Thursday, February 23, 2012

Let There Be Light

Isaiah 1:18
"Come now, and let us reason together,",,,
Often times an atheist will try to deride a person's Christian belief by saying something along the lines of, 'Well, we also don't believe that the sun orbits the earth any longer do we?', trying to mock the person's Christian belief as some type of superstitious belief that is left over from the Dark Ages that had blocked the progress of science. Yet, those atheists who say such things fail to realize that the geocentric (Earth centered) model of the solar system was overturned by three devout Christians, Copernicus, Kepler and Galileo. Copernicus, Kepler and Galileo, the three primary scientists involved in overturning the geocentric model, were all devout Christians and it certainly was not an atheist, nor some group of atheists, nor some other religion, involved in overturning the geocentric model. Johann Kepler (1571-1630), a devout Lutheran, was the mathematician who mathematically verified Copernicus's, a loyal Catholic, heliocentric model for the solar system. Diana Severance (PhD, Rice University), a historian with broad experience teaching in universities and seminaries, stated this about Kepler:
Kepler: the Heavens Declare God's Glory - Diana Severance PhD, Rice University
Excerpt: About the time that the Reformation was proclaiming Christ rather than the pope as the head of the Church, science was announcing that the sun rather than the earth was the center of our planetary system. A leader in this changing scientific perspective was the German scientist Johann Kepler.,,, Throughout his scientific work, Kepler never sought any glory for himself, but always sought to bring glory to God. At the end of his life his prayer was: I give you thanks, Creator and God, that you have given me this joy in thy creation, and I rejoice in the works of your hands. See I have now completed the work to which I was called. In it I have used all the talents you have lent to my spirit.
http://www.christianity.com/ChurchHistory/11630018/
In fact, on discovering the laws of planetary motion, Johann Kepler declared:
‘O God, I am thinking your thoughts after you!’
http://www.biblicalcreation.org.uk/introductory_articles/bcs104.html
In 1610, it was the Italian scientist Galileo Galilee (1564-1642), who was also a dedicated Christian to his dying day despite his infamous conflict with the hierarchy of the Catholic Church, who empirically verified Polish astronomer Nicolaus Copernicus's (1473-1543) heliocentric theory.

Contest Winner! - Barry Arrington - July 27, 2011
Please note the section titled 'Primer on the Galileo Affair' to see how far the popular myth of 'science vs. religion' is from the actual reality of the affair
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/contest-winner/
Jerry Coyne cites Andrew Dickson White on Galileo - Dr. Torley - February 8, 2014
Excerpt: It is clear, then, that not even the ordinary Magisterium has ever taught or promulgated the idea that the propositions of Copernican-Galilean astronomy are heretical or errors in faith. Thus it can in no way be claimed that “the Church” has taught that such views are heretical.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/all-at-sea-about-science-and-theology-jerry-coyne-cites-andrew-dickson-white-on-galileo/
The heliocentric theory was hotly debated at the time, for it proposed a revolutionary idea for the 1600's stating all the planets revolved around the sun. Many people of the era had simply, and wrongly, presumed everything in the universe revolved around the earth (geocentric theory), since from their limited perspective everything did seem to be revolving around the earth. As well the geocentric theory seems to agree with the religious sensibilities of being made in God's image, although the Bible never actually directly states the earth is the 'center' of the universe.
Job 26:7
“He stretches the north over empty space; He hangs the earth on nothing”
Galileo had improved upon the recently invented telescope. With this improved telescope he observed many strange things about the solar system. This included the phases of Venus as she revolved around the sun and the fact Jupiter had her own satellites (moons) which revolved around her. Thus, Galileo wrote and spoke about what had become obvious to him; the planets do indeed revolve around the sun. It is now commonly believed that man was cast down from his special place in the grand scheme of things, for the Earth beneath his feet no longer appeared to be the 'center of the universe', and indeed the Earth is now commonly believed by many people to be reduced to nothing but an insignificant speck of dust in the vast ocean of space. Yet actually the earth became exalted in the eyes of many people of that era, with its supposed removal from the center of the universe, since centrality in the universe had a very different meaning in those days. A meaning that equated being at the center of the universe with being at the 'bottom' of the universe, or being in the 'cesspool' of the universe.
The Copernican Revolution - March 2010
Excerpt: Danielson(2001) made a compelling case that this portrayal is the opposite of what really happened, i.e., that before the Copernican Revolution, Earth was seen not as being at the center, but rather at the bottom, the cesspool where all filth and corruption fell and accumulated.
http://www.creationsafaris.com/crev201003.htm#20100317a
Yet contrary to what is popularly believed by many people today, of the earth being nothing but a insignificant speck of dust lost in a vast ocean of space, there is actually a strong case to be made for the earth being central in the universe once again.

The Galileo Affair and Life/Consciousness as the true "Center of the Universe"
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BHAcvrc913SgnPcDohwkPnN4kMJ9EDX-JJSkjc4AXmA/edit

In what I consider an absolutely fascinating discovery, 4-dimensional (4D) space-time was created in the Big Bang and continues to 'expand equally in all places':
Where is the centre of the universe?:
Excerpt: There is no centre of the universe! According to the standard theories of cosmology, the universe started with a "Big Bang" about 14 thousand million years ago and has been expanding ever since. Yet there is no centre to the expansion; it is the same everywhere. The Big Bang should not be visualized as an ordinary explosion. The universe is not expanding out from a centre into space; rather, the whole universe is expanding and it is doing so equally at all places, as far as we can tell.
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/GR/centre.html
Thus from a 3-dimensional (3D) perspective, any particular 3D spot in the universe is to be considered just as 'center of the universe' as any other particular spot in the universe is to be considered 'center of the universe'. This centrality found for any 3D place in the universe is because the universe is a 4D expanding hypersphere, analogous in 3D to the surface of an expanding balloon. All points on the surface are moving away from each other, and every point is central, if that’s where you live.

Centrality of Earth Within The 4-Dimensional Space-Time of General Relativity - video
http://www.metacafe.com/w/8421879

So in a holistic sense, as facts revealed later in this paper will bear out, it may now be possible for the earth to, once again, be considered 'central to the universe'. This intriguing possibility, for the earth to once again be considered central, is clearly illustrated by the fact the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR), remaining from the creation of the universe, forms a sphere around the earth.

