsatisfactory to say the least, and that the concept that a multiverse exists, and we just “happen” to be living in the right one, is without any tangible proof, the only explanation that makes sense – and is the most reasonable – is that the universe is as it is because it was designed that way by an all powerful Creator.

And this is precisely what the Bible declares:

REVEAL KNOWLEDGE.” – Psalm 19:1-2

The Creator speaks to us not only through His written Word, the Bible, but also through the amazing reality of His creation.  Every time we gaze at the stars, wonder at a flower, or marvel at a beautiful bird in flight, the God of this universe is speaking to us – wanting us to know Him.

Do you know the Creator, the Lord of the universe?  If you do, then you have everything to look forward to – in this life, and in the life to come.  You were made for a purpose, and receiving the Lord into your heart and walking daily with Him will help you come to realize His purpose in your life and fulfill it.  If you don’t have a relationship with the Lord, you can!  He has reached down to our time-space reality and become one of us, so we could understand who He is, and become one with Him. We had all gone astray, but He “so loved us that He sent His one any only Son”.  He came in the form of Jesus, lived among us, and showed us the way back to our Maker.

Our Creator does’t want sacrifices, or good works.  He wants you.  A relationship with you – to come and live in your heart.  To know Him, and share your life with Him.  Don’t put it off any longer.  Invite JESUS in!  Steps to Peace with God ==> http://www.billygraham.org/SH_StepsToPeace.asp


Dr. William Lane Craig – Video

* Dr. Hugh Ross, “The Creator and the Cosmos”

** Reasonable Faith.org: http://www.reasonablefaith.org/transcript-fine-tuning-argument#ixzz3OYw8tKro)

Evidence for the Fine Tuning of the Universe
by Rich Deem


According to Carl Sagan, the universe (cosmos) "is all that is or ever was or ever will be." However, the idea that the universe is all is not a scientific fact, but an assumption based upon materialistic naturalism. Since Carl Sagan's death in 1996, new discoveries in physics and cosmology bring into questions Sagan's assumption about the universe. Evidence shows that the constants of physics have been finely tuned to a degree not possible through human engineering. Five of the more finely tuned numbers are included in the table below. For comments about what scientists think about these numbers, see the page Quotes from Scientists Regarding Design of the Universe.

Fine Tuning of the Physical Constants of the Universe
Parameter Max. Deviation
Ratio of Electrons:Protons 1:1037
Ratio of Electromagnetic Force:Gravity 1:1040
Expansion Rate of Universe 1:1055
Mass Density of Universe1 1:1059
Cosmological Constant 1:10120

Degree of fine tuning

Recent Studies have confirmed the fine tuning of the cosmological constant (also known as "dark energy"). This cosmological constant is a force that increases with the increasing size of the universe. First hypothesized by Albert Einstein, the cosmological constant was rejected by him, because of lack of real world data. However, recent supernova 1A data demonstrated the existence of a cosmological constant that probably made up for the lack of light and dark matter in the universe.2 However, the data was tentative, since there was some variability among observations. Recent cosmic microwave background (CMB) measurement not only demonstrate the existence of the cosmological constant, but the value of the constant. It turns out that the value of the cosmological constantexactly makes up for the lack of matter in the universe.3



The ripples in the universe from the original Big Bang event are detectable at one part in 100,000. If this factor were slightly smaller, the universe would exist only as a collection of gas - no planets, no life. If this factor were slightly larger, the universe would consist only of large black holes. Obviously, no life would be possible in such a universe.

Another finely tuned constant is the strong nuclear force (the force that holds atoms together). The Sun "burns" by fusing hydrogen (and higher elements) together. When the two hydrogen atoms fuse, 0.7% of the mass of the hydrogen is converted into energy. If the amount of matter converted were slightly smaller—0.6% instead of 0.7%— a proton could not bond to a neutron, and the universe would consist only of hydrogen. With no heavy elements, there would be no rocky planets and no life. If the amount of matter converted were slightly larger—0.8%, fusion would happen so readily and rapidly that no hydrogen would have survived from the Big Bang. Again, there would be no solar systems and no life. The number must lie exactly between 0.6% and 0.8% (Martin Rees, Just Six Numbers).

Fine Tuning Parameters for the Universe

  1. strong nuclear force constant
  2. weak nuclear force constant
  3. gravitational force constant
  4. electromagnetic force constant
    if lesser: chemical bonding would be insufficient for life chemistry
  5. ratio of electromagnetic force constant to gravitational force constant
  6. ratio of electron to proton mass
    if larger: chemical bonding would be insufficient for life chemistry
    if smaller: same as above
  7. ratio of number of protons to number of electrons
    if smaller: same as above
  8. expansion rate of the universe
    if larger: no galaxies would form
    if smaller: universe would collapse, even before stars formed
  9. entropy level of the universe
    if larger: stars would not form within proto-galaxies
    if smaller: no proto-galaxies would form
  10. mass density of the universe
  11. velocity of light
  12. age of the universe
  13. initial uniformity of radiation
  14. average distance between galaxies
  15. density of galaxy cluster
    if denser: galaxy collisions and mergers would disrupt the sun's orbit
  16. average distance between stars
    if smaller: planetary orbits would be too unstable for life
  18. decay rate of protons
    if greater: life would be exterminated by the release of radiation
    if smaller: universe would contain insufficient matter for life
  19. 12C to 16O nuclear energy level ratio
    if larger: universe would contain insufficient oxygen for life
    if smaller: universe would contain insufficient carbon for life
  20. ground state energy level for 4He
    if larger: universe would contain insufficient carbon and oxygen for life
    if smaller: same as above
  21. decay rate of 8Be
  22. ratio of neutron mass to proton mass
  23. initial excess of nucleons over anti-nucleons
    if greater: radiation would prohibit planet formation
    if lesser: matter would be insufficient for galaxy or star formation
  24. polarity of the water molecule
  25. supernovae eruptions
  26. white dwarf binaries
    if too few: insufficient fluorine would exist for life chemistry
    if too many: planetary orbits would be too unstable for life
    if formed too soon: insufficient fluorine production
  27. ratio of exotic matter mass to ordinary matter mass
    if smaller: no galaxies would form
  28. number of effective dimensions in the early universe
    if smaller: same result
  29. number of effective dimensions in the present universe
    if larger: same result
  30. mass of the neutrino
    if larger: galaxy clusters and galaxies would be too dense
  31. big bang ripples
  32. size of the relativistic dilation factor
    if larger: same result
  33. uncertainty magnitude in the Heisenberg uncertainty principle
  34. cosmological constant


The Creator and the Cosmos by Dr. Hugh Ross



  2. The amount of light and dark matter is only 30% of that necessary for a "flat" universe (one which contains the critical mass - the amount necessary to stop the expansion of the universe).
  3. Sincell, M. 1999. Firming Up the Case for a Flat Cosmos. Science 285: 1831.

Today's New Reason to Believe
Integrating Science and Faith

Science News Flash