Disclaimer

Disclaimer: I am not a Biblical scholar. All my posts and comments are opinions and thoughts formulated through my current understanding of the Bible. I strive to speak of things that can be validated through Biblical Scriptures, and when I'm merely speculating, I make sure to note it. My views can be flawed, and I thus welcome any constructive perspectives and criticisms!

Wednesday, July 2, 2014

Genesis 1:9-13

Bible study with Dr. Chuck Missler

DAY THREE (Genesis 1:9-13)

Missler spent a significant portion of this session to illustrate just how impossible (as defined by science) it is for life to have resulted from random chance. The flow of this session was thus structured to use Genesis 1:9-13 as backbone and build toward this climax.


STATISTICAL PROBABILITY -- We are not the product of random chance

If you found a string of black-and-white beads and upon further inspection discovered it spelled out Genesis 1:1 in Morse Code, what is the probability that this sequence occurred through random chance?


To achieve this, you would need exactly 347 beads for the complete code. To symbolize the short and long "pings" of Morse Code, the beads are either black or white.

The probability that this code resulted from random chance = 2^-347 = 2.8669 x 10^-104


In science, scientists have defined any probability < 10^-50 as impossible! In other words, the probability of randomly spelling out Genesis 1:1 in Morse Code with beads is defined impossible by science.


Let us take this example up a notch and apply it to nature: the composition of hemoglobin, a molecule that carries oxygen throughout our bodies.


Chemical Composition: Hemoglobin
The hemoglobin is composed of 574 amino acids. These amino acids are selected from a pool of 20 amino acids. That is, we can view the molecular sequence of amino acids as 574 beads on a string. Each bead can be one of twenty colors.

To determine the total possible number (N) of linear arrangements, we use this formula: N = n!/(p! x q! x r! ...). There are 10^650 permutations possible; only one of them is hemoglobin -- Aka, the probability of making the hemoglobin molecule by random chance is 10^-650. This is even more "scientifically impossible" than the first example! 

Impossibility of “Chance”
Consider the following facts, based on science:
• Only 10^18 seconds in the history of the universe 
• Only 10^66 atoms in our entire galaxy
• Only 10^80 particles in our entire galaxy
• Probabilities < 10^-50 is defined as “absurd”


"Chance" is too inefficient in both time and material for making just the hemoglobin molecule -- Just the hemoglobin molecule alone!


Specificity of 10^-650 is far beyond “chance” -- A chance of 10^-650 is equal to winning the lottery everyday for 90 days in a row! If I were to win the lottery everyday for 90 days in a row, how many of you would believe it was all due to dumb luck or random chance? And yet, so many of us believe life resulted from dumb luck or random chance?


The Elements of Language
The most advanced computers could not have “broken” Paul Revere’s code, because both semantics (“One if by land; two if by sea”) and syntax (“The Old North Church...”) are required. If a code made by man could not be broken by computers, how could the complex code of life be a matter of random chance? How could we not at least consider the possibility of it being a coordinated planning or design?

Let us now consider the most complicated "code" of all -- Our DNA.


Coding Structures
There are many types of coding structures. The following are just a few, listed in order of simple to complex structures.
• Simplex Alphabets
• Error-Detecting Codes
• Error-Correcting Codes
• Adaptive Coding Schema (e.g., Syntax-modifying codes)


Above, we have gone over two coding examples. A simple binary string of 347 elements has the probability of 10^-104 to achieve a certain code. The hemoglobin is string of 574 elements from an "alphabet" of 20 that derived from the probability of 10^-650. Either example have probabilities far below "scientifically impossible," but neither comes close to the most complex code of all: DNA -- a very complicated error-correcting code! (Yet, biologists would have us believe the most complicated code discovered is the result of random chance?!)

The DNA Code
Our DNA is a 3-out-of-4, error-correcting, self-replicating code, consisting of over 3 billion elements defining the manufacture and arrangement of hundreds of thousands of organelles; each organelle consists of unique assemblies selected from over 200 proteins; each protein involves 3,000 atoms in 3-dimensional configurations, all defined from an alphabet of 
20 amino acids!

What is the probability of all this occurring by chance? Way less than 10^-50, way less than 10^-104, way less than 10^-650 -- way less than absurdly impossible!


With that preface, let us now bathe in God's Word:


3RD DAY: DRY LAND, SEAS, VEGETATION

Genesis 1:9-13, NKJV
And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it was so. God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw that it was good. Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.

The details of these early chapters of Genesis—the Creation and the Flood—pervade the entire Bible, and are clearly confirmed in the New Testament, and by Jesus Christ personally.


Without the above preface, it is very tempting to disregard these Biblical texts because our experience tell us that it is impossible. In fact, "science" tell us that it's impossible. However, the same "science" has run the numbers and concludes that it is far more impossible to believe that life formed by random chance than it is to assume there is a Creator!


Here is my perspective: 


Science is fickle. Science has been shown to be wrong. Science is an evolving perspective. Science is experiential, based solely on events that can be experimented on. That is, any event that cannot be tangibly measured, science cannot either confirm or deny its existence. Examples? Plenty. Based on experience, scientists thought the Earth was flat until it was proven otherwise. Scientists thought everything revolved around the Earth until it was proven otherwise. God? Science cannot measure it. The truly objective scientist would thus conclude science can neither confirm nor deny God's existence. To make any other conclusions is being scientifically blind.


God, on the other hand, has proven to be exactly as He has said. Everything in the Bible has come to pass exactly as He has promised. Because of His perfection in the past, we therefore can have a high confidence of His fulfillment of events that have been prophesied to happen.


