A Draft Writing on: Consistency between contemporary sciences and creation of Universe Hikmat S. Hilal Chemistry, An-Najah National University Nablus, Palestine
[email protected] [email protected] 13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
1
Need for this subject - In the Early 20th Century many people misunderstood modern physical laws - In biology things were even worse. Evolution and evolution doctrine became like a matter of faith. New Darwinism has become like a religion. No one could question it. It became more or less like the Church in the Middle Ages. - Most clearly Dawkins writings in the 1970’s and later. - If one argues their thoughts then one is a creationist. Creationist to them is non-scientist or pseudo scientist. - A closer look at Scientific basics (Physics & Biology) shows a meaning that is totally opposite to the main stream. Two Main Examples Are Discussed Here: 13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية 2
First Subject: Laws of Thermodynamics 1st and 2nd Laws - 1st Law: Sum of energy and matter is constant. Energy (and matter) can be neither created not destroyed. Energy & matter can be interchanged according to Einstein’s Equation: Energy (J) = Mass (kg) X C2 (m2/s2) Which was made in 1905.
13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
3
Many who disbelieve in creation - Were happy with the 1st Law and with Einstein’s equation. - They understood it as: Impossibility to create the universe. - In fact, If I were a dis-believer I would be upset by these laws. I would rather be happy if such laws can be violated. - Example: If one can create matter or energy, then there will be no need for original creation. There will be no need for God. 13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
4
Primary Conclusions - Violation of (Law of Conservation of Energy) is against the idea of creation - If we can violate the Law, then we need no creator as we will be Gods ourselves - The Law is consistent with the fact of God creation. - However, the Law is not evidence but is consistent with creation idea. - This will be re-visited below
13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
5
2nd Law of Thermodynamics 1820s & 1850s - Has different statements, mostly: - In any spontaneous process the disorder in the Universe increases. - Natural Processes are spontaneous (irreversible) - Disorder is termed = entropy (S) - Entropy Change = ΔS
13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
6
- In all spontaneous processes, value of S for Universe always increases
For an irreversible (spontaneous) process, we have an increase in entropy of universe. Since they are irreversible, the Universe gains entropy: DS Universe = (DS system + DS surroundings) > 0 DS universe is constantly positive (the Universe is moving towards greater and greater disorder) Sept 15, 2015
An-Najah N. University Lecture
7
Possible Meaning of this Law - After long time ( say infinity of time) S must reach maximum value in Universe. - To many scholars: Universe should reach Thermal Death Reaches equilibrium (no hot an cold systems, all having same temperature). Thermal equilibrium will exist. No work can then be done. In such a case S is a maximum. Entropy no more increases (ΔSUniverse becomes zero) 13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
8
Thermal Death has been proposed in 1850s by a number of respectable scientists
The idea of heat death as a consequence of the laws of thermodynamics, however, was first proposed in loose terms beginning in 1851 by William Thomson, 1st Baron Kelvin, who theorized further on the mechanical energy loss views of Sadi Carnot (1824), James Joule (1843), and Rudolf Clausius (1850). Thomson’s views were then elaborated on more definitively over the next decade by Hermann von Helmholtz and William Rankine 13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
9
Thermal Death goes against atheistic ideologies It was well understood by the early marxists
13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
10
Marx/Engels vision about 2nd Law & Thermal Death -
http://ncse.com/blog/2013/10/engels-entropy-0015057
Engels ….. Denouncing the Second Law of Thermodynamics, he wrote to Marx: “You cannot imagine anything stupider.” The idea of gradual equalization of temperatures, or, as it would later be formulated, increasing entropy, led to a world “that begins in nonsense and ends in nonsense.” Although
the second law was seen as “the finest and highest perfection of materialism,” it envisaged a progressive cooling of the universe. Such a development implied “the original hot condition, from which things cooled off, absolutely inexplicable, even absurd, thus presupposes a God.” Since, for Engels, philosophy included atheism and materialism, and that philosophy was based on the natural sciences, a science that led to a questioning of atheism and materialism could not be science. Sept 15, 2015
An-Najah N. University Lecture
11
Important Notes - Some ones may argue the issue of Thermal Death as being questionable. - The Law itself is not questionable by any scientist (except some aethiest Philosophers who found it violating Marxism). - Engles ridiculed the Law and the Thermal death unjustifiably. Even if Thermal Death is incorrect (which is not the case) Engles still must respect scientific talk, and should not give bad gestures against it. 13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
12
Physicists understood the 2nd Law as follows - A new model for formation of Universe - Many theories proposed, most common is the Big Bang Theory - At some stage the Universe was a small object with terribly huge energy centered in a small space - It exploded with very high temperature - The neutrons were first formed, giving electrons and protons later - Hydrogen & Helium atoms then formed, then heavier atoms (Nuclear reactions) - Planets, stars, and galaxies then formed - Universe is in rapid continuous expansion (ΔSuniv. >0). 13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
13
Meanings - Before Big bang: Universe has no increase in entropy ΔSuniverse was = 0 This means that there is no time before big bang Since: Entropy change (ΔS) is arrow of time Therefore, before big bang there was no time
If there is no time then our laws of physics are not applicable 13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
14
Contd….. - Stephen Hawking says: - “Before big bang there is no time”, or “there is another time scale that we know”. - {{{See Below}}}. - Before big bang our physics fails to function and they are useless. - Only after big bang (even after small time with small fractions of a second), physical laws function. 13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
15
Important Example - All Newton and Einstein laws fail to work before big bang - Even the laws of thermodynamics fail to function before big bang. - Example: The First Law of Thermodynamics (Conservation of Energy & Matter) itself does not work before big bang.
