Not too long ago, someone attempted to rebut my assertion of creationism by saying that evolution occurs through “random mutation.” When they mentioned the word “random,” a thought came to my mind: “Is anything truly random?” The comprehensive theory of evolution greatly relies on the possibility that something was truly random. Only under such circumstances could God be discredited for creation. There are several scientific anomalies I would like to discuss in regards to randomness: The Big Bang (or the universe’s origins), abiogenesis (the materialistic origin of life), and random mutation (a supposed mechanism for evolution).
The premise for the Big Bang is that all of the universe’s building blocks were compacted into a point in the midst of nothingness. For whatever reason, this point expanded (the theory has been revised, it used to be called an explosion) and eventually evolved into everything in the universe (Douglas C. Giancoli. 2005. Physics. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall. 933). However, it is now theorized that the expansion of space was not random but part of an ongoing cycle dictated by rules and laws. These rules and laws have yet to be determined, but it is no longer supposed that the expansion of space was “random.”
Abiogenesis supposes that life came from non-life. This occurred according to chance. The environment gathered the correct composition of molecules, at the correct time, and synthesized the building blocks of life. Could this have happened by chance or would this need to be a part of another naturally occurring, ongoing cycle that is inevitable?
Random mutation, though not part of Darwin’s original Theory of Evolution, supposedly facilitates the process of evolution within living creatures. But is a random mutation truly random? Let’s consider, for a moment, the word “random.” When we hear the word “random,” we suppose it means “blind chance” or “without a guiding force.” If we define the word “random” in such a way, we are ignoring the truth. The truth is that the definition of “random” is that something is unpredictable. For instance, the exact location of an electron within an electron cloud of an atom is considered random because scientists have so far been unable to predict the location of individual electrons in motion. But is that because there is no reason for how electrons move or is it because we have not yet devised a mathematical formula that is able to accurately predict the location of an electron within a cloud?
Let’s sum this all up. Could the Big Bang have been a result of blind chance? No. If there was a Big Bang, it had to have operated according to preprogrammed laws and rules that complied with nature. Could abiogenesis have occurred according to blind chance? No. Because if natural laws for the formation of the universe existed, certainly preprogrammed natural laws would have to exist for life to come about. Otherwise, life would not just be pointless…it would be impossible! So if these two could not have been “blind chance”, could mutation? Even less so! A mutation is in no way random but is caused by dysfunction that occurs in the transmission, formation, and replication of genes. There are reasons that mutations happen, otherwise the scientific community is wasting its time in trying to learn how to cure genetically linked diseases! Think about it. (Hawking, Stephen “Life in the Universe.” 1996, (http://hawking.org. http://hawking.org.uk/index.php?option =com_content&view=article&id=65 [accessed July 16, 2011]).
So if these things are not random, what can we say? Nothing happens without a reason or purpose. I do not believe in the Big Bang, but if it happened its purpose was clearly to create a universe. I don’t believe in abiogenesis, but if abiogenesis did happen its purpose was to create life. I do not believe that random mutation is responsible for the creation of every species of animal, but if it is, its purpose was to create a hierarchy of life, laced with incredible diversity! Are you a result of random chance? Absolutely not! Order is the enemy of the atheist, despite their attempts to reconcile a world full of order to their disbelief in God.
The Bible tells us that even at the casting of lots (we would call it the rolling of dice) God determines the outcome (Proverbs 16:33). What does this tell us? It tells us that God created everything with such order that he has already known the number of days you will live on earth, the number of hairs on your head, the health and well-being of the tiniest life forms, and even the direction that the wind will be blowing at any particular place at any particular time. God is the one who ordains order. This can cause a theological divide, but the Bible clearly teaches God’s intimate working within his creation as he guides it to his desired end.
Randomness is a myth. Secularists try to reconcile a world of order with the possibility of disorderly origins. Unfortunately for their ideology, laws and guiding principles must first exist in order for chaos to be settled into an orderly state. Once order is established can we honestly say that anything happens based off of random chance?
4 comments:
Electronic motion isn't anywhere near totally random. No scientist would claim that it is. And it mildly concerns me that you would claim this.
There may be variations in their paths, but they "live" in what we call "orbitals", which have been mathematically mapped out. While it is true, that these orbitals are probability distributions, they are very distinct in shape, size, radius from the nucleus, and most importantly, they describe the domain of each electron (pair) within a certain energy level.
I teach my students that understanding the energy levels is a lot like people that live in a high rise apartment building. The different components of the apartment's address (building, floor, apartment, even the room...) correspond loosely to the four quantum numbers we assign electrons, based on where they "live". And we know what the apartments look like, and how much energy they have... This is referred to as Atomic Orbital Theory. Spectroscopy is one of the areas I specialize in that's based on understanding of electronic behavior.
The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (which I THINK you were trying to cite...) states only that we can't simultaneously know the POSITION (x) and the MOMENTUM (p) of a given electron at any time. That doesn't mean we can't predict the motion of an electron over time. We can. This is FAR from your notion of total randomness. Some may allege that electronic motion is random WITHIN ITS ORBITAL...I'll buy that. But total randomness? No, absolutely NOT.
As I said, this DEFENDS your case, but I'd also like for those who read this to correctly understand where we are / what we know about electrons.
Charles, you get it!
Actually, as long as I'm understanding what you are saying, we are actually on the exact same page here. I used language that simplified the situation I was describing. I would say if anyone wants elaboration on the process, they need to read your post. Thank you so much for doing that, but please understand that I am actually agreeing with you when you say that no scientist would claim that it is totally random.
But...
do you think that most students are taught that in science classrooms? I can tell you for sure that I wasn't. We talked about the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle in chemistry class. My prof essentially said that your statement: "The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle...states only that we can't simultaneously know the POSITION (x) and the MOMENTUM (p) of a given electron at any time" Means that its location is essentially random (within the paremeters of its orbit, of course).
Now, you and I know that it does not mean it is entirely random, but the word "random" to the untrained ear means it is totally unpredictable and unguided. To those who do not fully understand what "random" really means, it conditions them to accept the idea that "totally random" processes are possible.
The problem is not the word or concept of "randomness." It is a matter of understanding its true meaning. Most students are not trained to realize that "random" is not really purposeless and unguided by any variables. Such an understanding of randomness will inevitably lead one to deny the existence of God and lay a foundation for an atheistic, evolutionary worldview. On the other hand, understanding that there is no such thing as "totally random" should lead one to realize that nothing sophisticated arises out of chaos. This implies the necessity of an all-powerful Creator.
Thanks again Charles and blessings!
I see what Charles' confusion was. When I said that the definition of random means that it is "unpredictable" I did not mean that it was assumed to be "totally random." I should have elaborated. Sorry :)
Charles wasn't confused. He was correcting your misstatement....
That said....
As to your question about what I think most students are taught about the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.... Speaking for myself, yes I'm sure. The level at which I teach requires it. That is also true for my colleagues. As a student, I took Quantum Mechanics courses at the undergrad and grad level and was taught that way as well.
So it depends really on the level, identity, and purpose of the course. Naturally, the quality and purpose of the instructor and institution factor in as well.
Post a Comment