Intelligent Design Origin Of Life Signature in the Cell

“Every Cell Comes from a Preexistent Cell”

Spread the love

Eric Hedin writes:

Perhaps we unconsciously ascribe fertility to the Earth, since out of its soil grow all of the plants that provide food for animals and for us. And yet the Earth would produce nothing without the seeds of the plants. One of biology’s “universal laws” (accredited to Rudolph Virchow) states, “Every cell comes from a preexistent cell.”[1] So, we look to the seed, and what do we find? A rich storehouse of information coded in the seed’s DNA. We find information as the source of the physical complexity of life; the Earth is just the environment in which the seed’s hidden information can be unfolded and activated.

From where does the information embedded within the seed come? Not from the Earth, nor from the stars, nor from the Big Bang origin of the physical universe. One possibility—one that some refuse even to consider—is that the information found in a seed ultimately comes from a mind. A maker. And based strictly on the unmatched sophistication of these information systems, a mind far above ours.

There is good news here. Nature itself testifies that our lives may indeed have more significance than could be found in a merely naturalistic universe. The question for each of us, and our scientific culture generally, is whether we are willing even to consider this testimony.


[1] Franklin M. Harold, The Way of the Cell, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), 99.

Excerpt from Canceled Science: What Some Atheists Don’t Want You to See, by Eric Hedin (Seattle: Discovery Institute Press, 2021), 212.

21 Replies to ““Every Cell Comes from a Preexistent Cell”

  1. 1
    martin_r says:

    Perhaps we unconsciously ascribe fertility to the Earth, since out of its soil grow all of the plants that provide food for animals and for us. And yet the Earth would produce nothing without the seeds of the plants.

    Great thought.
    This is exactly what Darwinists do … basically, they still believe in spontaneous generation :))))

    from wikipedia:

    It was hypothesized that certain forms, such as fleas, could arise from inanimate matter such as dust, or that maggots could arise from dead flesh.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_generation

  2. 2
    Seversky says:

    Which is not what OOL research assumes. It does not propose that modern organisms spring fully-formed into existence from inanimate precursors.

    It is, however, what ID/creationists believe their designer/creator does.

    Although they have no idea how and apparently don’t care.

  3. 3
    PyrrhoManiac1 says:

    @2

    Which is not what OOL research assumes. It does not propose that modern organisms spring fully-formed into existence from inanimate precursors.

    True enough, though it’s exceedingly difficult to figure out the intervening steps. We think we know how to get metabolisms off the ground with autocatalytic sets, and we think we know how to get simple replication off the ground, and we think we know how simple vesicles can form spontaneously. The trick is figuring out how all three necessary components were assembled at the same time and place, and pretty quickly — life evolved on Earth almost as soon as it was physically possible.

    To my way of thinking, that suggests that life is a necessary consequence of thermodynamics under specific conditions that we don’t yet fully understand.

    But I’m just an another random amateur philosopher who is too online and never read enough, so what do I know?

  4. 4
    chuckdarwin says:

    PyrrhoManiac1/3
    You are too modest. :-)………………………………..

  5. 5
    Sir Giles says:

    Ditto.

  6. 6
    Seversky says:

    PyrrhoManiac1/3

    True enough, though it’s exceedingly difficult to figure out the intervening steps.

    And that’s putting it mildly as I understand it.

    The trick is figuring out how all three necessary components were assembled at the same time and place, and pretty quickly — life evolved on Earth almost as soon as it was physically possible.

    That’s another challenging question, how did life emerge so – relatively – quickly in an early Earth environment that was far more hostile to it than conditions now?

    But I’m just an another random amateur philosopher who is too online and never read enough, so what do I know?

    “In peace there’s nothing so becomes a man than modest stillness and humility … ”

    (I only remember that because Henry V was one of the primary texts in English Lit at school)

  7. 7
    martin_r says:

    Sev @2

    Which is not what OOL research assumes. It does not propose that modern organisms spring fully-formed into existence from inanimate precursors.

    Seversky, yes, you have updated the ‘spontaneous generation’-version of OoL, so it better fits 21st century, but in general, you still believe in spontaneous generation nonsense :))) You don’t realize that, do you ? :)))))

  8. 8
    martin_r says:

    Pyrr @3

    We think we know how to get metabolisms off the ground with autocatalytic sets, and we think we know how to get simple replication off the ground, and we think we know how simple vesicles can form spontaneously.

    :))))))) that is it ? If you could figure out these 3 things above you have created life ? :))))))
    You should have a look at some OoL-lectures … so yes, you were right … your “never read enough”

    PS:

    we think we know how to get simple replication off the ground

    you sure ? Because I know a guy, he is a Nobel laurate, his name is Jack Szostak, perhaps you heard of him … he was in OoL-research for 30+ years, and guess what ? he still does not have a self-replicating molecule … as for 2021 he is still working on it …

    See on your own, a 2021 interview with Jack Szostak:
    https://news.uchicago.edu/big-brains-podcast-unraveling-mystery-lifes-origins-earth

  9. 9
    Sir Giles says:

    Martin_r: Seversky, yes, you have updated the ‘spontaneous generation’-version of OoL, so it better fits 21st century, but in general, you still believe in spontaneous generation nonsense :))) You don’t realize that, do you ? :)))))

    You do realize that the work on spontaneous generation just demonstrated that existing life firms (eg, maggots) could not arise spontaneously, don’t you? It had nothing to do with the origin of life issue. None of those experiments could remotely be extrapolated to OoL.

  10. 10
    martin_r says:

    Sir @9

    i can only repeat what i said in my previous post

    You guys have updated the ‘spontaneous generation’-version of OoL, so it better fits 21st century, but in general, you still believe in spontaneous generation nonsense :))) You don’t realize that, do you ?

    Because someone told you, all what is needed, is a spontaneous generation of miraculous self-replicating molecule and when you wait long enough, one day you get a human out of it or an autonomous self-navigating flying system (birds, insects etc. :)))))

    Poor 21st century engineers :)))))

    Elon Musk (2021):
    Generalized self-driving is a hard problem, as it requires solving a large part of real-world AI. Didn’t expect it to be so hard, but the difficulty is obvious in retrospect.
    https://www.drive.com.au/news/tesla-boss-elon-musk-admits-autonomous-tech-is-a-hard-problem-and-the-difficulty-is-obvious/

  11. 11
    Belfast says:

