Popular accounts of cosmology love to dramatise the so-called “fine-tuning” of the universe: the precise values of physical constants seem almost impossibly suited to the emergence of life. This has historically invited metaphysical speculation:
-
Some infer a cosmic designer.
-
Others posit multiverses to “cover all possibilities.”
Both interpretations implicitly assume purpose — that the universe is “set up for” observers. Relational ontology offers a different reading.
1. Fine-tuning as distribution of potentials
From a relational standpoint:
-
The universe is a structured space of relational potentials.
-
Constants and laws define which potentials are ready to actualise certain kinds of phenomena.
-
Observer-like actualisations only occur in regions of the possibility space where potentials are sufficiently ready (inclination + ability).
Notice the subtle shift: nothing wills observers into existence. The “fine-tuning” is just a mapping of readiness to actualisation.
2. Why the multiverse isn’t necessary here
Multiverse proposals try to solve an apparent improbability: if our universe is so exquisitely suited to observers, maybe there are infinitely many universes, and we just happen to be in the “lucky” one.
In relational terms:
-
Probabilities are always conditional on potentials.
-
Some relational configurations are simply incapable of supporting observer-like cuts; others are ready.
-
Observers only emerge where readiness exists.
The multiverse becomes optional — not obligatory. Fine-tuning is not a cosmic miracle, it’s a structural inevitability in relational space.
3. Inclination + ability = natural selection of actualisations
Just as evolution is not “aimed” at humans but produces complex organisms where conditions allow, observer-like actualisations naturally emerge where potentials are ready.
-
Inclination: the relational configuration tends toward certain patterns (self-organising structures).
-
Ability: the configuration permits those patterns to actualise.
-
Actualisation: a perspectival cut (the observer) appears.
Life, intelligence, and comprehension emerge from the relational readiness of the system, not from teleology.
4. Implications for cosmology
-
The universe is comprehensible because certain actualisations can perceive and model relational structures.
-
Fine-tuning is descriptive, not prescriptive.
-
Teleology and multiverse speculation are both optional narrative overlays, not necessities.
-
Observers are outcomes of readiness + actualisation — not intended goals.
Relational ontology dissolves the paradox: the apparent improbability of life-supporting constants is simply a reflection of where potentials were ready, not a cosmic design or miraculous accident.
Bottom line
Fine-tuning is not a clue to purpose, nor a cosmic trick. It is a natural manifestation of relational potentials actualising as observers wherever readiness exists. The universe is comprehensible because relational structure makes comprehension possible — not because it intended it to be so.
No comments:
Post a Comment