Intelligent Design

Gravity Does Not Account For Itself

Spread the love

In response to my last post jurassicmac writes: “Darwinism has nothing to say about God other than that natural processes seem to be sufficient to account for life. I find it odd that the same amount of vitriol isn’t directed at Laplace for showing that the orbits of planets can be explained without invoking supernatural intervention. Darwin did for biology what Laplace (and Newton) did for astronomy: provide an explanatory framework. Why is Darwin vilified and Laplace not?”

It is true that Laplace refined Newton’s calculations and finally showed that the orbits of the planets can be accounted for by a “scientific law,” in this case, the law of gravity. But what is a “scientific law”? It nothing but an observed regularity. The law of gravity does not cause the planets to move in their orbits. It merely describes how they move now that they are moving. How did the planets begin to move in the first place? We don’t know. And where does a law come from? Science does not (because it cannot) speak to that question. From science’s perspective, the law of gravity just is. To the questions of where gravity came from and why it has the properties that it has (as opposed to any of an infinite number of properties it could have), the scientist qua scientist must remain mute, for he can have no answers.

It never ceases to amaze me when people assert something along the lines of God is not necessary to explain “X” because “X” can be accounted for on the basis of scientific laws. What? Do those scientific laws account for their own existence and properties? Now that’s a neat trick.

UPDATE:  And by the way, the reason Darwin catches more flack than Laplace is that the natural law Laplace described actually accounts for that data.  The natural law Darwin proposed does not.

33 Replies to “Gravity Does Not Account For Itself

  1. 1
    bornagain77 says:

    Mr. Arrington, you have plenty of evidence to back you up in this observation;

    Explaining The Unseen Spiritual Realm – Dr. Quantum – Flatland – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4119478

    These following videos and articles on Dark Energy and Matter really put the last nail in the coffin for the materialistic philosophy:

    REPORT OF THE DARK ENERGY TASK FORCE
    The abstract of the September 2006 Report of the Dark Energy Task Force says: “Dark energy appears to be the dominant component of the physical Universe, yet there is no persuasive theoretical explanation for its existence or magnitude. The acceleration of the Universe is, along with dark matter, the observed phenomenon that most directly demonstrates that our (materialistic) theories of fundamental particles and gravity are either incorrect or incomplete. Most experts believe that nothing short of a revolution in our understanding of fundamental physics will be required to achieve a full understanding of the cosmic acceleration. For these reasons, the nature of dark energy ranks among the very most compelling of all outstanding problems in physical science. These circumstances demand an ambitious observational program to determine the dark energy properties as well as possible.”
    http://jdem.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs.....report.pdf

    The Mathematical Anomaly Of Dark Matter – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4133609

    Dark matter halo
    Excerpt: The dark matter halo is the single largest part of the Milky Way Galaxy as it covers the space between 100,000 light-years to 300,000 light-years from the galactic center. It is also the most mysterious part of the Galaxy. It is now believed that about 95% of the Galaxy is composed of dark matter, a type of matter that does not seem to interact with the rest of the Galaxy’s matter and energy in any way except through gravity. The dark matter halo is the location of nearly all of the Milky Way Galaxy’s dark matter, which is more than ten times as much mass as all of the visible stars, gas, and dust in the rest of the Galaxy.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter_halo

    Hubble Finds Ring of Dark Matter – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4133618

    The Elusive “non-Material” Foundation For Gravity:
    http://docs.google.com/View?id=dc8z67wz_38d7zmrn9v

  2. 2
    Peepul says:

    Barry,

    There’s a sense in which laws are observed regularities, but also a sense in which that is an oversimplification.

    Laws are also explanations – and the explanations are not necessarily themselves observed. For example, conservation laws are observed regularities, but they also have a deep explanation in terms of symmetries. If the symmetry holds, then the world must behave in a certain way. That goes way beyond mere description.

    In that sense, it is possible for scientists to go at least some way to understand the origin of laws. You’re right in that we have no ultimate explanation of any laws, but we can take at least some steps towards understanding how they arise and reducing the number of things that need to be explained.

    That’s really what science has achieved – very many things are now explained based on a small set of fundamental principles.

    You don’t believe we can ever explain where these laws come from. I think it may be possible at least to reach a point where we discover a single fundamental principle or a very few that underpin all physical laws.

    If we get to that point, can we explain where the principle came from? I’m not sure. But I don’t think it’s necessarily impossible. There may be only one self consistent framework that must apply if anything exists. Who knows, to be honest.

    Either way, there’s no reason why our lack of understanding points to God. Lack of understanding cannot point to anything. Only understanding can do that.

  3. 3
    Peepul says:

    Bornagain,

    you are making a mistake if you think not having consistent explanations of dark energy / dark matter is a nail in the materialistic coffin.

    Was not having an explanation of the precession of Mercury’s orbit a nail in the coffin of materialistic philosophy? No, the inconsistency was removed by general relativity.

    Was the ultraviolet catastrophe a nail in the coffin of materialistic philosophy? No, the inconsistency was removed by the development of the quantum concept.

    Every single inconsistency in our understanding of the physical world that we have resolved has been resolved by a materialistic explanation.

    None has been resolved by a supernatural explanation. Not a single one.

  4. 4
    nullasalus says:

    You don’t believe we can ever explain where these laws come from. I think it may be possible at least to reach a point where we discover a single fundamental principle or a very few that underpin all physical laws.

    […]

    There may be only one self consistent framework that must apply if anything exists.

    Congratulations, you have discovered a form of theism. Neoplatonism and its variants, as a matter of fact.

    Every single inconsistency in our understanding of the physical world that we have resolved has been resolved by a materialistic explanation.

    I’m sure BA77 is going to roll in here in a moment with 20+ links that show why this is nonsense. But I’ll add my own criticism anyway: The only way “materialistic explanation” has survived is because “materialism” has been divested of meaning over time, finally reaching a near-complete absence of meaning in the wake of quantum physics. (A change that was so tremendous that even many materialists felt like they had to call themselves ‘physicalists’ from that point on.)

    It’s hardly a triumph when you, after the fact, claim as “material” and “natural” what prior to the fact was claimed as “immaterial” or “supernatural”. (Natural laws (Immaterial principles governing nature? Sounds like God or a method of God to me!), gravity in particular (Effects at a distance, rather than through contact? Supernatural, occult stuff!), quantum physics (Spooky action at a distance? ‘Measurement’ affecting outcomes? Ghostly!), and so on.)

    Materialism died a long time ago. Physicalism has taken up the torch instead, and its holders are so punch-drunk from science that their definition of ‘physical’ now includes everything from panpsychism to neutral monism to quite possibly idealism. (Just look up Physicalism in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy to see this in action.)

    Barry’s right: To call on “laws” as an explanation, much less an explanation hostile to theism or religious belief, is one hell of a trick.