Earth As The Center Of The Universe - illustrated image
http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AYmaSrBPNEmGZGM4ejY3d3pfOXQydzV2OGhz

The Known Universe - Dec. 2009 - a very cool video (please note the centrality of the earth in the universe)
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4240304/

This centrality that we observe for ourselves in the universe also happens to give weight to the verses of the Bible that indirectly imply centrality for the earth in the universe:
Psalm 102:19
The LORD looked down from His sanctuary on high, from heaven He viewed the earth,
On top of this '4D expanding hypersphere geometry', and other considerations of Einstein's special theory of relativity that show that the speed of light stays the same, while all other movement in the universe, no matter how fast or slow, is relative to that 'unchanging' speed of light, the primary reason the CMBR forms a sphere around the earth is because the quantum wave collapse of photons to their "uncertain" 3D wave/particle state, is dependent on 'conscious observation' in quantum mechanics. Moreover, this wave collapse of photons, to their 'uncertain' 3D wave/particle state, is shown by experiment to be instantaneous, and is also shown to be without regard to distance. i.e. It is universal for each observer (A. Aspect). CMBR, coupled with quantum mechanics, ultimately indicates that 'quantum information' about all points in the universe is actually available to each 'central observer', in any part of the 4D expanding universe, simultaneously. The primary reason that 'observers' are now to be considered 'central' in the reality of the universe is because of the failure of materialism to explain reality. Here is a clip of a talk in which Alain Aspect talks about a debate between Neils Bohr and Einstein, and the failure of 'local realism', or the failure of materialism, to explain reality:

Quantum Entanglement – The Failure Of Local Realism - Materialism - Alain Aspect - video
http://www.metacafe.com/w/4744145

Quantum Physics Debunks Materialism - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4C5pq7W5yRM&feature=c4-overview&list=UU5qDet6sa6rODi7t6wfpg8g

Divinely Planted Quantum States - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCTBygadaM4#t=156s
Of note: at the 8:30 minute mark of the preceding video, Schrodinger’s cat and Wigner's Friend are highlighted:

The falsification for local realism (reductive materialism) was recently greatly strengthened:
Physicists close two loopholes while violating local realism - November 2010
Excerpt: The latest test in quantum mechanics provides even stronger support than before for the view that nature violates local realism and is thus in contradiction with a classical worldview.
http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-11-physicists-loopholes-violating-local-realism.html

Zeilinger Group - Photons run out of loopholes - April 15, 2013
Excerpt: A team led by the Austrian physicist Anton Zeilinger has now carried out an experiment with photons, in which they have closed an important loophole. The researchers have thus provided the most complete experimental proof that the quantum world is in conflict with our everyday experience.,,, The young academics in Anton Zeilinger’s group,, have now achieved an important step towards delivering definitive experimental evidence that quantum particles can indeed do things that classical physics does not allow them to do. For their experiment, the team built one of the best sources for entangled photon pairs worldwide and employed highly efficient photon detectors designed by experts at NIST. These technological advances together with a suitable measurement protocol enabled the researchers to detect entangled photons with unprecedented efficiency. In a nutshell: "Our photons can no longer duck out of being measured," says Zeilinger.
This kind of tight monitoring is important as it closes an important loophole. In previous experiments on photons, there has always been the possibility that although the measured photons do violate the laws of classical physics, such non-classical behaviour would not have been observed if all photons involved in the experiment could have been measured. In the new experiment, this loophole is now closed. "Perhaps the greatest weakness of photons as a platform for quantum experiments is their vulnerability to loss – but we have just demonstrated that this weakness need not be prohibitive," explains Marissa Giustina, lead author of the paper.

http://vcq.quantum.at/research/research-groups/zeilinger-group/news/details/419.html

Closing the 'free will' loophole: Using distant quasars to test Bell's theorem - February 20, 2014
Excerpt: Though two major loopholes have since been closed, a third remains; physicists refer to it as "setting independence," or more provocatively, "free will." This loophole proposes that a particle detector's settings may "conspire" with events in the shared causal past of the detectors themselves to determine which properties of the particle to measure -- a scenario that, however far-fetched, implies that a physicist running the experiment does not have complete free will in choosing each detector's setting. Such a scenario would result in biased measurements, suggesting that two particles are correlated more than they actually are, and giving more weight to quantum mechanics than classical physics.
"It sounds creepy, but people realized that's a logical possibility that hasn't been closed yet," says MIT's David Kaiser, the Germeshausen Professor of the History of Science and senior lecturer in the Department of Physics. "Before we make the leap to say the equations of quantum theory tell us the world is inescapably crazy and bizarre, have we closed every conceivable logical loophole, even if they may not seem plausible in the world we know today?"

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/02/140220112515.htm

Looking beyond space and time to cope with quantum theory - 29 October 2012
Excerpt: Experiments have already shown that if you want to invoke signals to explain things, the signals would have to be travelling faster than light — more than 10,000 times the speed of light, in fact. To those who know that Einstein's relativity sets the speed of light as a universal speed limit, the idea of signals travelling 10,000 times as fast as light already sets alarm bells ringing. However, physicists have a getout: such signals might stay as 'hidden influences' — useable for nothing, and thus not violating relativity. Only if the signals can be harnessed for faster-than-light communication do they openly contradict relativity.
The new hidden influence inequality shows that the getout won't work when it comes to quantum predictions. To derive their inequality, which sets up a measurement of entanglement between four particles, the researchers considered what behaviours are possible for four particles that are connected by influences that stay hidden and that travel at some arbitrary finite speed.
Mathematically (and mind-bogglingly), these constraints define an 80-dimensional object. The testable hidden influence inequality is the boundary of the shadow this 80-dimensional shape casts in 44 dimensions. The researchers showed that quantum predictions can lie outside this boundary, which means they are going against one of the assumptions. Outside the boundary, either the influences can't stay hidden, or they must have infinite speed.,,, "Our result gives weight to the idea that quantum correlations somehow arise from outside spacetime, in the sense that no story in space and time can describe them,"

