I was out on facebook discussing, with a well known PhD creation scientist, the Ebola virus. Naturally, the discussion got onto information being added to a genome. This led to the following two links being posted (to me):-
Scientific laws of information and their implications—part 1
More or less information? / Has a recent experiment proved creation?
Now the second link advises this (bolding mine, and links omitted):-
But according to the first link:-
Now, I’ve written to the creation scientist pointing out that if Gitt’s first law is to be believed, then the answer to the question raised in respect to that experiment mentioned in the second quote should be a resounding “No”, surely.
Presumably, sonoluminescence is sound (a material phenomenon), producing energy (a material phenomenon), and that energy has information associated with it. It seems that a whiff of such logic is being argued if it’s suggested that the phenomenon may vaguely, possibly, just inform us about God speaking light into existence, but don’t press it too hard.
This got me thinking about that first law of Gitt’s.
Is it necessarily so? If I can look at a rock, examine it, look at its chemical and physical properties, and extract meaning from the associated data (e.g that rock is igneous, and was produced by that volcano over there), then surely information must exist for me to extract meaning.
But it was a natural (material/energetic) process (the volcano) that produced that rock in the first place.
Hence a material process, a material entity can generate information (a non-material entity).
Scientific laws of information and their implications—part 1
More or less information? / Has a recent experiment proved creation?
Now the second link advises this (bolding mine, and links omitted):-
Originally posted by first link above
Originally posted by Gitt’s first law of information
Now, I’ve written to the creation scientist pointing out that if Gitt’s first law is to be believed, then the answer to the question raised in respect to that experiment mentioned in the second quote should be a resounding “No”, surely.
Presumably, sonoluminescence is sound (a material phenomenon), producing energy (a material phenomenon), and that energy has information associated with it. It seems that a whiff of such logic is being argued if it’s suggested that the phenomenon may vaguely, possibly, just inform us about God speaking light into existence, but don’t press it too hard.
This got me thinking about that first law of Gitt’s.
Is it necessarily so? If I can look at a rock, examine it, look at its chemical and physical properties, and extract meaning from the associated data (e.g that rock is igneous, and was produced by that volcano over there), then surely information must exist for me to extract meaning.
But it was a natural (material/energetic) process (the volcano) that produced that rock in the first place.
Hence a material process, a material entity can generate information (a non-material entity).
Comment