UnNatural,OK?

 

A growing number of scientists, including well known ones, are coming to an end of conclusions about what is natural of the cosmos. A large number of efforts have been made over the decades to make the universe symmetrical or "beautiful". A goodly proportion of those endeavors are based on mathematic operations. Yet, with clever mathematical exploitations and other contributions, the numbers coming back from various sources including particle smashers are not enforcing the wonderful human descriptions of the universe. There are oddities poking out here and there that don't match up with the human endeavors. The scientists are running rapidly out of ideas to portray the universe we live in as "beautiful". It could come to an impasse before 30 more years. If so, they will have to accede to an universe that is oddities or is "ugly". (Much to the disgust of Einstein and many others.)

At least one scientist argues, if the universe is too perfect there would not be oddities and fractures in it from which elements of life's changes could arise and combine, it would indeed be fixed to only one format. It may follow that the world and the life we are familiar with would then not be able to arise.

The "ugly" cosmos will not beable to be depicted as "natural", and not smoothly following from a precedent condition.

It is said the universe is an experience of "higher entropy".

 Brown Dwarf stars are not taken as appealing. Most sciences, for example, follow that the age of the cosmos is near 14 billion years. But, the age of some of its particles are measured in the trillions of years. A likely mismatch to say the least.