60. Notes on vetting the found explanantia

    judging that none is acceptable
        : see @ ../60.vetting_their_explanantia.brec
        argument
            - none of the soley physics/nature-based explanations satisfies
                ∵ each leaves a residue of unexplained surprise at reality being so structured
                  that hardly could a viable, life-supporting cosmos exist unless (surprise!)
                  it also afforded a long-term safehold for mind
                    : re `leaves a residue of unexplained surprise`
                      see `^*b\) SPP reduction as a search criterion$` @ notes.brec
                    ∵ one then wonders at such open questions as: what constraint on reality
                      so slims the possibilities?  whence comes it, and why?
                    / thus the residue of surprise and the call for a more satisfying explanation
        feasiblity
            - prospects for refuting the claim: hardly could life exist absent a speed limit on causation
                ⇒ promising
                    - claimants’ arguments expose premises that feel weak on probing
                    - they invite attack
            !! still this remains the weakest part of the text
                : see https://scholar.google.ca/scholar_labs/search/session/11853463098872306418 :
                 ‘Find arguments and counter-arguments for the claim: life could not exist (or hardly)
                  absent a speed limit on causation (for instance, the given limit, *c*).’
                ⇒ promise of drawing strength from the open-endedness of the multiverse ensemble
                    : see notepad:2026-5-28e : inherent counter-fundamentalism of the multiverse ensemble
                      hypothesis owing to its effective infinite open-endedness|unboundedness
                      in regard to the structure of reality
                    - analysis, in light of the presence of the safehold,
                      of the explanantial|explanatory space|field of {the fine-tuning field|fine-tuning},
                      namely of these hypotheses together:
                            • necessity
                                - either it is greatly weakened
                                    ∵ now it has much more to explain
                                - or left like multiverse ensemble
                                    / viz. untouched but useless for explaining the safehold
                            • multiverse ensemble
                                - it is left untouched
                                - but it leaves the safehold unexplained
                                    : see `^*: see notepad:.+counter-fundamentalism of.+multiverse` :
                                      owing to which it cannot claim a fundamentally necessary
                                      (nor even probable) linkage between support for basic life
                                      and the presence of the safehold
                            • design
                                - it can explain the safehold
                                - but it leaves unexplained the presence of a designer
                    - based on this analysis, I [have cause to] try joining one of the former hypotheses
                      with the latter (designer) to form a single, combined explanation
                        - an obvious combination method: one hypothesis as explanans,
                          the other as explanandum
                            - then I have two choices re the role of design/designer
                                - only one choice improves on the status quo
                                    - viz. design/designer as explanandum
                                - but the improvement is better with multiverse ensemble as the explanans
                                    ∵ (again) necessity is greatly weakened in this role
                    - now the effective infinite open-endedness|unboundedness of the multiverse ensemble
                      makes the (eventual) presence of a successful designer plausible, if not inevitable
                        : re `effective infinite open-endedness|unboundedness`
                          see `^*: see notepad:2026-5-28e.+${same}`s
                    ?!! must it indeed be so open-ended|unbounded?
                        + read Ćirković, chapter 12, *Stranger things: multiverse, string cosmology,
                          physical eschatology*
                            : see @ 40.a_search_for_explanations.notes.brec
                        + read Mario Livio and Martin Rees, chapter 1,
                          *Fine-tuning, complexity, and life in the multiverse*
                            : see @ 40.a_search_for_explanations.notes.brec
                        : see https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fine-tuning/#FineTuniMult :
                          generally supportive
                            + re-read
                                / though only an review, it may suffice for now,
                                  pending time to read the cited texts