  5. 5
    bornagain77 says:

    peepul you state,

    ‘No, the inconsistency was removed by general relativity.’

    And peepul does General Relativity reduce to a material basis? No of course not, General Relativity is a purely mathematical equation which tells us how space-time relates to gravity. In fact a recent hypothesis, a hypothesis that I look upon favorably, postulates that gravity emerges as a entropic force once space-time itself has emerged:

    Evolution is a Fact, Just Like Gravity is a Fact! UhOh!
    Excerpt: The results of this paper suggest gravity arises as an entropic force, once space and time themselves have emerged.
    http://www.uncommondescent.com.....fact-uhoh/

    Yet peepul you insinuated that ‘materialism’ was responsible for the equation of General Relativity? Please tell me peepul, Exactly which material particle generated the unchanging transcendent logical information of the equation? Was it the proton or was it the neutron? Perhaps all the atoms conspired together to subjugate themselves under this transcendent equation just so as to deceive us into thinking that this unchanging universal order came from the infinite and transcendent Mind of God?

    further notes:

    This following video is very interesting for revealing how difficult it was for mathematicians to actually ‘prove’ that mathematics was true:

    Georg Cantor – The Mathematics Of Infinity – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4572335
    entire video: BBC-Dangerous Knowledge (Part 1-10)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cw-zNRNcF90

    As you can see, somewhat from the preceding video, mathematics cannot be held to be ‘true’ unless an assumption for a highest transcendent infinity is held to be true. A highest infinity which Cantor, and even Godel, held to be God. Thus this following formal proof, which was referred to at the end of the preceding video, shows that math cannot be held to be consistently true unless the highest infinity of God is held to be consistently true as a starting assumption:

    Gödel’s Incompleteness: The #1 Mathematical Breakthrough of the 20th Century
    Excerpt: Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem says:
    “Anything you can draw a circle around cannot explain itself without referring to something outside the circle – something you have to assume to be true but cannot prove “mathematically” to be true.”
    http://www.cosmicfingerprints......pleteness/

    THE GOD OF THE MATHEMATICIANS – DAVID P. GOLDMAN – August 2010
    Excerpt: we cannot construct an ontology that makes God dispensable. Secularists can dismiss this as a mere exercise within predefined rules of the game of mathematical logic, but that is sour grapes, for it was the secular side that hoped to substitute logic for God in the first place. Gödel’s critique of the continuum hypothesis has the same implication as his incompleteness theorems: Mathematics never will create the sort of closed system that sorts reality into neat boxes.
    http://www.faqs.org/periodical.....27241.html

    This following site is a easy to use, and understand, interactive website that takes the user through what is termed ‘Presuppositional apologetics’. The website clearly shows that our use of the laws of logic, mathematics, science and morality cannot be accounted for unless we believe in a God who guarantees our perceptions and reasoning are trustworthy in the first place.

    Proof That God Exists – easy to use interactive website
    http://www.proofthatgodexists.org/index.php

    Materialism simply dissolves into absurdity when pushed to extremes and certainly offers no guarantee to us for believing our perceptions and reasoning within science are trustworthy in the first place:

    Dr. Bruce Gordon – The Absurdity Of The Multiverse & Materialism in General – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5318486/

    Mathematics is the language with which God has written the universe.
    Galileo Galilei

    The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences – Eugene Wigner
    Excerpt: The miracle of the appropriateness of the language of mathematics for the formulation of the laws of physics is a wonderful gift which we neither understand nor deserve. We should be grateful for it and hope that it will remain valid in future research and that it will extend, for better or for worse, to our pleasure, even though perhaps also to our bafflement, to wide branches of learning.
    http://www.dartmouth.edu/~matc.....igner.html

    The Underlying Mathematical Foundation Of The Universe -Walter Bradley – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4491491

  6. 6
    bornagain77 says:

    The Five Foundational Equations of the Universe and Brief Descriptions of Each:
    http://docs.google.com/Doc?doc.....#038;hl=en

    How can it be that mathematics, being after all a product of human thought which is independent of experience, is so admirably appropriate to the objects of reality? — Albert Einstein

    “… if nature is really structured with a mathematical language and mathematics invented by man can manage to understand it, this demonstrates something extraordinary. The objective structure of the universe and the intellectual structure of the human being coincide.” – Pope Benedict XVI

    This following site has a brief discussion on the fact that ‘transcendent math’ is not an invention of man but that transcendent math actually dictates how ‘reality’ is constructed and operates:
    http://www.uncommondescent.com.....ent-363381

    “The reason that mathematics is so effective in capturing, expressing, and modeling what we call empirical reality is that there is a ontological correspondence between the two – I would go so far as to say that they are the same thing.”
    Richard Sternberg – Pg. 8 How My Views On Evolution Evolved

    The following site lists the unchanging constants of the universe:

    Systematic Search for Expressions of Dimensionless Constants using the NIST database of Physical Constants
    Excerpt: The National Institute of Standards and Technology lists 325 constants on their website as ‘Fundamental Physical Constants’. Among the 325 physical constants listed, 79 are unitless in nature (usually by defining a ratio). This produces a list of 246 physical constants with some unit dependence. These 246 physical constants can be further grouped into a smaller set when expressed in standard SI base units.,,,
    http://www.mit.edu/~mi22295/co.....tants.html

    The numerical values of the transcendent universal constants in physics, which are found for gravity which holds planets, stars and galaxies together; for the weak nuclear force which holds neutrons together; for electromagnetism which allows chemical bonds to form; for the strong nuclear force which holds protons together; for the cosmological constant of space/energy density which accounts for the universe’s expansion; and for many other constants which are universal in their scope, ‘just so happen’ to be the exact numerical values they need to be in order for life, as we know it, to be possible in this universe. A more than slight variance in the value of any individual universal constant, over the entire age of the universe, would have undermined the ability of the entire universe to have life as we know it. To put it mildly, this is a irreducibly complex condition.

    Anthropic Principle – God Created The Universe – Michael Strauss PhD. – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4323661

    “If we modify the value of one of the fundamental constants, something invariably goes wrong, leading to a universe that is inhospitable to life as we know it. When we adjust a second constant in an attempt to fix the problem(s), the result, generally, is to create three new problems for every one that we “solve.” The conditions in our universe really do seem to be uniquely suitable for life forms like ourselves, and perhaps even for any form of organic complexity.” Gribbin and Rees, “Cosmic Coincidences”, p. 269

    Here are a few sites that list the finely tuned universal constants:

    Fine-Tuning For Life In The Universe
    http://www.reasons.org/fine-tuning-life-universe

    Evidence for the Fine Tuning of the Universe
    http://www.godandscience.org/a.....ignun.html

    On and on through each universal constant scientists analyze, they find such unchanging precision from the universe’s creation.

