「生命は宇宙から来た」未邦訳部分 自動翻訳音声

「生命は宇宙から来た」未邦訳部分 自動翻訳音声

Convergence towards God At this point, it might be better to stop if it’s just to maintain your qualifications as a scientist.After all, there are no biologists who are dissatisfied with the status quo. have believed that the Earth provides a sufficient environment for the origin and evolution of life, so

On the galactic scale, the environmental diversity of the Earth is 10 to the 11th power, and on the cosmic scale, it is 10 to the 20th power, as shown in Figure 4.1. One cannot be dissatisfied with biological materials ↗ ↘ interstellar gas stars planets comets ↖ ↙

Amplified biological materials amplification cycles in astrobiology but if we are to maintain a correct scientific perspective the calculations in Chapter 2 At some stage we have to face the numbers. So we showed that even if we randomly shuffled the amino acids, the chance of producing an enzyme

Was less than 1 in 10 to the 40,000th power. It is common to try to get around this conundrum by claiming that enzymes evolved into polypeptides that were shorter and more complex, ultimately resulting in their current form. There is no point in trying to argue that the 2,000 or so

Enzymes are made from a much smaller number of basic building blocks, and that each building block has a simple structure. There are some structural repeats that can be determined by referring to the actual amino acid sequence of , but trypsin and chymotrypsin are given as examples in Chapter 2.If such surprising

Findings were true, they would have been discovered long ago. Furthermore , the same problem applies broadly to other complex biological materials such as histones, and the problem becomes even more acute when we consider the need for programs that control cell behavior. Anyone who has actually written a

Sophisticated program for a regular computer rather than in a provided language will agree that writing subroutines is the most difficult task. is the logic of the main program. In biology, enzymes, histones, etc. are just subroutines. The main program still remains, and the possibility of being discovered by a random process is the

Complex biological material on which our probability estimates are based. If there was an atlas showing the amino acid sequences of all enzymes, a human biochemist could construct it with complete accuracy; In fact, Encyclopedia Britannica can specify all the structural and functional sequences of DNA in human cells, and with enough effort can

Build all the complex biochemicals a cell needs. Furthermore, if we know the cellular program, we can express it physically.In short, if we know how to do it, it is far beyond human ability to create functional cells. No, any theory with a correct probability greater than 1/40,000

Must be judged to be better than random shuffle.The theory that life was assembled by intelligence has many of the mysteries mentioned in the previous chapter. In fact, such a theory is so obvious that we wonder why it is not widely accepted as self-evident. The reason for this is psychological rather than scientific.This

Kind of thing is implied by the special creation theory that God created individual living organisms. The impulse is _ Everything about special creationism that leans to the opposite extreme was considered to be false, and there was a general backlash against creationism among scientists.Since virtually every detail was considered wrong, life

Was created by intelligence. The basic idea of ​​creation was also denied , so we had to rely on natural inorganic processes.Somehow, the right chemicals came together to form an organic soup.Somehow, the chemicals were shuffled around and the early stages were created. From then on it seemed that

Natural selection acting on the simple and randomly generated mutations would do the rest, but by the mid-nineteenth century already this chemical shuffle Knowing that his claims were weak, Charles Darwin wrote: What if, in a small, warm pond, various ammonia and phosphates were present, and protein compounds were formed chemically,

Ready to undergo more complex changes? … Although the difficulty was recognized in the 19th century, it was not understood how large if10 to the 40,000th power was needed . As the enormity of the assumption gradually became clearer, attempts were made to circumvent this difficulty by inventing pseudoscience, which

Has its origins in the second law of thermodynamics. The second law is not a mathematical law of physics in the usual sense ; unlike Maxwell’s electromagnetic equations and Einstein ‘s equations of gravity, the second law relates physical quantities at individual points in space (a closed box), and

Relates physical quantities within that volume of time. Thermodynamics is an empirical science that refers to what happens during extension. The laws of thermodynamics . The second law describes certain general characteristics by which complex material systems are observed to behave. One way to express this is that a certain quantity called entropy never decreases.The