http://www.quantumlah.org/highlight/121029_hidden_influences.php

Closing the last Bell-test loophole for photons - Jun 11, 2013
Excerpt: In the years since, many "Bell tests" have been performed, but critics have identified several conditions (known as loopholes) in which the results could be considered inconclusive. For entangled photons, there have been three major loopholes; two were closed by previous experiments. The remaining problem, known as the "detection-efficiency/fair sampling loophole," results from the fact that, until now, the detectors employed in experiments have captured an insufficiently large fraction of the photons, and the photon sources have been insufficiently efficient. The validity of such experiments is thus dependent on the assumption that the detected photons are a statistically fair sample of all the photons. That, in turn, leaves open the possibility that, if all the photon data were known, they could be described by local realism.
The new research, conducted at the Institute for Quantum Optics and Quantum Communication in Austria, closes the fair-sampling loophole by using improved photon sources (spontaneous parametric down-conversion in a Sagnac configuration) and ultra-sensitive detectors provided by the Single Photonics and Quantum Information project in PML's Quantum Electronics and Photonics Division. That combination, the researchers write, was "crucial for achieving a sufficiently high collection efficiency," resulting in a high-accuracy data set – requiring no assumptions or correction of count rates – that confirmed quantum entanglement to nearly 70 standard deviations.,,,

http://phys.org/news/2013-06-bell-test-loophole-photons.html
The following articles give us a small glimpse as to what it truly means for entanglement to be confirmed to an order of '70 standard deviations':
Standard deviation
Excerpt: Particle physics uses a standard of "5 sigma" for the declaration of a discovery.[3] At five-sigma there is only one chance in nearly two million that a random fluctuation would yield the result.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_deviation#Particle_physics

SSDD: a 22 sigma event is consistent with the physics of fair coins? - June 23, 2013
Excerpt: So 500 coins heads is (500-250)/11 = 22 standard deviations (22 sigma) from expectation! These numbers are so extreme, it’s probably inappropriate to even use the normal distribution’s approximation of the binomial distribution, and hence “22 sigma” just becomes a figure of speech in this extreme case…
http://www.uncommondescent.com/mathematics/ssdd-a-22-sigma-event-is-consistent-with-the-physics-of-fair-coins/
This following study adds to Alain Aspect's work in Quantum Mechanics and solidly refutes the 'hidden variable' argument that has been used by materialists to try to get around the Theistic implications of the instantaneous 'spooky action at a distance' found in quantum mechanics.
Quantum Measurements: Common Sense Is Not Enough, Physicists Show - July 2009
Excerpt: scientists have now proven comprehensively in an experiment for the first time that the experimentally observed phenomena cannot be described by non-contextual models with hidden variables.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090722142824.htm
(of note: hidden variables were postulated to remove the need for 'spooky' forces, as Einstein termed them — forces that act instantaneously at great distances, thereby breaking the most cherished rule of relativity theory, that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light.). The distance for 'non-local' entanglement keeps getting extended:
Japanese Telco Smashes Entanglement Distance Record - October 29, 2013
Excerpt: Last year, for example, a Chinese team claimed the distance record for teleporting photons over a distance of 97 kilometre only to find a European team smash the record just a few months later.
Today, a Japanese team goes even further. Takahiro Inagaki and a few pals at the NTT Basic Research Laboratories in Kanagawa say they’ve distributed entangled photons over a distance of 300 kilometres.

http://www.technologyreview.com/view/520886/japanese-telco-smashes-entanglement-distance-record/
In fact the foundation of quantum mechanics within science is now so solid that researchers were able to bring forth this following proof from quantum entanglement experiments;
An experimental test of all theories with predictive power beyond quantum theory – May 2011
Excerpt: Hence, we can immediately refute any already considered or yet-to-be-proposed alternative model with more predictive power than this. (Quantum Theory)
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1105.0133.pdf

Can quantum theory be improved? - July 23, 2012
Excerpt: However, in the new paper, the physicists have experimentally demonstrated that there cannot exist any alternative theory that increases the predictive probability of quantum theory by more than 0.165, with the only assumption being that measurement (observation) parameters can be chosen independently (free choice, free will, assumption) of the other parameters of the theory.,,,
,, the experimental results provide the tightest constraints yet on alternatives to quantum theory. The findings imply that quantum theory is close to optimal in terms of its predictive power, even when the predictions are completely random.

http://phys.org/news/2012-07-quantum-theory.html
Now this is completely unheard of in science as far as I know. i.e. That a mathematical description of reality would advance to the point that one can actually perform a experiment showing that your current theory will not be exceeded in predictive power by another future theory is simply unprecedented in science! And please note that free will and consciousness are axiomatic to Quantum Theory in the experiment.
Free will creates quantum physics, and not the other way around? - September 2, 2013
Excerpt: It is not that free will follows from quantum physics but rather the other way around: quantum physics follows from free will.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/physics/free-will-creates-quantum-physics-and-not-the-other-way-around/

What Does Quantum Physics Have to Do with Free Will? - By Antoine Suarez - July 22, 2013
Excerpt: What is more, recent experiments are bringing to light that the experimenter’s free will and consciousness should be considered axioms (founding principles) of standard quantum physics theory. So for instance, in experiments involving “entanglement” (the phenomenon Einstein called “spooky action at a distance”), to conclude that quantum correlations of two particles are nonlocal (i.e. cannot be explained by signals traveling at velocity less than or equal to the speed of light), it is crucial to assume that the experimenter can make free choices, and is not constrained in what orientation he/she sets the measuring devices.
To understand these implications it is crucial to be aware that quantum physics is not only a description of the material and visible world around us, but also speaks about non-material influences coming from outside the space-time.,,,

https://www.bigquestionsonline.com/content/what-does-quantum-physics-have-do-free-will
Free will and nonlocality at detection: Basic principles of quantum physics - Antoine Suarez - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhMrrmlTXl4

Of related note:
Philosophy and Physics in the Kadison-Singer Conjecture - 21 June 2013
Excerpt: Kadison-Singer Conjecture. Let A be a discrete maximal abelian subalgebra of B(H), the algebra of bounded linear operators on a separable Hilbert space. Let p : A -> {C} be a pure state on that subalgebra. Then there exists a pure extension p' : B(H) -> {C} of p to all of B(H), and that extension is unique.
Proof of this statement provides a very nice assurance, that our experiments really are enough to describe quantum systems as we understand them.

http://www.soulphysics.org/2013/06/philosophy-and-physics-in-the-kadison-singer-conjecture/
Sometimes Atheists will go so far as to say quantum mechanics refutes the rules of right reason that are at the basis of science. The following site shows why that assertion is not only just plain silly (sawing the tree branch off that you are sitting on to reason with) but also completely false:

The Law Of Non-Contradiction as it is related to the discovery of the laws of Quantum Mechanics in the early 20th century
http://www.uncommondescent.com/faq/#LNC