    @PM1@3
    “What do I know?” This is what you know; you most probably know that all three necessary components are not known, they exist only as theories, and abandoned theories.
    It is more than likely that you intended no more than to very politely correct Seversky’s misrepresentation of the half-truth he alleges his despised “ID/Creationists believe” and his concealment of the fact that his statement is just his team’s current iteration of life through a stepped abiogenesis. But it must be corrected or it will stand.
    Taking the first, metabolism through autocatlytic sets; there are at least half a dozen different theories all of which are at stand-still. Evolutionary doyen,Professor Orgel, put it that such catalyst could be constructed by a skilled synthetic chemist, but he added a full set of such catalysts in the absence of catalysts to handle disruptive side effects is remote in the extreme; and lack of specificity may be the predominant barrier to the existence of complex autocatalysis. Even Google peters out when looking for prebiotic catalysts into Prebiotic Cornflakes and the like.
    As to the second; there is no such thing as simple replication. The multiple competing theories propose that in some pond, or lip of a volcano, or hot mineral spring, or in some thermal vent, or somewhere in outer space, or somewhere, there might be billions of novel interacting molecules that might possibly generate a super-molecule with qualities favoring assembly of copies of itself through harvesting a constant source of power from some unknown source. These, like the other two raised, are almighty speculations with no results nor observations to encourage persistence. But, additionally, the theories come linked with an attempt to shoehorn in a concept of possible ersatz mutation and ersatz natural selection, but not natural selection, so that there would be new molecules with even better powers of replication. As to the objection that if a self-replicating molecule can arise naturally then the world should be littered with such, the common replies is that it only needed to happen once and, if that cat won’t jump, it all happened before the arrival of loose sedimentary rock that might bear fossils to prove the theory.
    As to the simple vesicle theory – this has been disparaged so many times that it is surprising that it is still around. Vesicles barely resemble a living cell, no chemical reactions go on inside them that would lead to life, they are unstable, they have no voltage-gated or any pores to play a role in organizing energy through a proton gradient. With such a tight outer membrane they are no more than coffins.

  12. 12
    bornagain77 says:

    PMI at 3:

    We think we know how to get metabolisms off the ground with autocatalytic sets, and we think we know how to get simple replication off the ground, and we think we know how simple vesicles can form spontaneously. The trick is figuring out how all three necessary components were assembled at the same time and place, and pretty quickly — life evolved on Earth almost as soon as it was physically possible.

    Yet, I agree with Belfast at 11, when it comes to the OOL, we do not know nearly as much as some people apparently ‘think we know’. As Dr. Tour stated, “Nobody has any idea how this was done when using our commonly understood mechanisms of chemical science. Those that say they understand are generally wholly uninformed regarding chemical synthesis. Those that say “Oh, this is well worked out,” they know nothing, nothing about chemical synthesis – Nothing!”

    “We have no idea how the molecules that compose living systems could have been devised such that they would work in concert to fulfill biology’s functions. We have no idea how the basic set of molecules, carbohydrates, nucleic acids, lipids, and proteins, were made and how they could have coupled into the proper sequences, and then transformed into the ordered assemblies until there was the construction of a complex biological system, and eventually to that first cell.
    Nobody has any idea how this was done when using our commonly understood mechanisms of chemical science. Those that say they understand are generally wholly uninformed regarding chemical synthesis. Those that say “Oh, this is well worked out,” they know nothing, nothing about chemical synthesis – Nothing!
    Further cluelessness – From a synthetic chemical perspective, neither I nor any of my colleagues can fathom a prebiotic molecular route to construction of a complex system. We cannot figure out the prebiotic routes to the basic building blocks of life: carbohydrates, nucleic acids, lipids, and proteins. Chemists are collectively bewildered. Hence I say that no chemist understands prebiotic synthesis of the requisite building blocks let alone their assembly into a complex system.
    That’s how clueless we are. I’ve asked all of my colleagues – National Academy members, Nobel Prize winners -I sit with them in offices; nobody understands this. So if your professors say it’s all worked out, your teachers say it’s all worked out, they don’t know what they’re talking about. It is not worked out. You cannot just refer this to somebody else; they don’t know what they’re talking about.”
    James Tour – one of the top ten leading chemists in the world
    The Origin of Life: An Inside Story – March 2016 Lecture with James Tour
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zQXgJ-dXM4

    And although Sara Walker and Paul Davies, in their paper ‘The “Hard Problem” of Life”, far too generously conceded that “replication, metabolism and compartmentalization” are ‘easy problems’ to explain, never-the-less, in their paper Walker and Davies hold that the origin of life will never be adequately explained by chemistry and/or physics alone because of the ‘hard problem’ of information. Namely that the information is ‘calling the shots’ in life and is irreducible to the reductionist explanations. They also note that we currently lack “a physical theory for information that might explain how information could “call the shots”. And in their conclusion they also state that “life seems distinct from other physical systems in how information affects the world (that is, that macrostates are causal).”

    The “Hard Problem” of Life – 2016
    Sara Imari Walker and Paul C.W. Davies
    Excerpt: There are few open problems in science as perplexing as the nature of life and consciousness. At present, we do not have many scientific windows into either. In the case of consciousness, it seems evident that certain aspects will ultimately defy reductionist explanation, the most important being the phenomenon of qualia – roughly speaking our subjective experience as observers.,,,
    The same may be true for life.,,, Some basic aspects of terrestrial biology, for example, replication, metabolism and compartmentalization, can almost certainly be adequately explained in terms of known principles of physics and chemistry, and so we deem explanations for these features to belong to the “easy problem” of life. Research on life’s origin for the past century, since the time of Oparin and Haldane and the “prebiotic soup” hypothesis, has focused on the easy problem, albeit with limited progress. The more pressing question of course is whether all properties of life can in principle be brought under the “easy” category, and accounted for in terms of known physics and chemistry, or whether certain aspects of living matter will require something fundamentally new.,,,
    As a first step in addressing this issue we need to clarify what is meant by the “hard problem” of life; that is, to identify which aspects of biology are likely to prove refractory in attempts to reduce them to known physics and chemistry, in the same way that Chalmers identified qualia as central to the hard problem of consciousness. To that end we propose that the hard problem of life is the problem of how ‘information’ can affect the world. In this essay we motivate both why the problem of information is central to explaining life and why it is hard, that is, why we suspect that a full resolution of the hard problem will not ultimately be reducible to known physical principles.,,,
    ,,, we wish to stress that (information) is not a passive attribute of biological systems, but plays an active role in the execution of biological function.,, An example from genomics is an experiment performed by the Craig Venter Institute, where the genome from one species was transplanted to another, and ‘booted up’ to convert the host species to the foreign DNA’s phenotype – quite literally re-programming one species into another [19]. Here it seems clear that it is the information content of the genome – the sequence of bits – and not the chemical nature of DNA as such, which is (at least in part) ‘calling the shots’. Of course, a hard-nosed reductionist might argue that, in principle, there must exist a purely material narrative of this transformation, cast entirely in terms microstates (e.g. events at the molecular level). However, one might describe this position as “promissory reductionism”, because there is no realistic prospect of ever attaining such a complete material narrative, or of its being any use in achieving an understanding of the process even if it was attained. On practical grounds alone, we need to remain open to the possibility that the causal efficacy of information may amount to more than a mere methodological convenience, and might represent a new causal category not captured in a microstate description of the system. What we term “the hard problem of life” is the identification of the actual physical mechanism that permits information to gain causal purchase over matter. This view is not accommodated in our current approaches to physics.
    2 What is possible under the known laws of physics?
    Living and conscious systems attract our attention because they are highly remarkable and very special states of matter. In the words of the Harvard chemist George Whitesides
    “How remarkable is life? The answer is: very. Those of us who deal in networks of chemical reactions know of nothing like it? How could a chemical sludge become a rose, even with billions of years to try?” [37]
    The emergence of life and mind from non-living chemical systems remains one of the great outstanding problems of science.,,,
    ,,, The challenge is that we do not have a physical theory for information that might explain how information could “call the shots”. There are some indications for a potentially deep connection between information theory (which is not cast as a physical theory and instead quantifies the efficacy of communication through noisy channels), and thermodynamics, which is a branch of physics5 due to the mathematical relationship between Shannon and Boltzmann entropies. Substantial work over the last decade has attempted to make this connection explicit, we point the reader to [22, 20] for recent reviews. Schrodinger was aware of this link in his deliberations on biology, and famously coined the term “negentropy” to describe life’s ability to seemingly violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics6. Yet he felt that something was missing, and that thermodynamic considerations alone are insufficient to explain life [26]:
    “. . . living matter, while not eluding the ”laws of physics” as estab- lished up to date, is likely to involve ”other laws of physics” hitherto unknown …”
    4 Conclusions
    ,,, Here we have attempted to identify a core feature of life that won’t similarly be solved based on current paradigms – namely, that life seems distinct from other physical systems in how information affects the world (that is, that macrostates are causal).
    https://arxiv.org/pdf/1606.07184.pdf

