Unbelievable? Classic: Was the cosmos made for us? Sabine Hossenfelder vs Luke Barnes
Dec 9, 2025
In this thought-provoking discussion, Sabine Hossenfelder, a theoretical physicist known for her critiques of aesthetic-driven science, faces off against Luke Barnes, an astrophysicist who argues that the universe's fine-tuning supports theism. They delve into the meaning of fine-tuning, with Luke providing examples like the cosmological constant, while Sabine challenges its implications and the very definition of probability. The conversation navigates science versus metaphysics, exploring personal beliefs and the limits of fine-tuning in understanding the cosmos.
AI Snips
Chapters
Books
Transcript
Episode notes
Fine-Tuned Constants Limit Life
- Luke Barnes argues many fundamental constants appear finely tuned because small changes would prevent complexity and life.
- He cites the cosmological constant, Higgs value, and fine-structure constant as precise examples needing explanation.
Limits On Probability Claims
- Sabine Hossenfelder rejects labeling constants as 'fine-tuned' because we cannot observe alternative values.
- She says without a way to vary or sample other universes, assigning probabilities to those alternatives is unscientific.
Bayesian Probabilities For Counterfactuals
- Luke frames probability epistemically (Bayesian), not strictly by frequentist sampling.
- He argues scientists routinely use Bayesian degrees of support to assess counterfactual explanations.