Problem for many scientists is to explain why entropy does not decrease in terms of physical laws such as Maxwell’s and Einstein’s laws. Perhaps the most penetrating analysis of this problem was made by the German mathematician C. Karatheodori in 1909, but his work did not reach the desired results and

Was not generally praised. He proved that entropy either never decreases or never increases, but he still had to make arbitrary choices to match the observed situation, which was inconclusive. I now understand what went wrong. There is no such thing as a closed box isolated from the universe. For example,

If there is a hot gas inside the box, the gas Containing thermal energy is impossible because there is no perfect insulation for the walls of the box , so unless there is an influx from outer space, the gas inside will lose thermal energy.

The argument goes that the key condition that the gas neither gains nor loses energy is possible only if the box is properly connected to the outer universe.Of course people in 1909 believed in perfect insulation. What they were not naive about was that the walls of the box

Could be made of a sufficiently good insulator that the penetration of heat through the box would be small and negligible. But that’s exactly where they went wrong. The penetration of heat, even if small , is enough to unbalance the two possibilities of carathodory. The situation as it is understood today

Leads to the second law of thermodynamics inside the box. It is the connection between the box and the outer universe that determines the second law, which states that there is nothing. Although it is hindsight, the solution to this problem should have been recognized even in 1909. Since the second law

Does not refer to individual points in spacetime, but to the volume of spacetime, it is a truly trivial conjecture that the volume in question must be the entire universe, as mathematicians say. The Two Laws Must Be Global Laws Without taking advantage of this recognition, some

Scientists think of the problem of entropy as a closed box that determines it from within. I began searching for what I thought were new deep principles that could be applied to the behavior of material systems within, deep principles that I would impose on all sufficiently complex material systems.

It was the kind of thing that I came to describe as lifting myself up : there needs to be an explanation of the facts, so there needs to be principles, and no matter how imperfect the theory is, it’s true in the long run. The problem with unicorns is that

It is almost the same as the current bootstrap.It is still used in Darwinism.This is where the concept of scientific unicorns, which will someday become real animals, was born.The trouble with unicorns is that you can keep one If unicorns can determine the second law of thermodynamics , why not create another unicorn that can

Shuffle amino acids into enzymes ? It’s not a unicorn, it’s a unicorn with deep principles. It’s because there are deep principles that govern the nature of things. This idea is an older religious concept that it was supposed to

Replace , except that the word nature was used instead of God. It was really the same thing. We’re quick to follow the unicorn of Darwinism. As we’ve seen in previous chapters, Darwinism has so many flaws. Why has it taken over the world of science so completely?

Some may wonder why this endemic disease is still prevalent today.There are several reasons.Natural selection, proposed by Edward Blyth in 1835, was a sound and solid idea.Extreme religious bigotry Only those who suffer may not accept its validity, but it is precisely those who

Choose to argue the case against Darwinism and choose to do so in the full force of public controversy who suffer. Their defeat in the problem of natural selection was inevitable, and the public who saw them flying unchecked

Seemed only a matter of common sense to accept the validity of Darwin’s entire story. There was no general recognition that the real question of controversy, which had existed for decades between Charles and Darwin, was still unresolved. Difficulties for a few people who tried to understand the real question of

Whether or not it is sufficient to implicitly explain the origin of life, which Darwin argued but Bryce did not, arose in the 19th century. Before the advent of modern microbiology, evolutionists simply pointed to the long time scales of geology to produce the claimed effects . There was no

Way to prove that a time scale of 40,000 to the power of Christianity as practiced today is a fairly benign social philosophy, but in the Middle Ages it spanned the gamut of intellectual thought in the most frightening way. A similar but less extreme situation prevails in Marxist states today . Dissidents

Can now try to escape across the Iron Curtain. In the Middle Ages, there was no Iron Curtain, because there was nowhere to run. By the 19th century, the tyranny had passed, but otherwise there was no Iron Curtain. Its origins would have received a similar reputation as Copernicus’ theory of revolution.But Christianity,

Despite the loss of thumbscrews and other instruments of torture, still maintained respectability.Unless you were a Christian, you were not considered a gentleman and mathematicians If you wanted to get into Cambridge University to study, you had to pass Paley’s evidence exam and attend compulsory chapel . It