    In short, Walker and Davies are saying that the intractable ‘hard problem’ for reductive materialists is that they have no way of explaining, (from their ‘bottom up’ materialistic explanations), how information can possibly exert ‘top down’ control of a living organism.

    This intractable ‘hard problem’ for reductive materialists is pretty much the same exact intractable ‘hard problem’ that George Ellis clearly illustrated in his paper ‘Recognising Top-Down Causation”

    Recognising Top-Down Causation – George Ellis
    Excerpt: Causation: The nature of causation is highly contested territory, and I will take a pragmatic view:
    Definition 1: Causal Effect
    If making a change in a quantity X results in a reliable demonstrable change in a quantity Y in a given context, then X has a causal effect on Y.
    Example: I press the key labelled “A” on my computer keyboard; the letter “A” appears on my computer screen.,,,
    Definition 2: Existence
    If Y is a physical entity made up of ordinary matter, and X is some kind of entity that has a demonstrable causal effect on Y as per Definition 1, then we must acknowledge that X also exists (even if it is not made up of such matter).
    This is clearly a sensible and testable criterion; in the example above, it leads to the conclusion that both the data and the relevant software exist. If we do not adopt this definition, we will have instances of uncaused changes in the world; I presume we wish to avoid that situation.,,,
    ,,,However there are many topics that one cannot understand by assuming this one-way flow of causation. The flourishing subject of social neuroscience makes clear how social influences act down on individual brain structure[2]; studies in physiology demonstrate that downward causation is necessary in understanding the heart, where this form of causation can be represented as the influences of initial and boundary conditions on the solutions of the differential equations used to represent the lower level processes[3]; epigenetic studies demonstrate that biological development is crucially shaped by the environment[4]
    What about physics? In this essay I will make the case that top-down causation is also prevalent in physics, even though this is not often recognised as such. This does not occur by violating physical laws; on the contrary, it occurs through the laws of physics, by setting constraints on lower level interactions.
    Excerpt: page 5: A:
    Both the program and the data are non-physical entities, indeed so is all software. A program is not a physical thing you can point to, but by Definition 2 it certainly exists. You can point to a CD or flashdrive where it is stored, but that is not the thing in itself: it is a medium in which it is stored.
    The program itself is an abstract entity, shaped by abstract logic. Is the software “nothing but” its realisation through a specific set of stored electronic states in the computer memory banks? No it is not because it is the precise pattern in those states that matters: a higher level relation that is not apparent at the scale of the electrons themselves. It’s a relational thing (and if you get the relations between the symbols wrong, so you have a syntax error, it will all come to a grinding halt). This abstract nature of software is realised in the concept of virtual machines, which occur at every level in the computer hierarchy except the bottom one [17]. But this tower of virtual machines causes physical effects in the real world, for example when a computer controls a robot in an assembly line to create physical artefacts.
    Excerpt page 7: The assumption that causation is bottom up only is wrong in biology, in computers, and even in many cases in physics, for example state vector preparation, where top-down constraints allow non-unitary behaviour at the lower levels. It may well play a key role in the quantum measurement problem (the dual of state vector preparation) [5]. One can bear in mind here that wherever equivalence classes of entities play a key role, such as in Crutchfield’s computational mechanics [29], this is an indication that top-down causation is at play.,,,
    Life and the brain: living systems are highly structured modular hierarchical systems, and there are many similarities to the digital computer case, even though they are not digital computers. The lower level interactions are constrained by network connections, thereby creating possibilities of truly complex behaviour. Top-down causation is prevalent at all levels in the brain: for example it is crucial to vision [24,25] as well as the relation of the individual brain to society [2]. The hardware (the brain) can do nothing without the excitations that animate it: indeed this is the difference between life and death. The mind is not a physical entity, but it certainly is causally effective: proof is the existence of the computer on which you are reading this text. It could not exist if it had not been designed and manufactured according to someone’s plans, thereby proving the causal efficacy of thoughts, which like computer programs and data are not physical entities.
    https://arxiv.org/pdf/1212.2275.pdf

    And In 2019, in his book, “The Demon in the Machine: How Hidden Webs of Information Are Solving the Mystery of Life”, Paul Davies reiterated his claim that it must be ‘non-physical’ information that allows life to “resist the ravages of entropy that all forms of inanimate matter are subject to”.

    Hey, Paul Davies — Your ID Is Showing – Robert F. Shedinger – March 6, 2020
    Excerpt: With a nod toward James Clerk Maxwell’s entropy-defying demon, Davies argues that the gulf between physics and biology is completely unbridgeable without some fundamentally new concept. Since living organisms consistently resist the ravages of entropy that all forms of inanimate matter are subject to, there must be some non-physical principle allowing living matter to consistently defy the Second Law of Thermodynamics. And for Davies there is; the demon in the machine turns out to be information.
    https://evolutionnews.org/2020/03/hey-paul-davies-your-id-is-showing/

    So just how much top-down ‘non-physical’ information is required to allow ‘simple’ life to resist ‘the ravages of entropy’?

