Evidence Item - v0.6

Gravity vs electromagnetism strength ratio

E-GRAVITY-EM-RATIO

Open this item in the interactive Evidence Viewer Evidence Item Index Cite The Signal

AI-generated conceptual visualization of the strength ratio between gravity and electromagnetism, showing stars, planets, atoms, chemistry, stable matter, and life-permitting physical balance. — AI-generated conceptual visualization — for illustration only, not experimental data.

Classification

Evidence ID: E-GRAVITY-EM-RATIO
Corpus/version: v0.6
Stage: stage2
Category: Fine-Tuning
Major category: Science
Sub-category: Constants / Parameters
BF status: ready
Scoring label: Scored row with active Bayes factors

Navigation

Primary Datum

Datum: the relative strengths of gravity and electromagnetism affect star lifetimes, chemistry, and planetary stability.

Scoring / Hypothesis Pressure

Hypothesis	log10BF	Min	Max	Rationale
`H-DEISM`	0.05	-0.09999999999999999	0.2	Gravity vs electromagnetism strength ratio nudges Deism upward because it fits an ordered cosmos without yet requiring a revealed or covenantal God. The effect is limited because the clue is broad and does not prove Deism by itself.
`H-GOD`	0.1	-0.04999999999999999	0.25	Gravity vs electromagnetism strength ratio nudges God upward because it fits a reality with deep order, intelligibility, or purpose. The effect is limited because rival explanations remain possible, and this row does not prove God by itself.
`H-GOD-OT`	0	-0.15	0.15	Gravity vs electromagnetism strength ratio does not clearly pick out the God-OT frame from broader theism. It stays neutral because the row lacks enough biblical or covenant detail to prove that view.
`H-IDEALISM`	0	-0.15	0.15	Gravity vs electromagnetism strength ratio does not clearly separate Idealism from other accounts of order and structure. It stays neutral because the clue can be read without settling what is most basic in reality.

Dependency / Cap Metadata

dependency_cluster_id: fine_tuning_physical_constants
dependency_cluster_role: support_layer
dependency_cluster: fine_tuning_physical_constants
dependency_role: support_layer
cap_profile: support_layer_small
evidence_function: context_child
directness: supporting

Counter-Pressure

title: Gravity vs electromagnetism strength ratio is a bounded signal, not a standalone proof.
text: The strongest caution is overuse. Fine-tuning evidence is cumulative and dependency-capped. Selection effects, deeper physical law, multiverse proposals, and measure problems must stay in view. This row should be read inside its dependency family, not treated as an isolated demonstration of God, Christ, or the final synthesis.
path: Start with what the row actually shows, then name what it does not show. Use it to ask why the physical order is intelligible and life-permitting at all, then keep it with sibling fine-tuning rows rather than counting it as an independent proof of Christ as Logos.

Apologetic Note

label: Apologetic leverage
title: Gravity vs electromagnetism strength ratio is a clue inside an intelligible, life-bearing order.
key point: If gravity were stronger (or EM weaker), star lifetimes and planetary stability change drastically. The point is not that mechanisms fail. It is that mechanisms, information, constraints, and repeatable life-building patterns live inside an intelligible order.
conversation move: Say it plainly: science can describe how a process unfolds, and Christians should welcome that. The larger question is why there is a lawlike, information-rich, life-bearing world for such processes to unfold in.
caveat: Do not make a God-of-the-gaps move. Let mechanisms explain what they explain, then ask whether mechanism alone explains the whole field.

Caveats / Notes

Cap notes: Capped support under E-FINETUNE-PHYSICAL-CONSTANTS-LAWS; not an independent fine-tuning hit.
Cap profile note: Child/support rows in broad science families are capped as support, not independent root proofs.
Governance note: Capped as support under E-FINETUNE-PHYSICAL-CONSTANTS-LAWS.

Citations

Rees, M. (1999). Just Six Numbers.
Stenger, V. (2011). The Fallacy of Fine-Tuning (counterargument).

Recommended Citation

The Signal Evidence Dataset, "Gravity vs electromagnetism strength ratio," Evidence ID: E-GRAVITY-EM-RATIO, Version 0.6. Accessed [access date]. https://logos-signal.org/evidence/E-GRAVITY-EM-RATIO/

Machine-Readable Source

This page is generated from the public evidence mirror without recalculating or changing scores.