  7. 7
    bornagain77 says:

    peepul it is interesting that you should have picked Einstein’s General Relativity so as to defend your base materialistic philosophy (i.e. your atheism), because it is the materialistic philosophy itself which forced Einstein to commit his self admitted ‘greatest blunder’ in regards to his General Relativity equation:

    ,,,I find it very interesting that the materialistic belief of the universe being stable, and infinite in duration, was so deeply rooted in scientific thought that Albert Einstein (1879-1955), when he was shown his general relativity equation indicated a universe that was unstable and would ‘draw together’ under its own gravity, added a cosmological constant to his equation to reflect a stable universe rather than entertain the thought that the universe had a beginning.

    Einstein and The Belgian Priest, George Lemaitre – The “Father” Of The Big Bang Theory – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4279662

    of note: This was not the last time Einstein’s base materialistic philosophy had severely misled him. He was also severely misled in the Bohr–Einstein debates in which he was repeatedly proven wrong in challenging the ‘spooky action at a distance’ postulations of the emerging field of quantum mechanics. This following video, which I listed earlier, bears worth repeating since it highlights the Bohr/Einstein debate and the decades long struggle to ‘scientifically’ resolve the disagreement between them:

    The Failure Of Local Realism – Materialism – Alain Aspect – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/w/4744145

    etc… etc.. etc…

    Well peepul perhaps your misplaced belief in materialism is genuine, i.e. perhaps you feel that reality actually does have some type of solid material basis that it reduces to? Please let me shatter any such false confidence you may have in such a delusional ‘reductive materialistic’ belief:

    Dr. Quantum – Double Slit Experiment & Entanglement – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4096579

    Double-slit experiment
    Excerpt: In 1999 objects large enough to see under a microscope, buckyball (interlocking carbon atom) molecules (diameter about 0.7 nm, nearly half a million times that of a proton), were found to exhibit wave-like interference.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D.....experiment

    This following site offers a more formal refutation of materialism:

    Why Quantum Theory Does Not Support Materialism – By Bruce L Gordon:
    Excerpt: Because quantum theory is thought to provide the bedrock for our scientific understanding of physical reality, it is to this theory that the materialist inevitably appeals in support of his worldview. But having fled to science in search of a safe haven for his doctrines, the materialist instead finds that quantum theory in fact dissolves and defeats his materialist understanding of the world.
    http://www.4truth.net/site/c.h.....ialism.htm

    Atom takes a quantum leap – 2009
    Excerpt: Ytterbium ions have been ‘teleported’ over a distance of a metre.,,,
    “What you’re moving is information, not the actual atoms,” says Chris Monroe, from the Joint Quantum Institute at the University of Maryland in College Park and an author of the paper. But as two particles of the same type differ only in their quantum states, the transfer of quantum information is equivalent to moving the first particle to the location of the second.
    http://www.freerepublic.com/fo.....1769/posts

    As a side light to this, leading quantum physicist Anton Zeilinger has followed in John Archibald Wheeler’s footsteps (1911-2008) by insisting reality, at its most foundational level, is ‘information’.

    “It from bit symbolizes the idea that every item of the physical world has at bottom – at a very deep bottom, in most instances – an immaterial source and explanation; that which we call reality arises in the last analysis from the posing of yes-no questions and the registering of equipment-evoked responses; in short, that things physical are information-theoretic in origin.” John Archibald Wheeler

    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 – a leading expert in quantum teleportation:
    http://www.metanexus.net/Magaz.....fault.aspx

    Zeilinger’s principle
    The principle that any elementary system carries just one bit of information. This principle was put forward by the Austrian physicist Anton Zeilinger in 1999 and subsequently developed by him to derive several aspects of quantum mechanics.
    http://science.jrank.org/pages.....z17a7f88PM

    In the beginning was the bit – New Scientist
    Excerpt: Zeilinger’s principle leads to the intrinsic randomness found in the quantum world. Consider the spin of an electron. Say it is measured along a vertical axis (call it the z axis) and found to be pointing up. Because one bit of information has been used to make that statement, no more information can be carried by the electron’s spin. Consequently, no information is available to predict the amounts of spin in the two horizontal directions (x and y axes), so they are of necessity entirely random. If you then measure the spin in one of these directions, there is an equal chance of its pointing right or left, forward or back. This fundamental randomness is what we call Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle.
    http://www.quantum.at/fileadmi.....t/bit.html

  8. 8
    Frost122585 says:

    Bornagain hit the nail on the head with the two posts above. God cannot be dissolved via mathematical enlightenment. And mathematical enlightenment cannot speak to the fundamental questions concerning truth and the universe. There are certain things like incompleteness that can be demonstrated within mathematics and logic but their true meaning and significance must come from other faculties outside pure mathematics.

    Likewise, mysteries such as those pertaining to dark matter rely too much on abstract seculation and not enough on imminent evidence. It is a mistake to try an over simplify reality- like many physicists seek to do today with reductionism. God may be infinitely simple-but he is also infinitely complex as well.

    As Einstein put it, “everything should be made as simple as possible,but not simpler.”

  9. 9
    Bantay says:

    Bornagain77 thanks very much for posting the links to those excellent video reference materials.

  10. 10
    Chris Doyle says:

    The problem with chance and necessity (laws) is that they fail to account for all of the information we see in, say, a strand of DNA.

    Where did all the information come from? The more we learn about it, the further away we go from chance and necessity.

  11. 11
    bornagain77 says:

    Thanks Bantay,,,, peepul here are few more short notes on General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics that show that the successful ‘unification’ of the two is anything but materialistic in nature:

    ,,,I find it extremely interesting, and strange, that quantum mechanics tells us that instantaneous quantum wave collapse to its ‘uncertain’ 3-D state is centered on each individual observer in the universe, whereas, 4-D space-time cosmology (General Relativity) tells us each 3-D point in the universe is central to the expansion of the universe. These findings of modern science are pretty much exactly what we would expect to see if this universe were indeed created from a higher dimension by a omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, eternal Being who knows everything that is happening everywhere in the universe at the same time. These findings certainly seem to go to the very heart of the old question asked of many parents by their children, “How can God hear everybody’s prayers at the same time?”,,, i.e. Why should the expansion of the universe, or the quantum wave collapse of the entire universe, even care that you or I exist? Only Theism offers a rational explanation as to why you or I, or anyone else, should have such undeserved significance in such a vast universe:

    Psalm 33:13-15
    The LORD looks from heaven; He sees all the sons of men. From the place of His dwelling He looks on all the inhabitants of the earth; He fashions their hearts individually; He considers all their works.