Was this less extreme position that was defeated by Darwinism, which meant that you could not be a Christian. William of Ockham , c.1285 c.1349 Often referred to as the proponent of a method , most likely by scientists who have not read anything he actually wrote, Ockham is a method by which the

Intelligent human mind conforms to Christian concepts. A good example of how necessity can lead to absurdity, Ockham gave many sermons in 1330 and 1331 in which he explained that the souls of the saved receive visions of God immediately after death. Of course, this was not an appropriate way of thinking to approach the

Delicate issues of the scientific method. I mentioned William because there are definitely people who would use his razor to cut through the book’s arguments.Ockham’s razor is a Humpty Dumpty-esque man who now says exactly what he wants to say. We will

Give two examples that have been used against us in the past, then give our own interpretations, and then leave it to medieval historians to decide which of the three is correct.

Don’t propose a new theory if you already have a theory that hasn’t been disproven to the satisfaction of the scientific community.If this is what Ockham meant, then his opinion is worthless as far as science is concerned.If Einstein Had he taken this position, he would never have developed his theory of gravity ,

Because Newton’s theory was not considered to have been disproved by scientists in general. This small detail was not important to most astronomers and physicists until long after Einstein published his theory , which was consistent with At first glance, this doesn’t seem so bad, but if you think about it a little,

You’ll realize that our preference for simple possibilities is psychological rather than scientific. The more correct a theory is empirically, the more complex it appears.Quantum electrodynamics is probably the only theory that seems to be completely correct, and quantum electrodynamics is extremely complex

, which is why this elusive razor 2. The second interpretation is also meaningless; our own interpretation is that as new facts become available and new considerations are introduced, more and more hypotheses are needed to support the theory. This interpretation puts Darwinism at a disadvantage.In

The 120 years since it was published in On the Origin of Species, Darwin’s theory has had exactly this effect. Because that’s what Occam’s Razor forbids, its nature is to insist that Darwinism is correct, so the assumptions essential to its support must also be correct.This is what Occam’s

Razor forbids. Let’s talk a little bit about the evolutionary theory of JB Lamarck (1744-1829), who argued that traits acquired by parents tend to be passed on to offspring.If children spend their entire lives in the gymnasium, their children will have good motor nerves and will be devoted

To intellectual research throughout their lives. It would be easy to create impressive statistics to support this idea, and in an age when people were naive to the lies told by statistics, they believed it to be true. Of course, the important thing is that it is easy to be deceived.

People who are born physically weak do not choose to spend their lives in the gymnasium.Also, people with low intelligence do not want to spend their lives studying intellectually.In a complex society with a wide variety of occupations, most people do not choose to spend their lives in the gym. In

Fact, the social environment itself acts as a selection mechanism when choosing the job that best suits them.It is no wonder, then, that the abilities of offspring are generally correlated with the activities of their parents.Statistics as Lamarck thought. It is not so difficult to see through the trap that Darwinism avoided.Therefore,

We would never have heard of Lamarck’s name if ironic social developments had not occurred in the late 19th century after the publication of On the Origin of Species. Just as nature hates a vacuum, society also seems to hate a fluid intellectual situation.People seem to have more excitement

In their lives when there are simple, wide-ranging problems that they can passionately devote themselves to.Christianity When the intellectual restraints that had been imposed on them were lifted, a search for new forms of intellectual restraint sprang up among idle people. Quite a number of solutions were tried. Attempts to harvest grass failed because

Humans did not have the right kind of bacteria in their digestive systems.The winner was Marxism in some societies and Marxism in others. The idealism of early Marxism, which proved to be a paler relative socialism, was vastly different from the rigid reality that followed, just as early Christianity was vastly different from the

Rigid reality of the later medieval world. To begin with, the whole story was about human dignity and fulfillment.The teachings of biology must have seemed horrifying to people steeped in such ideas, but they were abhorrent. Darwinism cannot be denied because it was Darwinism that destroyed its rival, Christianity.Lamarckism found a loophole in this dilemma.Socialism

