Epistemology of Design (The limitations of science)

by Matt , Saturday, December 12, 2009, 15:54 (5461 days ago) @ David Turell

We don't actually know this. We'd have to know the size of the universe first; then--and only then--can we say there's a finite chance. I say this because mathematically this is a permutation/combination problem. How many possible combinations are required? 
> 
> > 
> > Quantum mechanically, all particles have two states or "spins." This means that any event that has a statistical probability of happening that is LESS than the total number particles in the universe is guaranteed to happen.
> > 
> > According to this view, life is a deterministic property based upon the total number of particles in the universe. Basically, it means that the "computer" that is the universe is guaranteed to produce life based purely on the concept of spin or "bits" in my more familiar language. 
> 
> Taking these statements on all at once: there are 10^80 estimated particles: fermions and bosons. That number is a fine estimate, but as far as we know life is confined to the Earth and its 92 original elements. It is from this batch of matter that life came. We don't needs the odds of the whole universe's contents. By providing the Earth, those contingent events are over and need not be included. Origin of life is a confined to Earth problem. Origin elsewhere need not concern us. And further we can study life's design as we are doing now. We can tear a building apart and put it back together just like new. So far it doesn't work that way for so-called abiogenesis. Maybe we can't. Maybe it is too complex for human intelligence to figure out.-And as I've stated several times--life didn't just magically appear. It was a chemical process both before and after--I still say your general thrust on a maker is "misguided." (forgive the word... I couldn't think of a gentler one!) In this quantum light the answer isn't really in biochemistry/organic chemistry, it's in the genesis of the whole universe. -If we crack the code of life, and the probability of it occurring is a number that is not smaller than the total number of particles in the universe; then it is simply one possible combination of particles. There IS no "chance" argument at all; life's existence was determined. The only way you have a legitimate argument that a maker perhaps had a direct hand in life, is if that combination's chance is larger than the total number of particles. Specifically, if the probability of a specific distribution, 1/n is a number smaller than the appearance of any specific combination in the entire permutation, then you've got a case. -If it's a universe of n particles, the probability would have to be something like 1/4n, for example's sake. (one divided by four times the number of particles in the universe.) If the probability of life occuring is some number less than n: 1/(n-m) than life is a determined property, and the search for God in biochemistry is over, in my eyes.