#### questfortruth

##### Well-Known Member

PREFACE, DIALOGS:

Reviewer insults my scientific talents:

"I can't make heads or tails of this word salad, tbh."

To whom I reply:

It is not different from any good scientific paper. I bet, you would say "word salat" to any of Dr. Hawking's papers. Provided, if he is not PhD and not peer-reviewed.

I am not hurt by this injustice because I am a loser. Look: if during 10 last years you have faced injustice, then the probability that during the next month you'll face recognition is simply

one month divided by the number of months in 10 years, which is one percent.

Look: the failures in life are making us a loser. And success-es are making from us a Lucky, charismatic person.

Reviewer: "you have here the intelligent-seeming math (which has been noted by others who evidently can do math, that it also "fails")."

To whom I reply by axiom: "Some people (not all) lie constantly, other people lie only once a month. All we lie."

DEFINITION:

The sense of Theory of Probability is in this: if the probability of an event p is 50 %, then we compare it to the following STANDARD event: one time tossed a coin onto the air falls "head". If the probability of an event is 1/100 then 7 times in the row tossed coin falls "head". We hate it if we need to toss the coin 30 times and constantly get "head". Thus, such an event, assumably, has not happened. Hereby it is forbidden by the theory to repeat the attempts. You need to get 30 heads by one single attempt. You can not repeat the 30 tosses day after day. You have only one time. Try it.

The probability, that I exist seems to be near zero because the right sperm-microbe of my father's sperm sample was very lucky to get into the right egg of my mother. However, Science has not proven yet, that soul or consciousness exists at all. Therefore, it is not an objection to my paper.

But even if there is soul, I would reply: God did it, God has bitten the odds.

PAPER:

The assumption that life has begun accidentally is presented as a scientific fact

by Science, not as an assumption: "the process of Evolution is scientific fact."

Evolution is defined as the accidental process, in

particular, man came from a common ancestor with monkeys by accident.

The modern textbook definition of Evolution says, that Evolution is not directed process.

Thus, accidental.

Therefore, Science is factually against God.

Science does defy the "pseudo-science" creationism, more specifically Young Earth Creationism.

But the YEC is a religion. Thus, at least one religion gets in the way of Science.

Let us consider a group of 10 lifeless similar planets. The probability that

at least on one planet in this group life will begin is P. Let us consider the

lifeless planet Earth, one of the planets in this group. The probability that

life will begin on Earth is p = P/10. Generally, if there are N planets, then

p is about p=P/N (for small p). Indeed, the probability, that life will emerge

on planet A is a, and on planet B the b. Thus, the probability,

that life will emerge in this system of planets is sum a+b. Assuming, that

life will occur only on one planet of these two.

Let the p be the upper limit of probability, it is the probability of life

emergence on a planet best suited for life.

Yes, it is very hard to calculate the p. But one can get some information about it. Namely, assuming, that p is small, the p is less than 100/N, where N is the number of planets suitable for life in the entire Universe and Multiverse.

The exact probability of Abiogenesis is unknown in Neo-Darwinism. The lowest limit

is 0, and the upper limit is 1/(250!), where 250 is the number of proteins, the

(!) is factorial of 250. Therefore, mine p=100/N belongs to 0<100/N<1/(250!).

The formula 100/N comes from the assumption, that probability of life to emerge on Earth was very small. That might not hold for primitive life, like apes, trees, cats. But for technically advanced life this assumption perfectly holds: the SETI has not detected signals of such life.

Life has begun. Therefore, the above statement with probability P was realized

and the second statement with probability p was realized as well. But even if

P is 50%, the second statement is practically impossible if the probability p

is near zero. This means that Jordano Bruno's idea of infinite many planets

suitable for life does not help life to emerge on our planet.

Secondly, the fine-tuning argument/proof for God was debunked by the

Multiverse idea: each universe in the infinite Multiverse is equipped with

slightly different fundamental constants of physics. But due to the present

note, the idea of many universes does not help our universe to have the right

physical constants.

Moreover, it certainly harms the idea of life on Earth to have an entire

lifeless universe-s out there. Because then N=infinity, and so p=0, as p<100%/N.

The original is published in ResearchGate:

(PDF) Zero Evolution probability

DISCUSSION:

Formally speaking:

Situation prior to life emergence in our Universe:

1. There is 50 % probability, that the Universe gets alive.

2. There is zero probability, that Earth gets alive.

Situation after the life emergence in our Universe:

1. There is 100 % probability, that the Universe got alive.

2. There is 100 % probability, that Earth got alive.

But because the event with zero % probability never happens, the Creationists are right: we need God to jump from zero to 100 %.

Analogously the Multiverse and fine-tuning:

There was zero probability, that our Universe will get the right physical constants for life. But then this probability became 100. It is a miracle!

It is really hard to save people these "last days". OK. The probability of simple lifeforms is some p=10 %. However, the probability of technically advanced life is near zero: we didn't get signals from space. So, in my paper, I will write this: "due to paper

https://www.quantamagazine.org/a-new-thermodynamics-theory-of-the-origin-of-life-20140122/

the p can not be considered the probability of simple life, but rather of the technically advanced one."

God is hiding because He does not want to be scientifically proven. He wants to be loved, not proven!

What method God used to create human beings?

Wonder. Simply - wonder. Because the God is Spirit. For example, the Spirit of Knowledge. God knows even the answer to Riemann Hypothesis, even if God has no proof of it. Because His name is Knowledge. Same way, His name is Creativity. Therefore, He can create man even from nothing.

The difference between Creationism and Neo-Darwinism is the number of kinds.

