Philip Cunningham’s vid on calculations of a single protein forming by chance was picked up recently:
Origin: Probability of a Single Protein Forming by Chance:
“For a protein made from scratch in a prebiotic soup, the odds of finding such globally optimal solutions are infinitesimally small- somewhere between 1 in 10exp140 and 1 in 10exp164 for a 150 amino acid long sequence if we factor in the probabilities of forming peptide bonds and of incorporating only left handed amino acids.” Axe is among the science types involved with a fascinating video entitled “Origin: Probability of a Single Protein Forming by Chance.” It’s just over nine minutes long, but beautifully produced and imminently accessible for those who aren’t already cosmologists, physics profs or other super-high grade brains.Mark Tapscott, “Would You Stake Your Life On A 1-In- 10-To-The-140th-Power Chance Of Surviving?” at HillFaith
Tapscott talks to US congressional staffers who are doubtless used to big numbers but, heck, not like this.
Of course, if you
See also: Paul Davies and the struggle to define life
and
Rob Sheldon On The Canadian Lab “Solving” The Origin-Of-Life Problem
Follow UD News at Twitter!
As was touched upon by Dr, Ann Gauger at the 8:20 minute mark of the video, getting a single functional protein is only the beginning of problems for any explanation for the Origin of Life that relies solely on chance as its creative agent. As Dr Gauger stated,
And as Paul Davies touches upon in the following article, “Trying to make life by mixing chemicals in a test tube is like soldering switches and wires in an attempt to produce Windows 98. It won’t work because it addresses the problem at the wrong conceptual level.”
And as Paul Davies further touches upon in the following article, this ‘missing ingredient’ that is being overlooked in Origin of Life research is ‘nonlocal’ biological information.
Since Paul Davies mentioned “top-down causation” in the preceding article, here are a few articles by George Ellis that further explain the link between mind, information, and “top-down causation”.
In fact, Paul Davies went on to term information to be ‘the hard problem of life’ and also holds that ‘the hard problem will not ultimately be reducible to known physical principles.’
In the reductive materialistic paradigm that currently dominates much of Origin of Life research, immaterial information (and immaterial mind) is simply not recognized as being its own independent and causally effective entity that is separate from matter and energy. In fact, in the current reductive materialistic paradigm that dominates practically all of biological sciences, immaterial information and immaterial mind are both held to be ‘abstract’ entities that ultimately reduce to purely materialistic explanations. That is to say, neither immaterial mind nor immaterial information are held to be real and causally effective entities in the reductive materialistic, i.e. Darwinian, scheme of things that currently dominates much of biological science.
But as George Ellis stated in his article on ‘top-down causation’, the computer sitting in front of you right now is proof that immaterial mind and immaterial information are both causally effective,,
To further establish the causal efficacy, i.e. physical reality, of immaterial information, independent of matter and energy, we can now also appeal to advances in our empirical science.
First off, information has now been experimentally shown to have a ‘thermodynamic content’:
This work on elucidating the precise relationship between information and thermodynamics, has now been extended:
A surprising detail, (a detail that I have still not completely wrapped my immaterial mind around), is revealed in the following article
In the following article a Professor is quoted as saying, “Now in information theory, we wouldn’t say entropy is a property of a system, but a property of an observer who describes a system.”,,,”
To reiterate, “Entropy,,, is a property of an observer who describes a system.” ??? If any claim ever contradicted the reductive materialistic claims of Darwinists, that claim is certainly it!
But anyways, (leaving that tantalizing tidbit on the relationship between immaterial mind and immaterial information aside for the moment, and of related interest to immaterial information having a ‘thermodynamic content’), classical digital information was found to be a subset of ‘non-local’, (i.e. beyond space and time), quantum entanglement/information by the following method which removed heat from a computer by the deletion of data:
In the following article, (and in direct contradiction to the reductive materialistic claims of Darwinian evolution), Dr. Vaccaro states in regards to the preceding thought experiment that “Landauer said that information is physical because it takes energy to erase it. We are saying that the reason it (information) is physical has a broader context than that.”,
Although the preceding is certainly very strong evidence for the physical reality of immaterial information, the coup de grace for demonstrating that immaterial information is its own distinct physical entity, separate from matter and energy, is Quantum Teleportation:
Moreover, this ‘physically real’ quantum information is also found to be ‘conserved’ (as in it cannot be created nor destroyed).
Moreover, this physically real quantum information can perform a number of tasks that are impossible for classical information. And indeed these ‘impossible tasks’ that quantum information is able to perform, provides the motivation for trying to build quantum computers.
As well this physically real quantum information, which cannot be created or destroyed, (and of which classical information is a subset), is also now found in molecular biology on a massive scale. In every DNA and protein molecule:
Moreover, this Quantum Information in molecular biology, since it can perform computational tasks that are impossible for classical information, provides coherent solutions for the protein folding enigma, DNA search problems, and for exactly why life is so far out of thermodynamic equilibrium in the first place.
Besides providing direct empirical falsification of Landauer’s claim, and neo-Darwinian claims in general, claims that say immaterial information does not exist apart from its representation on a physical medium, the implication of finding ‘non-local’, beyond space and time, and ‘conserved’, quantum information in molecular biology on such a massive scale, in every DNA and protein molecule, is fairly, and pleasantly, obvious.
That pleasant implication, or course, being the fact that we now have very strong physical evidence directly implying that we do indeed have an immaterial, and eternal, soul that is very well capable of living beyond the death of our material bodies.
As Stuart Hameroff states in the following video, ‘the quantum information,, isn’t destroyed. It can’t be destroyed,,, it’s possible that this quantum information can exist outside the body. Perhaps indefinitely as a soul.”
Verse and video:
Thus in conclusion, contrary to the dogmatic reductive materialistic claims of Darwinists, there is much evidence establishing the independent physical reality of immaterial information apart from matter-energy.
Of supplemental note, the empirical evidence establishing the reality of immaterial mind, the reality of free will in particular, is gone over in the following post:
Verse:
OT, but goes to logic:
“Through Him all things were made”
IF the set of “all things” that were made encompasses souls then souls are not immortal.
Does God give guidance on this point, to let us know if souls are inside or outside the set of all (made) things?
“The soul that sinneth, it shall die.”
Hmm.
@ScuzzaMan,
A created soul could definitely be immortal. It just would not be eternal. God is eternal because He has always existed. Human’s are immortal because they will always exist from the time of their creation. Two different concepts.
Also, death means separation, not necessarily the cessation of life. A soul can die physically and spiritually without ceasing to exist.
Ellijacket,
I quoted you the actual text.
You can’t beat something with nothing.