On Evolution & Creation

[metis]

DNA changes over time is an empirical correlation. It is not inferred by logic but can be inferred from observation. Why does DNA change over time, needs logic and reason. For example, that change can be traced to the 2nd law which says that entropy has to increase. Energy tries to reach the lowest level and stay there, but entropy has to keep increasing...

What you are doing is creating your own "science" by twisting some things. As far as the rest of your post is concerned, all you are doing is rambling on and on by dealing with specifics not pertinent to our discussion.

IOW, I have better things to do.

 

[wellwisher]

What you are doing is creating your own "science" by twisting some things. As far as the rest of your post is concerned, all you are doing is rambling on and on by dealing with specifics not pertinent to our discussion.

IOW, I have better things to do.

The current version of Evolution Theory is like correlating the lottery. We can go the Lottery Commission and get a print out of all the past winners. This is like collecting fossils. From all this observational data we know there will be future winners, but we still do not know who will win tomorrow or whether anyone will win tomorrow. There is a rational detachment in terms of extrapolation beyond a fuzzy conclusion. We know a winner will appear and that will more than likely, not be the same person as the day before. That is empirical and partially rational, but not fully rational. Fully rational would be like not having to dig up old evidence from the past, but rather but reason that from scratch.

What I was doing with my water analysis and DNA, was extrapolating from scratch without having to look in the archives. This is my own rational invention. I was showing you what a rational model of evolution should look, via a targeted application; DNA. When NASA sent the first men to the moon, there was no previous examples to correlate some empirical pattern for future success. This was all done, rationally on paper, because they had a rational theory connected to Newtonian Physics. It was not black box, it is open for all to see, with many coming to the same conclusions. When it was show time, they ran one successful test and there was the proof for the doubters. The current problem is connected to less than rational premises, due to a poor conceptual foundation. This makes that science stuck with the black box.

The DNA is like the hard drive of a computer. It has all the raw data. But like a computer, it is the CPU that processes this data, which in the case of the cell, is done by water. Water takes that raw data; raw RNA and raw protein, packs, folds and even combines until it is bioactive. Evolution currently correlates via dead things most of which are dehydrated; fossils. The hard drive alone; DNA, is assumed to also be the CPU, does not logically allow that goal to happen in a rationally consistent way. It looks fancy but fancy can be deceptive.

Below is a representation of water hydrogen bonding to other water, which is very stabilizing. If we add organic things to the matrix, the hydrogen bonds are no longer optimized. However seeing that water is still the dominate component of life; numbers and mass, and therefore the strongest secondary bonding matrix, the matrix can adapt by sending information through the grapevine to restore the dominance of the water; fold and pack the protein. This is very repeatable since the goal is to minimize the potential of the water; same sweet spot. Life work best when all is repeatable. Water takes away the randomness lowering the structural entropy, which amplifies the 2nd law; evolves more complexity. The use of casino math creates a game of chance and not the logic of life.

Each water molecule can form four hydrogen bonds. Water does with secondary bonding what carbon does with primary bonding; extended structures. While hydrogen bonds are polar with some partial covalent character. This allows each hydrogen bond to act like a binary switch. It can flip between these two settings without the hydrogen bond breaking. Each setting has a different free energy profile. Any organic material will have a fingerprint based on the induced water settings. Water molecules are small with four switch setting each. This is how specific genes can be targeted and activated.

In the liquid water matrix, individual water molecules with the same hydrogen and oxygen only last about a millisecond. Within the matrix the secondary and primary bonding of water; hydrogen bonding and covalent bonds, become interchangeable. This allows individual hydrogen protons to move within matrix. The hydrogen proton is the fastest thing in water. Acids are common to life; nucleic acids.