It is well explained here:

Comprehension of Evolution and Creation

Reviewer insults my scientific talents:

"I can't make heads or tails of this word salad, tbh."

To whom I reply:

It is not different from any good scientific paper. I bet, you would say "word salat" to any of Dr. Hawking's papers. Provided, if he is not PhD and not peer-reviewed.

I am not hurt by this injustice because I am a loser. Look: if during 10 last years you have faced injustice, then the probability that during the next month you'll face recognition is simply

one month divided by the number of months in 10 years, which is one percent.

Look: the failures in life are making us a loser. And success-es are making from us a Lucky, charismatic person.

Reviewer: "you have here the intelligent-seeming math (which has been noted by others who evidently can do math, that it also "fails")."

To whom I reply by axiom: "Some people (not all) lie constantly, other people lie only once a month. All we lie."

DEFINITION:

The sense of Theory of Probability is in this: if the probability of an event p is 50 %, then we compare it to the following STANDARD event: one time tossed a coin onto the air falls "head". If the probability of an event is 1/100 then 7 times in the row tossed coin falls "head". We hate it if we need to toss the coin 30 times and constantly get "head". Thus, such an event, assumably, has not happened. Hereby it is forbidden by the theory to repeat the attempts. You need to get 30 heads by one single attempt. You can not repeat the 30 tosses day after day. You have only one time. Try it.

The probability, that I exist seems to be near zero because the right sperm-microbe of my father's sperm sample was very lucky to get into the right egg of my mother. However, Science has not proven yet, that soul or consciousness exists at all. Therefore, it is not an objection to my paper.

But even if there is soul, I would reply: God did it, God has bitten the odds.

PAPER:

The assumption that life has begun accidentally is presented as a scientific fact

by Science, not as an assumption: "the process of Evolution is scientific fact."

Evolution is defined as the accidental process, in

particular, man came from a common ancestor with monkeys by accident.

The modern textbook definition of Evolution says, that Evolution is not directed process.

Thus, accidental.

Therefore, Science is factually against God.

Science does defy the "pseudo-science" creationism, more specifically Young Earth Creationism.

But the YEC is a religion. Thus, at least one religion gets in the way of Science.

Let us consider a group of 10 lifeless similar planets. The probability that

at least on one planet in this group life will begin is P. Let us consider the

lifeless planet Earth, one of the planets in this group. The probability that

life will begin on Earth is p = P/10. Generally, if there are N planets, then

p is about p=P/N (for small p). Indeed, the probability, that life will emerge

on planet A is a, and on planet B the b. Thus, the probability,

that life will emerge in this system of planets is sum a+b. Assuming, that

life will occur only on one planet of these two.

Let the p be the upper limit of probability, it is the probability of life

emergence on a planet best suited for life.

Yes, it is very hard to calculate the p. But one can get some information about it. Namely, assuming, that p is small, the p is less than 100/N, where N is the number of planets suitable for life in the entire Universe and Multiverse.

The exact probability of Abiogenesis is unknown in Neo-Darwinism. The lowest limit

is 0, and the upper limit is 1/(250!), where 250 is the number of proteins, the

(!) is factorial of 250. Therefore, mine p=100/N belongs to 0<100/N<1/(250!).

The formula 100/N comes from the assumption, that probability of life to emerge on Earth was very small. That might not hold for primitive life, like apes, trees, cats. But for technically advanced life this assumption perfectly holds: the SETI has not detected signals of such life.

Life has begun. Therefore, the above statement with probability P was realized

and the second statement with probability p was realized as well. But even if

P is 50%, the second statement is practically impossible if the probability p

is near zero. This means that Jordano Bruno's idea of infinite many planets

suitable for life does not help life to emerge on our planet.

Secondly, the fine-tuning argument/proof for God was debunked by the

Multiverse idea: each universe in the infinite Multiverse is equipped with

slightly different fundamental constants of physics. But due to the present

note, the idea of many universes does not help our universe to have the right

physical constants.

Moreover, it certainly harms the idea of life on Earth to have an entire

lifeless universe-s out there. Because then N=infinity, and so p=0, as p<100%/N.

The original is published in ResearchGate:

(PDF) Zero Evolution probability

DISCUSSION:

Formally speaking:

Situation prior to life emergence in our Universe:

1. There is 50 % probability, that the Universe gets alive.

2. There is zero probability, that Earth gets alive.

Situation after the life emergence in our Universe:

1. There is 100 % probability, that the Universe got alive.

2. There is 100 % probability, that Earth got alive.

But because the event with zero % probability never happens, the Creationists are right: we need God to jump from zero to 100 %.

Analogously the Multiverse and fine-tuning:

There was zero probability, that our Universe will get the right physical constants for life. But then this probability became 100. It is a miracle!

It is really hard to save people these "last days". OK. The probability of simple lifeforms is some p=10 %. However, the probability of technically advanced life is near zero: we didn't get signals from space. So, in my paper, I will write this: "due to paper

https://www.quantamagazine.org/a-new-thermodynamics-theory-of-the-origin-of-life-20140122/

the p can not be considered the probability of simple life, but rather of the technically advanced one."

God is hiding because He does not want to be scientifically proven. He wants to be loved, not proven!

What method God used to create human beings?

Wonder. Simply - wonder. Because the God is Spirit. For example, the Spirit of Knowledge. God knows even the answer to Riemann Hypothesis, even if God has no proof of it. Because His name is Knowledge. Same way, His name is Creativity. Therefore, He can create man even from nothing.

The difference between Creationism and Neo-Darwinism is the number of kinds.

It is well explained here:

Comprehension of Evolution and Creation

Last edited: