CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:15
Arguments:11
Total Votes:15
Ended:05/28/10
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Why is the Universe life forming? (11)

Debate Creator

nthdegreeman(39) pic



This debate has ended. You can no longer add arguments or vote in this debate.

Why is the Universe life forming?

Drs Stephen Hawkings, Machio Kiku, George Smoot and many others are "pro life forming Universe" Theoretical and Experimental Physicists (I am not sure if they are anthropomorphic believers). The great philosophical science question indeed... how does the mechanism of the universe know to "form" itself from chaos while operating within the laws of entropy. Becareful, this may be a chicken or the egg type question where the boundaries of faith and science may intersect?

Add New Argument
2 points

simple axiomatic rules.

an example of this is the Mandelbrot set and it is defined as the set of Z which satisfies Zn+1 = Zn^(2) + C being bounded. This is true for I=(-1)^(1\2) = Z initial ,and can be plotted on a complex plain.

i'm sure you've seen it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mandel_zoom_00_mandelbrot_set.jpg

Supporting Evidence: mandelbrot set (en.wikipedia.org)

what a wonderful description... you've observed ONE of many "natural forms" of nature inherent through the universe. Other natural forms are the Lorentz Attractor, chemical protein folds in nature for carbon and oxygen in atomic form, and in molecular form, CO and H2O plus a myriad of molecules based on nitrogen. Incidentally, but without error in nature, the fact that our human body is made up the every same atomic and molecular structure based of the same proportions amongst star material cannot be anything but engineered. This becomes a whole separate debate as to how the basic Physics principles of forms of nature are derived and reduced into biochemical forms.

Side: Life can emerge from simple rules
1 point

Incidentally, but without error in nature, the fact that our human body is made up the every same atomic and molecular structure based of the same proportions amongst star material cannot be anything but engineered.

I am not quite certain I understand what you mean here. If you mean engineered as in a sign of intent, I think you'd find that the proportions of elements deposited amongst life should reflect a similar degree of congruence with their occurrence in the universe, simply as a product of competition for scaffolding resources and selection pressure to use what exists.

Side: Life can emerge from simple rules
1 point

The universe has simple rules governing the most basic bits of energy and matter, and when they interact on large scales you see new behaviours emerge. Think of life as the product of emergence from a very simple rule set acting along celestial boundaries and galactic time.

This is a long way of saying "because it can."

Another way of answering the question is that since self-replicating molecules are capable of forming in this universe, it supports life.

Side: Life can emerge from simple rules

Agreed however, although we can describe the "forms" of nature in simplistic terms, the FACT that the probabilistic view of life formation in the universe tend to complicate the argument in support of a life forming universe, the FACT that statistical anomalies tend to be guaranteed to successfully yield the right balance of hydrogen, carbon oxygen helium in nature (we know this from meteorites ex planet Earth) that the same make up is inherent in these materials as on Earth suggests Natural Law uniformity (as such so are the Laws of Gravity inherent in our side of the galaxy as in the opposite side of the universe were it possible to measure).

Side: Life can emerge from simple rules
2 points

Yes, this is known as symmetry in our universe and leads to an important ability to simplify models of nature as well as derive conservation laws.

Side: Life can emerge from simple rules

Cosmological, Experimental and Theoretical Physicists have an easier time understanding the natural forms of nature than perhaps, Evolutionary Biologists, Organic Chemists etc in MOST cases. The argument for natural forms in nature and its implication in the development of cellular construction as the precursor to biological evolution mechanisms are easier to understand with respect to the laws of nature (strong and weak nuclear forces, electromagnetic and gravitational forces), inherent in atomic structure. Understanding this Newtonian (Principia philosophy) idea of classic Physics lends itself to intelligently designed, architect-ed or molecular forms in nature. Perhaps the modern biological evolutionary mechanism isn't the ONLY mechanism that can exist in the nature of biology. References www.youtube.com type "Dr Michael Denton" (Molecular Chemistry Professor) . See scientific papers http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12419661 (this is on the U.S. Federal go NIH website) The Protein Folds as Platonic Forms: New Support for the Pre-Darwinian Conception of Evolution by Natural Law 2003. http://forums.philosophyforums.com/threads/how-did-dna-evolve-37241.html I have the peer reviewed paper from the University of Otago New Zealand by Dr Michael Denton. You are welcome to a copy (PDF file) if you send me a direct message, I will respond and supply the paper.

Side: Life can emerge from simple rules