 

[icant]

"Creation and Evolution are the same thing are they not? "

Creation and Evolution are the same thing are they not? As the artist is creating his work is it not evolving and as it is evolving is it not also being created? However both are the result of Emanation ( Thought ) and Manifestation. Manifestation being the end result of both the creative and evolutionary process. Creation and Evolution are physical in nature but Emanation is Metaphysical and Manifestation is Spiritual. Only the Spiritual can permeate, pervade and perdure all things. The Holy Spirit is cohort to The Generative Word and moves and acts under the Power of said Generative Word. The body of Christ is The Generative Word and the Blood of Christ is the Holy Spirit. God is an uncaused cause that is both Essence (Love) and Existence (Life). Love is Metaphysical and Life is Spiritual and their physical aspects are what we experience although the "True" physical is both Metaphysical and Spiritual in nature.

Hi Folks I am the new kid on the block.

Creation and evolution are not the same thing.
Creation is to take Energy or Matter and produce something that does not exist.

Evolution is to take an absence of life and create a living something. That has never happened except in someone's imagination.
Once you have a living something the evolution can begin to take place. Darwin even said he did not know how many creatures God started with in his original Origin of the Species.

Enjoy

 

[metis]

Darwin even said he did not know how many creatures God started with in his original Origin of the Species.

First of all, welcome here to RF.

Darwin became an agnostic later in life but one wonders if that may be at least in part of so many insults thrown at him by so many Christians.

 

[icant]

First of all, welcome here to RF.

Darwin became an agnostic later in life but one wonders if that may be at least in part of so many insults thrown at him by so many Christians.

Thanks for the welcome.

I think he was trying to make religion and science agree, and you are probably right about insults. I have had a few of those thrown my way because I believe in a very, very, very old earth.

Science teaches us that energy and matter can not be created or destroyed. Then where did all the energy and matter in the universe come from?
Every thing in the universe came from energy and matter whether you believe in evolution or God.
So if they can't be created or destroyed they must be eternal in existence which is what Einstein thought, until it was discover that the universe was expanding.

Had he read Isaiah and Jeramiah he would have known why the universe was expanding.

Talking about these things have caused me a lot of grief in the past 70 years. People know what they believe and can't be bothered by the facts.

I am just a simple farm boy that believes if God said it I believe it because it is fact. The problem lies with mankind as our Bible translators introduced a lot of things they believed that God did not say as they were listening to their father the devil, just like the woman in the Garden did.

Isa 45:12

I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded.

Jer 10:12

He hath made the earth by his power, he hath established the world by his wisdom, and hath stretched out the heavens by his discretion

 

[wellwisher]

Darwin became an agnostic later in life but one wonders if that may be at least in part of so many insults thrown at him by so many Christians.

Thanks for the welcome.

I think he was trying to make religion and science agree, and you are probably right about insults. I have had a few of those thrown my way because I believe in a very, very, very old earth.

Science teaches us that energy and matter can not be created or destroyed. Then where did all the energy and matter in the universe come from?
Every thing in the universe came from energy and matter whether you believe in evolution or God.
So if they can't be created or destroyed they must be eternal in existence which is what Einstein thought, until it was discover that the universe was expanding.

Had he read Isaiah and Jeramiah he would have known why the universe was expanding.

Talking about these things have caused me a lot of grief in the past 70 years. People know what they believe and can't be bothered by the facts.

I am just a simple farm boy that believes if God said it I believe it because it is fact. The problem lies with mankind as our Bible translators introduced a lot of things they believed that God did not say as they were listening to their father the devil, just like the woman in the Garden did.

There is also bridge logic connected to the 2nd law of thermodynamic, which states that the entropy of the universe has to increase. Energy may be conserved and can change form, but entropy has to increase. When entropy increases it absorbs free energy. Therefore, if the entropy of the universe has to net increase, and this energy is conserved, where is that energy going and in what form is it conserved? The logic suggests that universe is bleeding energy into increasing entropy, and therefore is losing that energy, since entropy has to increase. Where does it get stored, since the universe cannot retrieve it in full, or else the 2nd law will be violated. It has to collect while also be beyond the reach of the universe.

We can retrieve the energy in entropy, in part, with machines, but since there is no perpetual motion, it costs more energy to get it back than we get, thereby adding to the bleeding energy stream of the universe. My theory is this goes to a parallel realm that is gaining in entropic energy over time. The implication of the science of entropy leads to a door to religion. The ancients sensed this other energy/entropy place that is fed by the universe but off limits to the universe in any direct net sense of retrieval. It is lost energy, but conserved somehow somewhere. It could be at the quantum level.

