Originally posted by twhitehead
Let us first ask: if you threw out the scrabble letters and they all just happened to fall on the ground instead of flying off in random directions into space, then what is the probability of that? How come they all end up in a near uniform plane?
Once we accept that a force is capable of resulting in organization out of disorder, we must also accept th ...[text shortened]... ence - including diamonds. What is the probability of getting 10 million carbon atoms in a row?
Richard Dawkins' "The Blind Watchmaker" was a great read, one of his best in my opinion.
He explains soundly how over immense periods of time, difficult for us to concieve, how mutation upon mutation and adaptation could emerge such things as the eye, with all the twists and turns of evolution evident within it.
He gives a wonderful simile of how a line of Shakespeare could emerge from chance throwings of such tiles, IF succesful positionings of letters remained in place when discovered. The positionings were equivalent to succesful adaptations for furtherance.
He gave a simple Basic program to illustrate, which I at the time copied and repeated.
Sure enough, that seemingly improbable line emerged, out of all those chance reiterations. The idea that at one throw such a line emerges is ludicrous.
He was the one who finally nailed it for me, the theory of evolution.
It didn't presuppose an a priori design either. But, as with quantum physics, the more we delve and the further back we go the story becomes much more difficult.
How highly complex biological molecules emerged together, complementing each other in processes that required a holisitic "chance" coming together to me has to require some sort of holistic awareness underlying it and is the best explanation.
This postulation needs to be seriously investigated to the extent we can. There are consciousness studies emerging more and more.
Information is on the whole not available, as you say, but why is that?
We need more information, we need more serious investigation of such a possiblity, along with the other sometimes fantastic reductionist postulations that are called respectable science.
None of us can talk about specific probabilities either, as you point out. You seem to be supporting the point being made about the immense unknown improbabilities involved. A good point about randomness and order in physics.
The formation of a diamond is somewhat easier to explain than a functioning living cell with its interacting molecules etc, and I expect the chance and order combinations are different to an exponential degree, even if one cannot be accurate about the probabilities.
Without investigation of postulations. saying we have no information is empty. Of course we don't have much information, because of a resistance in science generally to pursue such viable postulation because of its over-reactive wariness of anything that sounds remotely religious. Understandable perhaps, but does not advance things very much.