Can something be both scientific and miraculous?

The laws of physics are fine-tuned to maximize scientific discovery. I would call that miraculous.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D--lnA9eht0
https://benthams.substack.com/p/the-fine-tuning-argument-simply-works

>The fine structure constant determines the strength of the electromagnetic force. If it were stronger fires and biofuel wouldn’t work and so there would be no practical way of harnessing energy. If it were weaker fires would burn through all the wood and harnessing energy would also be impractical. It falls in a very narrow range needed for viable science.

>We use the cosmic microwave background radiation to discover how the universe works and that the big bang happened. Our ability to do this depends on the Baryon to photon ratio “which is just the ratio of the number of baryons (i.e., protons and neutrons) to that of photons (particles of light) per unit volume of space.” The ratio is one to one billion which is precisely optimal for fine-tuning, representing a share of the parameter space at probability 1 in 1 billion.

>In particle physics, lots of things are in a narrow range important for discoverability. For instance, Collins originally thought his thesis was refuted by the Higgs Boson, and that it was outside of a narrow range needed for discoverability. He later, however, realized that he’d made an error in his calculation and that it was precisely ideal for discovery.

>>16706291
>self evident necessity is a miracle
wrong