It's simple for me. I seek reliable sources to place my faith. Say I have two friends. One is flaky, constantly promises me something only to bail out in the end. The other is reliable. If she promises something, she makes sure she delivers. No excuses. Who would I trust? Who would you trust? Now, let's compare my two friends, Science and God. Who has been more consistently right? Who has been more reliable? I am not dismissing science. As a scientist, I love science -- I love how I get to wake up every morning and get paid to think and do science. However, science has limits, and after decades of experimenting, I have come to view science as a great tool to uncover the mysteries of God's creation. Contrary to popular (mis)belief, science complements the Biblical text.


Coming back to the topic of creation at hand, when we come across passages that appear to contradict science, we ought to remember 2 things: 1) science is not always right; it is an evolving pool of knowledge; 2) God does not deceive or lie; He has proven Himself to be trustworthy. Instead of sweeping questions we have under the rug, we ought to logically pursue them. Unraveling these questions is fundamental to our understanding of the entire Biblical plan of redemption, and more importantly, our understanding of the love of God. 

Laws of Thermodynamics


1st Law—Conservation
Matter and Energy cannot be created or destroyed (“You can’t win.”) -- Gen 2:2-3; Heb 4:3-4; Neh 9:6.

2nd Law—Entropy

All processes involve a loss (“You can’t break even.”) -- Ps 103:25,26; Isa 51:6; Mt 24:35; Rom 8:21.

Conservation of Energy
Nehemiah 9:6
All the things that are therein...you preserve them all.

The Bondage of Decay
There is an endpoint to life on earth.

Isaiah 51:6
The earth will grow old like a garment...


Matthew 24:35
Heaven and earth will pass away...


History of Hydrology -- An example of science catching up with God
1500s -- Galileo made a crude thermometer;
1643 -- Torriceli made a barometer; Blaise Pascal, Rene Descartes: atmospheric pressure, altitude studies;
1660 --Robert Boyle: pressure, volume of gas; Robert Hooke: anemometer;
1700 -- Pierre Perrault and Edme Marriotte described the earth’s water cycle;
1714 -- Gabriel Daniel Fahrenheit measured boiling and freezing points of water;
1802 -- Jean-Baptiste Lamarck classified clouds;
1806 -- Francis Beaufort: wind scale;
1812 -- First weather map


It wasn't until the 1500s that humans scientifically documented the water cycle. It then too more then a few hundred years to refine this particular field: hydrology. Yet, in the book of Job, a book written hundreds of years BC, God already revealed the mystery of the water cycle:


Job 36:27-28
For he maketh small the drops of water: they pour down rain according to the vapour thereof: Which the clouds do drop and distil upon man abundantly.


Ecclesiastes 1:6-7
The wind goeth toward the south, and turneth about unto the north; it whirleth about continually, and the wind returneth again according to his circuits. All the rivers run into the sea; yet the sea is not full; unto the place from whence the rivers come, thither they return again.

Both Job and Solomon described Earth’s water cycle thousands of years before science was able to measure it!


It is examples like this that allow me to approach both science and God with an open mind. That just because science can't explain it now doesn't mean the Biblical text is not accurate. Sometimes (well, actually, all the time), science just needs some time to catch up to God!


More examples of Biblical anticipations of scientific discoveries
• Water cycle -- Ecc 1:6,7; Job 36:27, 28
• Jet Stream -- Ecc 1:6-7
• Evaporation -- Job 26:8, Ecc 1:6-7, Amos 9:6

• Source of River Water -- Ecc 1:6-7
• Fresh-Water Springs in the Sea -- Job 38:16 

• Pathways in the sea -- Ps 8:8; Isa 43:16 (see story below)

Matthew Fontaine Maury discovered “Pathways in the sea”
Matthew Fontaine Maury was born in Spotsylvania County, Virginia, in 1806. As an avid Bible reader, he was struck by the reference in Psalm 8 to “the paths of the seas.” He also noticed that Isaiah wrote of a “path through the mighty waters.” The pursuit of this enigma became Maury’s lifetime quest.

He entered the Navy in 1825 as a midshipman. By 1842 he was placed in charge of the Depot of Charts and Instruments, out of which grew the U.S. Naval Observatory and Hydrographic Office. To gather information on maritime winds and currents, Maury distributed to ship captains specially prepared logbooks from which he compiled pilot charts, enabling him to shorten the time of sea voyages. In 1848, he published maps of the main wind fields of Earth. Maury was ultimately able to produce charts of the Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian Oceans, a profile of the Atlantic seabed, and the first modern oceanographic text. He is internationally recognized as the “Father of Oceanography,” and Maury Hall at the U.S. Naval Academy is named in his honor.

Maury's defining career came about all because of a remez, a hint of something deeper, in a verse of the Psalms!

God’s Science Quiz
There are 77 questions in the final 4 chapters of Job (Science’s mandate: Gen 1:28). Many of these questions man cannot even answer today. Ideally, science is the pursuit of truth. However, when we subjectively exclude God because we "just don't want to believe" rather than based on objective analysis, we allow our emotional bias to tint the scientific process. Simply put, if we irrationally exclude the answer from all possibilities right from the start, how do we expect to find the answer at all? All the great “founding fathers” of science—Newton, Boyle, Pascal, et al.—pursued their challenges “to the glory of God,” using science to uncover the mysteries of God. However, most of the various fields of study have been taken over by humanists, and Christians, by their indifference, have acquiesced in this takeover. Science, which should have been the great testimony to the majesty and glory of God, has instead become a device for ignoring and rejecting Him, and preying on the uninformed.

Below, let's take a look at some of the questions God has challenged us:


Job 38
1] Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said,
2] Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?
3] Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me. 

4] Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.

