questfortruth
Well-Known Member
The living Earth happens to be in a sphere with N lifeless planets.
The probability of this event to happen was P=Q*V, where Q<1 is the probability of life to emerge on an Earth-like planet, V=(1-Q)^N is the probability that life has not emerged on N planets. Hence, by increasing the size of the sphere, the N grows, and so P turns to zero. Therefore, the idea of a Multiverse with all kinds of possibilities and physical constants does not help the idea of Abiogenesis.
If we take the totality of an infinite number of lifeless planets (which are suitable for life), then this does not help the idea that life appeared on Earth. The general rule of sterility does not allow this. The exception to the law of sterility is a real (God's) miracle.
NASA tries not to violate the sterility of space by sterilizing its probes before launch.
[0801.0246] Does God So Love the Multiverse? (arxiv.org)
DISCUSSION:
I have mind-vision, not eye-vision. What about my logic? I know textbooks, but I have a new results. Science is only then Science if it can be falsified by a genius.
Opinion: "But we'll have a better understanding of the actual likelihood of life arising here after we've got a satisfactory description of abiogenesis. Until then, it's all guesses."
Me:
"I have mind-vision. I have presented a logical theory, which is not debunked yet by you. Thus, according to Presumption of Innocence, the theory adequately describes reality."
Opinion: "I do not agree. The probability that I will win the lottery is almost nil, while the probability that someone wins the lottery is very high. Now, should that someone wonder why he, and not somebody else, won the lottery?"
I reply: "There is no lower limit for life emerging probability on Earth-like planet. It ranges from total zero to some Q. Therefore, my theory has the right to exist. The probability of life emerging in perfect conditions on a planet can be zero, to win lottery is not zero. But even if probability Q is not zero, then my theory proves, that the Multiverse idea has not helped the chances for life to emerge on Earth, prior it has emerged. You are talking about 100 % probability of life on Earth after life has emerged on Earth. That all information you gave here. The probability, that you won the lottery if you have won it, is 100%. But the probability, that you will win lottery is less than 100%. The same way the probability of life emerging on Earth, before it has happened is near zero.
Opinion: " The Q is not small:
https://www.quantamagazine.org/a-new-thermodynamics-theory-of-the-origin-of-life-20140122/
Me:
"Mind is being used only for justification of Emotion" (Albert Einstein). If one wants God to be
non-active in life, he will find evidence for it.
Even the extremely improbable is still possible. But the probability of more than 5 sigma in Science is presumed impossible. That was used for the discovery of the Higgs boson.
Opinion: "You really started another thread on probability? Really? You must have a need for people to tell you your thoughts and concepts are nonsensical. You must revel in it."
Me:
You sound like those voices in my head.
Q: "But having multi-universes is no closer to answering the ultimate question than
having a single universe. Why and how?"
1. I have presented my argument in the thread, namely the rule of sterility of all cosmos does not allow life on Earth. If it is on Earth, then it is scientific miracle.
2. Yes, there are talks now of non-local laws of nature. Namely, quantum entanglement.
But I have unpublished yet argument, that even entanglement is just a local law.
Thus, all that matters are the things on Earth. There is no connection with the Multiverse, hence it can not alter the processes on Earth. The probability, that life will emerge on Earth if we were some billions of years ago on Earth, is small Q<1. But the probability, that this Earth will be surrounded by N lifeless planets, is P=Q*V=Q*(1-Q)^N<Q. Both these events have happened. One has happened with probability Q and the other with probability P. Both events must happen for Earth to get alive.
Thus, the real probability of life on Earth is dependent on the number of lifeless planets out there.
Hereby the Q is being calculated from the local laws of physics. The P is non-locality.
Well, there is non-locality in nature.
There are two options only:
1. God is existent,
2. god is not existent.
Because the basis of a person is god, then there are two gods. I have used logic.. Do you hate the Laws of Aristotle's logic?
The probability of this event to happen was P=Q*V, where Q<1 is the probability of life to emerge on an Earth-like planet, V=(1-Q)^N is the probability that life has not emerged on N planets. Hence, by increasing the size of the sphere, the N grows, and so P turns to zero. Therefore, the idea of a Multiverse with all kinds of possibilities and physical constants does not help the idea of Abiogenesis.
If we take the totality of an infinite number of lifeless planets (which are suitable for life), then this does not help the idea that life appeared on Earth. The general rule of sterility does not allow this. The exception to the law of sterility is a real (God's) miracle.
NASA tries not to violate the sterility of space by sterilizing its probes before launch.
[0801.0246] Does God So Love the Multiverse? (arxiv.org)
DISCUSSION:
I have mind-vision, not eye-vision. What about my logic? I know textbooks, but I have a new results. Science is only then Science if it can be falsified by a genius.
Opinion: "But we'll have a better understanding of the actual likelihood of life arising here after we've got a satisfactory description of abiogenesis. Until then, it's all guesses."
Me:
"I have mind-vision. I have presented a logical theory, which is not debunked yet by you. Thus, according to Presumption of Innocence, the theory adequately describes reality."
Opinion: "I do not agree. The probability that I will win the lottery is almost nil, while the probability that someone wins the lottery is very high. Now, should that someone wonder why he, and not somebody else, won the lottery?"
I reply: "There is no lower limit for life emerging probability on Earth-like planet. It ranges from total zero to some Q. Therefore, my theory has the right to exist. The probability of life emerging in perfect conditions on a planet can be zero, to win lottery is not zero. But even if probability Q is not zero, then my theory proves, that the Multiverse idea has not helped the chances for life to emerge on Earth, prior it has emerged. You are talking about 100 % probability of life on Earth after life has emerged on Earth. That all information you gave here. The probability, that you won the lottery if you have won it, is 100%. But the probability, that you will win lottery is less than 100%. The same way the probability of life emerging on Earth, before it has happened is near zero.
Opinion: " The Q is not small:
https://www.quantamagazine.org/a-new-thermodynamics-theory-of-the-origin-of-life-20140122/
Me:
"Mind is being used only for justification of Emotion" (Albert Einstein). If one wants God to be
non-active in life, he will find evidence for it.
Even the extremely improbable is still possible. But the probability of more than 5 sigma in Science is presumed impossible. That was used for the discovery of the Higgs boson.
Opinion: "You really started another thread on probability? Really? You must have a need for people to tell you your thoughts and concepts are nonsensical. You must revel in it."
Me:
You sound like those voices in my head.
Q: "But having multi-universes is no closer to answering the ultimate question than
having a single universe. Why and how?"
1. I have presented my argument in the thread, namely the rule of sterility of all cosmos does not allow life on Earth. If it is on Earth, then it is scientific miracle.
2. Yes, there are talks now of non-local laws of nature. Namely, quantum entanglement.
But I have unpublished yet argument, that even entanglement is just a local law.
Thus, all that matters are the things on Earth. There is no connection with the Multiverse, hence it can not alter the processes on Earth. The probability, that life will emerge on Earth if we were some billions of years ago on Earth, is small Q<1. But the probability, that this Earth will be surrounded by N lifeless planets, is P=Q*V=Q*(1-Q)^N<Q. Both these events have happened. One has happened with probability Q and the other with probability P. Both events must happen for Earth to get alive.
Thus, the real probability of life on Earth is dependent on the number of lifeless planets out there.
Hereby the Q is being calculated from the local laws of physics. The P is non-locality.
Well, there is non-locality in nature.
There are two options only:
1. God is existent,
2. god is not existent.
Because the basis of a person is god, then there are two gods. I have used logic.. Do you hate the Laws of Aristotle's logic?
Last edited:
