Replies

Thank you so very much for your encouragements!

That is simply a refined version of the Second Law argument against evolution. My objection to such formulations is that they suggest an end to certain lines of research.

In Shannon's mathematical theory of communication, information is the reduction of uncertainty [Shannon entropy] in the receiver (or molecular machine) in going from a before state to an after state.

Of a truth, the formula in thermodynamics for Gibbs entropy is very similar to Shannon. This discussion is illuminating:

At an everyday practical level the links between information entropy and thermodynamic entropy are not close. Physicists and chemists are apt to be more interested in changes in entropy as a system spontaneously evolves away from its initial conditions, in accordance with the second law of thermodynamics, rather than an unchanging probability distribution. And, as the numerical smallness of Boltzmann's constant k_B indicates, the changes in S/k_B for even minute amounts of substances in chemical and physical processes represent amounts of entropy which are large right off the scale compared to anything seen in data compression or signal processing.

But, at a more philosophical level, connections can be made between thermodynamic and informational entropy, although it took many years in the development of the theories of statistical mechanics and information theory to make the relationship fully apparent. In fact, in the view of Jaynes (1957), thermodynamics should be seen as an application of Shannon's information theory: the thermodynamic entropy is interpreted as being an estimate of the amount of further Shannon information needed to define the detailed microscopic state of the system, that remains uncommunicated by a description solely in terms of the macroscopic variables of classical thermodynamics. For example, adding heat to a system increases its thermodynamic entropy because it increases the number of possible microscopic states that it could be in, thus making any complete state description longer. (See article: maximum entropy thermodynamics). Maxwell's demon (hypothetically) reduces the thermodynamic entropy of a system using information about the states of individual molecules; but, as Landauer (from 1961) and co-workers have shown, the demon himself must increase his own thermodynamic entropy in the process, by at least the amount of Shannon information he proposes to first acquire and store; and so the total entropy does not decrease (which resolves the paradox).

I also am concerned about any suggestion to end a line of research. In my view, "Nature did it!" is just as much an artificial boundary as "God did it!"

IOW, even though I aver that abiogenesis is impossible due to information content - I am glad to see it researched. But if the investigators only look at the physical/chemical they will get no further than Miller/Urey. They need to follow Wimmer's lead, and look to the information content. Likewise, I consider the race to find the source of information in the universe to be a good thing.

Oh, and I should mention that it has always been a Jewish mystic understanding that we will be held accountable before God for asking questions about this physical world. IOW, God wants us to look and see. That is also Scriptural to us as Christians:

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed [it] unto them.

For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, [even] his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Because that, when they knew God, they glorified [him] not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. - Romans 1:18-21

The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge. [There is] no speech nor language, [where] their voice is not heard. – Psalms 19:1-3

I am more bewildered by the people - of whatever belief they might be - who are not interested at all. These, IMHO, are going through life "on auto pilot."

Excellent post, A-G. Rather than information, I’m still more interested in the definition of “life” itself. It strikes me as cart-before-horse to conclude that anything can come up with “life” until we define what life is.

So far as this article is concerned, it strikes me that any field should teach it’s weaknesses. I also think it should teach its major opposition.

JMHO.

Have a blessed day, sister, and may the Father of All guide your path and your thoughts this day through His Spirit in the truth of His Son, the Logos of the universe.

going through life "on auto pilot."

They simply have not yet discovered the claustral hypothesis. What do you make of John 5:30?

I also am concerned about any suggestion to end a line of research. In my view, "Nature did it!" is just as much an artificial boundary as "God did it!"

The difference being that having said nature did it, one is obligated to describe and explain the processes involved.

Second Law formulations, whether entropy or information theory, do not imply that stepwise accumulations of order cannot occur.