It is significant to fully realize how fundamental the Creation is in Christian apologetics. According to Genesis 1 (35 times in that one chapter), and these four chapters of Job, God created each thing with its own specific attributes, and the powers of reproducing “after its kind” (digitally defined by the DNA!); each with its own definite object and purpose.


5] Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? 

6] Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;
7] When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?


“...foundations”

Even today, we are only beginning to understand the fabric of space, the nature of matter, and space-time, etc.

“Sons of God”

These were not “the lines of Seth!” Bene Elohim, is always used of a direct creation of God; here, this phrase points to angels (We’ll review this in Gen 6).

Now God turns to the most prominent feature of the planet: the sea (75% of the earth’s surface...):


8] Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth, as if it had issued out of the womb?

9] When I made the cloud the garment thereof, and thick darkness a swaddlingb and for it, 
10] And brake up for it my decreed place, and set bars and doors,
11] And said, Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further: and here shall thy proud waves be stayed?


What controls the tides within bounds? (The greatest geophysical upheaval ever was the flood of Noah. We’ll review it in Gen 7-8). By another geophysical upheaval, He “braked up” for the flood waters a “decreed place,” and they were forever “shut up” in the deep ocean beds opened up to receive them: The earth’s isostatic balances now preclude another global deluge (Ps 104:6-9).


12] Hast thou commanded the morning since thy days; and caused the dayspring to know his place;


The precession of the earth causes the sun to rise in a different place each morning according to the seasons. If it was any different, we wouldn’t have any light on this earth!


13] That it might take hold of the ends of the earth, that the wicked might be shaken out of it?

14] It is turned as clay to the seal; and they stand as a garment.
15] And from the wicked their light is withholden, and the high arm shall be broken.
16] Hast thou entered into the springs of the sea? or hast thou walked in the search of the depth?

There are fresh-water springs in the sea... How did a writer from a time of thousands of years BC know this?


17] Have the gates of death been opened unto thee? or hast thou seen the doors of the shadow of death?


Death is still a mystery to us. Science has not really made a dent there.


18] Hast thou perceived the breadth of the earth? declare if thou knowest it all.


Thanks to satellites, this one has been cornered.


19] Where is the way where light dwelleth? And as for darkness, where is the place thereof, 


What is light? It’s nature is still illusive -- Is it a wave or a particle?


20] That thou shouldest take it to the bound thereof, and that thou shouldest know the paths to the house thereof?
21] Knowest thou it, because thou wast then born? or because the number of thy days is great? 
22] Hast thou entered into the treasures of the snow? or hast thou seen the treasures of the hail,
23] Which I have reserved against the time of trouble, against the day of battle and war?


Is this a reference to the role of eschatological hailstones (Josh 10:11; Ex 9:22-26; Isa 30:30; Ezek 13:11, 13; 38:22; Hag 2:17; Rev 16:21), or is this also a hint of some physics yet to be discovered?


24] By what way is the light parted, which scattereth the east wind upon the earth?


How is light diffracted? Why are stars “red shifted”? All meteorological phenomena are derived from the light from the sun: the evaporation of water, the clouds, and 
photosynthesis, etc. Even our most elaborate computer models fail in this area.


25] Who hath divided a watercourse for the overflowing of waters, or a way for the lightning of thunder; 


Fractals and Chaos Theory are topics in advanced mathematics...


26] To cause it to rain on the earth, where no man is; on the wilderness, wherein there is no man;
27] To satisfy the desolate and waste ground; and to cause the bud of the tender herb to spring forth?

Why is there beauty in the desert? Or in the depths of the sea where there is no light to see it? Why are flowers beautiful? (They serve no teleological purpose: bees are color blind!)

28] Hath the rain a father? or who hath begotten the drops of dew?
29] Out of whose womb came the ice? and the hoary frost of heaven, who hath gendered it? 

30] The waters are hid as with a stone, and the face of the deep is frozen.

Ice violates a basic physical law. Virtually all materials expand when heated, contract when cooled. Water follows a strange exception by expanding when it freezes. Life on the earth would prove impossible if ice didn’t float and rivers froze from the bottom up.


31] Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?


There are only two constellations in the heavens that are actually gravitationally linked: the Pleiades and Orion. The other groupings are of stars that are actually quite distant from each other and only appear to be a grouping. Not many astronomers know that. Influences of Pleiades couldn’t be unbound; bands of Orion couldn’t be loosened because they are gravitationally bound. Again, how would a writer from the time of thousands of years BC know this?

34] Canst thou lift up thy voice to the clouds, that abundance of waters may cover thee?
35] Canst thou send lightnings, that they may go, and say unto thee, Here we are?
36] Who hath put wisdom in the inward parts? or who hath given understanding to the heart? 


God even challenges us to research man’s ability to do research itself! Where did the brain come from? Who designed the language and the machinery of the DNA, etc.?

37] Who can number the clouds in wisdom? or who can stay the bottles of heaven,
38] When the dust groweth into hardness, and the clods cleave fast together?



These next three verses belong to the next chapter: Who feeds the Animals? Who provides their obstetrical care? God asks more questions about the biological world than with the physical.

39] Wilt thou hunt the prey for the lion? or fill the appetite of the young lions,
40] When they couch in their dens, and abide in the covert to lie in wait?
41] Who provideth for the raven his food? when his young ones cry unto God, they wander for lack of meat.


Allusions Included in Job 38
• The rotation of the earth, vv. 12-15
• The springs and pathways of the sea, v. 16 

• The breadth of the earth, v. 18
• The travel of light, v. 19
• The dividing of light, v. 24
• The source of rain, and ice, vv. 28-30
• The universal nature of physical laws, v. 33

• Electrical communications, v. 35

Scientific Insights gained from Job

Hydrological cycle (evaporation, circulation, precipitation) -- Job 28:24-27
How do clouds stay aloft? Air and wind have weight; water weighs more than air -- How are clouds supported?

