Monday, July 10, 2006

The Dog Ate My Homework

Ok, I know I said I'd be ready for Science class today, but I've been a little...distracted.

I have some things I have to do today, but I promise to get the calculator smoking in a little bit. I have a lot of research to do, about big numbers that Sal gave me, Vitamin C, Geology, and some other science stuff.


(at least until Kate comes home)

But I also have to tell you about being pampered yesterday. OOOOOOO that was good. Film at 11.

2 Eloquent Orations:

On 7/10/2006 10:21:00 AM, Blogger Clint Bourgeois waxed damned near poetic whilst opining...

Curious. Could you post the numbers that Sal gave you?


On 7/10/2006 11:06:00 AM, Blogger JanieBelle waxed damned near poetic whilst opining...

Hi BR!

It's good to see Kate and I haven't scared you off. I was beginning to worry you guys at AtBC were as prudish as Dave. We haven't been mentioned in almost a whole page! Has our fan club forgotten us so soon? :(


Here is what Sal said in this thread at UD about perfect architectures.

The italics will be where he's quoting me from earlier in the thread:

Ok, I get your drift. But isn’t that a calculation of one particular hunk of material becoming alive?


Wouldn’t you have to multiply that times all the hunks of material in the universe? The universe is pretty darned big, so by that reasoning, it almost seems like it would equal out to 1/1, which would mean that life would not only probably happen, but it would almost HAVE to happen “accidently”. Not that that rules out design, just that it doesn’t seem like it rules out random chance, either.

Good question, and an answer. Let’s look at the number I gave:

1 / (3.27 * 10^150)

lets multiply it by the number of chunks in the universe. The smallest chunk is a sub-atomic particle, it is estimated that there are 10^80 such particles in the universe. So let’s do the multiplication you suggest:

10^80 / (3.27 * 10^150) = 1 / (3.27 * 10^70)

Now the fastest rate a measurable quantum interaction can happen is 10^45 interactions per second based on Plank time (from physics). So let’s factor that in:

10^45 / (3.27 * 10^70) = 1/ (3.27 * 10^25)

Let’s then factor the amount of time in seconds since the beginning of time, roughly 10^16:

10^16 / (3.27 * 10^25) = 1/ (3.27 * 10^9)

Which is still one in billions.

So, even if one used the entire universe and all it’s resources, at the maximum possible speed (which is excessively generous!), one still has only a remote chance of creating a life. As I said, the probabilities, are probably far worse than the optimistic numbers I gave. Further, assuming that the universe is exploring all these possibilities at 10^45 interactions per second is unbelievably generous.

Sorry if I’m missing something, I’m just trying to get an idea here. (I’m blonde, whatdaya want?)

Thanks again, by the way, for taking so much of your time to explain this to me. It’s really very kind.


Those are good questions. You are welcome.

Feel free to ask more questions. I have some other posts I need to respond to, and I’ll be away this weekend, so please forgive me if I’m delayed in responding. Don’t hesitate however to call upon my other very able comrades here at UD.

I recommend if you want to learn more, you can watch the videos I linked to. has a list of IDEA chapters around the nation, and there is John Calvert’s Intelligent Design Network: It may take some work, but if you’re really determined, you might be able to meet some of the individuals in IDEA or the ID-network.

(Last but not least are those unsavory theologically heavy-handed creationist organizations out there, but well, let’s save those as a last resort. hehehe.)


Comment by scordova — July 6, 2006 @ 6:20 pm


Post a Comment

Oratory is now open to everyone. PLEASE don't make me moderate it. Also, be kind enough to sign your orations.