    The expansion of every 3D point in the universe(General Relativity), and the quantum wave collapse of the entire universe to each point of conscious observation in the universe, is obviously a very interesting congruence in science between the very large (relativity) and the very small (quantum mechanics). A congruence that Physicists, and Mathematicians, seem to be having a extremely difficult time ‘unifying’ into a ‘theory of everything’.(Einstein, Penrose).

    Yet, this unification, into a ‘theory of everything’, between what is in essence the ‘infinite world of Quantum Mechanics’ and the ‘finite world of the space-time of General Relativity’ seems to be directly related to what Jesus apparently joined together with His resurrection, i.e. related to the unification of infinite God with finite man:

    The Center Of The Universe Is Life – General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, Entropy and The Shroud Of Turin – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/w/5070355

    The End Of Christianity – Finding a Good God in an Evil World – Pg.31
    William Dembski PhD. Mathematics
    Excerpt: “In mathematics there are two ways to go to infinity. One is to grow large without measure. The other is to form a fraction in which the denominator goes to zero. The Cross is a path of humility in which the infinite God becomes finite and then contracts to zero, only to resurrect and thereby unite a finite humanity within a newfound infinity.”
    http://www.designinference.com.....of_xty.pdf

    ==========

    Brooke Fraser- “C S Lewis Song”
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHpuTGGRCbY

    ==============

    notes:

    http://lettherebelight-77.blog.....is_19.html

  12. 12
    Peepul says:

    I’m With you Bornagain – you are meaning strict materialism, ie matter is all that exists. I was using it a broader sense of ‘non-supernatural’.

    I completely agree that materialism in the sense you are using it is not applicable to the universe. Fields are real – in fact they are more fundamental in modern physics than matter. Likewise we know absolutely from Alain Aspect’s experiments, and others, that quantum reality is non-local.

    But why is materialism in that narrow sense relevant to the debate? It’s a completely non-controversial issue.

  13. 13
    bornagain77 says:

    peepul, So now that ‘reductive materialism’ is falsified, you, and all other atheists, want to ‘move goalposts’ to ‘non-reductive materialism? i.e. you are saying you want a ABG hypothesis? a Anything But God hypothesis? no matter what heights of absurdity you must endure to deny God?

    peepul, actually refutation of the ‘non-reductive materialism of the gaps’ you trying to cling to for whatever misguided reason, was in my notes, which you should have noticed if you were not so quick to try to defend your atheistic belief by whatever means necessary! i,e, see Bruce Gordon specifically:

    Dr. Bruce Gordon – The Absurdity Of The Multiverse & Materialism in General – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5318486/

    peepul, in the description of the video you would have found:

    BRUCE GORDON: Hawking’s irrational arguments – October 2010
    Excerpt: The physical universe is causally incomplete and therefore neither self-originating nor self-sustaining. The world of space, time, matter and energy is dependent on a reality that transcends space, time, matter and energy. This transcendent reality cannot merely be a Platonic realm of mathematical descriptions, for such things are causally inert abstract entities that do not affect the material world. Neither is it the case that “nothing” is unstable, as Mr. Hawking and others maintain. Absolute nothing cannot have mathematical relationships predicated on it, not even quantum gravitational ones. Rather, the transcendent reality on which our universe depends must be something that can exhibit agency – a mind that can choose among the infinite variety of mathematical descriptions and bring into existence a reality that corresponds to a consistent subset of them. This is what “breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to describe.,,, the evidence for string theory and its extension, M-theory, is nonexistent; and the idea that conjoining them demonstrates that we live in a multiverse of bubble universes with different laws and constants is a mathematical fantasy. What is worse, multiplying without limit the opportunities for any event to happen in the context of a multiverse – where it is alleged that anything can spontaneously jump into existence without cause – produces a situation in which no absurdity is beyond the pale.
    For instance, we find multiverse cosmologists debating the “Boltzmann Brain” problem: In the most “reasonable” models for a multiverse, it is immeasurably more likely that our consciousness is associated with a brain that has spontaneously fluctuated into existence in the quantum vacuum than it is that we have parents and exist in an orderly universe with a 13.7 billion-year history. This is absurd. The multiverse hypothesis is therefore falsified because it renders false what we know to be true about ourselves. Clearly, embracing the multiverse idea entails a nihilistic irrationality that destroys the very possibility of science.
    http://www.washingtontimes.com.....arguments/

  14. 14
    Peepul says:

    Bornagain, you said

    ‘Yet peepul you insinuated that ‘materialism’ was responsible for the equation of General Relativity? Please tell me peepul, Exactly which material particle generated the unchanging transcendent logical information of the equation? Was it the proton or was it the neutron? Perhaps all the atoms conspired together to subjugate themselves under this transcendent equation just so as to deceive us into thinking that this unchanging universal order came from the infinite and transcendent Mind of God?’

    No I didn’t say that. I’m not claiming that laws originate from matter. We don’t know where they come from. I’m saying that it’s possible that internal consistency may force one structure on the universe – but we really don’t know enough to say.

    You feel that the equations of general relativity point to God, but there’s no real connection there. Why does ignorance point to anything? Even if it did point to anything, why would it point to your God?

    And we come back to same old question – an eternal, creative God is in need of as much if not more explanation than a set of physical laws. Pointing to God just gives us something else to explain.

  15. 15
    Peepul says:

    Bornagain,

    Bruce Gordon’s assertions are not justified. For example.

    ‘Excerpt: The physical universe is causally incomplete and therefore neither self-originating nor self-sustaining’

    We don’t understand the ultimate origin of the universe and of scientific laws. We do not understand the origin or nature of causality. We cannot draw any reliable conclusions from our ignorance.

    ‘The world of space, time, matter and energy is dependent on a reality that transcends space, time, matter and energy’

    We have no evidence that it depends on anything. It may, but we don’t know. It’s not necessarily true in a logical sense.

    And so on. The basic point is it is not safe to draw any conclusions from things we don’t understand.

  16. 16
    Chris Doyle says:

    Peepul, you don’t need to know anything whatsoever about the Designer in order to detect Design.

  17. 17
    bornagain77 says:

    peepul you state:

    ‘We don’t understand the ultimate origin of the universe and of scientific laws. We do not understand the origin or nature of causality. We cannot draw any reliable conclusions from our ignorance.’

    If by ‘we’ you mean you materialistic atheists then the statement you said is correct. In fact it is impossible for atheists to ever pull themselves above their own self-imposed ignorance since they refuse to release their metaphysical presupposition of materialism no matter what cost to reason they must endure nor violence to science in general they must inflict..

    you then state:

    ‘We have no evidence that it (The world of space, time, matter and energy) depends on anything. It may, but we don’t know. It’s not necessarily true in a logical sense.’

    Actually we do have very strong evidence, from quantum teleportation and from universal observer dependent wave collapse, that space-time, matter-energy is absolutely dependent on the reality of a casually active (living) transcendent information realm, a living transcendent information realm which is infinite in its actuality as well as dominate and completely transcendent of any possible material basis.