Means that the sincere efforts of parents are rewarded by improved abilities of their descendants. How much better it would have been for Beethoven, who fit perfectly with the ideals of the ideal, to have been born to parents who worked as

Earnest and humble musicians, especially to humble parents, rather than to a mother who suffered from tuberculosis and a father who was an alcoholic. That biological genetics allows great geniuses to emerge from unfavorable social circumstances is indeed an inspiration comparable to that of Beethoven’s own late quartets

. It was actually the same as the Christianity it replaced, except that instead of being rewarded with one’s children, one’s own children were to be rewarded. In fact, the new socialism was ironically the only thing that mattered in the old religion. There was little that differed from

Old Christianity except that the concept of God, which was the concept of Many attempts were made to prove that acquired traits could be inherited, and experiments to this end continued into the late 20th century. The issues were sometimes delicate, but the purported

Proofs of Lamarckism were always shown to be false, to the point that even the Soviet Union’s leaders dared not attempt to maintain the Lamarckian position. But if it succeeds, there is no doubt that it will return to the position of Lamarckism, which will eventually dominate thought throughout the world.The

Failure of Lamarckism to prove itself only serves as a disproof of Lamarckism. It has been taken as proof of Darwinism , but if it is proven that these two possibilities are completely excluded, this reversal logic will be justified.Of course, such mutual exclusivity cannot be shown. Since we are not

Faced with an either/or situation, this reversal phenomenon is just as false as the proof of Lamarckism, but the decline of Lamarckism means that Erwinism must be correct. It certainly played a historical role in convincing biologists that, in addition to what has been said above, to understand why Darwinism was able to

Dominate scientific thinking so strongly, We must add the great force of continuity. It is difficult in later life to doubt the basic tenets of intellectual thought, which all teachers have accepted without question. We are creatures who say things like

: I admit that your views, which you have encountered many times with scholars, are consistent with the facts, and that they even have a certain driving logical quality that ordinary theories lack, but if I I do

N’t feel like facing the drastic change in my thinking that would occur if I agreed with your opinion.Once humanity as a whole is committed to a particular concept , it is impossible to change that pattern through continued education. It becomes very difficult to believe in the concept or be branded a

Heretic.The Protestant Reformation in Northern Europe broke away from the control of the Catholic Church after a long and painful struggle, but it did not break away from Christianity itself. The issues in the great debates were as trivial as how many angels could cluster around the head of a pin, or the

Trivial questions raised in William of Ockham’s sermon.True escape for the individual was impossible. But when humanity is divided on controversial issues, it’s relatively easy to run away, because if you’re thinking about changing your mind, there ‘s always someone on the other side with whom you can talk about your problems.

This is why a controversial situation is healthy and why a non-controversial society is unhealthy.The leaders of the Soviet Union were very concerned that opposition movements would be suppressed throughout the KGB and Red Army-controlled areas. This is the reality that Marxism led to.There

Is no doubt that past history and continuing education are two reasons why Darwinism is retained in the scientific community , but they claim to be the only reasons. If we did, we would be doing a grave injustice to our biologist colleagues, who

No doubt have a clear understanding of the option of what it means to remain within the safe smokescreen of Darwinism. It’s like you’re sitting on a little snow in the fog, and suddenly you’re on the north face of the Eiger, instead of the friendly heights you’d expect when the fog lifts. Only through

Intelligence can enzymes and other When we say we can assemble biochemicals we find ourselves in for a long and desperate climb. It may take generations to climb safely. But the first few steps aren’t so bad on the Eiger. As if the first few steps up the wall weren’t so bad, I happened

To mention Copernicus’ de revolutionibus in the discussion above.In this book, Copernicus explicitly abandoned the concept of the Earth as the geometric center of the universe for the first time. The conventional biological theory is that the earth’s organic soup and complex biochemicals miraculously

Combined to lead to the origin of life, but this is essentially a pre-Copernican idea that made the earth the biological center of the universe. An attempt to maintain a position similar to the passionate 16th century attempt to preserve pre-Copernican geocentrism, if