13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
16
Meaning of Time Revisited Two meanings of Time:
- Entropy Meaning: Second law of • thermodynamics, which states that entropy must increase over time - Cosmological meaning: • the cosmological arrow of time, which points away from the Big Bang Both meanings are the same 13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
17
Stephen Hawking about Time Hawking:even if time did not begin with the Big Bang and there were another time frame before the Big Bang, no information from events then would be accessible to us, and nothing that happened then would have any effect upon the present time-frame [Hawking, Stephen (1996). "The Beginning of Time". University of Cambridge, other references]. ” Time actually began with the Big Bang, and that questions about what happened before the Big Bang are meaningless” [Hawking, Stephen (1996). "The Beginning of Time". University of Cambridge ].
13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
18
Physics fails to explain things before Big Bang Scientists have come to some agreement on descriptions of events that happened 10−35 seconds after the Big Bang, but generally agree that descriptions about what happened before one Planck time (5 × 10−44 seconds) after the Big Bang are likely to remain pure speculation. (from references)
13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
19
Law of Conservation of Energy & Matter - The Law of Conservation fails to work before Big Bang. It works after that only. - Before big bang we need other totally different laws. Conclusion: Our Physical laws do not violate the idea of creation by any means. We need information from other frames rather than from physics. Here comes the power of Allah who creates matter, energy and who puts their laws. 13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
20
Another Issue: -
If ΔSuniverse > 0 And if infinity of time has passed on Universe, Then S must be now a maximum. However, we can see that there is still order in the Universe, i.e. value of S has not yet reached maximum value.
-
Conclusion: The Universe has not lived for infinity. And the Universe has a definite time after its presence. There is a starting point for Universe. See what scientists say on this issue: 13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
21
STEPHEN HAWKING HTTP://WWW.HAWKING.ORG.UK/THE-BEGINNING-OF-TIME.HTML
In this lecture, I would like to discuss whether time itself has a
All the evidence seems to indicate, that the universe has not existed forever, but that it had a beginning, about 15 billion years ago. This is probably the most remarkable discovery beginning, and whether it will have an end.
of modern cosmology. Yet it is now taken for granted. We are not yet certain whether the universe will have an end. When I gave a lecture in Japan, I was asked not to mention the possible recollapse of the universe, because it might affect the stock market. However, I can re-assure anyone who is nervous about their investments that it is a bit early to sell: even if the universe does come to an end, it won't be for at least twenty billion years. By that time, maybe the GATT trade agreement will have come into effect. Sept 15, 2015 An-Najah N. University Lecture 22
Conclusion
- Universe has a beginning • Physics does not function before big • bang
13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
23
Second Subject: Biology and Life Sciences
13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
24
Life Sciences have Physical Foundations Schroedinger Definition for a Living Body
A Living Body is one system that maintains its order by increasing entropy in the surroundings (and Universe)
This is a wonderful explanation for life 13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
25
That means - Living organism is such a complex system, that has ability to maintain its order by exerting disorder (entropy) in the surroundings. - Examples: - A lion kills preys and eats them. He maintains his own (system) order by exerting disorder in surroundings and Universe - An oak tree grows and maintains its order, at the expense of Universe (which involve sun heat and sun reactions that emit radiation on which the tree grows. - A seed: grows and lowers its entropy by increasing entropy in Universe. - Burning a tree also increases entropy in Universe. All such processes are spontaneous and all involve ΔSUniverse > 0 13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
26
A Living body undergoes spontaneous processes in a complementary way, where the genes undertake specific jobs while being controlled by the body, the organ or the cell, themselves.