    Perhaps you would like to invoke ‘many worlds’ to get passed the clear theistic implications of wave collapse, but once again you step into a world of absurdity which renders science impossible as Dr. Gordon pointed out with the multi-verse conjecture. You see peepuk it is, contrary to your assertion, it is possible to logically know that God is the basis of all ‘material’ reality, what does not ‘logically’ follow in all this is the atheists refusal to look reality square in the face and give glory to the living God who created it. Please do tell me why do atheists deny the obvious to such a point of intellectual suicide peepul?

    Romans 1:20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

    All Of Creation – Mercyme
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkdniYsUrM8

  18. 18
    bornagain77 says:

    correction:

    ‘universal observer dependent wave collapse,’

    instead should read:

    ‘universal, observer centered , wave collapse,

  19. 19
    bornagain77 says:

    recent article of related note:

    No evidence of time before Big Bang = Dec. 10 2010v- Nature
    http://www.nature.com/news/201.....0.665.html

  20. 20
    Peepul says:

    Bornagain, you said

    ‘Actually we do have very strong evidence, from quantum teleportation and from universal observer dependent wave collapse, that space-time, matter-energy is absolutely dependent on the reality of a casually active (living) transcendent information realm, a living transcendent information realm which is infinite in its actuality as well as dominate and completely transcendent of any possible material basis’

    That simply isn’t true. Show me if you can the reasoning that leads from quantum teleportation to the existence of a living transcendent information realm of infinite extent.

    By the way, there is no clarity as to what causes wave function collapse. There is no concensus that it depends on ‘observers’.

  21. 21
    bornagain77 says:

    peepul you ask:

    ‘Show me if you can the reasoning that leads from quantum teleportation to the existence of a living transcendent information realm of infinite extent.’

    ,,,As well, ‘pure transcendent information’ is now shown to be ‘conserved’. (i.e. it is shown that all transcendent information which can possibly exist, for all possible physical/material events, past, present, and future, already must exist.) This is since transcendent information exercises direct dominion of the foundational ‘material’ entity of this universe, energy, which cannot be created or destroyed by any known ‘material’ means. i.e. First Law of Thermodynamics.

    Conservation Of Transcendent Information – 2007 – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/watch/3995275

    These following studies verified the violation of the first law of thermodynamics that I had suspected in the preceding video:

    How Teleportation Will Work –
    Excerpt: In 1993, the idea of teleportation moved out of the realm of science fiction and into the world of theoretical possibility. It was then that physicist Charles Bennett and a team of researchers at IBM confirmed that quantum teleportation was possible, but only if the original object being teleported was destroyed. — As predicted, the original photon no longer existed once the replica was made.
    http://science.howstuffworks.c.....ation1.htm

    Quantum Teleportation – IBM Research Page
    Excerpt: “it would destroy the original (photon) in the process,,”
    http://www.research.ibm.com/qu.....portation/

    Unconditional Quantum Teleportation – abstract
    Excerpt: This is the first realization of unconditional quantum teleportation where every state entering the device is actually teleported,,
    http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/.....2/5389/706

    Of note: conclusive evidence for the violation of the First Law of Thermodynamics is firmly found in the preceding experiment when coupled with the complete displacement of the infinite transcendent information of “Photon c”:
    http://docs.google.com/Doc?doc.....cjR0eG1neg

    In extension to the 2007 video, the following video and article shows quantum teleportation breakthroughs have actually shed a little light on exactly what, or more precisely on exactly Whom, has created this universe:

    Scientific Evidence For God (Logos) Creating The Universe – 2008 – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/watch/3995300

    It is also very interesting to note in this following paper that the quantum state of a photon is actually defined as ‘infinite information’:

    Explaining Information Transfer in Quantum Teleportation: Armond Duwell †‡ University of Pittsburgh
    Excerpt: In contrast to a classical bit, the description of a (photon) qubit requires an infinite amount of information. The amount of information is infinite because two real numbers are required in the expansion of the state vector of a two state quantum system (Jozsa 1997, 1) — Concept 2. is used by Bennett, et al. Recall that they infer that since an infinite amount of information is required to specify a (photon) qubit, an infinite amount of information must be transferred to teleport.
    http://www.cas.umt.edu/phil/fa.....lPSA2K.pdf

    It should be noted in the preceding paper that Duwell, though he never challenges the mathematical definition of a photon qubit as infinite information, tries to refute Bennett’s interpretation of infinite information transfer in teleportation because of what he believes are ‘time constraints’ which would prohibit teleporting ‘backwards in time’. Yet Duwell fails to realize that information is its own completely unique transcendent entity, completely separate from any energy-matter, space-time, constraints in the first place. A few more details on Duwell’s flawed ‘materialistic’ reasoning in trying to refute Bennett’s interpretation of the teleportation of infinite information are here:
    http://www.uncommondescent.com.....ent-359265

    As well this following paper offers a solid rebuttal to Duwell’s objection to Bennett of teleporting information ‘backwards in time’ simply because he believes there is no path, or mechanism, to do so:

    Time travel theory avoids grandfather paradox – July 2010
    Excerpt: “In the new paper, the scientists explore a particular version of CTCs based on combining quantum teleportation with post-selection, resulting in a theory of post-selected CTCs (P-CTCs). ,,,The formalism of P-CTCs shows that such quantum time travel can be thought of as a kind of quantum tunneling backwards in time, which can take place even in the absence of a classical path from future to past,,, “P-CTCs might also allow time travel in spacetimes without general-relativistic closed timelike curves,” they conclude. “If nature somehow provides the nonlinear dynamics afforded by final-state projection, then it is possible for particles (and, in principle, people) to tunnel from the future to the past.”
    http://www.physorg.com/news198948917.html

  22. 22
    bornagain77 says:

    cont.