Humans were to survive in the three centuries that separated the Deevolutions from Hubble’s discovery of the expansion of the universe. No one would be surprised if our horizon expanded significantly.The next step is to face the chicken-and-egg problem: if life already existed, what would happen if

There was intelligence in our galaxy or elsewhere in the universe? It is easy to imagine that the decision was made to assemble enzymes, but what would be the point if enzymes were already present in the functioning of living organisms themselves ? Even if we could show that it was for a purpose, there

Would be no logical progress; in order for the hypothetical life form to function, we would have to explain how the enzymes came to be assembled in the first place. Here we might try to use a naive trick.Enzyme assembly becomes a problem for other organisms, not our own.Putting it this way, this trick becomes

Absurd. But in reality, it is the same trick that all religions do: shift all problems to God and refuse to discuss them further . In order to be logically consistent. It must be said that the intelligence that assembled the enzymes itself did not contain enzymes. This is equivalent

To claiming that carbonaceous life was invented by a non-carbonaceous intelligence, but it does not have to be divine in any way. is an atom similar to carbon, and it has often been speculated that life forms based on silicon exist instead of carbon. The idea quickly falls apart because it is

Easy to show that silicon is chemically less versatile than carbon, although they are generally similar.Therefore, in any case, it is easy to show that silicon is chemically less versatile than carbon . When you think about it from this point of view, it is hard

To imagine that life forms containing silicon arose before life forms containing carbon.However, what if we forget about chemistry and think about electronics ?In that case, silicon chips overwhelmingly beat carbon. We’ve all heard of it by now, but no one has thought about the possibility of carbon chips. So what if our ancestors

Were extremely complex silicon chips? There’s one thing right about this idea. No amount of intelligence, no matter how great, would be able to create carbonaceous life without doing enormous calculations.Within one volume of the Encyclopedia Britannica, the blueprints for all the enzymes and much more can be found. It is possible

To identify the blueprints of important biochemical substances , but computationally distinguishing that particular volume from all the volumes with 10 to the power of 40 000 incorrect specifications is a task far beyond human ability. The best way to do the necessary calculations would be

To use a silicon chip.For doing things, getting something, doing things, carbonaceous life forms would be best, but for quick calculations and perhaps thinking . However, this idea is verifiable in principle because it is possible to specify the necessary computational power if we can quantitatively estimate the amount of calculation

. In particular, we can only speculate that we may not yet have enough information on the mathematical details of complex chemical structures to determine whether calculations are possible even on silicon chips . The key point is that intelligence and quick calculations

Can stand up to the analysis of a wide range of possibilities, whereas mere random trials with actual chemicals can never do so. The same thing can be said at the level of technology.If we relied solely on combining chemicals randomly, chaos would quickly descend into chaos.What is the point of a silicon chip?It

‘s a tool.One of us. As suggested elsewhere, it’s a tool for controlling large-scale astronomical processes . The arrow leads to .In doing so, the silicon chip itself will succeed in spreading.With our current knowledge, this is all we can think of.But if this is all there is to it, the idea

Lacks grandeur. I’m sure you’ll be disappointed in the story we’ve been trying to unfold.To take the story further, you could write : → silicon chip → carbonaceous life form → silicon chip In this case, an unspecified intelligence or can be considered our direct ancestors ? → carbonaceous life forms → silicon chips

Problem definition is lost but our dignity is increased Select which of the above sequences to focus on ? It becomes somewhat irrelevant whether the If it is dominant, life will not occur.The necessary condition is that oxygen be present in greater quantities than carbon, which is exactly the situation.Both of these elements

Are produced from helium by nuclear reactions that occur inside stars. The details of the carbon nuclei have so far been elucidated to a great extent.Unavoidably, it has been found that obtaining the correct abundance, let alone

Obtaining the appropriate conditions, depends on some oxygen nuclei. Both the 7.65mev level and the 7.12mev level of the oxygen nucleus have to be adjusted very closely to these specific energy values.If we didn’t know from laboratory experience that everything should be this way.