Space/Time/Mass universe

“He stretcheth out the north over empty space, and hangeth the earth upon nothing” (Job 26:7). The “morning stars singing” at the foundation of the earth? (Job 38:7).


THE WATER MOLECULE: WHY DOES ICE FLOAT?


Model of the Atom
The nucleus is 100,000 times smaller than the electron cloud that orbits it and gives the size of the atom: a pinhead vs. 100 meters. An atom is mostly empty space.

The Nature of Matter
There are four states of matter: 1) Plasma 2) Gas 3) Liquid and 4) Solid. They decrease in entropy (become more ordered) from plasma to solid.

Water (H2O)
In the plasma stage, water consists of ions and electrons only. In the gas phase, they are bonded into molecules. In the liquid stage, the individual water molecules array themselves into ordered patterns. In the solid state, this ordered pattern is bonded to form a six-sided lattice. Virtually everything we know contracts as it gets colder. However, water is a profound exception. It expands as it freezes. That’s why ice floats. Without this peculiar exception, life would be impossible on Earth! (For example, rivers would freeze from bottom up, making our ecosystem hostile to life!)


DEATH OF DARWINISM

Advances in microbiology, DNA, et al., have dealt the death blow to Darwinism. DNA is a digital code. Darwinism cannot explain the origin of life because it cannot explain the origin of information. The question isn’t where did life begin but where did the information come from?


The Cell Revealed -- Miracles in a Miniature City

Michael Denton, 1986
"Although the tiniest bacterial cells are incredibly small, each is in effect a veritable micro- miniaturized factory containing thousands of exquisitely designed pieces of intricate molecular machinery, made up of 100,000,000,000 atoms, far more complicated than any machine built by man and absolutely without parallel in the nonliving world."

The (“Simple?”) Cell

The “simple cell” is unparalleled in its complexity and adaptive design. It has a central memory bank, assembly plants and processing units, repackaging and shipping centers, robot machines (protein molecules: 3000 atoms each in 3D configurations; hundreds of thousands of specific types), and elaborate communication systems with quality control and repair mechanisms. Does this sound simple to you?

Automated Factories in the Cell

• Robot Machines (aka, organelles; there are hundreds of thousands of different types found within a cell)
• Artificial languages and decoding systems
• Memory banks for information storage
• Control systems regulating automated assembly of components 

• Prefabrication and modular construction
• Error fail-safe and proofreading devices for quality control

Technology Comparison

Example, Ford River Rouge Plant in Dearborn Michigan:
– Raw limestone, iron ore, coal go into one end; 

– Manufactures its own steel, glass, and paint;
– Its own automated engine manufacturing line; 

– Assembly of mixed models, options, colors;
– New cars exit the other end


The cell is unequalled in any factory on earth. It is capable of replicating its entire structure within a matter of a few hours (all cells derive from previous cells). There are 10^13 Cells in the human body. Self-reproduction is the most fundamental characteristic of al living organisms: Mitosis (nuclear division) and cytokinesis (cell division).


Think of the DNA strand as equivalent to two strands of monofilament fishing line 125 miles long, stored inside a basketball. It is unzipped, copied, and restored on spools (at 3 times the speed of an airplane propeller), all without tangling!

The Mitosis Mystery

The initial cell divides into an identical pair, which then divides again. Eventually, specialization (differentiation) leads to tissue formation, then organs, etc. Through science, we're beginning to understand how all of this is choreographed (beginning!) -- Yet, the ultimately question is, who encoded all this information in the form of DNA? Random chance? Really?

Photosynthesis

Photosynthesis means “To build with light”—all life derives from light. Sugar factories produce millions of new glucose molecules/second. Most plants produce more
glucose than they use and store it as starch and other carbohydrates in roots, stems, and leaves.

Each year, photosynthesizing organisms produce about 170 billion metric tons of extra carbohydrates, about 30 metric tons for every person on earth. 


Photosynthesis is a two-stage process.


1. The Light-Dependent Reaction
A chloroplast traps light energy and converts it into chemical energy contained in two types of molecules, nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate (NADPH) and adenosine triphosphate (ATP).

Light energy causes the electrons in chlorophyll to boost up and out of their orbit. The electrons instantly fall back into place, releasing resonance energy, or vibrating energy, as they go, all in millionths of a second. Light contains many wavelengths. Certain red and blue wavelengths of light are the most effective in photosynthesis because they have exactly the right amount of energy to energize chlorophyll electrons and boost them out of their orbits to a higher energy level. Other accessory pigments enhance the light-absorption capacity of the leaf by capturing a broader spectrum of blue and red wavelengths, along with yellow and orange wavelengths. None of the photosynthetic pigments absorb green light; as a result, green wavelengths are reflected, which is why plants appear green.


2. The Light-Independent Reaction

NADPH provides the hydrogen atoms that help form glucose, ATP provides the energy for this and other reactions used to synthesize glucose.

Why all these examples? To extensively show that life is not the result of random chance.



THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE

Simply stated, it is the appearance that the universe was designed for Man. In constructing a mathematical model of what we believe we know about the universe, there are hundreds of delicate ratios that, if altered the slightest, would render life impossible (some as little as 1/10^-55!).

This view has been noted by such venerated observers as Augustine, Maimonides, Aquinas, Newton, Paley, and others. This idea was dubbed “the Anthropic Principle” by Paul Dirac in 1937 and by Robert Dicke in 1961. 


Paul Davies

"It seems as though somebody has fine-tuned nature’s number to make the Universe... The impression of design is overwhelming."