    The following excerpt is also of interest to this issue of time constraints in quantum mechanics:

    Solving the quantum mysteries – John Gribbin
    Excerpt: But a giant leap in what might be called quantum philosophy has recently been taken by the American physicist John Cramer. He has taken a new look at the wave equations of quantum mechanics — the famous Schrödinger equation, and the equations describing the probability waves, which travel, like photons, at the speed of light. What Cramer has pointed out is that the equations actually have two sets of solutions, one equivalent to a positive wave flowing into the future (a “retarded” wave), and the other describing a negative wave flowing into the past (an “advanced” wave). As all physicists learn at university (and most promptly forget) the full version of the wave equation has two sets of solutions — one corresponding to the familiar simple Schrödinger equation, and the other to a kind of mirror image Schrödinger equation describing the flow of negative energy into the past.
    http://www.lifesci.sussex.ac.u.....tm#Solving

    As well, I also have another reason to object to Duwell’s complaint of ‘no mechanism’ for information travel to the past, in that I firmly believe Biblical prophecy has actually been precisely fulfilled by Israel’s ‘miraculous’ rebirth as a nation in 1948, as this following video makes clear:

    The Precisely Fulfilled Prophecy Of Israel Becoming A Nation In 1948 – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4041241

    More supporting evidence for the transcendent nature of information, and how it interacts with energy, is found in these following studies:

    Single photons to soak up data:
    Excerpt: the orbital angular momentum of a photon can take on an infinite number of values. Since a photon can also exist in a superposition of these states, it could – in principle – be encoded with an infinite amount of information.
    http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/7201

    Ultra-Dense Optical Storage – on One Photon
    Excerpt: Researchers at the University of Rochester have made an optics breakthrough that allows them to encode an entire image’s worth of data into a photon, slow the image down for storage, and then retrieve the image intact.
    http://www.physorg.com/news88439430.html

    This following experiment clearly shows information is not an ’emergent property’ of any solid material basis as is dogmatically asserted by some materialists:

    Converting Quantum Bits: Physicists Transfer Information Between Matter and Light
    Excerpt: A team of physicists at the Georgia Institute of Technology has taken a significant step toward the development of quantum communications systems by successfully transferring quantum information from two different groups of atoms onto a single photon.
    http://gtresearchnews.gatech.e.....mtrans.htm

    The following articles show that even atoms (Ions) are subject to teleportation:

    Of note: An ion is an atom or molecule in which the total number of electrons is not equal to the total number of protons, giving it a net positive or negative electrical charge.

    Ions have been teleported successfully for the first time by two independent research groups
    Excerpt: In fact, copying isn’t quite the right word for it. In order to reproduce the quantum state of one atom in a second atom, the original has to be destroyed. This is unavoidable – it is enforced by the laws of quantum mechanics, which stipulate that you can’t ‘clone’ a quantum state. In principle, however, the ‘copy’ can be indistinguishable from the original (that was destroyed),,,
    http://www.rsc.org/chemistrywo.....ammeup.asp

    Atom takes a quantum leap – 2009
    Excerpt: Ytterbium ions have been ‘teleported’ over a distance of a metre.,,,
    “What you’re moving is information, not the actual atoms,” says Chris Monroe, from the Joint Quantum Institute at the University of Maryland in College Park and an author of the paper. But as two particles of the same type differ only in their quantum states, the transfer of quantum information is equivalent to moving the first particle to the location of the second.
    http://www.freerepublic.com/fo.....1769/posts

    This following paper is fairly good for establishing the primacy of transcendent information in the ‘reality’ of this universe:

    What is Truth?
    http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dc8z67wz_3g3vnsmcn

    It is also interesting to note that a Compact Disc crammed with information on it weighs exactly the same as a CD with no information on it whatsoever.,, Here are a few videos reflecting on some of the characteristics of transcendent information:

    Information – Elusive but Tangible – video
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WytNkw1xOIc

  23. 23
    bornagain77 says:

    cont.

    Information? What Is It Really? Professor Andy McIntosh – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/w/4739025

    But to reflect just a bit more on the teleportation experiment itself, is interesting to note that scientists can only ‘destroy’ a photon in these quantum teleportation experiments. No one has ‘created’ a photon as of yet. I firmly believe man shall never do as such, since I hold only God is infinite, and perfect, in information/knowledge.

    Job 38:19-20
    “What is the way to the abode of light? And where does darkness reside? Can you take them to their places? Do you know the paths to their dwellings?”

    Further reflection on the quantum teleportation experiment:

    That a photon would actually be destroyed upon the teleportation (separation) of its ‘infinite’ information to another photon is a direct controlled violation of the first law of thermodynamics. (i.e. a photon ‘disappeared’ from the ‘material’ universe when the entire information content of a photon was ‘transcendently displaced’ from the material universe by the experiment, when photon “c” transcendently became transmitted photon “a”). Thus, Quantum teleportation is direct empirical validation for the primary tenet of the Law of Conservation of Information (i.e. ‘transcendent’ information cannot be created or destroyed). This conclusion is warranted because information exercises direct dominion of energy, telling energy exactly what to be and do in the experiment. Thus, this experiment provides a direct line of logic that transcendent information cannot be created or destroyed and, in information demonstrating transcendence, and dominion, of space-time and matter-energy, becomes the only known entity that can satisfactorily explain where all energy came from as far as the origination of the universe is concerned. That is transcendent information is the only known entity which can explain where all the energy came from in the Big Bang without leaving the bounds of empirical science as the postulated multiverse does. Clearly anything that exercises dominion of the fundamental entity of this physical universe, a photon of energy, as transcendent information does in teleportation, must of necessity possess the same, as well as greater, qualities as energy does possess in the first law of thermodynamics (i.e. Energy cannot be created or destroyed by any known material means according to the first law). To reiterate, since information exercises dominion of energy in quantum teleportation then all information that can exist, for all past, present and future events of energy, already must exist.
    As well, the fact that quantum teleportation shows an exact ‘location dominion’, of a photon of energy by ‘specified infinite information’, satisfies a major requirement for the entity needed to explain the missing Dark Matter. The needed transcendent explanation would have to dominate energy in a very similar ‘specified location’ fashion, as is demonstrated by the infinite information of quantum teleportation, to satisfy what is needed to explain the missing dark matter.

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

    Moreover, the fact that simple quantum entanglement shows ‘coordinated universal control’ of entangled photons of energy, by transcendent information, regardless of distance, satisfies a major requirement for the entity which must explain the missing Dark Energy. i.e. The transcendent entity, needed to explain Dark Energy, must explain why the entire space of the universe is expanding in such a finely-tuned, coordinated, degree, and would have to employ a mechanism of control very similar to what we witness in the quantum entanglement experiment.

    Job 9:8
    He stretches out the heavens by Himself and walks on the waves of the sea.

    Thus ‘infinite transcendent information’ provides a coherent picture of overarching universal control, and specificity, that could possibly unify gravity with the other forces. It very well may be possible to elucidate, mathematically, the overall pattern God has chosen to implement infinite information in this universe. The following article backs up this assertion:

    Is Unknown Force In Universe Acting On Dark Matter?
    Excerpt: It is possible that a non-gravitational fifth force is ruling the dark matter with an invisible hand, leaving the same fingerprints on all galaxies, irrespective of their ages, shapes and sizes.” ,,Such a force might solve an even bigger mystery, known as ‘dark energy’, which is ruling the accelerated expansion of the Universe. A more radical solution is a revision of the laws of gravity first developed by Isaac Newton in 1687 and refined by Albert Einstein’s theory of General Relativity in 1916. Einstein never fully decided whether his equation should add an omnipresent constant source, now called dark energy. ,,Dr Famaey added, “If we account for our observations with a modified law of gravity, it makes perfect sense to replace the effective action of hypothetical dark matter with a force closely related to the distribution of visible matter.”
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/re.....154644.htm

    “I discovered that nature was constructed in a wonderful way, and our task is to find out its mathematical structure”
    Albert Einstein

    Reflections on the ‘infinite transcendent information’ framework:

    The weight of mass becomes infinite at the speed of light, thus mass will never go the speed of light. As well, mass would disappear from our sight if it could go the speed of light, because, from our non-speed of light perspective, distance in direction of travel will shrink to zero for the mass going the speed of light, whereas conversely, if mass could travel at the speed of light its size will stay the same while all other frames of reference not traveling the speed of light will disappear from its sight.

