Perfect World Design - Whisperings
Main menu:
Perfect World Design
Greatest Story Never Told
Perfect World Design - DNA Intelligence - Quantum Physics
There have been many other equally startling discoveries in recent years which I detail in the book, Whisperings of My Soul. To highlight just three:
* How finely tuned many parameters in the laws of nature are and need to be in order to support life on earth. This points absolutely to a creative design:
* How DNA coding reveals extraordinary intelligence, beyond anything that could possibly be arrived at by pure chance
* Recent discoveries in Quantum Physics have overturned everything scientists believed they understood about the sub atomic world
I provide examples of all three of these in the following:
Perfect World Design
At the turn of the century scientists appear closer to validating the existence of a Creative Intelligence behind the origin of the universe, than to disproving the existence of God.
As progress continues, the unfolding mysteries of the universe leave scientists with more questions than answers. Cosmologists, who study the universe's origin, claim the intricacies of the world are baffling. They can't understand how a random cosmic explosion could bring about life unless it was engineered to do so.
For life to begin, gravity and the other forces of nature needed to be just right. We now know if the expansion rate in the universe had been slightly weaker, the “big bang’’ would have ended in a “big crunch”. Gravity would have pulled all matter back to its original point.
The late physicist and cosmologist Stephen Hawking wrote:
“If the rate of expansion one second after the big bang had been smaller by even one part in a hundred thousand million million, the universe would have re-collapsed before it ever reached its present size.” If the expansion rate was slightly larger, the planets and solar systems would not exist.
More and more frequently we hear words like “design’’ “super-intellect” and “creator” in the lexicon of the scientific world. And more and more scientists admit that with every stride in progress we make, there is more evidence pointing towards intelligent design. In fact, the more that we learn about the complexity of the universe, the more scientists are astonished by the odds of human existence at all.
The Wall Street Journal's 2014 article “Science Increasingly Makes the Case for God,” has become the most popular online article in the paper's history.
Author Eric Metaxas explained that back in the 1960s, experts believed that an infinite number of planets were capable of supporting life. Scientists estimated there was one septillion planets – (one followed by 24 zeros) - in the universe capable of having life forms.
The requirements for life were the right kind of star and a planet the right distance from that star, according to the experts. Stephen Hawking; A Brief History of Time; 1996.
By the 1990s, it became clear that there were far more factors necessary for life. The right kind of star and a planet the right distance from that star was not going to be enough. If Earth was smaller, its gravity wouldn't be enough to hold a thin layer of oxygen extending 50 miles above the earth's surface. If it was larger, the atmosphere would be like Jupiter, full of hydrogen. The Earth is also the perfect distance from the sun. Any closer and we'd burn up, and any colder and the earth would be a ball of ice. It also spins on its axis as it hurtles around the sun at a speed of 67,000mph ensuring all the surface of the earth to warm and cool every 24-hours.
“The odds turned against any planet in the universe supporting life, including this one,’’ reported Metaxas in the Wall Street Journal.
Defying the Laws of Probability
Metaxas reported that there are now more than 200 known parameters necessary for a planet to support life. All of them must be met perfectly or the whole thing falls apart. He gives an example of one of the parameters for life on earth:
"Without a massive planet like Jupiter nearby, whose gravity will draw away asteroids, a thousand times as many would hit Earth’s surface.”
It seems the odds of any life in the universe after a random explosion are so minuscule that the fact that we exist at all is simply astonishing. A cosmic explosion is as unlikely to bring about life any more than a nuclear bomb would, unless it was engineered to do so. Yet the conditions in our solar system and planet are perfectly attuned to creating life on earth.
Defies Common Sense
Author Eric Metaxas posed the questions: “Can every one of those many parameters have been perfect by accident? At what point is it fair to admit that science suggests that we cannot be the result of random forces?” He reports the scientific odds against the universe existing are so
astronomical that the notion that it all “just happened” defies common sense. “It would be like tossing a coin and having it come up heads 10 quintillion times in a row,’’ he claimed.
So, what exactly are the odds against human life existing from a random explosion in cosmic history?
A research article called “Has Science Discovered God?”, on the Y-Jesus.com website, says the odds defy all the laws of probability. The site, which operates as part of JesusOnline Ministries, makes some interesting analogies to help non-experts understand the odds.
“One astronomer calculates the odds at less than 1 chance in a trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion,’’ the writer explains.
“It would be far easier for a blind-folded person - in one try - to discover one specially marked grain of sand out of all the beaches of the world.”
It adds: “Another example of how unlikely it would be for a random big bang to produce life is one person winning over a thousand consecutive mega million dollar lotteries after purchasing only a single ticket for each.”
