[00:00:04] Speaker A: ID the Future, a podcast about evolution and intelligent design.
[00:00:12] Speaker B: Welcome to ID the Future. I'm Eric Anderson, and today I'm pleased to be joined again by Dr. Eric Hedin, author of the new book Canceled what Some Atheists Don't Want yout to see. Dr. Hedin earned his PhD in experimental plasma physics and and has taught physics and astronomy in Indiana and in Southern California. His research has focused on computational nanoelectronics and higher dimensional physics. Welcome back again, Eric.
[00:00:37] Speaker A: Thank you very much, Eric. It's good to be here again.
[00:00:40] Speaker B: So last time we were talking a little bit about the information problem as it relates to the origin of life, and we were talking about physicist Arthur Hobson and the generalized second law of thermodynamics, which applies not just to heat and the kinds of things that we would typically think of in thermodynamics, but also to information content of a system. And Hobson noted that the information content of a system subjected to natural processes can't increase over time, and in fact it tends to decrease over time. And you mentioned that this is a very critical point for origin of life because if we're going from something like the proverbial primordial soup to a single celled organism, that's a quantum huge, huge leap in information content, which this loss really can't happen. So I'd like you now, Eric, to address one of my pet peeves in this area. Often when this topic is discussed and people who are skeptical about the naturalistic abiogenesis story point to the degrading tendency of these natural systems. And that's true whether we're talking about the dissipation of energy under classical thermodynamics or the loss of information under the more generalized principle that we've been talking about. When those observations are made, it's common to hear supporters of abiogenesis say something like, oh, yes, but the Earth is an open system, there's energy coming in from the sun, so things don't have to degrade, they can get better, they can become more organized, things can happen that wouldn't otherwise be expected.
Is this, in your view, a valid explanation for how an information rich biological system can arise on the early Earth because there's energy available that can come into the system?
[00:02:19] Speaker A: Well, the, the short answer is no, it is not a valid explanation. And we can discuss it in this context to understand why, if you have energy available, which, for example, our sun is an energy source through electromagnetic radiation, delivers energy to the Earth constantly, and some even describe it as a low Entropy energy source. As if that's going to make it somehow more potent for getting around the second law of thermodynamics.
[00:02:51] Speaker B: There you go.
[00:02:53] Speaker A: However, mere energy into a system is not sufficient to increase the information content of a system. Because if you put energy into a system, you don't automatically have a mechanism to leverage that energy into an increased information content. For example, if humans want to say print a newspaper, just from an old fashioned perspective, think of a printing press. The information content that goes into the newspaper has to be within the typesetting of the printing press and you can use energy to run the press button. But it's the mechanism and the pre programmed information that actually results in the information rich product, the printed newspaper.
So if the sun is a source of energy, it is impotent, it's unable to generate new information unless there's a mechanism with a template that already contains the information, that's just waiting for an energy input in order to begin to unfold that information. It's like there might be a lot of data and let's say impressive computer programs stored on your computer, but all of that is going to be worthless unless you have a power supply, a battery or a plug in. But the electricity coming into your computer doesn't create the information, it simply allows what's already there to be expressed.
[00:04:36] Speaker B: Yeah, if the mechanisms are in place to capture and use that, that energy to do useful work. Yeah, you could. I love your print shop example. I'm thinking of an old style print shop with, you know, wooden building with wooden floors. And you can add a lot of energy to the system by pouring some gas on the floor and setting a match to it. But that's not going to produce any information.
So that, that's really important, that there has to be a mechanism and a way to capture the energy and put it toward a particular process or a useful work. And in addition to that, another thing that I see is kind of a long standing and pervasive failure that many people run into when they think about this is they fail to distinguish between mere order and functional organization. Yes, certain natural processes can produce order. We can have a, you know, a crystal form, but that has precious little to do with living organisms. What needs to be explained is not mere order, which is inert and dead like a crystal, but functional organization. How the parts and the pieces work together to perform specific activities and to, and to allow the organism to do what it is.
[00:05:44] Speaker A: That's exactly right. Ordered systems actually contain a very little, a small amount of information. You mentioned Crystals. Crystals contain actually less information than the uncrystallized state of the same atoms. Another example from nature that does happen naturally is the formation of stars, which are essentially composed of hydrogen and helium gas that existed in the interstellar medium as a very distributed, low density nebula. But gravitational collapse can compress that gas down to a star, where it's all localized in one smaller region and it gets hot and begins to shine.
[00:06:29] Speaker B: Sure.
[00:06:30] Speaker A: But that process actually leads to an increase in entropy or a decrease in information.
Stars are something nature produces very well. We look out in the universe, it's just ablaze with stars. Astronomers estimate 100 billion stars or more within our galaxy and at least 100 billion galaxies like ours throughout the universe. So we've got a lot of stars, but stars are low information systems, which are typical of what nature can produce on its own. And to kind of understand the difference between the information content of a star and. And even a simple living system like a single celled bacteria, imagine taking a giant spoon and putting it into a star and stirring it up. Well, if you pulled the spoon out and waited, natural forces like gravity and so on would settle the star back into a condition where it would begin to shine just like it was doing before. However, if you did the same process with even a single cell, a living cell, take a little tiny needle, stick it into the cell and stir it up, break all the molecular bonds, and then pull out the needle and wait, you will never find that cell settling down back into its former functional living state.
So natural processes can generate stars, but natural processes are not sufficient to generate the complex, completely specific arrangement of molecules that allow a cell to function.
[00:08:14] Speaker B: Yeah, that's a great example. I like that contrast between the simple state of the star and what we're dealing with in a cell. It reminds me of the Humpty Dumpty. You know, once. Once you break the cell, destroy the bonds in there. Humpty Dumpty can't get back together again.
So bring us to another example. Maybe if you can, Eric, maybe something from our everyday life that can help people understand this concept a little bit better, that the natural processes tend to degrade information rather than produce it.
[00:08:42] Speaker A: All right, so something that we've already mentioned is a newspaper. Whether or not you like what's printed there, you could agree that a newspaper contains a high degree of information.
So newspapers tend to be disposable. Say that one gets just thrown out and lying in a ditch beside the road over time, with rain and sun and wind, and the newspaper itself will decompose and the information will be lost. Eventually it turns to a pile of pulp and you cannot read it at all. No matter how long you waited or how many newspapers in the ditch you examined. You would never find natural processes somehow rearranging the molecules in the newsprint to create a new information rich news story. Or to take an example from the electronic world, suppose you've got your computer plugged in and there was a lightning storm and a power surge and a jolt of electricity of higher voltage went through your computer. You're not going to turn it on in the morning and find brand new computer programs that do amazing things or documents that contain valuable and useful information? No, the jolt of energy from nature will only destroy information. It never works the other way around.
[00:10:09] Speaker B: Yeah, well, you're a real downer, Eric. I've got a draft of a book I've been working on that's printed out and sitting in the corner here for the last year. You're saying if I just keep waiting it's not going to get better?
Not going to finish the book for me?
There you go. Yeah. So Eric, what's the takeaway for the naturalistic origin of life and this need for information at the beginning of life to even get the first cell up and running?
[00:10:38] Speaker A: The bottom line is that nature really doesn't have the capability to generate the large increase in information content that would be required in going from non life to life using or employing only natural processes. And honestly, it doesn't matter what mechanism is envisioned that nature might, the result would be the same. You just can't get there from here.
[00:11:08] Speaker B: So this reminds me of the course title that you had. You were talking about this course, I think you called it the Boundaries of Science.
[00:11:17] Speaker A: Yes.
[00:11:17] Speaker B: And there's kind of this boundary of what we're not talking about science, but we're talking about naturalistic processes here. This boundary of what they can and they can't do. And what I'm hearing you suggest, if I can say it, correct me if I'm wrong, but we actually have quite a bit of information, quite a bit of knowledge about what natural processes can do. It's not as though we're sitting here with no knowledge and a blank slate and we're saying, gee, we need to go out and discover some new natural process. And I hear people talk about this, Eric, in the particular in the origin of life field, there have been a couple of well known researchers who have said, well, if we're going to explain the origin of life, we need to come up with a new Understanding of physics, or we need to find some new law of physics that's going to help us resolve this. But we actually have a pretty good understanding about what these natural processes can and can't do. And there's kind of a boundary there.
[00:12:09] Speaker A: Yes. And that was one of the key focal points of this class that I taught, that with regards to naturalism or the laws of nature. At this stage in the game of our understanding of nature, through the study of science, we've learned not only the things that nature can do, but the limits of natural processes. There are just things that nature cannot do. So one of those limits is this inability of nature natural processes to generate the increase in information necessary for even the simplest living system to originate, or for more complex versions of living systems to progressively and iteratively come into being.
[00:13:00] Speaker B: Well, Eric, this has been super valuable information, pun intended, I guess, there. It's been great to talk to you about this new book and your university course. I'm sure it must have been an absolutely fascinating course for the students. I know I would have loved a class like this when I was in the university and probably could have benefited a lot from it and learned some of these concepts years earlier in my life. So that, that sounds like a great. A great opportunity. And I'm sad that the course was canceled. But I'm excited that this new book is out for everybody now we don't have to be at the university to take the class. And I wanted to end up with a little bit of a personal question, if you don't mind. How has delving into this evidence, both as you taught the course and now circling back years later and writing this detailed book, how has delving into this evidence impacted you personally?
[00:13:48] Speaker A: Well, thank you for giving me the chance just to comment on that. I'm a man of faith. I have faith that God exists and that God is the source of the information that we've been discussing here today. But I've often said that the strongest assurances of faith, for me personally, come from evidence that could best be described as spiritual. All of the discoveries in physics, astronomy, biochemistry, over the course of human history, and especially more recently, the evidence that points to design has strengthened my faith. The evidence from science points towards significance of our lives, showing that the universe is finely tuned for our existence. So I'd say that studying the science has only strengthened my conviction that there is something beyond nature, that our lives do have eternal significance.
[00:14:45] Speaker B: Excellent. Appreciate you sharing that with us. Well, Eric, thank you so much for being with us these past several discussions to share with us this great new book and also your personal experience in your own journey of looking at the evidence and following it, where it leads. As someone who's read the book cover to cover, and on behalf of all our readers out there, I want to thank you for putting together this great resource and for sharing your experience with us.
[00:15:08] Speaker A: Well, thank you for having me on this interview. It's been a pleasure.
[00:15:11] Speaker B: This has been a conversation with Dr. Eric Hedin, author of the new book Canceled what Some Atheists Don't Want yout to See. In addition to the points we've been able to cover in our conversations, there are numerous additional insights and pieces of evidence in the book that point toward purpose and design in the world. It's been a real pleasure to chat with Dr. Hadeen and read this new book, and I encourage listeners to pick up a copy of Canceled Science at online retailers like Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Pick up a copy for yourself or for someone in your life who could benefit from this important message for ID the Future. I'm Eric Anderson. Thanks for listening.
[00:15:45] Speaker A: Visit
[email protected] and intelligent design.org this program is Copyright Discovery Discovery Institute and recorded by its center for Science and Culture.
