The probability of spontaneous life forming by evolution is 'small to utopian'

How do 20 natural left-handed amino acids randomly gather together to create the first life? According to mathematics, the probability for that to happen is only about 0b. How does 2000 enzymes appear at the same time to create the first cell? The probability of that event is about 0a. These numbers show that life CANNOT be spontaneous!

Evolutionary theory explains the diversity of the biological world through the evolutionary chain: where A is the first creature and Z is the last creature.

The question immediately arises: What is the first creature? Where did it come from? In other words: What is the origin of life? If that question is not answered, the theory of evolution will collapse.

At the beginning, the atmosphere on the earth was different from the current atmosphere. Free oxygen gas hardly exists. The elements nitrogen, hydrogen and carbon form carbon dioxide, methane, ammonia and water. When lightning and ultraviolet rays impact the mixture of these gases and water vapor, sugar and amino acids are created. These molecular mixtures drift into the sea or other water bodies. For a long time, sugar, acid and other mixtures condensed into "pre-ecology soup pot", in which random amino acids combine to form proteins. Broadly speaking, other compounds called nucleotides merge into chains and become nucleic acids, such as DNA. Protein and DNA molecules stumble upon each other, recognize each other and embrace each other. So the first cell formed! It was a difficult question, very difficult, would never even have an answer. More than 150 years have passed since the question was raised, so far there is no answer. In fact, the theory of evolution gave an answer, but not a science-based answer, but just a HYPOTHESIS - hypothesis of "primitive soup pot" with the following main content:

The whole scenario above is just a 100% fantasy fairy tale. A lot of facts cannot be verified and will never be verifiable. For example, how do we know the atmosphere is far away from today? In short, there is no evidence to support the "original soup pot" hypothesis, while there are hundreds of reasons to reject it. Mathematics is a reason.

Probability theory rejects the original theory of soup soup

In the above scenario, there is an important circumstance, that is, random amino acids aggregated together to form proteins . Although amino acids are a basic component of life as we see them today, but can they RANDOM gather together to make proteins?

To answer this question, it is important to know that today science knows 100 different amino acids, but only 20 are present in life (life only uses 20 types). Moreover, all of these 20 amino acids are left-handed. So the problem is how do 20 random left-handed amino acids in nature gather together to make proteins?

It will not solve this problem without knowing a fundamental law of life: the law of asymmetric life or the left-handed life law discovered by Louis Pasteur in 1848, when he was only 26 years old.

Today's lesson is just a brief reminder that the same organic compound can have two types of mirror symmetrical structures, like the right hand and the left hand. Such as molecules in the picture below.

Theoretically, for an organic compound, the probability for two types of structure to appear is the same: the ratio of 50-50. But the strange thing is that the organic compound in living cells has only the left hand structure (left-handed only). Pasteur discovered this when he studied tartaric acid crystals. While man-made tartaric acid in the laboratory or in the industry (called paratartaric acid) appears both in the right and left hand structures at the rate of 50-50, tartaric acid extracted from life (grape pulp) has only left-handed molecules. With genius intuition, Pasteur generalized that observation into a law, that left-handedness is characteristic of life - where there is life, where there is only left-handed, and reverse Again, where there is a molecule that is only left-handed, there is life.

Through more than 150 years of trial, this law is proven to be absolutely true - without any real case contrary to it. The evolutionary world is very uncomfortable, because it is challenging this law, but they still have to admit it is a confusing truth of life.

Applying this law to the case of amino acids, we have the following remark: in 100 amino acids in nature, amino acids have two types of right-handed and left-handed structures with a ratio of 50- 50 are not present in life, while the amino acids used by life have left-handed structures.

Interesting to recall a little about the Urey-Miller experiment in 1953, an experiment that was heavily advertised by the press was "making life", stirring up public opinion. But in fact it's an exaggeration - Miller only made a few amino acids, but they are all non-living amino acids, ie symmetrical amino acids with right-handed and left-handed molecules. face with equal ratio). It turns out this experiment has the opposite effect: it warns that life cannot be made out of matter without living! Life requires molecules only to LEFT HANDS, and that is beyond human ability. Miller himself 40 years later confessed to Scientific American magazine that "The issue of life origin is actually more difficult than I and most others expected ".

In 1969, biology professor Dean Kenyon, who believed in Darwinism , concluded: "Basically, it is unbelievable that matter and energy do not need help but organize themselves into living".

Indeed, all scientists now admit that it is impossible to explain why life is left-handed. It is a great secret, one of nature's greatest challenges.

Stuck in decoding this challenge, evolutionists recently turned to "blaming" the universe, that left-handed life is somewhere in the universe, and the universe has brought that life to the left. land. This blame does not change the core content of the problem, it just moves the location of the problem from the earth to the universe.

So it's time to try to figure out how much chance of 20 amino acids needed for life (left-handed) randomly gathered to form protein? This probability does not depend on the problem on earth or anywhere in the universe.

This is a typical, very interesting probability problem, which can be used as a sample exercise in probability theory for students and practical students.

