Epistemology of Design (The limitations of science)

by Matt , Saturday, December 12, 2009, 23:53 (5458 days ago) @ David Turell


> > Your probability of life appearing in our universe must have a number or "probability limit" (to use one of your previous examples) of that kind of magnitude before chance can even enter the conversation. Before then, life is a deterministic property of the universe with or without a creator God.
> 
> Matt: I know you are trying hard, but you have totally lost me. I'm talking about biochemistry and you are bringing in particles which make up molecules. I've read about spins, half-spins, 2/3 rd spins. I know about quarks. I don't see why we have to jump, as I view it, backwards to the basic particles underlying elements and molecular structure. Particles as bits of information, if the universe is treated as a giant computer, is understandable, but seems to me to be extraneous to our discussion. Shannon information theory might apply to understanding the coding of info in DNA, but DNA, itself, is not life. All I know about Shannon theory is that it exists. With my basic algebra years and years ago finally reaching analytic algabra is all I've got and most is forgotten. I suggest you use lay terms for your math, and explain your point differently, or let's stop at this point. I do appreciate your effort.-Alright, I'll try again, with as little math as possible...-What it means is that the universe has a finite set of matter, with predetermined combinations. In order to make an appeal to a creator based on a probability limit, you need to demonstrate that the probability limit or threshold is a number smaller than the probability of randomly grabbing a single particle of the universe. -So say we figure how to make life, and figure its chances of happening are 1/100 or 1%. -Say that the total number of particles in the universe is 100. -Since the probability we're talking about has a 1:1 relationship with a particle in this universe, it has an equal chance of appearing in our universe as any other particle. This means, that even if we can calculate that it has a 1% chance of occuring, because its probability is in line with the rest of the particles in the universe, its existence is actually predetermined. -If we double the odds to 2%, then it is even more likely to happen; its predetermination is doubly guaranteed. -If we halve the odds to 0.5%, then we start getting into rough territory. The only way to improve the odds is to double the total number of particles in the universe; the equivalent of doubling the universe, since the only thing important to us is matter and not dead space. This is also impossible. -In this manner of accounting, the kind of probability threshhold you're looking for is one that would need to be measured against the size of the universe, not among the component parts and materials in our general vicinity. It won't matter that you're artificially limiting your search to earth; if this view has any truth behind it, it means that life and earth are part of a predetermined part of the universe, albeit a predetermination that still needs to be explained!-It means that the amount of information we know is woefully insufficient for us to come to any reasonable determination at all about a creator; everything we know now is but a mere fraction of what exists in our universe. They can estimate the number of particles, but that's as good as an estimate as a "jigger" or "pinch." The estimation is still inferred from a model and not independently verified; the range is 10^72 to 10^87, and that is absolutely shameful in terms of precision.