Life and the brain; consciousness, are based on entropy changes. Inanimate matter not change as fast. Entropy increases complexity; cellular division, growth and learning potential. It is very possible that life adds energy content to the pool of lost energy, that the universe bleeds; divine soul.

For example, neurons expend 90% of their metabolic energy pumping and exchanging sodium and potassium cations. This lowers cationic entropy, which releases entropic energy. However, this costs the brain more than it gets back, since there is no perpetual motion. We have a process lowering entropy, while also increasing entropy, by a little more; neurons fire and currents flow (memory). There is this natural push toward higher complexity from the push to lower complexity, with the push to higher complexity going to the pool separated from the universe. This would not be a static form of memory, but something more fluid/ethereal to explain its dynamic energy/entropy nature.

 

[icant]

There is also bridge logic connected to the 2nd law of thermodynamic, which states that the entropy of the universe has to increase. Energy may be conserved and can change form, but entropy has to increase. When entropy increases it absorbs free energy. Therefore, if the entropy of the universe has to net increase, and this energy is conserved, where is that energy going and in what form is it conserved? The logic suggests that universe is bleeding energy into increasing entropy, and therefore is losing that energy, since entropy has to increase. Where does it get stored, since the universe cannot retrieve it in full, or else the 2nd law will be violated. It has to collect while also be beyond the reach of the universe.

We can retrieve the energy in entropy, in part, with machines, but since there is no perpetual motion, it costs more energy to get it back than we get, thereby adding to the bleeding energy stream of the universe. My theory is this goes to a parallel realm that is gaining in entropic energy over time. The implication of the science of entropy leads to a door to religion. The ancients sensed this other energy/entropy place that is fed by the universe but off limits to the universe in any direct net sense of retrieval. It is lost energy, but conserved somehow somewhere. It could be at the quantum level.

Life and the brain; consciousness, are based on entropy changes. Inanimate matter not change as fast. Entropy increases complexity; cellular division, growth and learning potential. It is very possible that life adds energy content to the pool of lost energy, that the universe bleeds; divine soul.

For example, neurons expend 90% of their metabolic energy pumping and exchanging sodium and potassium cations. This lowers cationic entropy, which releases entropic energy. However, this costs the brain more than it gets back, since there is no perpetual motion. We have a process lowering entropy, while also increasing entropy, by a little more; neurons fire and currents flow (memory). There is this natural push toward higher complexity from the push to lower complexity, with the push to higher complexity going to the pool separated from the universe. This would not be a static form of memory, but something more fluid/ethereal to explain its dynamic energy/entropy nature.

The 2nd law of thermodynamic, being a concept of the human mind, entropy itself is the product of the human mind I have never really been able to understand entropy as the examples are vague. Melt ice and get water. the water changes. Put a drop of oil in that water and it will spared on the water. All I see is that if you put the water back in the freezer it will become ice again. Problem, some of the water has evaporated into the atmosphere and will return to earth in the form of rain.. You still have the same amount of water. The drop of oil that spread over the water can be retrieved off the water and you have almost the same amount of water you started with only that which evaporated into the atmosphere which will return to earth one day. The oil was the same amount as what you put on the water.

So my idea of the universe ever reaching equilibrium is that it is impossible as the eco-system keeps everything in balance.

since there is no perpetual motion.

Are you sure there is no such thing as perpetual motion?
A human dies, you place the body in the ground and it becomes food for the worms and provides him energy to live.
The problem is that our minds are so small that we can not see the Big Picture as someone mentioned in another thread.

For example, neurons expend 90% of their metabolic energy pumping and exchanging sodium and potassium cations. This lowers cationic entropy, which releases entropic energy. However, this costs the brain more than it gets back, since there is no perpetual motion. We have a process lowering entropy, while also increasing entropy, by a little more; neurons fire and currents flow (memory). There is this natural push toward higher complexity from the push to lower complexity, with the push to higher complexity going to the pool separated from the universe. This would not be a static form of memory, but something more fluid/ethereal to explain its dynamic energy/entropy nature.

