However, his number cannot be "totally unrealistic" FOR THE SAME REASON.
whatever.
That's your opinion, and you have no corner on realistic.
In that case, show me the evidence. Show me the proof of those alleged "different ways" and "other arrangements."
The evidence is that there were no other ways considered, even to discredit them.
The evidence is that only one method of formation was considered and it has been shown not to represent reality.
That is the evidence necessary to show that the calculation is not a reasonable model of reality.
If we assume that life didn't come all at once (and we don't know that), then the components must have been separated by time and/or space. Would it make the probability even much smaller (exponentially smaller!) for the reasons I described as "logistics?"
In a word, no.
Let's look at the "probability problem" from a different angle using the same kind of "logic" used in your calculations:
Take any protein and cut it in half: what is the probability that it would rejoin in exactly the same way as it was before being cut?
We'll label the protein {A-MN-Z} and it is cut into {A-M} and {N-Z} portions, and then we see that they can join in the following combinations:
{A-M}-{Z-N}
{M-A}-{Z-N}
{M-A}-{N-Z}
{A-M}-{N-Z} .... !!!BINGO!!! 25% of the time == WOW!!!
Next we'll put them in a sea of {A-M} and {N-Z} sub-proteins, say 10
^+42 just for fun. What is the probability that
at least one {A-M}-{N-Z} combination would form? Well, the probability that one would NOT form is 0.75
^+42 = ~0, so it must actually have happened (same creatortionista logic on probabilities = possiblities when close to unity\zero)
Now we take each sub=protein and do the same "thought experiment" with them
{A-FG-M} becomes {A-F} and {G-M} and the combinations are:
{A-F}-{M-G}
{F-A}-{M-G}
{F-A}-{G-M}
{A-F}-{G-M} .... right? Still 25% of the time (using creatortionista logic), eh?
Next we'll put them in a sea of {A-F} and {G-M} sub-proteins, say 10
^+84 just for fun. What is the probability that
at least one {A-F}-{G-M} combination would form? Again, the probability that one would NOT form is 0.75
^+84 = ~0, again, so it MUST have happened as well. GOSH.
And then the other half:
{N-ST-Z} becomes {N-S} and {T-Z}
{N-S}-{Z-T}
{S-N}-{Z-T}
{S-N}-{T-Z}
{N-S}-{T-Z} ... still good? Still 25% of the time (using creatortionista logic), eh?
Next we'll put them in a sea of {N-S} and {T-Z} sub-proteins, say 10
^+84 just for fun. What is the probability that
at least one {A-F}-{G-M} combination would form? Again, the probability that one would NOT form is 0.75
^+84 = ~0, once again, so it MUST have happened as well. GOSH AND GOLLY.
And we can keep going, dividing and recombining until we get down to {A-B} {C-D} {E-F} {G-H} {I-J} {K-L} {M-N} {O-P} {Q-R} {S-T} {U-V} {W-X} {Y-Z} ... or in the real world until we get down to the 20 amino acids (which we now know can be formed spontaneously or provided by extra-solar generation). In each case the probability of it NOT happening is your astronomically small probability number that YOU say is evidence that it never happened.
But we can also look at the probability of BOTH not happening -- it is
0.75
^+42 x 0.75
^+84 = 0.75
^+42+84 = 0.75
^+126
Which is LESS than either probability of it NOT happening, so it is even more likely that BOTH occurred.
By this same logic then it really MUST have happened.
This is just as "realistic" as Fred Hoyle's -- and all similar creatortionista calculations.
Unfortunately, quite a few of them think that their theories are proven facts.
Care to back that assertion with some facts?
Edited by RAZD, : No reason given.
Join the effort to unravel {AIDS/HIV} {Protenes} and {Cancer} with Team EvC! (click)
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
™ Version 4.2