Brilliance behind DNA
Astronomers are not the only scientists seeing evidence of design in the universe. Molecular biologists, for example, have discovered that the coding in DNA is so sophisticated and intricate that it's the ultimate computer software programme. In fact, Microsoft founder Bill Gates has famously been quoted saying that DNA is “far, far more complex than any software we have ever developed.” Inside the 37 trillion or so cells in every human body is DNA holding a code that is three billion letters long.
Genome expert, Francis Collins, has tried to explain the complexity of DNA code in a single cell:
“A live reading of that code at a rate of three letters per second would take thirty-one years, even if reading continued day and night." he wrote.
The brilliance behind DNA coding can't be overstated. Science has discovered that 99.9% of DNA is similar to everyone's genetic make-up. However, the sequencing is different in every single person. It means that inside every cell in every person is a three-billion-lettered DNA structure that is unique to them. Out of 7 billion people in the world today, no two will have the exact same DNA.
Molecular biologist and DNA’s co-discoverer, Francis Crick, believed that the mini-computer within every cell could never have originated naturally.
“The origin of life appears at the moment to almost be a miracle, so many are the conditions which would have had to have been satisfied to get it going”, he claims.
Intelligent Design or Divine Creator
Still, most scientists continue to talk about ‘intelligent design' rather than a Creator.
English physicist Paul Davies speaks of an unknown ‘design’ in the universe.
Francis Collins; The Language of God; 2006.
Francis Crick; Life Itself; 1981 "There is for me powerful evidence that something is going on behind it all,'' he said. "It seems as though somebody has fine-tuned nature's numbers to make the Universe…. The impression of design is overwhelming."
Fred Hoyle, the astronomer, who coined the dismissive term the “big bang” spoke about a 'super-intellect' behind the universe. He argued that living organisms could not have arisen by chance alone.
“A junkyard contains all the bits and pieces of a Boeing 747, dismembered and in disarray,’’ he writes. “A whirlwind happens to blow through the yard. What is the chance that after its passage a fully assembled 747, ready to fly, will be found standing there? So small as to be negligible…” Hoyle’s remarks were similar to Stephen Hawking’s in A Brief History of Time:
“The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers seem to have been very finely adjusted to make possible the development of life."
All due to Aliens!
Some scientists are determined to deny any possibility of a Divine Creator in the world. Genome expert Crick preferred to attribute the genius behind DNA to aliens rather than consider a God.
In a theory called Directed Panspermia, he and British chemist Leslie Oriel suggested that life may have been started by an advanced extra-terrestrial civilisation. Crick claimed that the universe is old enough for other intelligent civilisations to have built a spaceship and introduced organisms to the earth.
(Paul Davies; The Cosmic Blueprint; 1988.
Fred Hoyle; The Intelligent Universe; 1983
Stephen Hawking; A Brief History of Time; 1996)
Not many scientists are convinced that the origins of the universe lie with aliens.
However, agnostic astronomer, physicist and cosmologist Robert Jastrow, acknowledged that many of his co-workers recoil from the idea of God. “When a scientist writes about God, his colleagues assume he is either over the hill or going bonkers,’’ he claimed. He also revealed some scientists' frustration that the possibility of a Creator can’t be denied.
“For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream,’’ he wrote. “He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.’’
A 2009 PEW Research Centre survey showed American scientists are half as likely as the general public to believe in God or a universal power. Still, the survey also found that the percentage of scientists that believe in some form of a deity was 51%. One of those is U.S. geneticist Francis Collins, a former director of the Human Genome Project.
In Cathedral or Laboratory!
Collins, a convert from atheism to Christianity as a result of his work, sees a close affinity between God and new scientific discoveries. “I have found there is a wonderful harmony in the complementary truths of science and faith,” he wrote. “The God of the Bible is also the God of the genome. God can be found in the cathedral or in the laboratory. By investigating God's majestic and awesome creation, science can actually be a means of worship.”
Robert Jastrow; God and the Astronomers; 1978:
Francis Collins; Why This Scientist Believes in God;
CNN.com; April 6, 2007.
Quantum Physics
Werner Heisenberg, in 1925, produced the first outline of what became known as quantum mechanics. This is essentially a study of the universe at the sub atomic level. It was quickly discovered that we cannot know the speed and location of a sub atomic particle at the same time. This became known as the Uncertainty Principle.
If the validation Fr George Lemaitre’s thesis for origin of the universe being the action of the Primeval Atom called a serious questioning / headache about all their theories among cosmological scientists, Heisenberg’s discovery of the Uncertainty Principle at the sub atomic level caused such a degree of doubt amongst scientists about all they believed they understood about the nature of our universe, that it’s often referred to as a nervous breakdown amongst the scientific community. None of the questions it posed have yet been resolved.
In the following, I detail two of the most well-known phenomena that have been the subject of experiments at the sub atomic level experiments.