As you can see I am still learning.

You consume food it is digested in your stomach then enters into the blood system which returns energy to the brain. The system works the only thing is the house you live in is only designed to last for 120 years.

Enjoy,

 

[wellwisher]

There is also bridge logic connected to the 2nd law of thermodynamic, which states that the entropy of the universe has to increase. Energy may be conserved and can change form, but entropy has to increase. When entropy increases it absorbs free energy. Therefore, if the entropy of the universe has to net increase, and this energy is conserved, where is that energy going and in what form is it conserved? The logic suggests that universe is bleeding energy into increasing entropy, and therefore is losing that energy, since entropy has to increase. Where does it get stored, since the universe cannot retrieve it in full, or else the 2nd law will be violated. It has to collect while also be beyond the reach of the universe.

We can retrieve the energy in entropy, in part, with machines, but since there is no perpetual motion, it costs more energy to get it back than we get, thereby adding to the bleeding energy stream of the universe. My theory is this goes to a parallel realm that is gaining in entropic energy over time. The implication of the science of entropy leads to a door to religion. The ancients sensed this other energy/entropy place that is fed by the universe but off limits to the universe in any direct net sense of retrieval. It is lost energy, but conserved somehow somewhere. It could be at the quantum level.

Life and the brain; consciousness, are based on entropy changes. Inanimate matter not change as fast. Entropy increases complexity; cellular division, growth and learning potential. It is very possible that life adds energy content to the pool of lost energy, that the universe bleeds; divine soul.


The 2nd law of thermodynamic, being a concept of the human mind, entropy itself is the product of the human mind I have never really been able to understand entropy as the examples are vague. Melt ice and get water. the water changes. Put a drop of oil in that water and it will spared on the water. All I see is that if you put the water back in the freezer it will become ice again. Problem, some of the water has evaporated into the atmosphere and will return to earth in the form of rain.. You still have the same amount of water. The drop of oil that spread over the water can be retrieved off the water and you have almost the same amount of water you started with only that which evaporated into the atmosphere which will return to earth one day. The oil was the same amount as what you put on the water.

So my idea of the universe ever reaching equilibrium is that it is impossible as the eco-system keeps everything in balance.



Are you sure there is no such thing as perpetual motion?
A human dies, you place the body in the ground and it becomes food for the worms and provides him energy to live.
The problem is that our minds are so small that we can not see the Big Picture as someone mentioned in another thread.



As you can see I am still learning.

You consume food it is digested in your stomach then enters into the blood system which returns energy to the brain. The system works the only thing is the house you live in is only designed to last for 120 years.

Enjoy,

Entropy is a real thing that can be measured in the lab. Every state of matter has an entropy value. Entropy is considered a state variable with specific values for each state of matter. This value can change between states of the same material. The entropy of ice is less than that of liquid water which is less than that of water vapor. In a sense, it is like a fingerprint. If you wore a blind fold and randomly measured entropy, you would know which state it is, by the value measured. The link below has a chart of some commonly measured entropy values, S.

Table of Thermodynamic Values

The term entropy was first coined during the industrial revolution with the development of steam engines. When they ran tests and measured input and output, and did a careful energy balance, there was always lost energy. With steam engines you go from liquid to gas; steam, with steam a state with more entropy. There was lost energy going into the steam state. Steam is a more complex state where single water molecules have more freedom beyond the hydrogen bonding matrix of liquid water. Entropy is not energy but rather entropy times temperate is energy; -TS, where T is temperature in degrees K, and S is entropy. If entropy stays the same and you add more heat there is a larger energy loss. At absolute zero of T=0, a large entropy change does not lose energy; superconductors.

