Fine-Tuned Evidences and Probabilities
in Arguments for a Creator

Key Thought: When there is evidence of a Design, there must also be a Designer.

Why? Because Designs don’t just make themselves. No where in the Universe does that happen. Logic and science mitigate against.  Only atheist scientists put forth that fake belief system–but it doesn’t hold water, make sense, or is evidenced anywhere in the Universe.

While the ontological argument is a purely logical or conceptual proof and does not rely on empirical evidence, the fine-tuning argument uses scientific observations about the universe’s physical constants. Given your question, here is an organized review of the most cited fine-tuned elements, their associated improbabilities (as calculated by notable sources), and their relevance to the idea of a Creator.

Most Significant Fine-Tuned Features

1. Gravitational Constant

• Value: If changed by even 1 part in 10341034, stars and thus life could not exist.

• Estimated Random Chance: ~1 in 1034103412.

2. Strength of Electromagnetic Force vs. Gravity

• Value: Needs to be tuned to 1 part in 10371037.

• Estimated Random Chance: ~1 in 1037103712.

3. Cosmological Constant

• Value: Must be tuned to within 1 part in 1012010120.

• Estimated Random Chance: ~1 in 101201012012.

4. Mass Density of the Universe

• Value: Tightly constrained to 1 part in 10591059.

• Estimated Random Chance: ~1 in 1059105912.

5. Rate of Expansion of the Universe

• Value: Precision required is 1 part in 10551055.

• Estimated Random Chance: ~1 in 1055105512.

6. Initial Entropy of the Universe

• Value: Estimated as fine-tuned to 1 in 10101231010123.

• Estimated Random Chance: Extremely small, beyond comprehension12.

Table: Fine-Tuned Elements and Improbable Chances

Main Points

• Fine-tuning refers to the universe’s physical constants being in a very narrow range that supports the existence of life.

• The probability of these constants having life-permitting values purely by chance is astronomically low, according to leading physicists and cosmologists.

• Proponents argue that such precision makes accidental origin unreasonable and points toward intelligent design.

Supporting Points

• Changing even one constant slightly leads to a universe incapable of supporting life as we know it3124.

• These precise values are not required by any known laws, making their existence seem arbitrary unless explained by design or by the existence of a multiverse35.

• The argument is formalized by philosophers like Robin Collins, who use probabilistic reasoning to claim that fine-tuning is more probable on theism than on atheism or random chance678.

Key Summary Point

The astonishing precision of the universe’s fundamental constants, with chances of life-supporting values sometimes estimated at less than 1 in 1012010120 or even smaller, is seen by many as compelling evidence for an intelligent creator or designer. Critics question the interpretation of these odds and propose alternative explanations like the multiverse, but the probabilities often cited suggest that our universe’s life-supporting conditions are vastly improbable as a random accident.1623

Note: The numbers cited above are widely referenced in both scientific and apologetic literature, but debates remain about what these probabilities truly demonstrate, and whether the fine-tuning argument is logically or scientifically persuasive. No argument yields complete certainty, but these data form the backbone of the modern fine-tuning case for a creator.

Arguments for a Creator based on fine-tuning focus on the observation that numerous physical constants and conditions must fall within narrow ranges for the universe (and specifically life) to exist. While lists sometimes differ, there are indeed at least 12 (often more) parameters routinely cited as examples of fine-tuning in the scientific and philosophical literature281.

Key Points

• Fine-tuning refers to the precise values required by many fundamental physical constants and cosmological conditions to permit the existence of complex, conscious life.

• The probability that these values would occur “by chance” (without design or necessity) is calculated to be extraordinarily small for most parameters.

• Proponents argue that the accumulation of such improbabilities is strong evidence for design, while critics often invoke natural necessity, selection effects, or a multiverse.

Commonly Considered Fine-Tuned Constants and Conditions

Here are 12 of the most commonly cited, along with brief details and, where available, the probability estimates cited in the literature:

Note: “Estimated probability” figures are debated and should be regarded as rough indications, illustrating how improbable the specific, life-permitting values are as random occurrences4.

Supporting Details

• Recent scientific literature has identified over 25 dimensionless and key dimensional constants as potentially “fine-tuned”5.

• Some sources attempt to enumerate hundreds of specific requirements for life or the development of a habitable planet (e.g., lists of planetary or galactic conditions), but the core cosmological argument focuses on universal parameters18.

• Parameters like the cosmological constant, gravitational constant, and certain nuclear parameters (which govern atomic/the chemical structure and the formation of stars) are almost always included, as the life-permitting ranges are considered especially narrow.

Summary

There are at least 12, and indeed sometimes dozens, of physical constants and boundary conditions considered finely tuned for the universe to allow life—each requiring values within an astronomically narrow window. The probability of all aligning by random chance is routinely quoted as extremely low, supplying one of the main modern scientific arguments for a Creator or intelligent design248.