**Can the Anthropic Principle and the Cosmological principle exist in harmony?**

On Wikipedia, the following is stated as an elaboration of the Strong Anthropic Principle: "An ensemble of other different universes is necessary for the existence of our Universe." Thus, we are but one universe in Multiverse, and since the boundary conditions in our universe must have been very finely tuned in order to create life as we know it, surely this universe must be very special indeed and violate the Cosmological principle - "that observers … do not occupy a restrictive, unusual or privileged location within the universe as a whole" (also from Wikipedia)

One could take another view: that although it would be extremely unlikely for a universe like ours to be born out of the omnium, there are an infinite number of universes created, and so also an infinite number of universes supporting Life (observers). So perhaps there are many more universes like ours and we are not special at all.

(Although universes such as these would make up close to zero percent of the total number of universes, so may be special after all?)

What do we think?

Kathryn u 4845956

My interpretation of the cosmological principle was a little different. The cosmological principle says that the universe is homogeneous and isotropic right? So i think the "not occupying a privileged location" is in this sense. Say (hypothetically) that we are the only observers in the universe, then the universe should look the same to us regardless of our location. So i don't think us being 'special' or even unlikely necessarily violates the cosmological principle.

Also, I don't think having an infinite number of universes necessarily implies that that there will be infinite universes like ours, nor that such universes comprising 0% of everything makes us special. I often think of 'infinity' in terms of coordinate geometry, because then it is easy to visualise the universal set of every possible coordinates. Of this universal set, we know that we can have an infinite variety of both finite and infinitely large subsets. By this analogy, we can think of the origin, which is a single, undoubtedly special point surrounded by infinitely many others. or we can think of a line, whose infinitely many points make up 0% of all the points. whether or not a single point on this line is special is a matter of opinion.

im not sure if my way of thinking is common or not… will be interesting to see what others think :)

Sharmila (u 4848798)