A state of higher entropy, meaning simply more complexity, is a useful tool, when modeling cells. When water packs proteins, it is like steam condensing back to liquor water, with a loss of entropy. This releases free energy. Warm blooded animals get more bang for their entropy buck due more T for all the enzymes. Life and evolution is constantly making new states, with evolution following the 2nd law toward higher complexity. Entropy has to increase, so life has to evolve. It is not random, but only appears that way because the current theory does not include the hydrogen bonding of water, as the dominate secondary bonding force, able to lower organic material entropy; packed states. This gives extra leverage throughout the cell.

ATP is an important energy currency in the cell. It attaches a phosphate to the enzyme. Since phosphate is polar this lowers the surface tension of the water-protein interface, so the protein's active site puffs out into higher entropy. This pull the substrate up the free energy hill to help catalyze the reaction. Higher entropy wants to absorb that energy. The phosphate is then lost and the surface tension increases and protein's active site is compressed again. The ATP is moving the enzyme between two states of higher and lower entropy.

 

[wellwisher]

Cooperative Hydrogen Bonding

The hydrogen bonding of the water matrix within cells, has another key feature called cooperative hydrogen bonding. A cooperative is where a bunch of water molecules, often near hydrophilic organic surfaces; enzyme surfaces, hydrogen bonds with each, and the surface, to form a type of hydrogen bonding resonance structure that is sharing hydrogen and electrons. These cooperatives have the unique property of the first bond broken being the hardest to break. It does not matter which bond you pick to break first. This is due to the sharing stabilizing the entire cooperative like all of benzene bonds become similar.

The cooperative sharing, does so with the partial covalent character of the hydrogen bonds. These expands to align the magnetic covalent bonding orbitals; tension effect. This lowers the entropy of the water and protein surface, due the organized cooperative structure formed by the sharing.

ATP is designed to have a one- two entropy punch. The addition of phosphate cause the protein to expand to higher entropy. While the ADP left behind, needs to attach a water molecule. It does so like a bolt cutter, biting a water, from the cooperative; the first is the hardest to break. This causes an effect similar a bolt cutter, cutting a link on a chain, under tension, with the chain recoiling; rapid entropy increase; endothermic pull up the energy hill. The water quickly resets the enzyme and rebuilds the cooperative for another ATP cycle. This supplies extra catalytic potential. I first postulated this in 1988. Now the state of the art in water research supports this.

 

[shunyadragon]

The current version of Evolution Theory is like correlating the lottery. We can go the Lottery Commission and get a print out of all the past winners. This is like collecting fossils. From all this observational data we know there will be future winners, but we still do not know who will win tomorrow or whether anyone will win tomorrow. There is a rational detachment in terms of extrapolation beyond a fuzzy conclusion. We know a winner will appear and that will more than likely, not be the same person as the day before. That is empirical and partially rational, but not fully rational. Fully rational would be like not having to dig up old evidence from the past, but rather but reason that from scratch.

What I was doing with my water analysis and DNA, was extrapolating from scratch without having to look in the archives. This is my own rational invention. I was showing you what a rational model of evolution should look, via a targeted application; DNA. When NASA sent the first men to the moon, there was no previous examples to correlate some empirical pattern for future success. This was all done, rationally on paper, because they had a rational theory connected to Newtonian Physics. It was not black box, it is open for all to see, with many coming to the same conclusions. When it was show time, they ran one successful test and there was the proof for the doubters. The current problem is connected to less than rational premises, due to a poor conceptual foundation. This makes that science stuck with the black box.

The DNA is like the hard drive of a computer. It has all the raw data. But like a computer, it is the CPU that processes this data, which in the case of the cell, is done by water. Water takes that raw data; raw RNA and raw protein, packs, folds and even combines until it is bioactive. Evolution currently correlates via dead things most of which are dehydrated; fossils. The hard drive alone; DNA, is assumed to also be the CPU, does not logically allow that goal to happen in a rationally consistent way. It looks fancy but fancy can be deceptive.