Does Quantum Mechanics Invalidate the Law of Non-contradiction? Part 2 - January 2013
http://www.toughquestionsanswered.org/2012/01/04/does-quantum-mechanics-invalidate-the-law-of-non-contradiction-part-2/

Quantum Mechanics has now been extended to falsify local realism (reductive materialism) without even using quantum entanglement to do it:
‘Quantum Magic’ Without Any ‘Spooky Action at a Distance’ – June 2011
Excerpt: A team of researchers led by Anton Zeilinger at the University of Vienna and the Institute for Quantum Optics and Quantum Information of the Austrian Academy of Sciences used a system which does not allow for entanglement, and still found results which cannot be interpreted classically.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/06/110624111942.htm
Falsification of Local Realism without using Quantum Entanglement - Anton Zeilinger - video
http://vimeo.com/34168474
Particle and Wave-Like Behavior of Light Measured Simultaneously (Nov. 1, 2012)
Excerpt: Dr Peruzzo, Research Fellow at the Centre for Quantum Photonics, said: "The measurement apparatus detected strong nonlocality, which certified that the photon behaved simultaneously as a wave and a particle in our experiment. This represents a strong refutation of models in which the photon is either a wave or a particle."
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/11/121101141107.htm
A Quantum Delayed Choice Experiment - June 2012
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1205.4926v2.pdf

Put more simply, a photon is not a self existent entity but is always dependent on a 'non-local', beyond space and time, cause to explain its continued existence within space-time. i.e. as Theists have always held, God 'sustains' the universe!

i.e. Photons, on which everything in the universe is dependent on so as to derive their most minute movements, are found to require a beyond space and time, ‘non-local’, cause to explain their continued existence in space time. It is also very interesting to point out how these recent findings for quantum non-locality for photons, (and even for material particles), dovetails perfectly into some of the oldest philosophical arguments for the existence of God and offers empirical confirmation for those ancient philosophical arguments. For instance, quantum non locality provides empirical confirmation for the ancient philosophical argument for ‘being’, for ‘existence’ itself!

Aquinas' Third way - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V030hvnX5a4

God Is the Best Explanation For Why Anything At All Exists - William Lane Craig - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjuqBxg_5mA

As well, non local, i.e. beyond space and time, quantum actions provide solid support for the argument from motion. Also known as Aquinas’ First way. (Of note, St Thomas Aquinas lived from 1225 to 7 March 1274.)

Aquinas’ First Way – (The First Mover – Unmoved Mover) - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qmpw0_w27As
Aquinas’ First Way
1) Change in nature is elevation of potency to act.
2) Potency cannot actualize itself, because it does not exist actually.
3) Potency must be actualized by another, which is itself in act.
4) Essentially ordered series of causes (elevations of potency to act) exist in nature.
5) An essentially ordered series of elevations from potency to act cannot be in infinite regress, because the series must be actualized by something that is itself in act without the need for elevation from potency.
6) The ground of an essentially ordered series of elevations from potency to act must be pure act with respect to the casual series.
7) This Pure Act– Prime Mover– is what we call God.

http://egnorance.blogspot.com/2011/08/aquinas-first-way.html
Or to put it much more simply:
"The ‘First Mover’ is necessary for change occurring at each moment."
Michael Egnor – Aquinas’ First Way
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2009/09/jerry_coyne_and_aquinas_first.html
The following video is also very helpful in understanding the "First Mover" argument:

The Laws of Nature (Have Never ‘Caused’ Anything) by C.S. Lewis – doodle video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_20yiBQAIlk

Of related interest to ‘the first mover’ argument, in the following video Anton Zeilinger, whose group is arguably the best group of experimentalists in quantum physics today, ‘tries’ to explain the double slit experiment to Morgan Freeman:

Quantum Mechanics - Double Slit Experiment. Is anything real? (Prof. Anton Zeilinger) - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayvbKafw2g0

Prof. Zeilinger makes this rather startling statement in the preceding video that meshes perfectly with the ‘first mover argument’::
"The path taken by the photon is not an element of reality. We are not allowed to talk about the photon passing through this or this slit. Neither are we allowed to say the photon passes through both slits. All this kind of language is not applicable."
Anton Zeilinger

…the “paradox” is only a conflict between reality and your feeling of what reality “ought to be.”
Richard Feynman, in The Feynman Lectures on Physics, vol III, p. 18-9 (1965)

Acts 17:28
For in Him we live, and move, and have our being; as also certain of your own poets have said, ‘For we are also His offspring.’
One of the first, and most enigmatic, questions that arises from people after seeing the Quantum actions that are 'observed' in the infamous double slit experiment is, "What does conscious observation have to do with anything in the experiments of quantum mechanics?" and thus by extrapolation of that question, "What does conscious observation have to do with anything in the universe?" Yet, the seemingly counter-intuitive conclusion that consciousness is to be treated as a separate entity when dealing with quantum mechanics, and thus with the universe, has some very strong clout behind it.
Quantum mind–body problem
Parallels between quantum mechanics and mind/body dualism were first drawn by the founders of quantum mechanics including Erwin Schrödinger, Werner Heisenberg, Wolfgang Pauli, Niels Bohr, and Eugene Wigner
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mind%E2%80%93body_problem
The Action of Mind on Brain - Dr. Henry Stapp - video (The summary is at the 43 minute mark and then a few minutes of Q&A)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=1t2dnfhpL6I#t=2593s
Stapp received his PhD in particle physics at the University of California, Berkeley, under the supervision of Nobel Laureates Emilio Segrè and Owen Chamberlain.,, Stapp moved to ETH Zurich to do post-doctoral work under Wolfgang Pauli.,, When Pauli died in 1958, Stapp transferred to Munich, then in the company of Werner Heisenberg.

Of related note to the preceding Henry Stapp lecture:
How observation (consciousness) is inextricably bound to measurement in quantum mechanics:
Quote: "We wish to measure a temperature. If we want, we can pursue this process numerically until we have the temperature of the environment of the mercury container of the thermometer, and then say: this temperature is measured by the thermometer. But we can carry the calculation further, and from the properties of the mercury, which can be explained in kinetic and molecular terms, we can calculate its heating, expansion, and the resultant length of the mercury column, and then say: this length is seen by the observer.
Going still further, and taking the light source into consideration, we could find out the reflection of the light quanta on the opaque mercury column, and the path of the remaining light quanta into the eye of the observer, their refraction in the eye lens, and the formation of an image on the retina, and then we would say: this image is registered by the retina of the observer.
And were our physiological knowledge more precise than it is today, we could go still further, tracing the chemical reactions which produce the impression of this image on the retina, in the optic nerve tract and in the brain, and then in the end say: these chemical changes of his brain cells are perceived by the observer. But in any case, no matter how far we calculate -- to the mercury vessel, to the scale of the thermometer, to the retina, or into the brain, at some time we must say: and this is perceived by the observer. That is, we must always divide the world into two parts, the one being the observed system, the other the observer. In the former, we can follow up all physical processes (in principle at least) arbitrarily precisely. In the latter, this is meaningless. The boundary between the two is arbitrary to a very large extent. In particular we saw in the four different possibilities in the example above, that the observer in this sense needs not to become identified with the body of the actual observer: In one instance in the above example, we included even the thermometer in it, while in another instance, even the eyes and optic nerve tract were not included. That this boundary can be pushed arbitrarily deeply into the interior of the body of the actual observer is the content of the principle of the psycho-physical parallelism -- but this does not change the fact that in each method of description the boundary must be put somewhere, if the method is not to proceed vacuously,,,"

John von Neumann - 1903-1957 - The Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, pp.418-21 - 1955
http://www.informationphilosopher.com/solutions/scientists/neumann/

On The Comparison Of Quantum and Relativity Theories - Sachs - 1986
Excerpt: quantum theory entails and irreducible subjective element in its conceptual basis. In contrast, the theory of relativity when fully exploited, is based on a totally objective view.
http://books.google.com/books?id=8qaYGFuXvMkC&pg=PA11#v=onepage&q&f=false

"It was not possible to formulate the laws (of quantum theory) in a fully consistent way without reference to consciousness." Eugene Wigner (1902 -1995) from his collection of essays "Symmetries and Reflections – Scientific Essays"; Eugene Wigner laid the foundation for the theory of symmetries in quantum mechanics, for which he received the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1963.
http://eugene-wigner.co.tv/

"It will remain remarkable, in whatever way our future concepts may develop, that the very study of the external world led to the scientific conclusion that the content of the consciousness is the ultimate universal reality" -
Eugene Wigner - (Remarks on the Mind-Body Question, Eugene Wigner, in Wheeler and Zurek, p.169) 1961 - received Nobel Prize in 1963 for 'Quantum Symmetries'
http://www.informationphilosopher.com/solutions/scientists/wigner/
Eugene Wigner receives his Nobel Prize for Quantum Symmetries - video 1963
http://www.nobelprize.org/mediaplayer/index.php?id=1111

Here is Wigner commenting on the key experiment that led Wigner to his Nobel Prize winning work on quantum symmetries,,,
Eugene Wigner
Excerpt: When I returned to Berlin, the excellent crystallographer Weissenberg asked me to study: why is it that in a crystal the atoms like to sit in a symmetry plane or symmetry axis. After a short time of thinking I understood:,,,, To express this basic experience in a more direct way: the world does not have a privileged center, there is no absolute rest, preferred direction, unique origin of calendar time, even left and right seem to be rather symmetric. The interference of electrons, photons, neutrons has indicated that the state of a particle can be described by a vector possessing a certain number of components. As the observer is replaced by another observer (working elsewhere, looking at a different direction, using another clock, perhaps being left-handed), the state of the very same particle is described by another vector, obtained from the previous vector by multiplying it with a matrix. This matrix transfers from one observer to another.
http://www.reak.bme.hu/Wigner_Course/WignerBio/wb1.htm
i.e. In the experiment the 'world' (i.e. the universe) does not have a ‘privileged center’. Yet strangely, the conscious observer does exhibit a 'privileged center'. This is since the 'matrix', which determines which vector will be used to describe the particle in the experiment, is 'observer-centric' in its origination! Thus explaining Wigner’s dramatic statement, “It was not possible to formulate the laws (of quantum theory) in a fully consistent way without reference to consciousness.”
Von Neumann–Wigner - interpretation
Excerpt: The von Neumann–Wigner interpretation, also described as "consciousness causes collapse [of the wave function]", is an interpretation of quantum mechanics in which consciousness is postulated to be necessary for the completion of the process of quantum measurement.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Von_Neumann%E2%80%93Wigner_interpretation#The_interpretation
Further weight for consciousness to be treated as a separate entity in quantum mechanics, and thus the universe, is also found in the fact that it is impossible to 'geometrically' maintain 3-Dimensional spherical symmetry of the universe, within the sphere of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation, for each 3D point of the universe, unless all the 'higher dimensional quantum information waves' actually do collapse to their 'uncertain 3D wave/particle state', universally and instantaneously, for each point of conscious observation in the universe just as the experiments of quantum mechanics are telling us that they do. The 4-D expanding hypersphere of the space-time of general relativity is insufficient to maintain such 3D integrity/symmetry, all by itself, for each different 3D point of observation in the universe. The primary reason for why the 4D space-time, of the 3D universe, is insufficient to maintain 3D symmetry, by itself, is because the universe is shown to have only 10^79 atoms. In other words, it is geometrically impossible to maintain such 3D symmetry of centrality with finite 3D material resources to work with for each 3D point in the universe. Universal quantum wave collapse of photons, to each point of 'conscious observation' in the universe, is the only answer that has adequate sufficiency to explain the 3D centrality we witness for ourselves in this universe.

From a slightly different point of reasoning this following site, through a fairly exhaustive examination of the General Relativity equations themselves, acknowledges the insufficiency of General Relativity to account for the 'completeness' of 4D space-time within the sphere of the CMBR from different points of observation in the universe.
The Cauchy Problem In General Relativity - Igor Rodnianski
Excerpt: 2.2 Large Data Problem In General Relativity - While the result of Choquet-Bruhat and its subsequent refinements guarantee the existence and uniqueness of a (maximal) Cauchy development, they provide no information about its geodesic completeness and thus, in the language of partial differential equations, constitutes a local existence. ,,, More generally, there are a number of conditions that will guarantee the space-time will be geodesically incomplete.,,, In the language of partial differential equations this means an impossibility of a large data global existence result for all initial data in General Relativity.
http://www.icm2006.org/proceedings/Vol_III/contents/ICM_Vol_3_22.pdf
The following article speaks of a proof developed by legendary mathematician Kurt Gödel, from a thought experiment, in which Gödel showed General Relativity could not be a complete description of the universe:
THE GOD OF THE MATHEMATICIANS - DAVID P. GOLDMAN - August 2010
Excerpt: Gödel's personal God is under no obligation to behave in a predictable orderly fashion, and Gödel produced what may be the most damaging critique of general relativity. In a Festschrift, (a book honoring Einstein), for Einstein's seventieth birthday in 1949, Gödel demonstrated the possibility of a special case in which, as Palle Yourgrau described the result, "the large-scale geometry of the world is so warped that there exist space-time curves that bend back on themselves so far that they close; that is, they return to their starting point." This means that "a highly accelerated spaceship journey along such a closed path, or world line, could only be described as time travel." In fact, "Gödel worked out the length and time for the journey, as well as the exact speed and fuel requirements." Gödel, of course, did not actually believe in time travel, but he understood his paper to undermine the Einsteinian worldview from within.
http://www.firstthings.com/article/2010/07/the-god-of-the-mathematicians

Physicists continue work to abolish time as fourth dimension of space - April 2012
Excerpt: "Our research confirms Gödel's vision: time is not a physical dimension of space through which one could travel into the past or future."
http://phys.org/news/2012-04-physicists-abolish-fourth-dimension-space.html
The fact that photons are shown to travel as uncollapsed quantum information waves in the double slit experiment, and not as collapsed particles, is what gives us a solid reason for proposing this mechanism of the universal quantum wave collapse of photons to each point of conscious observation.
Double-slit experiment
Excerpt: In quantum mechanics, the double-slit experiment (often referred to as Young's experiment) demonstrates the inseparability of the wave and particle natures of light and other quantum particles. A coherent light source (e.g., a laser) illuminates a thin plate with two parallel slits cut in it, and the light passing through the slits strikes a screen behind them. The wave nature of light causes the light waves passing through both slits to interfere, creating an interference pattern of bright and dark bands on the screen. However, at the screen, the light is always found to be absorbed as though it were made of discrete particles, called photons.,,, Any modification of the apparatus that can determine (that can let us observe) which slit a photon passes through destroys the interference pattern, illustrating the complementarity principle; that the light can demonstrate both particle and wave characteristics, but not both at the same time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment
Double Slit Experiment – Explained By Prof Anton Zeilinger – video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/6101627/

That quantum mechanics applies to the large, 'macro', scale of the universe was established here:
Macrorealism Emerging from Quantum Physics - Brukner, Caslav; Kofler, Johannes
American Physical Society, APS March Meeting, - March 5-9, 2007
Excerpt: for unrestricted measurement accuracy a violation of macrorealism (i.e., a violation of the Leggett-Garg inequalities) is possible for arbitrary large systems.,,
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007APS..MARB33005B
Many atheists like to label the findings of quantum mechanics as 'quantum poofery', since the findings go directly against many of their foundational materialistic beliefs. But alas for them, this quantum mechanical 'magic' that they are so averse to has many real world applications (some of which are essential for the information age we live in):
10 Real-world Applications of Quantum Mechanics - 2013
Excerpt: The study of quantum mechanics led to some truly astounding conclusions. For instance, scientists found that electrons behave both as waves and as particles, and the mere act of observing them changes the way they behave. Revelations like this one simply defied logic, prompting Einstein to declare “the more success the quantum theory has, the sillier it looks.”
Einstein’s sentiments still resonate today, more than a century after humanity’s first insights into the quantum world; quantum mechanics makes perfect sense mathematically but defies our intuition at every turn. So it might surprise you that, despite its strangeness, quantum mechanics has led to some revolutionary inventions over the past century and promises to lead to many more in the years to come. Read on to learn about 10 practical applications of quantum mechanics.
10. The Transistor
9. Energy Harvesters
8. Ultraprecise Clocks
7. Quantum Cryptography
6. Randomness Generator
5. Lasers
4. Ultraprecise Thermometers
3. Quantum Computers
2. Instantaneous Communication (highly debatable)
1. Teleportation (with huge caveats)

Go here to read details of each
http://dsc.discovery.com/tv-shows/curiosity/topics/10-real-world-applications-of-quantum-mechanics.htm
It is also interesting to note that materialists, instead of dealing forthrightly with the Theistic implications of quantum wave collapse, postulated quasi-infinite parallel universes, i.e. Many-Worlds, in which any absurdity would not be out of bounds in the infinite parallel universes i.e. Elvis could be president, pink elephants, etc.. etc.. in the Many-Worlds model;
Quantum mechanics
Excerpt: The Everett many-worlds interpretation, formulated in 1956, holds that all the possibilities described by quantum theory simultaneously occur in a multiverse composed of mostly independent parallel universes.[43] This is not accomplished by introducing some new axiom to quantum mechanics, but on the contrary by removing the axiom of the collapse of the wave packet:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics#Philosophical_implications
i.e. Many worlds is dependent on the wave function being merely an abstract description of reality. In fact, many worlds gets rid of the axiom of wave function collapse altogether and gives primary consideration to the particle. Many Worlds truly exposes materialism in all its full blown absurdity in doing so. i.e. The particle is given so much unmerited power in the many worlds interpretation of Quantum Mechanics that every time someone observes a particle, instead of the wave function merely collapsing, the particle instead creates a virtual infinity of parallel universes. i.e. Many worlds is basically saying that, instead of God, the material particle has bestowed within itself the power to create as many universes as it wants or needs to! And I am not overstating the case in the least!

Here is, in my view, a excellent mini-overview of the many empirical problems with the Many Worlds Interpretation:
The Parallel Universes of David Deutsch
(As argued for in Deutsch's book The Fabric of Reality) - A Critque by Henry R. Sturman
Excerpt: 1. The whole argument rests on the untestable, and therefore invalid, assumption that a photon goes through one of the four slits when a four slit interference pattern emerges. In particular, Deutsch's argument seems to rest on the hidden assumption that non-locality is impossible (see below), while he does not present any arguments for this assumption.
2. Deutsch fails to explain an essential fact of the slit experiments, that the interference pattern disappears when we measure which slit the photon goes through. This fact is evidence against the existence of shadow photons rather than evidence for it.
3. Deutsch fails to invalidate the alternative standard single universe explanation of the slit experiments.
4. Deutsch fails to explain the structure of the interference patterns.
5. Deutsch's argument against his critics that their theory makes use of imaginary things which have an effect on real things, is based on a straw man.

http://henrysturman.com/english/articles/multiverse.html

Is Shor's algorithm a demonstration of the many worlds interpretation?
Excerpt: David Deutsch is very fond of pointing out Shor’s integer factorization algorithm is a demonstration of the many worlds interpretation. As he often asked, where else did all the exponentially many combinations happen?
Are there any other alternative interpretations of quantum mechanics which can explain Shor’s algorithm, and the Deutsch-Jozsa and Simon’s algorithm?
,,, this argument is totally wrong for a simple reason: the real Universe - our Universe - is a quantum system, not a classical system. So it is normal for quantum systems in a single Universe to behave just like the quantum computer running Shor's algorithm. On the contrary, if we only use the classical computers, we exponentially slow down the computer relatively to what it could do. In this sense, Deutsch's "argument" shows that the many-worlds interpretation is just another psychological aid for the people who can't resist to incorrectly think about our world as being a classical world of a sort.,,,
There is one more lethal conceptual problem with the “many worlds” explanation of the Shor’s algorithm’s speed: the whole quantum computer’s calculation has to proceed in a completely coherent way and you’re not allowed to imagine that the world splits into “many worlds” as long as things are coherent i.e. before the qubits are measured. Only when the measurement is completed – e.g. at the end of the Shor’s algorithm calculation – you’re allowed to imagine that the worlds split. But it’s too late because by that moment, the whole calculation has already been done in a single (quantum) world, without any help from the parallel worlds.

(Many more excellent answers are on the site)
http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/10062/is-shors-algorithm-a-demonstration-of-the-many-worlds-interpretation
Many Worlds also carries some 'heavy baggage' to put it mildly. Moreover, it turns out that even the many worlds hypothesis allows for immortality. Atheists just can't seem to catch a break anywhere in quantum mechanics!

10 Mind-Bending Implications of the Many Worlds Theory - February 2013
http://listverse.com/2013/02/22/10-mind-bending-implications-of-the-many-worlds-theory/
If you thought life didn’t make sense in a multiverse, meet Many Worlds - Dec. 16, 2013
Excerpt: In the materialist’s/atheist’s commitment to keep the Almighty’s miraculous power out of science they have unwittingly, solely through the power of their imagination, bestowed omnipotent miraculous power onto a single material particle. For what other power could a material particle possibly possess, other than omnipotent power, in that the material particle creates entirely new parallel universes every time we try to observe it?
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/if-you-thought-life-didnt-make-sense-in-a-multiverse-meet-many-worlds/#comment-484057

Does Quantum Physics Make it Easier to Believe in God? July 2012 - Stephen M. Barr - professor of physics at the University of Delaware.
Excerpt: The upshot is this: If the mathematics of quantum mechanics is right (as most fundamental physicists believe), and if materialism is right, one is forced to accept the Many Worlds Interpretation of quantum mechanics. And that is awfully heavy baggage for materialism to carry.
If, on the other hand, we accept the more traditional understanding of quantum mechanics that goes back to von Neumann, one is led by its logic (as Wigner and Peierls were) to the conclusion that not everything is just matter in motion, and that in particular there is something about the human mind that transcends matter and its laws. It then becomes possible to take seriously certain questions that materialism had ruled out of court: If the human mind transcends matter to some extent, could there not exist minds that transcend the physical universe altogether? And might there not even exist an ultimate Mind?

http://www.bigquestionsonline.com/content/does-quantum-physics-make-it-easier-believe-god

You don't exist in an infinite number of places, say scientists - January 25, 2013
Excerpt: But the scientists' biggest criticism of the idea of infinite repetition in both proposals is the assumption that the universe is infinite. Whether the universe is infinite or finite is a big open-ended question in cosmology that scientists may never answer.
Soler Gil and Alfonseca note that, looking back at the history of physics, situations emerged where infinities seemed impossible to avoid, yet improved theories eliminated the infinities. Currently the two basic theories in physics, general relativity and quantum theory, both predict infinities. In relativity, it's gravity singularities in black holes and the big bang. In quantum theory, it's vacuum energy and certain parts of quantum field theory. Perhaps both theories are simple approximations of a third more general theory without infinities.
Soler Gil and Alfonseca also note that, Paul Dirac once stated that the most important challenge in physics was "to get rid of infinity."
While Soler Gil and Alfonseca can't disprove the proposals of infinite repetition, they emphasize that the point of their critique is to show that the idea remains in the realm of philosophy, mythology, and sci-fi tales, not modern cosmology. They call the speculation "ironic science," a term used by science journalist John Horgan to describe options that do not converge on truth but are at best "interesting."

http://phys.org/news/2013-01-dont-infinite-scientists.html

The inevitable nonlinearity of quantum gravity falsifies the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics - T. P. Singh - 2007
Excerpt:,,, This nonlinearity is responsible for a dynamically induced collapse of the wave-function, during a quantum measurement, and it hence falsifies the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. We illustrate this conclusion using a mathematical model based on a generalized Doebner-Goldin equation. The non-Hermitian part of the Hamiltonian in this norm-preserving, nonlinear, Schrodinger equation dominates during a quantum measurement, and leads to a breakdown of linear superposition.
http://arxiv.org/abs/0705.2357
Nonlocality and free will vs. many-worlds and determinism: The material world emerges from outside space-time - Antoine Suarez - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=q-YULI2WfBs#t=2469s
Empty waves, many worlds, parallel lives, and nonlocal decision at detection - Antoine Suarez - 2012
Abstract: I discuss an experiment demonstrating nonlocality and conservation of energy under the assumption that the decision of the outcome happens at detection. The experiment does not require Bell's inequalities and is loophole-free. I further argue that the local hidden variables assumed in Bell's theorem involve de Broglie's "empty waves", and therefore "many worlds" achieves to reconcile locality with the violation of Bell's inequalities. Accordingly, the discussed experiment may be the first loophole-free demonstration of nonlocality.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1204.1732v1
This following research showed that even a quasi infinite 'many worlds' cannot account for quantum entanglement:
Looking Beyond Space and Time to Cope With Quantum Theory – (Oct. 28, 2012)
Excerpt: To derive their inequality, which sets up a measurement of entanglement between four particles, the researchers considered what behaviours are possible for four particles that are connected by influences that stay hidden and that travel at some arbitrary finite speed.
Mathematically (and mind-bogglingly), these constraints define an 80-dimensional object. The testable hidden influence inequality is the boundary of the shadow this 80-dimensional shape casts in 44 dimensions. The researchers showed that quantum predictions can lie outside this boundary, which means they are going against one of the assumptions. Outside the boundary, either the influences can’t stay hidden, or they must have infinite speed.,,,
The remaining option is to accept that (quantum) influences must be infinitely fast,,,
“Our result gives weight to the idea that quantum correlations somehow arise from outside spacetime, in the sense that no story in space and time can describe them,” says Nicolas Gisin, Professor at the University of Geneva, Switzerland
,,,
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121028142217.htm
The following physicist shows that allowing a conscious observer to be given an ontologically complete role in Quantum Mechanics eliminates 'bizarre speculations':
Quantum brains: The oRules - Richard A. Mould - 2004
Department of Physics and Astronomy, State University of New York,
Excerpt page 9: Traditional quantum mechanics is not completely grounded in observation inasmuch as it does not include an observer. The epistemological approach of Copenhagen does not give the observer a role that is sufficient for him to realize the full empirical potential of the theory; and as a result, this model encourages bizarre speculations such as the many-world interpretation of Everett or the cat paradox of Schrödinger. However, when rules are written that allow a conscious observer to be given an ontologically complete role in the system, these empirical distortions disappear. It is only because of the incompleteness of the epistemological model by itself that these fanciful excursions seem plausible3. note 3: Physical theory should be made to accommodate the phenomena, not the other way around. Everett goes the other way around when he creates imaginary phenomenon to accommodate traditional quantum mechanics. If the oRules were adopted in place of the Born rule, these flights of fantasy would not be possible.
http://ms.cc.sunysb.edu/~rmould/voRules/voRules.pdf
Here is another critique of Deutsch's many worlds interpretation from another angle:
Measurement Outcomes and Probability in Everettian Quantum Mechanics - David J. Baker - 2006
Excerpt: The decision-theoretic account of probability in the Everett or many-worlds interpretation, advanced by David Deutsch and David Wallace, is shown to be circular.
http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/2717/1/OutcomeProbEverett.pdf