The Four Forces

Gravity
* Causes an apple to fall to the ground
* Keeps our feet on the floor
* Binds together our Solar System
* Keeps the Earth and planets in their orbits
* Prevents the stars from exploding
* Guides the galaxies in their motions

If gravity were stronger, all stars would be more massive than our sun by 1.4 times; they’d burn too rapidly and too inconstantly to maintain life-supporting conditions on surrounding planets. If gravity were weaker, all stars would have less than 0.8 times the mass of the sun -- we would have no heavy elements.


Electromagnetic Force

* Holds the atom together
* Determines the structure of the orbits of the electrons
* Governs the laws of chemistry

Forms of electromagnetic force include X-rays, radio waves, and light. It can overcome gravity on Earth and can dominate other forces down to the size of the nucleus of an atom. As physicists examine the “strong nuclear force coupling constant,” it turns out that if it were only slightly weaker, multi-proton nuclei would not hold together and hydrogen would be the only element in the universe. The supply of various life-essential elements heavier than iron would be insufficient. If they were only slightly stronger, nuclear particles would tend to bond together more frequently and more firmly, and hydrogen would be rare in the universe. Either way, with less than a 1% change, life would be impossible.

Strong Nuclear Force
* Binds together the protons and neutrons in the nucleus of the atom

The balance between the strong force and electromagnetic forces limit a nucleus to about 100 protons. Energy released is substantially greater than electromagnetic (chemical) force. Thus, stars shine, which is essential for life. If this force were slightly weaker, multi-proton nuclei would not hold together: hydrogen would be the only element in the universe. If slightly stronger, nuclear particles would tend to bond together more frequently and more firmly: hydrogen would be rare in the universe, and the supply of various life-essential elements heavier than iron would be insufficient.


Weak Nuclear Force

Governs atomic instability and radioactivity and disintegration of heavier nuclei

Weak nuclear force can create heat, such as the decay of radioactive elements in the Earth’s core, or in a nuclear power plant. If it were larger there would be no helium and no heavy elements. If it were weaker, it would be all helium and an over abundance of heavy elements.


Other Anthropic Conditions
 Ratio of electron to proton mass 
• Age of the universe 
• Expansion rate of the universe 
• Entropy level of the universe 
• Mass of the universe 
• Uniformity of the universe 
• Stability of the proton 
• Fine structure constants 
• Velocity of light 
• Beryllium, carbon, oxygen nuclear energy levels 
• Distance between stars 
• Rate of luminosity increase for stars
• Number of Stars 

• Parent star (Sun) birth date 
• Parent star age 
• Parent star distance 
• Parent star mass 
• Parent star color 
• Surface gravity 
• Distance from parent star 
• Thickness of earth’s crust 
• Rotation period 
• Lunar gravitational interaction 
• Magnetic field 
• Axial tilt 
• Albedo (reflectivity) 
• Oxygen to nitrogen ratio 
• Carbon dioxide and water vapor levels 
• Ozone level 
• Atmospheric electric discharge rate 
• Seismic activity

ALL of these parameters are kept in perfect balance -- ALL! The probability of all of this intricately balanced forces is unimaginable number of zeros after the decimal point. As defined by science, this is more impossible than absurdly impossible. How could we continue to remain blind and claim life to be the result of random chance?!


More examples: Extraterrestrial Communication
Green Bank Formula
N = R * fp * ne * fl * fc * L

To determine the probability of life in the universe, scientists developed what is known as the Green Bank Formula. [Project Ozma; CETI: National Academy of Sciences, Byukratan, Russia; and SETI (37 intercepts)].

N = Number of civilizations in our galaxy;
R = Rate of star formation;
fp = fraction with planetary systems;
ne = mean planets with a life capable ecology;
fl = fraction on which life actually occurs;
fc = fraction on which intelligent beings develop to a 
communication phase; 

L = mean lifetime of technological civilizations.
The results of this scientific endeavor showed that the probability of life in the universe is impossible. Unless a Designer created us, random chance had, well, no chance.

3RD DAY: THE DAY OF THE DOUBLE BLESSING

John 2:1, 3
And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there: And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage.


It seems as though the text lacked context in terms of "the third day," or as if there were context, it was understood without needing further elaboration. What is this context?


Read Genesis 1:1-13. We will notice that throughout the 6 days of creation, God declared every one of them as "good" -- except Day 2. On Day 3, however, God said “It was good” twice. The Jews picked up on this and deemed Day 3 as the day of the double blessing.The third day, to the Jews, naturally corresponds with the third day of creation. And because this day had the Lord's double blessing, most Jewish weddings take place on the third day (or Tuesday, since the Jews consider Day 1 as Sunday).



STUDY QUESTIONS

1) What level of probability is defined by science as “absurd”?


2) Why is the hemoglobin molecule less likely to have occurred by unaided chance than the beads spelling, in Morse Code, Genesis 1:1? Why is the DNA molecule even less likely?

3) How does the 1st Law of Thermodynamics support the concept of Creation?


4) How does the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics refute a self-generating universe? 


5) Why does ice float? What would be the results if it didn’t?


6) What is the anthropic principle? How does it refute evolution by unaided chance?

7) What is the significance of a 3-out-of-4 error-correcting self-replicating digital code in our DNA molecule?


8) Give examples of “irreducible complexity” and the implications for plausible inferences. 

9) How do recent discoveries in microbiology refute evolution?


10) How does the process of photosynthesis refute evolution?
11) How does the current approaches to the “Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence” (SETI) contradict the premises of evolutionary thought?

12) Compile a list of examples where scientific discoveries were anticipated in the Scriptures. 

13) Compile background on the missing (95%!) “dark matter” in the universe and the major theories and conjectures supporting the searches.


Wednesday, June 18, 2014

Genesis 1:6-8

Bible study with Dr. Chuck Missler

DAY TWO (Genesis 1:6-8)

Genesis 1:6-8
Then God said, "Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters." Thus God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament; and it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. So the evening and the morning were the second day.

The “2nd Day” is probably the most difficult of all six days of Creation to understand. One obvious reason is the ancient vocabulary used to describe it.

Proverbs 8:8-9
...let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters

The Hebrew word, Mayim, is translated as "waters"
- Mayim can mean "water or waters”
- Mayim can can also mean danger, violence, transitory things
- The origin of the word is a dual of a primitive noun (i.e., a plural form that is always used in a singular sense.

Is the term “water” used as a metaphor or a synecdoche? 

A summary of Psalm 104
God created the waters in the clouds (v. 3), and on the earth (v. 6). He controls their boundaries (vv.7-9) and appoints springs to break out (v.10) and rain to fall at his bidding (v.13), thereby fructifying the earth and gladdening the heart of man (vv. 11-18).

There are over 200 different figures of speech found in the Bible, such as synecdoche, puns, metaphors, similies, and allegories. In Psalm 104, we see "water" used to idiomatically to point to certain things. For example, Jesus is our Living Water.

Coming back to the text at hand, could water, in Genesis 1:6-8, be used as a synecdoche of plasma?

Properties of Plasmas
Plasma is known as the 4th state of matter, where molecules are ionized (in a “pre-molecule” state).

David Bohm, from the University of London, was a protégé of Einstein’s, one of the world’s most respected quantum physicists, and one of the world’s most eminent thinkers. At the Lawrence Radiation Laboratory, he noticed that in plasmas (gases composed of high-density electrons and positive ions) the particles stopped behaving like individuals and started behaving as if they were part of a larger and interconnected whole.

At Princeton, in 1947, he continued his work in the behavior of oceans of particles, noting their highly organized overall effects and behaving as if they knew what each of the untold trillions of individual particles were doing. Bohm’s sense of the importance of inter-connectedness, as well as years of dissatisfaction with the inability of standard theories to explain all of the phenomena encountered in quantum physics, left him searching. With a supportive relationship with Einstein, they shared their mutual restlessness regarding the strange implications of current quantum theory. Bohm’s interpretation of quantum physics indicated that at the sub-quantum level, location ceased to exist. All points in space become equal to all other points in space, and it was meaningless to speak of anything as being separate from anything else. Physicists call this property “non-locality.”

An atom is mostly empty space
The nucleus of an atom is 100,000 times smaller than atom.

There are over 200 known sub-atomic particles
• Hadrons (subject to the “strong” force), e.g., Baryons (Protons, Neutrons, and Mesons).
• Leptons (not subject to the “strong” force), e.g., Neutrinos (10,000 times lighter than electrons) and Quarks.

Quarks
There are six quarks (named whimsically, “Up,” “Down,” “Charm,” “Strange” “Top/Truth,” and “Bottom/Beauty”) that are part of the “Standard Model” of the atom. Evidence of all six has now been measured experimentally, with the final “top” quark having been discovered in March 1995. The quark theory of structure views force-carrying particles, called gluons, as binding the quarks together to form the protons.

Symmetry of Design
Each particle has an antiparticle. When a particle collides with its anti-particle, both particles are annihilated, creating a photon. Reversibility of this process implies that light could created a particle and its antiparticle “out of nothing.” This scientific theory resonates with God's Day 1 of Creation: God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light (Genesis 1:3).

The World of Quantum Physics
Quantum physics, unlike the world that we know, is non-causal and non-deterministic. Nothing is definitively real. We cannot say anything about what things are doing when we are not looking at them. Reality is non-local: distant particles seem to be inseparably connected into some indivisible whole. Although particles can sometimes behave as if they were a compact little particle, physicists have found that they literally possess no dimension. Everything is probabilistic in some strange way.

This is Copenhagen's interpretation of quantum physics: In the quantum world, a system has no reality except while it is being observed. [Example, “Schroedinger’s cat” paradox.]

Non-locality is not just a theory
- 1964: John Stewart Bell, CERN, Geneva, formulated a mathematical approach to demonstrate non-locality: “The Bell Inequality.” At the time, the technology was not available to test the theory.

- 1982: Alain Aspect, Jean Dalibard, and Gérard Roger at the Institute of Theoretical and Applied Optics, Paris, conducted a landmark experiment: The Two-Particle Experiment, in which it demonstrated that photons exhibit non-locality.

Niels Bohr, 1885-1962
“Anyone who is not shocked by quantum theory has not understood it.”

Richard Feynman
“I think it is safe to say that no one understands quantum mechanics... in fact, it is often stated of all the theories proposed in this century, the silliest is quantum theory. Some say that the only thing that quantum theory has going for it, in fact, is that it is unquestionably correct.”

A similar statement can be made about the God's Word!

Without quantum physics, we would have no lasers, semiconductors, microcircuits, etc. Our reality depends on the implications of quantum physics. And yet, the theory behind it is so unbelievable.

The Hebrew word, Raqia, is translated as "firmament"
Raqia means extended surface (solid), expanse. In Greek, it alludes to firmness. In Latin, it alludes to 3-dimensional solidity, firmness, empty space.

How is something solid be empty space? Well, since the atom is largely empty space, on the atomic level, even the most solid of blocks are made up indeed of empty space!

Separation of Raqia (firmament) & Mayim (water)
The Canopy Theory [Henry Morris and Institute of Creation Research.] explains that "waters above the earth" can refer to the following:
- The atmosphere
- Sky; region of stars, etc. 
- Heaven, the Throne of God
- The "fabric" of Space itself

The Fabric of Space: A History of The Aether Hypotheses

Psalm 19:1
The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.

Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) taught that the physical world was made up of four elements: air, earth, fire and water. Tying these together was a “subtle” medium, called “aether” (later known as the vacuum, Latin: vacuus, “empty”). 

At the time, the earth was believed to be fixed, immovable, and at the center of the cosmos. In a sense, the aether was the substratum of the material world. 

The Greeks believed that “nature abhors a vacuum” so they could not imagine space as being totally empty. They also believed the stars were suspended from, or attached to, a rotating crystalline shell at a fixed distance from the earth. When some of the “stars” (planets) were observed to be moving with respect to the “fixed” stars, a series of rotating crystal spheres was postulated. Not until the 16th century were these Greek (Ptolemaic) ideas challenged by the Copernican revolution.

Galileo Galilei (1564-1642) challenged the notion with the Copernican revolution.

Rene Descartes (1596-1640) championed the theory that the aether was a plenum, from the Greek word for “full.” Descartes imagined that a very dense medium of very small particles pervaded everything, in constant motion; more solid than matter, yet invisible. Descartes’ universe was purely a “mechanical universe” and his theories were soon superseded.

Evangelista Torricelli (1608-1647), inverting a long, glass tube with mercury into a dish, observed that the mercury dropped some 30 inches at the closed upper end of the tube, thereby creating what was obviously a vacuum.

[From 1641 to 1642 Torricelli was Galileo’s secretary. On Galileo’s death in 1642, Torricelli succeeded him as professor of philosophy and mathematics at the Florentine Academy. Torricelli gave a definition of atmospheric pressure and in 1643 invented the barometer.]

Blaise Pascal (1623-1662) took this work even further and soon everyone was convinced that the vacuum of space was empty after all.

The Nature of Light
Light “particles” could traverse a pure vacuum without the necessity of a real medium pervading space. However, other experiments soon began to show that light was a wave phenomenon. So which was it? Was light a particle or a wave?

At the time only compressional waves were imagined, but light waves proved also to be transverse. In parallel with all these growing controversies, the velocity of light was finally measured by Olaf Roemer in 1675 and found to be finite, although the values he obtained were a few percent higher than the present value of 299,792.4358 km/sec.

Maxwell’s Equations
In Sir Isaac Newton’s day (1642-1727), aether was believed to be more fluid than solid and a medium which would support waves.

James Clerk Maxwell (1839-1879) developed a set of equations which described how light waves could travel through an aether. He proposed that light waves are composed of oscillating electric and magnetic vectors in an x-y plane for a wave traveling in the z-direction. For a wave to exist at all, a medium must possess elasticity (a spring-like property) and also inertia (a mass-like property). The velocity of a wave in any medium is equal to the square root of the stiffness divided by the density of the medium.

Maxwell found that the aether possessed an electric-field scaling parameter, called “dielectric permittivity,” a magnetic-field scaling parameter, called “permeability.” Light slows down in glass, in gases, and in water—because media other than the vacuum had differing permeability and permittivity.
Empty space behaves like a transmission line with a “characteristic impedance” of 377 ohms (which is the ratio of permeability to permittivity for “free space.”)

The aether was once again viewed as a very real medium which could be stretched or compressed. It had resilience or compliance and inertia, yet no known physical substance had a stiffness to mass density ratio anywhere near 9 x 10^16, which was required of the aether as a medium. The
aether appeared to possess elasticity but negligible inertia.

Michelson-Morley Experiment
The idea that some kind of aether medium existed prevailed until 1887 when Albert Michelson (1852-1931) and Edward Morley utilized an interferometer in an attempt to detect the relative motion of the earth. No motion of the earth relative to the aether could be detected: the Aether apparently did not exist. The negative result of the Michelson-Morley experiment baffled scientists until Einstein’s Theory of Relativity, published in 1905.

Einstein’s Theory
That the velocity of light has the same value in all reference frames, whatever their velocity, may be relative to other frames. Thus, modern physics took off in the direction of Special and General Relativity Theory and Quantum Mechanics.

For many scientists, the notion that an actual aether existed was simply discarded. Yet, the apparent non-existence of an aether raised many other problems, including the confounding Michelson-Morley experiment.

“Zero-Point” Energy
If the temperature of an empty container is lowered to absolute zero, there still remains a residual amount of thermal energy that cannot by any means be removed. This is the “zero-point energy.” A “vacuum” is now known to be a vast reservoir of seething energy out of which particles are being formed and annihilated constantly.

Why doesn’t the electron in an atom simply radiate its energy away and spiral into the nucleus? It picks up energy from the background zero-point energy and therefore is sustained by the energy (which is estimated at 1.071 x 10^117 kilowatts per square meter!).

Without the zero-point energy, all electrons would collapse in their orbits!

Colossians 1:16-17
For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

“...consist”: In the original Greek, the word meant, "to sustain," "to hold together" – Jesus is the zero-point energy!

Hebrews 1:1-3
God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high.

“Stretching the Heavens”: The Fabric of Space
Is "stretching the Heavens" more than a metaphor?

Throughout the Scripture, we come across various ways that describe space as a "fabric:
- Who alone stretches out the heavens (Job 9:8)
- Stretching out heaven like a tent curtain (Ps 104:2)
- Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them out like a tent to dwell in (Isa 40:22)
- He has stretched out the heavens (Jer 10:12)
- The Lord who stretches out the heavens (Zech 12:1).
- Other mentioning of “Stretching the Heavens”: 2 Sam 22:10; Job 9:8, 26:7, 37:18; Psalm 18:9, 104:2, 144:5, 40:22, Isaiah 42:5, 44:24, 45:12, 48:13, 51:13; Jeremiah 10:12, 51:15; Ezekiel 1:22; Zechariah 12:1

According to the Bible, space is not an empty vacuum
It can be “torn” (Isaiah 64:1); “worn out” like a garment (Psalm 102:25); “shaken” (Hebrews 12:26, Haggai 2:6, Isaiah 13:13); “burnt up” (2 Peter 3:12); “split apart” like a scroll
(Revelation 6:14); “rolled up” like a mantle (Hebrews 1:12) or a scroll (Isaiah 34:4).