Below is a representation of water hydrogen bonding to other water, which is very stabilizing. If we add organic things to the matrix, the hydrogen bonds are no longer optimized. However seeing that water is still the dominate component of life; numbers and mass, and therefore the strongest secondary bonding matrix, the matrix can adapt by sending information through the grapevine to restore the dominance of the water; fold and pack the protein. This is very repeatable since the goal is to minimize the potential of the water; same sweet spot. Life work best when all is repeatable. Water takes away the randomness lowering the structural entropy, which amplifies the 2nd law; evolves more complexity. The use of casino math creates a game of chance and not the logic of life.

Each water molecule can form four hydrogen bonds. Water does with secondary bonding what carbon does with primary bonding; extended structures. While hydrogen bonds are polar with some partial covalent character. This allows each hydrogen bond to act like a binary switch. It can flip between these two settings without the hydrogen bond breaking. Each setting has a different free energy profile. Any organic material will have a fingerprint based on the induced water settings. Water molecules are small with four switch setting each. This is how specific genes can be targeted and activated.

In the liquid water matrix, individual water molecules with the same hydrogen and oxygen only last about a millisecond. Within the matrix the secondary and primary bonding of water; hydrogen bonding and covalent bonds, become interchangeable. This allows individual hydrogen protons to move within matrix. The hydrogen proton is the fastest thing in water. Acids are common to life; nucleic acids.

The rambling anti-science misuse of science to justify a religious agenda continues unabated.

 

[icant]

Hi Wellwisher,

Your quote in msg. #28 is a quote of what you said in msg. #26 of what you had said in msg.#25. At that time I had not learned how to quote. And I am still learning.

Enjoy,

 

[shunyadragon]

There is also bridge logic connected to the 2nd law of thermodynamic, which states that the entropy of the universe has to increase. Energy may be conserved and can change form, but entropy has to increase. When entropy increases it absorbs free energy. Therefore, if the entropy of the universe has to net increase, and this energy is conserved, where is that energy going and in what form is it conserved? The logic suggests that universe is bleeding energy into increasing entropy, and therefore is losing that energy, since entropy has to increase. Where does it get stored, since the universe cannot retrieve it in full, or else the 2nd law will be violated. It has to collect while also be beyond the reach of the universe.

We can retrieve the energy in entropy, in part, with machines, but since there is no perpetual motion, it costs more energy to get it back than we get, thereby adding to the bleeding energy stream of the universe. My theory is this goes to a parallel realm that is gaining in entropic energy over time. The implication of the science of entropy leads to a door to religion. The ancients sensed this other energy/entropy place that is fed by the universe but off limits to the universe in any direct net sense of retrieval. It is lost energy, but conserved somehow somewhere. It could be at the quantum level.

Life and the brain; consciousness, are based on entropy changes. Inanimate matter not change as fast. Entropy increases complexity; cellular division, growth and learning potential. It is very possible that life adds energy content to the pool of lost energy, that the universe bleeds; divine soul.


The 2nd law of thermodynamic, being a concept of the human mind, entropy itself is the product of the human mind I have never really been able to understand entropy as the examples are vague. Melt ice and get water. the water changes. Put a drop of oil in that water and it will spared on the water. All I see is that if you put the water back in the freezer it will become ice again. Problem, some of the water has evaporated into the atmosphere and will return to earth in the form of rain.. You still have the same amount of water. The drop of oil that spread over the water can be retrieved off the water and you have almost the same amount of water you started with only that which evaporated into the atmosphere which will return to earth one day. The oil was the same amount as what you put on the water.

So my idea of the universe ever reaching equilibrium is that it is impossible as the eco-system keeps everything in balance.



Are you sure there is no such thing as perpetual motion?
A human dies, you place the body in the ground and it becomes food for the worms and provides him energy to live.
The problem is that our minds are so small that we can not see the Big Picture as someone mentioned in another thread.



As you can see I am still learning.

You consume food it is digested in your stomach then enters into the blood system which returns energy to the brain. The system works the only thing is the house you live in is only designed to last for 120 years.

Enjoy,

A misuse and misunderstanding of how entropy applies to our universe. You need a better understanding of the role of Quantum Mechanics applies to the underlying Quantum world the underlies the nature and energy relationships of our universe and all possible universes.