If we had to properly set the probability of something happening in a state of ignorance, the probability might be estimated to be about 1 in 1000. Previously, the favorable properties of nuclei were just a lucky coincidence of physics, and without them It was thought that life could not exist. It

Was like a child fiddling with the tuning knob on a radio receiver. And when he turned on the receiver, the tuning happened to be exactly what he wanted . For more than a quarter of a century since the discovery of these properties of oxygen and carbon, the temperament of astronomers

Has veered away from the idea that this situation might be intentional, even if Otherwise, life would not have existed. So far so good. Next comes the reversal of logic. Since we are here, the favorable provisions of physics must hold, so there is no problem. This argument is as follows.

Q. Why is A taller than B? A is 6 feet 9 inches tall, while B is only 5 feet 9 inches tall. If the random inorganic origin of life had been maintained, we wouldn’t have created too many situations like this.Everything is a result of chance.However,

The probability of life occurring randomly does not change the concept of randomness. It is wise to assume that the advantageous properties of physics on which life depends are in every respect intentional, if they are found to be so infinitesimal as to render them absurd. The intelligence required to control properties is

Probably very high.The so-called coupling constant in physics is a numerical value that appears in science empirically, that is, it is determined based on observation rather than logical argument. Fundamental units of charge One of them is the charge of the electron.As far as the consistency of physics is concerned, the unit of charge

Can have an infinite number of values ​​other than those we assign from observation.Determines the desirable properties of carbon and oxygen nuclei. is the bond constant. By controlling the bond constant, intelligence may be able to determine various features of the universe. The remarkable chemical behavior of carbon atoms and the remarkable electronic

Properties of silicon chips may be controlled in this way. It is clear that we are moving to a much higher level of intelligence than that of a silicon chip, which is another important example of unparalleled properties.Calculating the properties of enzymes is an amazing feat from a human level. No doubt it seems

rather simple to an intelligence that can control the coupling constants of physics; astronomically speaking, controlling the origin of life is probably equally coupled to controlling stellar-scale processes. Controlling constants is Perhaps it’s equivalent to controlling galactic-scale processes. Can we now suggest that equivalence ? What’s the next rearrangement? ≡ Adding “God”

Is the end. But such a facile conclusion is difficult. This is because the relationship between God and the universe remains unclear.The result is that God is still only a part of the universe, and since it

Is within the universe, God is also only a part of the universe. Yes, this is certainly not a satisfying conclusion.People in the past did not think in this biological sense, but it was clear at a glance that society had a multilayered relationship.Emotional versus two-layered structure The conflict between the

Logical demands of a multilayered structure and the logical demands of a multi-layered structure caused great confusion in the religious systems of the past.The Greeks were unable to control their religion. An example showing progression to a lower order of existence Cronos → subsidiary gods and goddesses → king → people

This caused them many problems but no comparison to the problems of Catholics Catholics were roughly → ???? _ _ This arrangement has no meaning unless it has a clear meaning , but attempts to do so have always led to absurdity in the past.The position of most scientists is based on the following

Three points of view. I think we can say that it corresponds to either/or.1 No such order exists.2 3 There is such an order, but we don’t know anything about it so there’s no point in discussing it. Everything is wrong.The correct position that we think is that there is such an order, and

In the question mark to the left of humans is the term for the order of intelligence, which designed biochemical substances and brought about the origin of carbonaceous life. And to the left there is a higher intelligence that controls the coupling constants of physics.A gray religion that is not at all suitable for

Wearing fancy clothes or parading in the streets on saint’s days. It’s much better to bet on the possibility of being modestly right than to face the absolute certainty that something that may look like it is overwhelmingly wrong.Where does the sequence to the left stop ? The level indicated by the question mark

Increases steadily.However, there is an idealized limit like a mathematical sequence where a function converges, and by going far enough to the left, there is a property that the term differs even slightly from the idealized limit. This idealized limit is God, and God is the universe.

This closes the system of logic, leaving only one essentially incomprehensible question . You could use the humanistic trick of saying that if there was no such thing, no one would ask the question. But this is an evasion, not an answer.