    Special Relativity – Time Dilation and Length Contraction – video
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSRIyDfo_mY

    For us to hypothetically travel at the speed of light, in this universe, only gets us to first base as far as quantum entanglement, or teleportation, are concerned. That is to say, traveling at the speed of light only gets us to the place where time, as we understand it, comes to complete stop for light, i.e. gets us to the eternal, ‘past and future folding into now’, framework of time. This higher dimension ‘eternal’ inference for the time framework of light is warranted because light is not ‘frozen within time’ yet it is shown that time, as we understand it, does not pass for light.

    “I’ve just developed a new theory of eternity.”
    Albert Einstein
    http://www.rd.com/your-america.....176-2.html

    “The laws of relativity have changed timeless existence from a theological claim to a physical reality. Light, you see, is outside of time, a fact of nature proven in thousands of experiments at hundreds of universities. I don’t pretend to know how tomorrow can exist simultaneously with today and yesterday. But at the speed of light they actually and rigorously do. Time does not pass.”
    Richard Swenson – More Than Meets The Eye, Chpt. 12

    Light and Quantum Entanglement Reflect Some Characteristics Of God – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4102182

    ‘In the ‘spirit world,,, instantly, there was no sense of time. See, everything on earth is related to time. You got up this morning, you are going to go to bed tonight. Something is new, it will get old. Something is born, it’s going to die. Everything on the physical plane is relative to time, but everything in the spiritual plane is relative to eternity. Instantly I was in total consciousness and awareness of eternity, and you and I as we live in this earth cannot even comprehend it, because everything that we have here is filled within the veil of the temporal life. In the spirit life that is more real than anything else and it is awesome. Eternity as a concept is awesome. There is no such thing as time. I knew that whatever happened was going to go on and on.’
    Mickey Robinson – Near Death Experience testimony

    ‘When you die, you enter eternity. It feels like you were always there, and you will always be there. You realize that existence on Earth is only just a brief instant.’
    Dr. Ken Ring – has extensively studied Near Death Experiences

    Also, hypothetically traveling at the speed of light in this universe would be instantaneous travel for the person going at the speed of light. This is because time does not pass for them, but, and this is a big but; this ‘timeless’ travel is still not instantaneous and transcendent to our temporal framework of time, i.e. Speed of light travel, to our temporal frame of reference, is still not completely transcendent of our framework since light appears to take time to travel from our perspective. In information teleportation though the ‘time not passing’, eternal, framework is not only achieved in the speed of light framework/dimension, but also in our temporal framework. That is to say, the instantaneous teleportation/travel of information is instantaneous to both the temporal and speed of light frameworks, not just the speed of light framework. Information teleportation/travel is not limited by time, nor space, in any way, shape or form, in any frame of reference, as light is seemingly limited to us. Thus ‘pure transcendent information’ is shown to be timeless (eternal) and completely transcendent of all material frameworks. Moreover, concluding from all lines of evidence we have now examined; transcendent, eternal, infinite information is indeed real and the framework in which ‘It’ resides is the primary reality (highest dimension) that can exist, (in so far as our limited perception of a primary reality, highest dimension, can be discerned).

    “An illusion can never go faster than the speed limit of reality”
    Akiane – Child Prodigy

    Logic also dictates ‘a decision’ must have been made, by the ‘transcendent, eternal, infinite information’ from the primary timeless (eternal) reality ‘It’ inhabits, in order to purposely create a temporal reality with highly specified, irreducible complex, parameters from a infinite set of possibilities in the proper sequential order. Thus this infinite transcendent information, which is the primary reality of our reality, is shown to be alive by yet another line of evidence besides the findings of quantum mechanics.

    The First Cause Must Be A Personal Being – William Lane Craig – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/w/4813914

    As a side light to this, leading quantum physicist Anton Zeilinger has followed in John Archibald Wheeler’s footsteps (1911-2008) by insisting reality, at its most foundational level, is ‘information’.

    “It from bit symbolizes the idea that every item of the physical world has at bottom – at a very deep bottom, in most instances – an immaterial source and explanation; that which we call reality arises in the last analysis from the posing of yes-no questions and the registering of equipment-evoked responses; in short, that things physical are information-theoretic in origin.” John Archibald Wheeler

    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 – a leading expert in quantum teleportation:
    http://www.metanexus.net/Magaz.....fault.aspx

    Zeilinger’s principle
    The principle that any elementary system carries just one bit of information. This principle was put forward by the Austrian physicist Anton Zeilinger in 1999 and subsequently developed by him to derive several aspects of quantum mechanics.
    http://science.jrank.org/pages.....z17a7f88PM

    In the beginning was the bit – New Scientist
    Excerpt: Zeilinger’s principle leads to the intrinsic randomness found in the quantum world. Consider the spin of an electron. Say it is measured along a vertical axis (call it the z axis) and found to be pointing up. Because one bit of information has been used to make that statement, no more information can be carried by the electron’s spin. Consequently, no information is available to predict the amounts of spin in the two horizontal directions (x and y axes), so they are of necessity entirely random. If you then measure the spin in one of these directions, there is an equal chance of its pointing right or left, forward or back. This fundamental randomness is what we call Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle.
    http://www.quantum.at/fileadmi.....t/bit.html

    The restriction imposed by our physical limitations of us ever accessing complete infinite information to our temporal space-time framework/dimension (Wheeler; Zeilinger) does not detract, in any way, from the primacy and dominion of the infinite transcendent information framework that is now established by the quantum teleportation experiment as the primary reality of our reality. Of note: All of this evidence meshes extremely well with the theistic postulation of God possessing infinite and perfect knowledge. This seems like a fitting place for this following quote and verse:

    “To see the world in a grain of sand, and to see heaven in a wild flower, hold infinity in the palm of your hands, and eternity in an hour.”
    William Blake

    Psalm 19:1-2
    The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands. Day after day they pour forth speech; night after night they display knowledge.

  24. 24
    bornagain77 says:

    peepul you state:

    there is no clarity as to what causes wave function collapse. There is no concensus that it depends on ‘observers’.

