Origin of Life and Matter, Limitations of Science

(Third Edition)

Ever pondered your own existence and wondered why it's rewarding to raise a child that come with all the difficulties? Is it because you bound by a commandment to to go forth and multiply?

That's utterly ridiculous to believe because no entity has been seen or heard to have given such a commandment even though we find that all species seem to do so.

To designers and engineers, it should be unthinkable to consider that things with intricacies can come into existence without a designer, in particular, robotic computers with powerful operating systems.

Delved into the arts and sciences, self-aware, self-contained and dexterous with the ability to self-repair and self-replicate and powered by the most efficient energy production technology, we are surrounded by prehistoric machines that are at the top of the class even to this day.

From a design and engineering perspective, they are near perfect and super advanced and are classified under engineering terms as mobile biochemoelectromechanical super computing robots. Who designed them?

In case you don't already know, those prehistoric super robots are those of the human body, brain and mind.

Atheists say these machines originated from mere chemical reactions of matter, lightning and evolution because no designer has been seen. Without due regard for complexity and intricacy, they say that a piece of pot is obviously a designer item.

Even simplest of these machines, single cell organisms, are far too complex for science to fully understand. We built super computers that have taken over infrastructure management. Robotic computers build our cars and smartphones virtually run our everyday lives today yet we don't not have the slightest inkling on how to build a single cell let alone its ability to self-replicate or the mysterious ability of stem cells to cure diseases.

More so, how and why single cell organisms upgrade into advanced species and how these grow from microscopic embryos are questions that science cannot answer. The operating systems governing evolution and reproduction are considered super advanced and way beyond the scope of our technology.

When we hear even the best experts talk about their knowhow in these fields, be assured that they are merely drawing from observations and experiments on how to apply alterations rather than deep understanding.

Some of Darwin's fans are among those who say that life originated from chemical reactions of matter, lightning and evolution. If they made you think so, that is because they mistook or misquoted Darwin's "Origin of Species" for the origin of life.

Darwin's declarations are no more than observations of an intelligent scientist and certainly limited at the surface of the intricate processes of evolution. He was merely saying that lifeforms evolved from other lifeforms in his famous book but said nothing about the origin of life.

Lifeforms and life are two different but intertwined subjects much like  computer systems. Computer hardware represents lifeforms. Software represents life. Computers come alive because of software. Lifeforms are alive because of life. Your smartphones are dead without software and so are lifeforms without life. Smartphones and lifeforms are tangible. Software and life are intangible.

There are questions of which one came first. Before hardware was created, software already existed in the mind of its maker. In the same manner, life came first because it existed in the mind of its maker before lifeforms were created.

But unlike software, which cannot function outside computer hardware, life goes on outside their biological hosts. This means that lifeforms are mere three-dimensional manifestations of life which exists beyond the realm of physical sciences.  To atheists, life is merely the activity of lifeforms.

The latter is a simple case of mediocracy while the former is backed up by hard evidence of confirmed testimonies of patients who clinically died but were revived.  Those patients testified to be floating in the air during the time their bodies had no vital signs of life but were able to describe visual and audible details of the events that occurred from a perspective that allowed them to view their own bodies while the medical staff applied emergency procedures.

Two cases of revived blind patients even told nurses where to find certain things they've lost. These confirmed testimonies are too numerous to ignore as evidence to support the belief that life  is indestructible and that consciousness continues to exists outside their biological hosts.

Thus, famous wheelchair-bound physicist and atheist, Steven Hawkins, who suggested that life is endemic throughout the universe and that there is "life in the middle of the sun", could not possibly explain the origin of life because life exists beyond the three-dimensional realm of physics.

But maybe Hawkins was right that there is life in the middle of the sun because life is indestructible and can travel to anywhere it wants to. But lifeforms are born and they die.

But if Hawkins was suggesting that there are lifeforms in the middle of the sun, he may be the greatest scifi writer of all time and it appears that he, or should I say, the science fiction writer makes no distinction between life and lifeforms.

Atheists were right that a piece of pot required a creator and nothing more. But they have allies among scientists who imply that matter just appears out of nowhere based on the "God particle" theory. And that seems to explain the origin of matter. Famous Hawkins is among them.

 

If something pops out of nowhere with the wave of a magic wand, that's magic. For science, a question should arise asking where or how matter seem to pop out of nowhere. For a scientist to argue that you don't need a god to create because of those properties is simply a show of mediocracy not befitting a scientist. An intelligent scientist should wonder whether the existence of matter and the dynamics of physics alone can create lifeforms let alone the complexities of advanced lifeforms.

The Great Albert Einstein, who was quoted to have twice mentioned God in his expressions which implies he is a believer, has a much bigger say on the origin of matter.

His famous but seemingly simple equation, e=mc2, proven to be true with the creations of the atomic bomb and nuclear power plants, states that to create matter you need energy. By splitting its atoms, energy is released.

But Einstein's equation brings up another question of which one came first.  Matter or energy? That will be like asking whether the chicken or the egg came first. Evolution may explain the chicken and the egg but whether matter or energy came first would be just one of those questions that science cannot conceivably answer.

Thus, the Big Bang that caused the expansion of the universe and the creation  all matter that make up the galaxies, stars and planets required  an immensely powerful source and immeasurable form of energy as the origin of matter.

Where that energy came from will forever remain a question for science which has reached a point where it is being confronted with questions that it cannot hopefully answer unless it subscribes to the existence of an immensely powerful entity.