13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
27
NeoDarwinism
The Selfish gene – Richard Dawkins 1976 • • • • •
•
In In he 19th Century Darwin did not know about genetics, and talked about natural selection and creation of new species through natural selection and evolution Mendel then talked about new synthesis paradigm in evolutionary biology has then dominated and became well accepted as a matter of fact not just as a theory NeoDarwinism accepted the gene and attributed to it all random changes which are responsible for selection. That became wide spread among the main stream of evolutionary scientists specially in 1970s. Later on things started to change. In 1983 The role of the cell in changes was proposed (Nonble Prize Laureate). Noble says: If genetic changes occur randomly, there is then no place for modern physiology. He believes that random changes are not a basic science but assumptions that have no real basis.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMVfafAYTMg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UeqEBrnai4s His ideas were presented in a lecture in China as discussed below 13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
28
بخصوص التغيرات العشوائية من نقس الجينات •
• • •
حسب ما ورد في كتاب شابيرو «التطور من منظور القرن الحادي والعشرين « حول تفسير حدوث الطفرة العشوائية من الصعب ان لم يكن من المستحيل ايجاد تغير عشوائي ناتج عن فعل الجينات نفسها في الحمض النووي DNA ان ادعاء الطفرة العشوائية غير صحيح وغير متفق مع الواقع التجريبي
29
المحاضرة الثانية -االربعاء 13/4/2016
Modern Science says that Gene changes occur according to delicate plan based on organism and environment, not randomly Protein does not evolve by random changes The gene is not the origin of changes but itself is controlled bay organism system and regulations 13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
30
31
المحاضرة الثانية -االربعاء 13/4/2016
According to NeoDarwinism (Dawkins 1976) The genes are the ones who control the living organism. The genes are the master, and the body is the output of their random changes. That is totally unscientific
13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
32
In fact: Changes by the gene Occur according to certain rules and regulations. Changes by genes are not merely random chemical reactions at all. Such reactions are controlled not random. This is totally against Dawkins.
13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
33
34
المحاضرة الثانية -االربعاء 13/4/2016
Dawkins says also: The Genes and the DNA are the master, while the organism is only a tool.
13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
35
36
المحاضرة الثانية -االربعاء 13/4/2016
In the new scientific approach (Noble) The genes function under strict code that maintains the organism existence, not the opposite.
13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
37
38
المحاضرة الثانية -االربعاء 13/4/2016
Noble The Organism is the one who controls the function of the DNA. Alone: The DNA (and the gene) is a dead body with no life.
13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
39
Experimental Challenge - If we take genes from a cell, and add to it nutrients, in petri dishes, the genes will not give protein even for thousands of years. - Genes are dead not alive - There is no random change resulting from genes - No accumulative random change resulting from genes - Changes are not random
13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
40
41
المحاضرة الثانية -االربعاء 13/4/2016
Shapiro 2011: - It is important to note that “Selection has never lead to formation of a new species” Contrary to what Darwin says. - Selection is a purifying process but not a creative force.
13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
42
Random Changes are not a basic science
13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
43
44
المحاضرة الثانية -االربعاء 13/4/2016
45
المحاضرة الثانية -االربعاء 13/4/2016
46
المحاضرة الثانية -االربعاء 13/4/2016
In the above page: Dawkins claims that the gene creates proteins and thus control the cell, the organ and the organism. To Noble: That is absolutely untrue
The true alternative is the one shown in the page below The process is too complex and there is synergistic relation. Every thing must thus occur according to certain delicate regulations not randomly. 13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
47
48
المحاضرة الثانية -االربعاء 13/4/2016
49
المحاضرة الثانية -االربعاء 13/4/2016
Shapiro says: The central Dogma of Biology is thus insufficient or even incorrect.
13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
50
Even some scientists who support the NeoDarwinism started to question it. Example is John Menard Smith 1983
13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
51
52
المحاضرة الثانية -االربعاء 13/4/2016
Experimantal Issue To NeoDarwinism: Gene creates the organ. Means: If we take a gene from an organism, and plant the gene inside a cell from another organism, the result will be an organism like of the original gene organism Experimentally: That is not true The result will resemble both original organism and host organism This proves that the gene itself is controlled by the host cell 13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
53
Evidence from Star Fish and Gold Fish If we take gene from one type of fish, and plant it inside a cell from another type of fish, the resulting fish will carry characters from both types. See below Figure
13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
54
55
المحاضرة الثانية -االربعاء 13/4/2016
One pro-NeoDarwinism described the gene as: … a highly sensitive organ of the cell …
(Menard, 1983)
13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
56
57
المحاضرة الثانية -االربعاء 13/4/2016
Now: the question is: - If organism life is not determined by random chemical reactions in the gene - If gene activities are controlled by the biological system - If organism life is ability to maintain its order at the expense of surroundings, in a complex process governed by delicate rules - All such rules are not dictated by the material itself - Then: Where did these rules and regulations come from???? 13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
58
Conclusion: Modern Physics and Modern Biology are consistent with the concept of creation
13/4/2016 االربعاء- المحاضرة الثانية
59
