No. 149 

DESIGN IN NATURE: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE

By Donald B. DeYoung, Ph.D.*

INTRODUCTION

William Paley (1743-1805) was a British philosopher and clergyman. In

the book, Natural Theolog_v, he offered a powerful argument for the

truth of the Creator and His work. Paley supposed that in crossing a

field, two different objects are found lying upon the ground, a stone and

a watch. The basic question is then asked, where did these two items

come from? Concerning the stone, nothing is unusual. The stone is a

"natural" object, just one in a trillion similar stones. But what about the

watch? The watch is in a separate category altogether. It displays plan-

ning and craftmanship, beauty and usefulness. In short, a watch clearly

requires a watchmaker. Paley then applied this common-sense conclu-

sion to earth's life forms. The complexity of living creatures far sur-

passes that of any watch ever constructed. Therefore, design seen in

living systems surely requires a Designer.

EVOLUTION'S CHALLENGE

Paley's recognition of intelligent planning in nature is known as a teleo-

logical argument. Teleology refers to the study of evidences of design in

nature, and is derived from the Greek word for end or purpose. This

teleological argument has been continually challenged by critics since

Paley's day. The philosopher David Hume (1711-76) brought forward the

problem of evil: How could suffering and death possibly reveal a perfect

Designer? The answer, of course, is that nature's design is just one

*Dr. DeYoung received his Ph.D. degree in Astrogeophysics from Iowa

State University in 1972. He is Professor of Physics at Grace College

in Winona Lake, Indiana, and is also Visiting Professor of Geophysics

he ICR Graduate School.

Dimension of theology. Suffering results from the curse occurring subse-

quent to creation. The cure for sin, through redemption alone, shows the

Lord's eternal perfection in the greatest way possible. A second attack

on Paley came from Darwin's 1859 publication, Origin of Species by

Means of Natural Selection. The appeal this time was to a mechanistic

self-ordering process in nature. Mutations provide random changes and

natural selection concentrates the beneficial features. Of course there

are many fatal problems with Darwin's view. However, it is still much

used in the design debate.

Old arguments have an uncanny way of returning at a later time with

increased strength. Thus after two centuries, Paley's reasoning still ap-

plies and is even stronger than before. The chief reason is the discovery

of a new "watch" in nature. In fact, not just one watch has been found,

but a whole showcase full, all beautifully constructed and running

smoothly. This reference is not to literal watches, but instead, to

hundreds of carefully balanced equations, constants, and properties of

matter! It is further realized that if any of these quantities were changed

in the slightest way, the result would be catastrophic. Scientists, in

describing today's universal balance, often refer to "astonishing preci-

sion," "cosmic coincidences," or a "contrived appearance." This per-

spective has been summarized in the Anthropic Principle which states

that the universe appears to be carefully designed for the well-being of

mankind.', 2

Three examples of design will be presented, representing scores of

others. First, consider the mass of the proton. Such a property of an ele-

mentary particle might at first seem of trivial significance. However,

closer inspection reveals that the proton's mass has been exactly chosen

to provide both its own stability and that of the entire universe. In con-

trast, a free neutron (n), a slightly heavier particle, decays to a proton,

an electron, and an antineutrino with a half-life of just twelve minutes.

Free neutrons simply cannot persist in nature.

However, if the mass of a proton were somehow increased by just

0.2%, then the proton would become the unstable particle. It would

quickly decay to a neutron, positron and neutrino: This second reaction

does not occur, but it would if the proton were just slightly heavier.

The implications are truly universal. Of chief significance, the hydrogen

nucleus is just a single proton. Thus the hypothesized rapid decay of

protons would destroy all hydrogen atoms. Furthermore, hydrogen is a

major component of our bodies, as well as water molecules, the sun, and

all other stars. Hydrogen is, after all, the dominant element of the uni-

verse. It is obvious that the proton's mass has been wisely planned to be

slightly smaller than that of a neutron, to prevent the collapse of the

universe. Also, protons are not subject to the influence of mutation or

natural selection. Their physical properties were chosen from the be-

ginning and have not changed.