If space can be "rolled up" or "bent," then there is a direction it can be rolled or bent toward. This suggests there exists additional spatial dimensions.

Hyperdimensions (> 3 dimensions): Beyond Euclid
June 10, 1854: Georg Riemann gave a lecture on Metric Tensors, arguably the most important mathematical lecture ever given. It took over 60 years for his lecture to be applied.

1915: Einstein went to his grave frustrated over his inability to reconcile issues with 3 dimensions, which subsequently yielded by applying his previous insights (4-dimensional space-time).

1953: Kaluza-Klein proposed 4+n dimensions (Light & Supergravity).

1963: Yang-Mills Fields was developed (Electromagnetic & Both Nuclear Forces).

1984: Superstrings, 10-dimensions, was developed. The current thinking among quantum physicists is that our universe consists of one-dimensional “superstrings” vibrating in 10 dimensions.

Dimensions of “Reality”
Should we take the Bible literally?

Nachmonides was a 12th century Jewish scholar, who concluded, based on a detailed study of Genesis, that there are 10 dimensions in the world that we live, and only 4 are “knowable” (Commentary on Genesis, 1263).

Particle physicists of the 20th century (i.e., hundreds of years of research and billions of dollars later) came to the same conclusion: The world we live is has 10 dimensions, and 4 are directly measurable (3 spatial + time). The other 6 are “curled” into less than 10^-33 cm and thus inferable only by indirect means.

We have spent billions of dollars building elaborate particle accelerators to learn what Nachmonides discovered by a careful study of Genesis 1!

Boundaries of Reality

Proverbs 16:33
The lot is cast into the lap; but the whole disposing thereof is of the LORD.

Einstein paraphrased Proverbs 16:33 -- “God does not play dice.”

There are two mathematical concepts that do not exist in our physical world

1. Randomness (cf. Prov 16:33)
Mathematicians rely on supercomputers to generate random numbers. These really are pseudo-random numbers, because the fact that they are generated by supercomputers running algorithms prove that these numbers are not truly random!

The fact that randomness has never been observed in our physical world casts evolutionary theories, such as the Chaos Theory, into great doubt.

2. Infinity (cf. Jas 1:17)
On the macrocosm level, we know that the universe is finite (because if it was infinitely old, for example, there would be no heat exchange, as everything would be at equilibrium).

On the microcosm level, quantum physics has shown us that at 10^-13 cm, molecules cease to have locality. 

Everything (time, mass, etc.) we know is made of quanta. Like a photograph, our physical world is pixelated, as if we live in a digital simulation. And like a photograph that captures a 2-D picture of a 3-D reality, our physical presence is a mere snapshot, a hologram perhaps, of our spiritual reality.

2 Cor 4:18
While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.

The inability to confirm the existence of infinity—in either the macrocosm of the astronomer or the microcosm of the quantum physicist—has placed an unwelcome limit on our cosmological speculations. Even the ambiguous comfort of true randomness within the physical world has now been called into question by the new math of Chaos Theory. (This would also seem to pull the rug out from under those who insist on ascribing the creation to a accident of “chance.”)
It is amazing—and yet not surprising—that the Word of God presents a view of reality that is not at variance with these contemporary insights from the very boundaries of our present understanding of the physical universe, which is but a transient illusion for temporal.

WHAT DO WE DO WITH ALL THIS?

Risk Analysis
A Type I Error is the rejection of a true hypothesis.
A Type II Error is the acceptance of a false hypothesis.
(J. Neyman and E. S. Pearson, Transactions of Royal Society of London, A, 31, 1933, pp. 289-337.)

Pascal’s Wager
“Yes, but you must wager. There is no choice, you are already committed. Which will you choose then? Let us see: since a choice must be made, let us see which offers you the least interest. You have two things to lose: the true and the good; and two things to stake: your reason and your will; and, your knowledge and your happiness. Your nature has two things to avoid: error and wretchedness. Since you must necessarily choose, your reason is no more affronted by choosing one rather than the other. That is one point cleared up. But your happiness? Let us weigh up the gain and the loss involved in calling heads that God exists. Let us assess the two cases: if you win you win everything, if you lose you lose nothing. Do not hesitate then; wager that he does exist.”
Blaise Pascal, Pensées, 1670


Study Questions
1. Is there life on other planets?
2. Could life have started “on its own”?
3. On which day was: the earth created? the sun created?
4. Could photosynthesis occur without the sun?
5. What are “hyperspaces”? How do they impact our perspectives of Biblical topics? In what way does the Bible anticipate our current discoveries regarding the nature of hyperspaces?
6. What is meant by “non-locality” of particles? How do these discoveries impact our Biblical views?
7. Which two concepts in mathematics are elusive as far as our physical universe is concerned? How do they bound our understanding of reality?
8. Why do some scientists suspect that the entire universe, as we know it, is some kind of synthetic simulation; a subset of an ultimate reality? 
9. Why are classical scientists shocked at the findings of quantum physics? How do they impact our own perspectives?
10. List the primary versions of “Big Bang” models and discuss their fatal shortcomings.
11. Explore the various paradoxes emerging from quantum physics and their implications in understanding our universe.