Also, physicists claim that the universe was created by pairs of particles that emerged from a vacuum. However, this is not an answer because the physical properties of a vacuum are required and this is something.The old religions were best when they limited themselves to general theories such as the

Idea that humans were created in the image of God. This is a Jewish version of this particular idea , which probably dates back to ancient times . It is therefore almost inevitable that the measure of our own intelligence must reasonably reflect the

Higher intelligence to our left up to the extreme idealized limits of God. It is true that our defect lies in the limitations of our intellect, not in our inability to reason correctly in our own light; otherwise our situation would be hopeless. The calculation of the properties of enzymes that are difficult to solve

Is an example of the limitations of intelligence. Although we ourselves cannot deal with the enormous details involved in this particular problem, we can easily imagine the calculations being made and the general It may not be long before we can understand how the problems of coupling constants can be solved

Due to advances in modern physics. Although we cannot actually imitate what the intelligent lifeforms on the far left of this column are doing, we can understand in a non-detailed way what kind of monkey play they are playing. And this is

Science, properly understood. The way to establish a connection to a higher intelligence is by flying around the galaxy in a spaceship or listening to encoded radio waves emanating from other planetary systems in the galaxy. There are some people who think that it is a matter of taking or taking things.While we

May sympathize with the second of these ideas , we have rejected the first as being extremely time-consuming and crude and does not yield any benefits. And now I’m starting to think that the second way of thinking is unnecessarily troublesome.If we’re right, then

There’s bound to be a lot of space around us on the surface of this earth, just to the left of us in the array. There must be many clues to the true nature of the intelligence that exists in cells, perhaps even intelligence that calculates

The properties of enzymes. It would be wiser to look for such clues, of course , which would require obtaining DNA before it becomes garbled due to copying errors . If we attribute the main characteristics of spirituality to all higher intelligences, higher intelligences may have a remarkable sense of humor.The clues are

Handed out in the style of a child’s hidden object game. Trying to fit ourselves into the role of a higher intelligence that might have been the result of having clues locked away in the genome of a California sequoia

Would definitely suit our sense of humor or wit. Those with a greater propensity for farce could also trap clues in the social behavior of insects. Either possibility would be much easier than traveling the galaxy. Many people have higher intelligence. This is a much better idea , but it is still

Essentially an old religious idea, with important connections along the order. That is … → ????? → ???? → ??? → ?? → ? → Human → … is probably not all thoughts that appear in thoughts, but probably the entire process of consciousness. This series of connections, which

Have a deep cosmic meaning but not all thought, is a sudden flash of recognition that brought about a major change in all the major tendencies of human thought – to Damascus. The conclusion is likely to be limited to Paul’s conversion. This book presents the relationship between biology and

Astronomy in a broader perspective than previous works. Our perspective attributing this influence is anti-Darwinian and in some ways a return to the concept of special creation, but it is not the old concept of special creation. If we define it, the unit of creation that we think of is a gene,

Not a functioning collection of genes that we call a species.Which set of genes will survive and which set of genes will not survive depends on the earth’s environment. The potential for life to be determined is cosmic, but its realization is terrestrial.We are told by friends and colleagues that our views on such

Issues are generally resented in the scientific world. We have been warned and suggested that Darwin’s theory of evolution is not true, but we have been saddened to learn how little attention is paid to facts and how much attention is paid to myths and prejudices.

It is not difficult to find texts that state the myth that the fossil record is proven by Even the best writing can be blamed on the imperfections of the fossil record.But a patient study of the geological literature will eventually reveal the truth.The fossil record is very incomplete from Darwin’s point of view.