Possibly more to follow . . .

 

[icant]

The rambling anti-science misuse of science to justify a religious agenda continues unabated.

Hi shunny,

I for one am not anti-science. I am a walking wonder at 85 due to science.

I am not anti-creation of the universe as we know it today. I am anti-BBT.
When someone produces the source of the energy that is supposed to begin to expand 1 billionth of a second after T=0 where there was nonexistence I will have to reconsider my position.

I am not anti-evolution as I was born and raised on a farm where we did marvelous things with selective breeding animals and pollination of plants. I am anti-evolution of life coming from non-life. When someone succeeds in doing that in a lab I will have to reconsider my position.

But at 85 I don't think I will live long enough to see either one of those happen. they have spent billions of dollars in my lifetime to figure out those two problems.

Now if you or anyone else on this site have the answers to my objection to either problem lay it on me.

Enjoy,

 

[The Hammer]

When someone produces the source of the energy that is supposed to begin to expand 1 billionth of a second after T=0 where there was nonexistence I will have to reconsider my position.

You're living in the "Source".

 

[Subduction Zone]

Hi shunny,

I for one am not anti-science. I am a walking wonder at 85 due to science.

I am not anti-creation of the universe as we know it today. I am anti-BBT.
When someone produces the source of the energy that is supposed to begin to expand 1 billionth of a second after T=0 where there was nonexistence I will have to reconsider my position.

I am not anti-evolution as I was born and raised on a farm where we did marvelous things with selective breeding animals and pollination of plants. I am anti-evolution of life coming from non-life. When someone succeeds in doing that in a lab I will have to reconsider my position.

But at 85 I don't think I will live long enough to see either one of those happen. they have spent billions of dollars in my lifetime to figure out those two problems.

Now if you or anyone else on this site have the answers to my objection to either problem lay it on me.

Enjoy,

Sorry, but you admitted to being anti-science even if you did not realize it. For the BBT you are thinking using Newtonian physics in a realm where Newtonian physics does not work. As to the energy needed the best response is "What energy?" You should seriously look up the answer to "What is the total energy of the Universe."

As to abiogenesis, demanding that they make something in the lab that likely took millions of years to occur naturally is another unrealistic condition. It also show a complete lapse of judgement when it comes to that science. There is scientific evidence for they various hypotheses of abiogenesis. There is no scientific evidence for any other explanations. That does not mean that abiogenesis is an absolute fact, but it does mean that it is very sill to accept any other explanation.

 

[metis]

When someone produces the source of the energy that is supposed to begin to expand 1 billionth of a second after T=0 where there was nonexistence I will have to reconsider my position.

Cosmologists and physicists have numerous hypotheses, but it probably is unlikely we will never know for certain what caused the BB.

 

[wellwisher]

The rambling anti-science misuse of science to justify a religious agenda continues unabated.

I am not pushing a religious agenda, but pushing for a better model of evolution. If you read my last two posts, it was all about water, hydrogen bonding and entropy. That is not religion. That was bio-physical chemistry for the layman.

Where religion came in was connected to my choice of conceptual foundation decades ago. The story of Genesis, where God makes the universe, is a deterministic approach, which implies a rational universe of cause and effect. The Genesis story does not have God throwing dice, with a dozen prototypes universes, before he settles on one, that is partially there with margin of error.

The hint, to me was about brooding and planning a blueprint, before giving it to the general foreman for construction. It is rational plan where you perfect all the contingencies before building. Evolution in its current form, is more dice and cards than rational. If Genesis had been the story of a drunken God who falls and passed out and a universe form I may have used dice and cards as my approach. I do not use a dice and card conceptual foundation. I assumed from day one, my model had to be logical, even if the current theory was dice and are. I understood the risk and the misunderstanding I would get trying to be fully rational in the land of dice and cards. He must be a creationist.

If it became deterministic, that would allow me to predict the future; determine the future with accuracy. Predicting the future makes it deterministic. This is the highest level of science which evolution currently falls short. Evolution is better about the past, which I do not deny. It needs something extra to reach the future. I am not the enemy but the misunderstood visionary.