    Well, the information content of a ‘simple’ cell, when working from the thermodynamic perspective, is found to be on the order of 10^12 bits,

    Molecular Biophysics – Information theory. Relation between information and entropy: – Setlow-Pollard, Ed. Addison Wesley
    Excerpt: Linschitz gave the figure 9.3 x 10^12 cal/deg or 9.3 x 10^12 x 4.2 joules/deg for the entropy of a bacterial cell. Using the relation H = S/(k In 2), we find that the information content is 4 x 10^12 bits. Morowitz’ deduction from the work of Bayne-Jones and Rhees gives the lower value of 5.6 x 10^11 bits, which is still in the neighborhood of 10^12 bits. Thus two quite different approaches give rather concordant figures.
    https://docs.google.com/document/d/18hO1bteXTPOqQtd2H12PI5wFFoTjwg8uBAU5N0nEQIE/

    And 10^12 bits is equivalent to approx. 100 million pages of the Encyclopedia Britannica.

    “a one-celled bacterium, e. coli, is estimated to contain the equivalent of 100 million pages of Encyclopedia Britannica. Expressed in information in science jargon, this would be the same as 10^12 bits of information. In comparison, the total writings from classical Greek Civilization is only 10^9 bits, and the largest libraries in the world – The British Museum, Oxford Bodleian Library, New York Public Library, Harvard Widenier Library, and the Moscow Lenin Library – have about 10 million volumes or 10^12 bits.”
    – R. C. Wysong – The Creation-evolution Controversy

    ‘The information content of a simple cell has been estimated as around 10^12 bits, comparable to about a hundred million pages of the Encyclopedia Britannica.”
    – Carl Sagan, “Life” in Encyclopedia Britannica: Macropaedia (1974 ed.), pp. 893-894

    Now that massive amount of information, (i.e. the largest libraries in the world), needed to explain how ‘simple’ life can possibly ‘resist the ravages of entropy’ certainly invokes a fairly strong inference to God.

    But in order to make our inference to God more ‘scientifically secure’, we need to go even further than that massive amount of information found in a ‘simple’ cell in drawing out our inference to God,,,

    in regards to thermodynamics and life, Dr. Brian Miller states that, “No system without assistance ever moves both toward lower entropy and higher energy which is required for the formation of a cell.”

    in regards to thermodynamics and life, Dr. Brian Miller states that, “No system without assistance ever moves both toward lower entropy and higher energy which is required for the formation of a cell.”

    “No system without assistance ever moves both toward lower entropy and higher energy which is required for the formation of a cell.”
    – Brian Miller, Ph. D. – MIT
    – Episode 0/13: Reasons // A Course on Abiogenesis by Dr. James Tour
    https://youtu.be/71dqAFUb-v0?t=1434

    And Dr. Miller also stated,, “the generation of a minimally functional cell on the ancient Earth required a local system of molecules to transition into a state of both lower entropy and higher energy.,, The only plausible explanation for the origin of life is intelligent agency.”

    Thermodynamic Challenges to the Origin of Life – Brian Miller – March 27, 2020
    Excerpt: The thermodynamic barriers to the origin of life have become decidedly more well defined since this book’s first publication. The initial challenges described in the original edition still stand. Namely, spontaneous natural processes always tend toward states of greater entropy, lower energy, or both. The change of entropy and energy are often combined into the change of free energy, and all spontaneous processes move toward lower free energy. However, the generation of a minimally functional cell on the ancient Earth required a local system of molecules to transition into a state of both lower entropy and higher energy. Therefore, it must move toward dramatically higher free energy. The chance of a system accomplishing this feat near equilibrium is astronomically small.,,,
    The only plausible explanation for the origin of life is intelligent agency.
    https://evolutionnews.org/2020/03/thermodynamic-challenges-to-the-origin-of-life/

    i.e., it is only by an intelligence imparting (positional) information into ‘a local system of molecules’ that we are able to move toward lower entropy and higher energy at the same time in order to move towards life.

  13. 13
    bornagain77 says:

    Importantly, and as far as empirical science is concerned, Dr. Miller’s claim that intelligence is required to “thermodynamically; move a system towards life has now been experimentally realized.

    In the following 2010 experimental realization of Maxwell’s demon thought experiment, “they coaxed a Brownian particle to travel upwards on a “spiral-staircase-like” potential energy created by an electric field solely on the basis of information on its location. As the particle traveled up the staircase it gained energy from moving to an area of higher potential, and the team was able to measure precisely how much energy had been converted from information.”

    Maxwell’s demon demonstration turns information into energy – November 2010
    Excerpt: Scientists in Japan are the first to have succeeded in converting information into free energy in an experiment that verifies the “Maxwell demon” thought experiment devised in 1867.,,, In Maxwell’s thought experiment the demon creates a temperature difference simply from information about the gas molecule temperatures and without transferring any energy directly to them.,,, Until now, demonstrating the conversion of information to energy has been elusive, but University of Tokyo physicist Masaki Sano and colleagues have succeeded in demonstrating it in a nano-scale experiment. In a paper published in Nature Physics they describe how they coaxed a Brownian particle to travel upwards on a “spiral-staircase-like” potential energy created by an electric field solely on the basis of information on its location. As the particle traveled up the staircase it gained energy from moving to an area of higher potential, and the team was able to measure precisely how much energy had been converted from information.
    http://www.physorg.com/news/20.....nergy.html

    As Christopher Jarzynski, (who was instrumental in formulating the ‘equation to define the amount of energy that could theoretically be converted from a unit of information’), stated, “This is a beautiful experimental demonstration that information has a thermodynamic content,”

    Demonic device converts information to energy – 2010
    Excerpt: “This is a beautiful experimental demonstration that information has a thermodynamic content,” says Christopher Jarzynski, a statistical chemist at the University of Maryland in College Park. In 1997, Jarzynski formulated an equation to define the amount of energy that could theoretically be converted from a unit of information2; the work by Sano and his team has now confirmed this equation. “This tells us something new about how the laws of thermodynamics work on the microscopic scale,” says Jarzynski.
    http://www.scientificamerican......rts-inform

    Moreover, the Maxwell demon thought experiment has now been extended to build ” a tiny machine powered purely by information,”.