A second example of design involves the basic forces of nature. One

of these is the law of universal gravitation. According to this law, all

masses are found to attract each other with a force F which is inversely

proportional to the square of a separation distance, between the

masses. Discovered by Isaac Newton 300 years ago, this fundamental

force holds the universe together. Gravity maintains the moon's orbit

around the earth, the earth's orbit around the sun, and also the rotation

of the entire Milky Way galaxy.

Scientists have always wondered about the factor 2 in this equation.

As Science News put it, this relation "has always seemed a little too

neat. Is the exponent some fraction near two, which would be messy but

might seem more empirical?"3 In an evolved universe, one would not

expect such a simple relationship. Why is the factor so exact; why not

1.99 or 2.001? The gravity force has been repeatedly tested with sensitive

torsion balances, showing that the factor is indeed precisely 2, at least

to five decimal places, 2.00000. As with the proton's mass, any value

other than 2 would lead to an eventual catastrophic decay of orbits and

of the entire universe. The gravity force clearly displays elegant and

essential design.

Another basic force of nature measures the attraction or repulsion

between electrical charges. The strength of the electric force can be seen

in a lightning stroke, when electrons surge between charged objects.This

Coulomb force also is found to vary as the inverse square of the dis-

tance between the charges. Since the electric force is much stronger

than gravity, the factor 2 can be measured to a much greater precision

than that of gravity. Thus far the electric force distance dependence has

been measured as exactly 2, to 16 decimal places: 2.0000000000000000!4

In other words, the factor in the force equation once again remains

exactly 2, to the best limits of scientific testing. These "natural" laws

such as gravity and electricity might better be called God's laws. They

surely reflect His purposeful planning.

Consider the testimony of Max Planck (1858-1947), Nobel Prize winner

and founder of modern physics:

"According to everything taught by the exact sciences about the

immense realm of nature, a certain order prevails-one independent

of the human mind ... this order can be formulated in terms of pur-

poseful activity. There is evidence of an intelligent order of the uni-

verse to which both man and nature are subservient."

The knife-edged balance of protons and forces is indeed a strong

testimony to the Creation. These are not artificial relationships resulting

merely from human measurements and constructs. Instead, the intricate

physical values have forced themselves upon our senses. Other similar

"coincidences" involve such quantities as the fine structure constant,

nuclear forces, and the total number of particles in the universe. All

seem carefully chosen. Evolutionary change is entirely unable to deal

with such permanent properties of nature.

What then has the opposition done with such data? Great imagination

has been exercised! It has been postulated that an infinite number of

universes actually exist, all beyond our detection. In this grand super-

space there are assumed to be universes of every conceivable type, both

harmful and beneficial to life. Thus it is inevitable (that word again!) that

there will be at least one universe where all properties are ideal, and we

happen to be in it! These many universes are thought to exist indepen-

dently, like soap bubbles. They spontaneously arise from quantum

mechanical fluctuations from nothing.6Eventually, after expansion, they

evaporate back to nothing.

The creation of the real universe was indeed ex nihilo, from nothing,

but by the direct infinite power of the Creator instead of random fluc-

tuations. This more credible view was presented by the Apostle Paul

long ago. He declared that the power and planning of the Creator could

be understood by the obvious design of the creation. This design should

then lead us to the Scriptures, through which the Creator may be

personally known. Paul further warned that those who reject such

physical evidence are vfithout excuse (Romans 1:20).

The reader is challenged to give serious and open-minded considera-

tion to the timeless design argument, valid for the Apostle Paul and

William Paley, as well as for Max Planck and thousands of present-day

scientists too.

I , Carr, B.J. and M.J. Rees, "The Anthropic Principle and the Structure of the Physical

World," Nature 278 (April 12, 1979) pp. 605-612.

2. Gale, G., "The Anthropic Principle," Scientific American 245 (December 1981)

pp. 154-171.

3.

4.

5. "Gravity Very Precisely," Science News 118 (July 5, 1980) p. 13.

Halliday, D. and R. Resnick, 1978. Physics, Part 2. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., p. 609.

Barth, A., The Creation In the Light of Modem Science, (1966) Jerusalem Post Press,

Jerusalem, p. 144.

6. Thomsen, D.E., "The Quantum Universe: A Zero-Point Fluctuation. 2 'Science News 128