(I could be wrong about this, I haven&#x27;t thought about it in great detail)<p>I think invoking the Anthropic principle only makes sense if we can demonstrate that there are a number of other &quot;places&quot; with varying &quot;conditions&quot;. For such a selection bias to occur there needs to be a population to actually select from. For example, the Anthropic principle makes sense regarding the composition of the earth because we know that there are a large number of planets with a distribution of orbits and masses around a distribution of stars. Of course we will be on a planet that supports life as we know it.<p>To invoke the anthropic principle regarding a constant would imply — to me, at least — that there would need to be a number of universes with different constants. Or different regions of this universe where the constant would vary.<p>If there truly is only a single universe, and the constant is <i>not</i> changing in time or space, then it would seem we did actually just happen to get lucky.<p>Edit: of course, at this point we can&#x27;t say definitely either way about our universe. We don&#x27;t know if ours is one among many, or if its the solitary universe in existence. We also, clearly, have uncertainty about how constant this constant actually is.