To make it easier to understand, imagine the amino acids in nature as peas in the heap in the picture below, in which red beans are left-handed amino acids, white beans are right-handed amino acids.

Note that there are 100 different types of pea beans in the pile of white / red beans, and there are 20 types of life needed. Then the probability that 20 types of amino acids are needed for random life to gather together will be equivalent to the probability to randomly shuffle a batch of beans in a heap so that the batch receives all red beans. and all these red beans are the kind needed for life. So what is the probability of contacting a batch of beans? Just mixing a wrong type of grain will result in failure to form proteins, meaning that life cannot appear. Life needs a variety of proteins, so the problem is extremely complex. But even if one type of protein appeared, the probability would be extremely small, so small that it could be concluded that the event could not happen. Indeed, mathematicians calculated that probability, and said it was about: 0b (1 out of 10 caps 113).

In probability theory, mathematicians argue that an event with probability less than 0c can be considered never to happen. So the event with 0b probability cannot occur. To imagine how small this probability is, just imagine how big 10 caps 113 is - it's bigger than the number of atoms in the whole universe (!)

Conclusion : 20 types of amino acids needed for life cannot be randomly combined to produce proteins.

This is only the probability to form a protein. In fact there are many types of proteins, including proteins that play a vital role, without it, life will cease to function, which are enzymes - proteins that play a role in promoting chemical reactions within the cell. cell. Without these enzymes, cells will die. Yet there are up to 2000 different types of enzymes! What are the chances of at the same time randomizing all these enzymes?

Mathematicians answered: that probability is about 0a. This number is so small that Fred Hoyle, a famous English astronomer, must exclaim: "A terrible small probability . so small that the event cannot happen even in the whole case. the universe contains an organic soup ", then he concludes:" This calculation results in a clean sweep of spontaneous thought of life from the conflict (of the origin of life), if one is not determined. ants by social beliefs or by scientific education created (making it a stubborn conservative) ".

Fred Hoyle argues: "It is obvious that a series of amino acids binds together in a way to make a protein. But that is not important in biology: the problem is the deterministic order of amino acids give the string strange properties . If the amino acids are reconnected randomly, there are countless arrangements, but most of the rearrangement is useless, not suitable for items. For example, when we consider an enzyme made up of 200 amino acids that are joined together, that each junction has about 20 arrangements, then you will easily find that the arrangements are invisible. useful is a huge number, bigger than the number of atoms in all the visible galaxies with the strongest telescope. i am just an enzyme, there are about 2000 other enzymes, each has a very different task, so how can amino acids randomly connect together to create all these So instead of accepting life arising from the blind forces of nature with very small probability, it would be more reasonable to assume that the root of life is an intentional intellectual act. "

The proof of reason is more than enough to reject the fairy tale of Darwin's " original soup pot, " but the rejection of Darwinism will be even more powerful and decisive, if we know that real opportunity let spontaneous life be smaller than Fred Hoyle's " terrible little probability ". Why so?

Because even in the case of 20 amino acids gathered together, life has not yet formed. To have life, there must be cells - amino acids must be encased in cells, that is, cell membranes must appear.

But cell membranes are a complex part, far beyond Darwin's imagination and understanding. It is made up of protein, sugar and fat molecules. The evolutionist Leslie Orgel felt uneasy because the more he knew the truth inside life, the more obstacles he had to explain the first life formation. He said: " The current membrane consists of ducts and pumps responsible for controlling nutrient absorption and elimination of residues, metal ions, etc. These pipes are related to high-quality proteins - molecules that cannot be present at the beginning of the evolution of life. "

Of course Darwin doesn't know anything about the incredibly complex world inside a cell as we know it today. He thought the cell was simply a drop of organic matter with some organic compounds, and so he appealed to the liver to imagine the "small warm pond" with special environmental conditions for life. may arise randomly from non-living matter. After all, Darwin is an imaginative but naive man of science.

Was Darwin a character typical of British thought and character, because he was revered by the British court as a great man? I think this worship is actually more political than science. The most representative representatives of Britain's science are Isaac Newton, Lord Kelvin, Paul Dirac, . All these people believe in the Creator - the author of the laws of self Of course.

Closer to us, Fred Hoyle is also an Englishman, a highly influential mathematician and astronomer in the second half of the 20th century, having the opposite idea of ​​Darwin's 100% when he declared:

" The ability to spontaneously form life from non-living matter is 1 out of 10 40,000 caps. This number is large enough to bury Darwin along with his entire evolutionary theory. There is no original soup pot, though this planet or on another planet, and if the beginning of life is not accidental, it must be the result of a purposeful smart design ".

END

According to Kurt Gödel's Theorem of Incompleteness, it is not possible to establish a complete and non-contradictory axiomatic system for mathematics. In general, it is inferred that the first cause of any logical system cannot be proved. The theory of evolution is ambitious to explain the first cause of life, contrary to Gödel's Theorem , so the ambition to explain the origin of life is just an utopian dream. The results of the above probability calculation are consistent with Gödel's Theorem.