    Actually that is clarity as to what, or more precisely Who, causes it, but as a materialist, who refuses to accept the obvious, you must force yourself into a absurd many worlds scenario so as to deny the obvious, at least that is the absurd path you must take if you want to remain a ‘consistent’ (lol) scientific atheist.

    you then state:

    By the way, there is no clarity as to what causes wave function collapse. There is no concensus that it depends on ‘observers’.

    I corrected my word ‘observer dependent’ to ‘observer centered’, and though their may not be ‘consensus’ (LOL), there is plenty of evidence for observer centered wave collapse.

  25. 25
    Peepul says:

    Bornagain, thanks for your information.

    This I found very interesting

    ‘Excerpt: In contrast to a classical bit, the description of a (photon) qubit requires an infinite amount of information. The amount of information is infinite because two real numbers are required in the expansion of the state vector of a two state quantum system (Jozsa 1997, 1) — Concept 2. is used by Bennett, et al. Recall that they infer that since an infinite amount of information is required to specify a (photon) qubit, an infinite amount of information must be transferred to teleport.’

    I’m interested in this ‘infinite information’ concept. I’m wondering whether the use of real numbers is actually just a part of the mathematical formalism for QM and whether it actually implies that in reality there is infinite information in every quantum state. If you have any more material on this I would be very interested.

    Even if ‘infinite information’ is teleported, then that is just the nature of reality. It simply means that a photon could be a carrier of infinite information. That would be the way things are. I find it hard to believe thing are that way, but who am I?

    There is no implication that there is, in your words

    ‘a living transcendent information realm which is infinite in its actuality as well as dominate and completely transcendent of any possible material basis’.

    To justify this, you would need to demonstrate

    – there is a realm of information somehow distinct from the physical universe (I’m assuming that’s what you mean by transcendent – correct me If I’m wrong)

    – that it is living

    – that it is infinite in its actuality

    – that it dominates the material universe (here I’m including matter and fields in ‘material).

  26. 26
    bornagain77 says:

    all those conditions are met

  27. 27
    Peepul says:

    But can you demonstrate how? They don’t follow from what you’ve posted.

  28. 28
    bornagain77 says:

    yes, and they do

  29. 29
    jurassicmac says:

    Barry, I’m quite flattered to have an article made around one of my comments. I believe that the article from whence it came was one of the best I’ve read on UD, and was a great response to O’leary’s article.

    However, I never said that gravity accounted for itself. Gravity explains the motion of the planets. In that same way, the laws of the universe that make evolution possible don’t account for themselves; but they do explain the current state of life.

    By your reasoning, it seems as if we could never ‘explain’ anything if we could always push the question back a step and say “Well, you can’t explain your explanation!”

  30. 30
    jurassicmac says:

    Can someone inform me as to what infraction has caused all my comments to require moderation?

  31. 31
    bornagain77 says:

    Coincidentally and appropiately, I just read this in a review of ‘Signature In The Cell’:

    What DNA Has to Tell Us About the Origins of Life
    Excerpt: The question of “who made God” is also refuted by Meyer. He points out that materialist explanations must themselves finally rest on assumptions. For example, who or what made gravity along with the chemicals, particles, and their bonding affinities upon which materialistic explanations rely? As Meyer concludes, “All causal explanations must ultimately terminate with explanatory entities that do not themselves require explication by reference to anything more fundamental or primary.” To accept materialist as­­sum­ptions and then to reject design assumptions is a form of special pleading.
    http://www.newoxfordreview.org.....0-scambray

  32. 32
    bornagain77 says:

    jurassicmac you state:

    ‘the laws of the universe that make evolution possible don’t account for themselves; but they do explain the current state of life.’

    Please do tell of this ‘law of the universe’ that operates completely contrary to the second law of thermodynamics, and Conservation of Information, so as to ‘make evolution possible:

    Roger Penrose discusses initial entropy of the universe. – video
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhGdVMBk6Zo

    The Physics of the Small and Large: What is the Bridge Between Them? Roger Penrose
    Excerpt: “The time-asymmetry is fundamentally connected to with the Second Law of Thermodynamics: indeed, the extraordinarily special nature (to a greater precision than about 1 in 10^10^123, in terms of phase-space volume) can be identified as the “source” of the Second Law (Entropy).”
    http://www.pul.it/irafs/CD%20I.....enrose.pdf

    This 1 in 10^10^123 number, for the time-asymmetry of the initial state of the ‘ordered entropy’ for the universe, also lends strong support for ‘highly specified infinite information’ creating the universe since;

    “Gain in entropy always means loss of information, and nothing more.”
    Gilbert Newton Lewis

    Thermodynamic Argument Against Evolution – Thomas Kindell – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4168488

    Evolution Vs. Thermodynamics – Open System Refutation – Thomas Kindell – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4143014

    “there are no known violations of the second law of thermodynamics. Ordinarily the second law is stated for isolated systems, but the second law applies equally well to open systems.”
    John Ross, Chemical and Engineering News, 7 July 1980

    “…the quantity of entropy generated locally cannot be negative irrespective of whether the system is isolated or not.”
    Arnold Sommerfel, Thermodynamics And Statistical Mechanics, p.155

    “Bertalanffy (1968) called the relation between irreversible thermodynamics and information theory one of the most fundamental unsolved problems in biology.”
    Charles J. Smith – Biosystems, Vol.1, p259.

    “The laws of probability apply to open as well as closed systems.”
    Granville Sewell – Professor Of Mathematics – University Of Texas El Paso
    http://www.uncommondescent.com.....ent-347999

    Can “ANYTHING” Happen in an Open System? – Granville Sewell PhD. Math
    Excerpt: If we found evidence that DNA, auto parts, computer chips, and books entered through the Earth’s atmosphere at some time in the past, then perhaps the appearance of humans, cars, computers, and encyclopedias on a previously barren planet could be explained without postulating a violation of the second law here (it would have been violated somewhere else!).
    http://www.math.utep.edu/Facul.....endixd.pdf

    Can Anything Happen In A Open System – Granville Sewell PhD. Math – video
    http://www.math.utep.edu/Facul.....thermo.htm

    The common sense law of physics – Granville Sewell – July 2010
    http://www.uncommondescent.com.....f-physics/

    Casey Luskin interviews Granville Sewell – audio
    http://intelligentdesign.podom.....7_00-08_00

    etc.. etc.. etc..

  33. 33
    jurassicmac says:

    Bornagain77:

    Please do tell of this ‘law of the universe’ that operates completely contrary to the second law of thermodynamics, and Conservation of Information, so as to ‘make evolution possible:

    Evolution isn’t contrary to the second law of thermodynamics. The second law pertains to the flow of energy in a closed system. The Earth is not a closed system.

    ‘Conservation of Information’ is not a widely accepted concept in the scientific community. (yet)

Leave a Reply