Water, hydrogen bonds and entropy is a tiny rational set of premises, that I can apply as deep as I need to go, past or future. The dice and cards approach of the current cannot do this. It is a correlation of the past, based on observational data, but it is not rationally predictive.

A misuse and misunderstanding of how entropy applies to our universe. You need a better understanding of the role of Quantum Mechanics applies to the underlying Quantum world the underlies the nature and energy relationships of our universe and all possible universes.

Possibly more to follow . . .

Entropy is more important to engineering and applied science , than pure science like evolution. In applied science you need to build something in reality and not just theory. Entropy and lost energy will bite you in applied science, if the bridge falls. But it can be lumped into the fuzzy dice of casino science; entropic side effects in medicine should not be acceptable via fuzzy dice. I am bringing the entropy, now placed in fuzzy dice, to a focus, so one can reason life and evolution and not be stuck at fuzzy dice theory, with side effects.

If you click on the link Table of Thermodynamic Values , there are dozens of measured entropy values for common materials used by applied science. But since cells and all the cellular structure are harder to measure due to their complexity, and that data was slow in coming, I had to find a simple qualitative way to move forward; more or less entropy. I can look at the situation, and that is all I need to go deep into the weeds, and analysis the logic stemming from my simple premises. The model is unique but is simple when understood.

I am pro-evolution, but not in its current state of theoretical presentation. Not agreeing with the current dice and card version has been called being a Creationists, as though there are only two alternative. I represent a third that is rational science. Dice and cards raises yellow flag; fudge factors. I worked for decades on a rational model, which required simplicity, to make it practical.

My trinity of variables are water, hydrogen bonds and entropy. Trinity came from ancient thinking but it works. I interface these to the organic diversity of life's material with the simple assumption of the water-oil effect. When water and organics meet this adds surface tension to both and that leads to logical energy/enthalpy and entropy responses.

The model is an 3-D model that works under the premise that water is the dominant secondary bonding force matrix in life. Being the continuous phase and dominant material, water has it finger in all pies. It has a global effect implicit of an integrated 3-D model. It also has local effects based on each unique enzyme and the local water. This simplified the cell, since each organic situation, is also a unique water situation allowing all the organic diversity to be express with one variable; water. One reflects the other. This allow for advanced compact simulations of life and evolution based on water; hydrogen bonding and entropy, water-oil to interface organics.

 

[Audie]

A misuse and misunderstanding of how entropy applies to our universe. You need a better understanding of the role of Quantum Mechanics applies to the underlying Quantum world the underlies the nature and energy relationships of our universe and all possible universes.

Possibly more to follow . . .

Please not!.

 

[icant]

You're living in the "Source".

In other words, the universe was created out of itself. If that is the case, why have science spent billions of dollars trying to find the outside source.

Enjoy,

Sorry, but you admitted to being anti-science even if you did not realize it. For the BBT you are thinking using Newtonian physics in a realm where Newtonian physics does not work. As to the energy needed the best response is "What energy?" You should seriously look up the answer to "What is the total energy of the Universe."

As to abiogenesis, demanding that they make something in the lab that likely took millions of years to occur naturally is another unrealistic condition. It also show a complete lapse of judgement when it comes to that science. There is scientific evidence for they various hypotheses of abiogenesis. There is no scientific evidence for any other explanations. That does not mean that abiogenesis is an absolute fact, but it does mean that it is very sill to accept any other explanation.

So because I don't believe in the BBT, are you saying I am anti-science.

Do you realize that the reason the universe had to have a beginning to exist is that if it had reached equilibrium there would be no movement and the universe would have been frozen trillions of years ago if it was eternal in existence. A zero-energy universe is nothing but a hypothesis, it is not even a theory.

There is no scientific evidence for life being produced from non-life. Until you get that evidence you got no evolution.

Enjoy,

 

[The Hammer]

In other words, the universe was created out of itself.

Essentially my opinion.

If that is the case, why have science spent billions of dollars trying to find the outside source.

They haven't?