Dr.GH
Posts: 2333
Joined: May 2002
|
| Quote | | I guess we could envision a microscopic bubble which forms automatically through simple mechanical actions like waves coming ashore or bubbles created in an underwater hot vent. From several sources I've read pieces discussing the self-replicating nature of the spheres being due to the specific structure of the enclosing membrane. |
Think of waves crashing up aginst rocky coast. Trillions of bubbles every few seconds. With higher tides on a fairly fast cycle, you generate astronomical numbers of "trials" every day. Every high tide leaves billions of trillions of oily bubbles exposed on the shore to dry out and also be soaked in UV light. The products are recovered for further reactions on the next tide.
I have never been impressed with the so-called "cosmic upper bound" What is the number Dembski likes to spout? 10^150?? This is supposed to represent the number of states that universe could possibly have given the number of particles in the universe and their possible states. Piffle, piffle. Lets say 10^15 bubbles per kilometer of shoreline (very modest), recycled/repeated 10^4 times every day for maybe 50 million years. The notion of how long is a shoreline is difficult, but let's pull a number out of the air; 10^6 kilometers (very modest). We are well on the way without adding rivers, waterfalls, storms, wind caps, oceanic waves, under water thermal vents, geysers etc... I think that every single bubble is a "trial." Now repeat for a hundred billion galaxies with a hundred billion stars, for say ten billion years, just to bring us up to bat, and we have nearly 50/50 odds. (unless it is very late at night and I can't add). I doubt that every star has planets of that every planet could support life. There are also good reasons we need to wait until there are metal rich star systems. So even shedding a few orders of magnitude here and there, the odds are far from grim and we can top Borel's number of 10^50 cited by Dembski.
Earlier I was asked if I were a pessimist about abiogenesis, and obviously I am not. I am doubtful that we will be able to demonstrate that a "particular" pathway to life was inevitable, unique in the universe, or the particular one followed here on earth. I know it happened, we are here aren't we?
Edited by Dr.GH on Jan. 14 2007,02:19
--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."
L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"
|