    New Scientist astounds: Information is physical – May 13, 2016
    Excerpt: Recently came the most startling demonstration yet: a tiny machine powered purely by information, which chilled metal through the power of its knowledge. This seemingly magical device could put us on the road to new, more efficient nanoscale machines, a better understanding of the workings of life, and a more complete picture of perhaps our most fundamental theory of the physical world.
    http://www.uncommondescent.com.....-physical/

    In fact, as of 2021, a ‘Information engine’ has now been constructed that achieves “power comparable to molecular machinery in living cells,”

    World’s fastest information-fuelled engine designed by SFU researchers – May 11, 2021
    Excerpt: Simon Fraser University researchers have designed a remarkably fast engine that taps into a new kind of fuel — information.
    The development of this engine, which converts the random jiggling of a microscopic particle into stored energy, is outlined in research published this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) and could lead to significant advances in the speed and cost of computers and bio-nanotechnologies.
    SFU physics professor and senior author John Bechhoefer says researchers’ understanding of how to rapidly and efficiently convert information into “work” may inform the design and creation of real-world information engines.
    “We wanted to find out how fast an information engine can go and how much energy it can extract, so we made one,” says Bechhoefer, whose experimental group collaborated with theorists led by SFU physics professor David Sivak.
    Engines of this type were first proposed over 150 years ago but actually making them has only recently become possible.
    “By systematically studying this engine, and choosing the right system characteristics, we have pushed its capabilities over ten times farther than other similar implementations, thus making it the current best-in-class,” says Sivak.
    The information engine designed by SFU researchers consists of a microscopic particle immersed in water and attached to a spring which, itself, is fixed to a movable stage. Researchers then observe the particle bouncing up and down due to thermal motion.
    “When we see an upward bounce, we move the stage up in response,” explains lead author and PhD student Tushar Saha. “When we see a downward bounce, we wait. This ends up lifting the entire system using only information about the particle’s position.”
    Repeating this procedure, they raise the particle “a great height, and thus store a significant amount of gravitational energy,” without having to directly pull on the particle.
    Saha further explains that, “in the lab, we implement this engine with an instrument known as an optical trap, which uses a laser to create a force on the particle that mimics that of the spring and stage.”
    Joseph Lucero, a Master of Science student adds, “in our theoretical analysis, we find an interesting trade-off between the particle mass and the average time for the particle to bounce up. While heavier particles can store more gravitational energy, they generally also take longer to move up.”
    “Guided by this insight, we picked the particle mass and other engine properties to maximize how fast the engine extracts energy, outperforming previous designs and achieving power comparable to molecular machinery in living cells, and speeds comparable to fast-swimming bacteria,” says postdoctoral fellow Jannik Ehrich.
    https://www.sfu.ca/university-communications/issues-experts/2021/05/world-s-fastest-information-fuelled-engine-designed-by-sfu-resea.html

    An ‘Information engine’ that achieves “power comparable to molecular machinery in living cells”?

    To say Darwinist materialists ‘never saw this coming’ would be an understatement.

    And as if an ‘information engine’ that achieves “power comparable to molecular machinery in living cells” was not enough to make a committed Darwinian materialist’s head spin around in circles, in quantum information theory it is also now found that entropy is not a property of a system, but a property of an observer who describes a system.

    As the following article states, “James Clerk Maxwell (said), “The idea of dissipation of energy depends on the extent of our knowledge.”,,,
    quantum information theory,,, describes the spread of information through quantum systems.,,,
    Fifteen years ago, “we thought of entropy as a property of a thermodynamic system,” he said. “Now in (quantum) information theory, we wouldn’t say entropy is a property of a system, but a property of an observer who describes a system.”,,,

    The Quantum Thermodynamics Revolution – May 2017
    Excerpt: the 19th-century physicist James Clerk Maxwell put it, “The idea of dissipation of energy depends on the extent of our knowledge.”
    In recent years, a revolutionary understanding of thermodynamics has emerged that explains this subjectivity using quantum information theory — “a toddler among physical theories,” as del Rio and co-authors put it, that describes the spread of information through quantum systems. Just as thermodynamics initially grew out of trying to improve steam engines, today’s thermodynamicists are mulling over the workings of quantum machines. Shrinking technology — a single-ion engine and three-atom fridge were both experimentally realized for the first time within the past year — is forcing them to extend thermodynamics to the quantum realm, where notions like temperature and work lose their usual meanings, and the classical laws don’t necessarily apply.
    They’ve found new, quantum versions of the laws that scale up to the originals. Rewriting the theory from the bottom up has led experts to recast its basic concepts in terms of its subjective nature, and to unravel the deep and often surprising relationship between energy and information — the abstract 1s and 0s by which physical states are distinguished and knowledge is measured.,,,
    Renato Renner, a professor at ETH Zurich in Switzerland, described this as a radical shift in perspective. Fifteen years ago, “we thought of entropy as a property of a thermodynamic system,” he said. “Now in (quantum) information theory, we wouldn’t say entropy is a property of a system, but a property of an observer who describes a system.”,,,
    https://www.quantamagazine.org/quantum-thermodynamics-revolution/

    And in the following 2011 paper, researchers ,,, show that when the bits (in a computer) to be deleted are quantum-mechanically entangled with the state of an observer, then the observer could even withdraw heat from the system while deleting the bits. Entanglement links the observer’s state to that of the computer in such a way that they know more about the memory than is possible in classical physics.,,, In measuring entropy, one should bear in mind that (in quantum information theory) an object does not have a certain amount of entropy per se, instead an object’s entropy is always dependent on the observer.

    Quantum knowledge cools computers: New understanding of entropy – June 1, 2011
    Excerpt: Recent research by a team of physicists,,, describe,,, how the deletion of data, under certain conditions, can create a cooling effect instead of generating heat. The cooling effect appears when the strange quantum phenomenon of entanglement is invoked.,,,
    The new study revisits Landauer’s principle for cases when the values of the bits to be deleted may be known. When the memory content is known, it should be possible to delete the bits in such a manner that it is theoretically possible to re-create them. It has previously been shown that such reversible deletion would generate no heat. In the new paper, the researchers go a step further. They show that when the bits to be deleted are quantum-mechanically entangled with the state of an observer, then the observer could even withdraw heat from the system while deleting the bits. Entanglement links the observer’s state to that of the computer in such a way that they know more about the memory than is possible in classical physics.,,,
    In measuring entropy, one should bear in mind that an object does not have a certain amount of entropy per se, instead an object’s entropy is always dependent on the observer. Applied to the example of deleting data, this means that if two individuals delete data in a memory and one has more knowledge of this data, she perceives the memory to have lower entropy and can then delete the memory using less energy.,,,
    No heat, even a cooling effect;
    In the case of perfect classical knowledge of a computer memory (zero entropy), deletion of the data requires in theory no energy at all. The researchers prove that “more than complete knowledge” from quantum entanglement with the memory (negative entropy) leads to deletion of the data being accompanied by removal of heat from the computer and its release as usable energy. This is the physical meaning of negative entropy.
    Renner emphasizes, however, “This doesn’t mean that we can develop a perpetual motion machine.” The data can only be deleted once, so there is no possibility to continue to generate energy. The process also destroys the entanglement, and it would take an input of energy to reset the system to its starting state. The equations are consistent with what’s known as the second law of thermodynamics: the idea that the entropy of the universe can never decrease. Vedral says “We’re working on the edge of the second law. If you go any further, you will break it.”
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/re.....134300.htm

    To repeat, “In measuring entropy, one should bear in mind that (in quantum information theory) an object does not have a certain amount of entropy per se, instead an object’s entropy is always dependent on the observer.”

    That statement is simply completely devastating to the ‘bottom up’ reductive materialistic explanations of Darwinists, and is a full empirical vindication of the presuppositions of Intelligent Design, where it is held that only an Intelligent Mind has the capacity within itself to create the ‘non-physical’ information that is needed to ‘thermodynamically’ explain why life can ‘resist the ravages of entropy’.

  14. 14
    bornagain77 says:

    And although the preceding experimental evidence gets us to an intelligent mind in general, to make our inference to the Mind of God in particular more complete it is necessary to also appeal to advances in quantum biology.

    But first it is important to point out that ‘classical’ sequential information, (such as what is encoded on DNA, proteins, etc..), is a subset of quantum information.

    Classical Information is a subset of Quantum information – illustration
    https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2000/nsf00101/images/figure1.gif
    below that illustration they have this caption,
    “Figure 1: The well-established theory of classical information and computation is actually a subset of a much larger topic, the emerging theory of quantum information and computation.”
    https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2000/nsf00101/nsf00101.htm

    And it is also important to point out that the independent, (i.e. separate from matter and energy), ‘physical’ reality of this immaterial quantum information, (quantum information of which classical information is found to be a subset), is fairly easily demonstrated with quantum teleportation.

    Specifically, quantum information can be teleported between photons and/or atoms without the photons and/or atoms ever physically interacting with one another.

    For instance, the following article states, “the photons aren’t disappearing from one place and appearing in another. Instead, it’s the information that’s being teleported through quantum entanglement.,,,”

    Quantum Teleportation Enters the Real World – September 19, 2016
    Excerpt: Two separate teams of scientists have taken quantum teleportation from the lab into the real world.
    Researchers working in Calgary, Canada and Hefei, China, used existing fiber optics networks to transmit small units of information across cities via quantum entanglement — Einstein’s “spooky action at a distance.”,,,
    This isn’t teleportation in the “Star Trek” sense — the photons aren’t disappearing from one place and appearing in another. Instead, it’s the information that’s being teleported through quantum entanglement.,,,
    ,,, it is only the information that gets teleported from one place to another.
    https://www.discovermagazine.com/d-brief/2016/09/19/quantum-teleportation-enters-real-world/#.V-HqWNEoDtR

    And as the following article states. “scientists have successfully teleported information between two separate atoms in unconnected enclosures a meter apart,,, information,,, is transferred from one place to another, but without traveling through any physical medium.”

    First Teleportation Between Distant Atoms – 2009
    Excerpt: For the first time, scientists have successfully teleported information between two separate atoms in unconnected enclosures a meter apart – a significant milestone in the global quest for practical quantum information processing.
    Teleportation may be nature’s most mysterious form of transport: Quantum information, such as the spin of a particle or the polarization of a photon, is transferred from one place to another, but without traveling through any physical medium. It has previously been achieved between photons over very large distances, between photons and ensembles of atoms, and between two nearby atoms through the intermediary action of a third. None of those, however, provides a feasible means of holding and managing quantum information over long distances.
    Now a team from the Joint Quantum Institute (JQI) at the University of Maryland (UMD) and the University of Michigan has succeeded in teleporting a quantum state directly from one atom to another over a substantial distance
    https://jqi.umd.edu/news/first-teleportation-between-distant-atoms

    Moreover this quantum information, and/or quantum entanglement, is now found to be ubiquitous within life. i.e. It is found within every important biomolecule of life.

    As the following 2015 article entitled, “Quantum criticality in a wide range of important biomolecules”, stated, “Most of the molecules taking part actively in biochemical processes are tuned exactly to the transition point and are critical conductors,” and the researchers further commented that “finding even one (biomolecule) that is in the quantum critical state by accident is mind-bogglingly small and, to all intents and purposes, impossible.,, of the order of 10^-50 of possible small biomolecules and even less for proteins,”,,,

    Quantum criticality in a wide range of important biomolecules – Mar. 6, 2015
    Excerpt: “Most of the molecules taking part actively in biochemical processes are tuned exactly to the transition point and are critical conductors,” they say.
    That’s a discovery that is as important as it is unexpected. “These findings suggest an entirely new and universal mechanism of conductance in biology very different from the one used in electrical circuits.”
    The permutations of possible energy levels of biomolecules is huge so the possibility of finding even one (biomolecule) that is in the quantum critical state by accident is mind-bogglingly small and, to all intents and purposes, impossible.,, of the order of 10^-50 of possible small biomolecules and even less for proteins,”,,,
    “what exactly is the advantage that criticality confers?”
    https://medium.com/the-physics-arxiv-blog/the-origin-of-life-and-the-hidden-role-of-quantum-criticality-ca4707924552

    Even the classical information of DNA is now found to be a subset of quantum information.

    In the following video, at the 22:20 minute mark, Dr Rieper shows why the high temperatures of biological systems do not prevent DNA from having quantum entanglement and then at 24:00 minute mark Dr Rieper goes on to remark that practically the whole DNA molecule can be viewed as quantum information with classical information embedded within it.

    “What happens is this classical information (of DNA) is embedded, sandwiched, into the quantum information (of DNA). And most likely this classical information is never accessed because it is inside all the quantum information. You can only access the quantum information or the electron clouds and the protons. So mathematically you can describe that as a quantum/classical state.”
    Elisabeth Rieper – Classical and Quantum Information in DNA – video (Longitudinal Quantum Information resides along the entire length of DNA discussed at the 19:30 minute mark; at 24:00 minute mark Dr Rieper remarks that practically the whole DNA molecule can be viewed as quantum information with classical information embedded within it)
    https://youtu.be/2nqHOnVTxJE?t=1176

    What is so devastating to Darwinian presuppositions with the (empirical) finding of pervasive quantum coherence and/or quantum entanglement within molecular biology, is that quantum coherence and/or quantum entanglement is a non-local, beyond space and time, effect that requires a beyond space and time cause in order to explain its existence. As the following paper entitled “Looking beyond space and time to cope with quantum theory” stated, “Our result gives weight to the idea that quantum correlations somehow arise from outside spacetime, in the sense that no story in space and time can describe them,”

    Looking beyond space and time to cope with quantum theory – 29 October 2012
    Excerpt: “Our result gives weight to the idea that quantum correlations somehow arise from outside spacetime, in the sense that no story in space and time can describe them,”
    http://www.quantumlah.org/high.....uences.php

  15. 15
    bornagain77 says:

    Darwinists, with their reductive materialistic framework, and especially with the falsification of ‘hidden variables’, simply have no beyond space and time cause that they can appeal so as to be able to explain the non-local quantum coherence and/or entanglement that is now found to be ubiquitous within biology.

    Not So Real – Sheldon Lee Glashow – Oct. 2018
    Excerpt: In 1959, John Stewart Bell deduced his eponymous theorem: that no system of hidden variables can reproduce all of the consequences of quantum theory. In particular, he deduced an inequality pertinent to observations of an entangled system consisting of two separated particles. If experimental results contradicted Bell’s inequality, hidden-variable models could be ruled out. Experiments of this kind seemed difficult or impossible to carry out. But, in 1972, Alain Aspect succeeded. His results contradicted Bell’s inequality. The predictions of quantum mechanics were confirmed and the principle of local realism challenged. Ever more precise tests of Bell’s inequality and its extension by John Clauser et al. continue to be performed,14 including an experiment involving pairs of photons coming from different distant quasars. Although a few tiny loopholes may remain, all such tests to date have confirmed that quantum theory is incompatible with the existence of local hidden variables. Most physicists have accepted the failure of Einstein’s principle of local realism.
    https://inference-review.com/article/not-so-real

    The Universe Is Not Locally Real, and the Physics Nobel Prize Winners Proved It
    Elegant experiments with entangled light have laid bare a profound mystery at the heart of reality
    – Daniel Garisto – October 6, 2022
    Excerpt: One of the more unsettling discoveries in the past half century is that the universe is not locally real…. As Albert Einstein famously bemoaned to a friend, “Do you really believe the moon is not there when you are not looking at it?”
    This is, of course, deeply contrary to our everyday experiences. To paraphrase Douglas Adams, the demise of local realism has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
    Blame for this achievement has now been laid squarely on the shoulders of three physicists: John Clauser, Alain Aspect and Anton Zeilinger. They equally split the 2022 Nobel Prize in Physics “for experiments with entangled photons, establishing the violation of Bell inequalities and pioneering quantum information science.” (“Bell inequalities” refers to the pioneering work of the Northern Irish physicist John Stewart Bell, who laid the foundations for this year’s Physics Nobel in the early 1960s.) Colleagues agreed that the trio had it coming, deserving this reckoning for overthrowing reality as we know it. “It is fantastic news. It was long overdue,” says Sandu Popescu, a quantum physicist at the University of Bristol. “Without any doubt, the prize is well-deserved.”,,,
    No one pounced to close these loopholes with more gusto than Anton Zeilinger, an ambitious, gregarious Austrian physicist. In 1998, he and his team improved on Aspect’s earlier work by conducting a Bell test over a then-unprecedented distance of nearly half a kilometer. The era of divining reality’s nonlocality from kayak-sized experiments had drawn to a close. Finally, in 2013, Zeilinger’s group took the next logical step, tackling multiple loopholes at the same time.,,,
    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-universe-is-not-locally-real-and-the-physics-nobel-prize-winners-proved-it/

    “hidden variables don’t exist. If you have proved them come back with PROOF and a Nobel Prize.
    John Bell theorized that maybe the particles can signal faster than the speed of light. This is what he advocated in his interview in “The Ghost in the Atom.” But the violation of Leggett’s inequality in 2007 takes away that possibility and rules out all non-local hidden variables. Observation instantly defines what properties a particle has and if you assume they had properties before we measured them, then you need evidence, because right now there is none which is why realism is dead, and materialism dies with it.
    How does the particle know what we are going to pick so it can conform to that?”
    per Jimfit

    Whereas Darwinian materialists have no ‘beyond space and time’ cause that they can appeal to, on the other hand, the Christian Theist readily does have a beyond space and time cause that he can appeal to so as to explain quantum entanglement, and/or quantum information that is now found to be ubiquitous within life. And indeed, Christians have been postulating just such a cause for a few thousand years now. As Colossians 1:17 states, “He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.”

    Colossians 1:17
    He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.

    It is also important to realize that quantum information, unlike classical information, is physically conserved. As the following article states, In the classical world, information can be copied and deleted at will. In the quantum world, however, the conservation of quantum information means that information cannot be created nor destroyed.

    Quantum no-hiding theorem experimentally confirmed for first time – 2011
    Excerpt: In the classical world, information can be copied and deleted at will. In the quantum world, however, the conservation of quantum information means that information cannot be created nor destroyed. This concept stems from two fundamental theorems of quantum mechanics: the no-cloning theorem and the no-deleting theorem. A third and related theorem, called the no-hiding theorem, addresses information loss in the quantum world. According to the no-hiding theorem, if information is missing from one system (which may happen when the system interacts with the environment), then the information is simply residing somewhere else in the Universe; in other words, the missing information cannot be hidden in the correlations between a system and its environment.
    http://www.physorg.com/news/20.....tally.html

    The implication of finding ‘non-local’, (beyond space and time), and ‘conserved’, (cannot be created nor destroyed), quantum information in molecular biology on such a massive scale, in every important biomolecule in our bodies, is fairly, and pleasantly, obvious.
    That pleasant implication, of course, being the fact that we now have fairly strong empirical evidence indicating that we do indeed have a transcendent, metaphysical, component to our being, a “soul”, that is, in principle, capable of living beyond the death of our material/temporal bodies.

    As Stuart Hameroff succinctly stated in the following article, “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.”

    Leading Scientists Say Consciousness Cannot Die It Goes Back To The Universe – Oct. 19, 2017 – Spiritual
    Excerpt: “Let’s say the heart stops beating. The blood stops flowing. The microtubules lose their quantum state. But the quantum information, which is in the microtubules, isn’t destroyed. It can’t be destroyed. It just distributes and dissipates to the universe at large. If a patient is resuscitated, revived, this quantum information can go back into the microtubules and the patient says, “I had a near death experience. I saw a white light. I saw a tunnel. I saw my dead relatives.,,” Now if they’re not revived and the patient dies, then it’s possible that this quantum information can exist outside the body. Perhaps indefinitely as a soul.”
    – Stuart Hameroff – Quantum Entangled Consciousness – Life After Death – video (5:00 minute mark) (of note, this video is no longer available for public viewing)
    https://radaronline.com/exclusives/2012/10/life-after-death-soul-science-morgan-freeman/

    Personally, I consider these recent findings from quantum biology to rival all other scientific discoveries over the past century. Surpassing even the discovery of a beginning of the universe, via Big Bang cosmology, in terms of scientific, theological, and even personal, significance.