Paleontologists have known this truth for more than 100 years, but they are not recognized as experts in the field, not because of geologists’ ineptitude , but because the slow evolutionary connections that the theory requires did not occur. However , the rate at which genes encoding polypeptides such as hemoglobin undergo mutations

Has been measured to be less than 10 to the negative 5th power per generation. This means that the rate at which individual amino acids in the corresponding polypeptide chain change is less than 10 to the minus 7 power per generation. If only 10 were needed, an initially different sequence

Could not mutate into the required sequence.Darwin’s evolution meant that living cells could have only 1, let alone the thousands of polypeptides on which they depend for survival. This situation is well known to geneticists, but no one seems ready to sound the alarm definitively on this theory

. Of course this would not have been the case if it had been considered politically undesirable and not even essential to the peace of mind of the nation.If there were such an error in our own theory, there would be many voices against it. We

Did not arrive at the position described in this book in an instant.At first, we did not imagine that the small path we were following in interstellar space would eventually spread out and become a major highway. The whole picture was finally revealed by the discovery and combination

Of many unexpected facts , but what may have been a satisfying moment in those early days was met with difficulties that overwhelmed us. No matter how big the environment is, life cannot have started randomly. Even if a horde of monkeys were to randomly thunder over a typewriter

, it would not be possible to produce Shakespeare’s works. We need the entire observable universe. The same is true for living matter, for practical reasons that it is not large enough to accommodate the hordes of typewriters needed and the wastepaper baskets needed to handle the misguided attempts our ideas develop.

Just as it took Shakespeare’s brain to create his famous play, a monster-like apparition kept beckoning to him.In order to create living cells, he needed prior information.But where did the information come from? I want to answer this, but it’s something like this, which will incur the wrath of Tommy Gold.A

Male lecturer was talking about the nature of the Earth and the planets.Afterwards, an old woman came up to the lecturer from the audience and asked the lecturer: He claimed to have a better theory than the one that told us

That we don’t live on a sphere orbiting the sun, but on the crust of the earth on the back of a giant turtle . She asked the teacher, who wanted to please the old woman, what was the turtle standing on?

He answered confidently that it was on the back of a second, even bigger turtle. But what is supporting the second turtle ?The teacher continued in a slightly exasperated tone.No , the teacher and the old woman answered.It has always been a turtle.It symbolizes the difficult problems of life. As long as living cells are

Born from existing cells, we need support from another turtle.The question is, where does a turtle stop?The conventional answer is that a mountain of turtles ends up in an ocean of organic soup. Louis Pasteur , who denied the theory of spontaneous generation,

Is a scientifically impossible answer, as the story of Tommy Gold makes us think, but as in the words of Lord Kelvin quoted above in Chapter 3, he himself by the side of a little old woman … German scientist Hermann von

Helmholtz 1821-1894 also 1874 Even if all our attempts to generate living things from inanimate objects have failed, raising the question of whether life ever arose or is not as old as matter itself. It seems to me that this is a perfectly correct scientific procedure, and that seeds

Were not transported from one planet to another. The steady-state cosmology, which drives us toward a cosmology in which there is only an unbroken chain stretching back infinitely into the past, is in much better shape than the proponents of the past 15 years believed, but we are Indeed , over much longer spans

Than the 10 billion years of Big Bang cosmology, the universe may be nearly unchanging, but it is not as unchanging as Kelvin and Helmholtz effectively assumed. It’s questionable whether stability can hold up into the infinite past , given that the universe is evolving, but on time scales much longer than 10 billion years,

So what ultimately makes the old lady’s turtle pile At the beginning of this book, we emphasized that even the simplest living systems contain vast amounts of information, such as the meteorological and chemical processes that occur on the surfaces of lifeless planets. We believe that it is impossible for

This information to be generated by processes that are often called natural . We have argued that the information we need comes from a beckoning specter of intelligence. Yes, library books contain information, but we don’t think of books as intelligence. To define intelligence. requires additional qualities: the ability to act

On information that books alone cannot provide ; it requires not only the provision of information, but also the ability to act on that information; computers must act on information; It may be objected that it is possible to It doesn’t end there , because it

Replaces the problem of the origin of life with the problem of the origin of computers. We simply swap the turtle pile for the elephant pile. I won’t repeat it here, but from Chapter 9. The final part

Shows an attempt to address this transposition and the problem of infinity, which is the ultimate compass of the universe.

9章 神への収斂 結論
　　 生物材料
　　↗　　　　　　↘
星間ガス 　　　　　星、惑星、彗星
　　↖　　　　　　　↙
　　増幅された生体物質
図4.1宇宙生物学における増幅サイクル