A Description of -Double-slit experiment
Photons or particles of matter (like an electron) produce a wave pattern when two slits are used.
In modern physics, the double-slit experiment is a demonstration that light and matter can display characteristics of both classically defined waves and particles. Moreover, it displays the fundamentally probabilistic nature of quantum mechanical phenomena. The experiment was first performed with light by Thomas Young in 1801. In 1927, Davisson and Germer demonstrated that electrons show the same behaviour, which was later extended to atoms or molecules.
The double-slit experiment (and its variations) has become a classic thought experiment, for its clarity in expressing the central puzzles of quantum mechanics. Because it demonstrates the fundamental limitation of the ability of the observer to predict experimental results, Richard Feynman called it "a phenomenon which is impossible […] to explain in any classical way, and which has in it the heart of quantum mechanics. In reality, it contains the only mystery [of quantum mechanics
This first example is the single particle double slot experiment conducted at the sub atomic level. This demonstrates that the laws of quantum physics are not deterministic, that is they do not follow the long accepted cause and effect rules.
* But that they are probably-mistic
* A quantum particle can exist in a great number of states. Only when observed will it fall into one position.
* What it seems to conclusively prove is that sub atomic particles re act differently when they are being observed by a human/camera/microscope that when not being observed.
* That is, that there are infinite possibilities in every situation and only when observed by a human does it become reality.
* Meaning our act of observation influences and therefore creates the reality of every moment, not some mechanistic cause and effect rule of nature. Many people feel/believe we are like an inanimate object reacting passively to actions/situations that come at us over which we have no influence. The results of this experiment absolutely contradict that interpretation of our reality.
Discoveries in Quantum Physics
The Verification of Quantum Entanglement and its implications for our interpretation of the reality of the world we live in, is one of the most perplexing discoveries of quantum physics.
It is difficult to summarise in simple terms this phenomena and its implications. Below is an attempt at simplifying and summarizing a technical background paper available on Wikipedia.
Do not get too bogged down in trying to follow the detail. I provide an explanation by way of a simple analogy in human terms at the end of this article.
Quantum entanglement is a physical phenomenon that occurs when pairs or groups of particles are generated, interact, or share spatial proximity in ways such that the quantum state of each particle cannot be described independently of the state of the other(s), even when the particles are separated by a large distance.
Such phenomena were the subject of a 1935 paper by Albert Einstein, Boris Podolsky, and Nathan Rosen,[1] and several papers by Erwin Schrödinger shortly thereafter,[2][3] describing what came to be known as the EPR paradox. Einstein and others considered such behavior to be impossible, as it violated the local realism view of causality (Einstein referring to it as "spooky action at a distance")[4] and argued that the accepted formulation of quantum mechanics must therefore be incomplete.
Later, however, the counterintuitive predictions of quantum mechanics were verified experimentally[5] Quantum entanglement has been demonstrated experimentally with photons,[11][12][13][14] neutrinos,[15] electrons,[16][17] molecules as large as buckyballs,[18][19] and even small diamonds.[20][21] The utilization of entanglement in communication and computation is a very active area of research.
Meaning of entanglement
An entangled system is defined to be one whose quantum state cannot be factored as a product of states of its local constituents; that is to say, they are not individual particles but are an inseparable whole. In entanglement, one constituent cannot be fully described without considering the other(s). Quantum systems can become entangled through various types of interactions.
As an example of entanglement: a subatomic particle decays into an entangled pair of other particles. The decay events obey the various conservation laws, and as a result, the measurement outcomes of one daughter particle must be highly correlated with the measurement outcomes of the other daughter particle (so that the total momenta, angular momenta, energy, and so forth remains roughly the same before and after this process).
The special property of entanglement can be better observed if we separate the said two particles. Let's put one of them in the White House in Washington and the other in Buckingham Palace (think about this as a thought experiment, not an actual one). Now, if we measure a particular characteristic of one of these particles (say, for example, spin), get a result, and then measure the other particle using the same criterion (spin along the same axis), we find that the result of the measurement of the second particle will match (in a complementary sense) the result of the measurement of the first particle, in that they will be opposite in their values.
Explanation in human terms:
These entangled particles can arise or are born as a result of a collision of particles at ultra-high speeds and force like in an explosion or under set ups for experimental purposes. Let us equate it to identical twins who, after being born, experience throughout their lives, that whatever happens to one twin happens in exactly the same way, at exactly the same time to the other. Even if they are in different countries, on different continents or even on different planets:
Small wonder scientists are perplexed.
These discoveries begin to give an insight into how it is possible that an all-powerful being could influence all situations and yet allow free will to determine each single outcome. We create our own reality at each point of choice, nothing is pre-determined by cause and effect. How an omnipresent being, meaning a being capable of being everywhere all the time, throughout the universe, could exist.