    As Jesus once asked his disciples and a crowd of followers, “Is anything worth more than your soul?”

    Verse:

    Mark 8:37
    Is anything worth more than your soul?

    Quotes and verses:

    “The most fundamental definition of reality is not matter or energy, but information–and it is the processing of information that lies at the root of all physical, biological, economic, and social phenomena.”
    Vlatko Vedral – Professor of Physics at the University of Oxford, and CQT (Centre for Quantum Technologies) at the National University of Singapore, and a Fellow of Wolfson College – a recognized leader in the field of quantum mechanics.

    Why the Quantum? It from Bit? A Participatory Universe?
    Excerpt: In conclusion, it may very well be said that information is the irreducible kernel from which everything else flows. Thence the question why nature appears quantized is simply a consequence of the fact that information itself is quantized by necessity. It might even be fair to observe that the concept that information is fundamental is very old knowledge of humanity, witness for example the beginning of gospel according to John: “In the beginning was the Word.”
    Anton Zeilinger – 2022 Nobel laureate in quantum mechanics:
    http://www.metanexus.net/archi.....linger.pdf

    48:24 mark: “It is operationally impossible to separate Reality and Information”
    49:45 mark: “In the Beginning was the Word” John 1:1
    Prof Anton Zeilinger speaks on quantum physics. at UCT – video
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3ZPWW5NOrw

    John 1:1-4
    In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind.

    Acts 3:15
    You killed the author of life, but God raised him from the dead. We are witnesses of this.

    Thus in conclusion, I hold that the inference to the Mind God in order to explain the ‘top down’ information we find in life is now on strong empirical footing, and, therefore, the inference to the Mind of God is a more than valid inference for Christian Theists to make from the empirical evidence itself.

  16. 16
    Seversky says:

    I think BA77 has a secret deal with scroll-wheel manufacturers.

  17. 17
    Sir Giles says:

    Seversky: I think BA77 has a secret deal with scroll-wheel manufacturers.

    I only use my iPhone and I am wearing a groove in the screen. To say nothing of the callous I have built up on my thumb. It is amazing how much heat can be generated by quickly scrolling over his posts.

    Or maybe BA77 has shares in WordPress, that charges website hosts by the mb.

  18. 18
    bornagain77 says:

    Sev, to save your scroll wheel I will provide a brief summary of posts 12-15.

    PMI claimed that ‘we think we know’ how metabolism, simple replication, and simple vesicles ‘got off the ground’. And PMI further claimed that “The trick is figuring out how all three necessary components were assembled at the same time and place”,,,

    I pointed out, via James Tour, that we know less than ‘we think we know’ and that, “Nobody has any idea how this was done when using our commonly understood mechanisms of chemical science.”

    I then pointed out, via Sara Walker and Paul Davies, that although they (over) generously conceded that “replication, metabolism and compartmentalization” are ‘easy problems’ to explain, never-the-less, in their paper Walker and Davies hold that the origin of life will never be adequately explained by chemistry and/or physics alone because of the ‘hard problem’ of information. Namely that the information is ‘calling the shots’ in life and is irreducible to reductionist explanations. They also noted that “life seems distinct from other physical systems in how information affects the world (that is, that macrostates are causal).”

    I then noted that this is pretty much the same exact intractable ‘hard problem’ that George Ellis clearly illustrated in his paper ‘Recognising Top-Down Causation”.

    I then noted that it takes 10^12 bits of information to allow ‘simple’ life to ‘resist the ravages of entropy’.

    I then quoted Dr. Brian Miller in regards Intelligence being required to ‘thermodynamically’ move a system ‘uphill’ towards life. And then I provided several experiments that have now verified Dr. Miller’s claim. Many experiments that now show intelligence imparting information into a system can indeed “thermodynamically” move a system ‘uphill’ towards life.

    I then went into ‘quantum information’, of which classical information is a subset, and showed that quantum information is separate from matter and energy, and then I showed that this quantum information is now known to be ubiquitous within molecular biology. And then I showed that ‘non-local’ quantum information requires a beyond space and time cause to explain its existence and that Darwinian materialists simply have no ‘beyond space and time cause to appeal to, whereas Christians do have a ‘beyond space and time cause to appeal to. ,,, I then also noted that quantum information, unlike classical information, is physically considered in that it can’t be created nor destroyed, and then I further noted how these facts lend strong empirical support to the Christian’s claim that there is a immaterial component to our being, a “soul’, that is capable of living beyond the death of our material bodies.

    I then concluded, “I hold that the inference to the Mind of God in order to explain the ‘top down’ information we find in life is now on strong empirical footing, and, therefore, the inference to the Mind of God is a more than valid inference for Christian Theists to make from the empirical evidence itself.”

    i.e. In short, the Christian’s claim that God created life, and that we have immaterial souls, is now on empirical footing

    Verse:

    Mark 8:37
    Is anything worth more than your soul?

  19. 19
    bornagain77 says:

    correction, this sentence should read,

    ,,, “I then also noted that quantum information, unlike classical information, is physically CONSERVED in that it can’t be created nor destroyed,”,,,

  20. 20
    Querius says:

    Bornagain77 @18,

    I pointed out, via James Tour, that we know less than ‘we think we know’ and that, “Nobody has any idea how this was done when using our commonly understood mechanisms of chemical science.”

    Indeed!

    And now 11/23/2022, James Tour is declaring war on fanciful and fraudulent origin of life claims!

    James M. Tour, a synthetic organic chemist, received his Bachelor of Science degree in chemistry from Syracuse University, his Ph.D. in synthetic organic and organometallic chemistry from Purdue University, and postdoctoral training in synthetic organic chemistry at the University of Wisconsin and Stanford University. After spending 11 years on the faculty of the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry at the University of South Carolina, he joined the Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology at Rice University in 1999 where he is presently the T. T. and W. F. Chao Professor of Chemistry, Professor of Computer Science, and Professor of Materials Science and NanoEngineering. Tour’s scientific research areas include nanoelectronics, graphene electronics, silicon oxide electronics, carbon nanovectors for medical applications, green carbon research for enhanced oil recovery and environmentally friendly oil and gas extraction, graphene photovoltaics, carbon supercapacitors, lithium ion batteries, CO2 capture, water splitting to H2 and O2, water purification, carbon nanotube and graphene synthetic modifications, graphene oxide, carbon composites, hydrogen storage on nanoengineered carbon scaffolds, and synthesis of single-molecule nanomachines which includes molecular motors and nanocars.

    Here’s his announcement:

    How did life begin? Addressing Abiogenesis Series Trailer with Dr James Tour
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FP7ojkrZ1sc

    -Q

  21. 21
    Querius says:

    Oh, and . . . wait for it. (smile)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4oUuRBnEkE

    -Q

Leave a Reply