Quantum probability and many worlds - 2007
Abstract: We discuss the meaning of probabilities in the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. We start by presenting very briefly the many worlds theory, how the problem of probability arises, and some unsuccessful attempts to solve it in the past. Then we criticize a recent attempt by Deutsch to derive the quantum mechanical probabilities from the non-probabilistic parts of quantum mechanics and classical decision theory. We further argue that the Born probability does not make sense even as an additional probability rule in the many worlds theory. Our conclusion is that the many worlds theory fails to account for the probabilistic statements of standard (collapse) quantum mechanics.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S135521980700024X

Quantum Theory's 'Wavefunction' Found to Be Real Physical Entity: Scientific American - November 2011
Excerpt: "This strips away obscurity and shows you can't have an interpretation of a quantum state as probabilistic," he says.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=quantum-theorys-wavefunction

Dream Machine by Rivka Galchen May 2, 2011
Excerpt: "Deutsch is nearly alone in this conviction that quantum computing and Many Worlds are inextricably bound, though many (especially around Oxford) concede that the construction of a sizable and stable quantum computer might be evidence in favor of the Everett interpretation."
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/05/02/110502fa_fact_galchen
I consider the following absurd consequence of the Many Worlds hypothesis to be a self refutation of the hypothesis:
'I tentatively accept the consequences of such a theory, including that I would also be a multiversal object, which includes at least 10^500 versions of myself' - Scott - Many Worlds proponent
http://darwins-god.blogspot.com/2012/04/neuroscientist-most-seamless-illusions.html?showComment=1334583967799#c7217305678409346277
What makes the preceding comment from 'Scott' particularly absurd is that 'Scott', who believes in 10^500 versions of himself, denies the reality of his own consciousness, something he experiences firsthand, in order to believe in 10^500 versions of himself. Thus, it can be literally said that 'Scott' has lost his 'mind' in order to believe in 10^500 versions of himself. Yet when pressed 'Scott' denied that he held his mind was a epiphenomena (a illusion) of his 10^500 brain:
'No. I do not think my own consciousness is an illusion.' - Scott - many worlds proponent who believes in 10^500 versions of himself
http://darwins-god.blogspot.com/2012/06/nas-authority-it-makes-no-theological.html?showComment=1339707034302#c8475342352229004151

God Versus Science: A Futile Struggle By J Roy Singham - May 2012
Excerpt: Materialists believe that matter is unconscious, a tenable opinion. But they also believe that consciousness is an illusion. That belief is absurd, almost madness.
http://ezinearticles.com/?God-Versus-Science:-A-Futile-Struggle&id=6940055
Further notes refuting the Many Worlds Interpretation (parallel universes) of quantum mechanics:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AM4hZl80HUDnv0wgIC1cpAEHw7uUrSL5WVSTXgQO2K4/edit
For some questions, science may not have answers - Moorad Alexanian - February 2014
Excerpt: Surely, not only the question of the origin of life,, but questions of consciousness and of free will may be beyond the bounds of science. For instance, what measuring devices, other than human beings themselves, can we use to detect human consciousness? Clearly, purely physical data cannot penetrate the mystery that is the human mind.
http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/magazine/physicstoday/article/67/2/10.1063/PT.3.2260
Though the preceding author rightly observes that no machine exists that can directly detect consciousness, the following experiments have shown that consciousness and free will are integral to quantum experiments. In this following experiment, the double slit experiment is extended to show that the 'spooky actions', for instantaneous quantum wave collapse, happen regardless of any considerations for time or distance (and also overturn the detector interference objection) i.e. The following experiment shows that quantum actions are 'universal and instantaneous':
Wheeler's Classic Delayed Choice Experiment:
Excerpt: Now, for many billions of years the photon is in transit in region 3. Yet we can choose (many billions of years later) which experimental set up to employ – the single wide-focus, or the two narrowly focused instruments. We have chosen whether to know which side of the galaxy the photon passed by (by choosing whether to use the two-telescope set up or not, which are the instruments that would give us the information about which side of the galaxy the photon passed). We have delayed this choice until a time long after the particles "have passed by one side of the galaxy, or the other side of the galaxy, or both sides of the galaxy," so to speak. Yet, it seems paradoxically that our later choice of whether to obtain this information determines which side of the galaxy the light passed, so to speak, billions of years ago. So it seems that time has nothing to do with effects of quantum mechanics. And, indeed, the original thought experiment was not based on any analysis of how particles evolve and behave over time – it was based on the mathematics. This is what the mathematics predicted for a result, and this is exactly the result obtained in the laboratory.
http://www.bottomlayer.com/bottom/basic_delayed_choice.htm

Wheeler's Delayed Choice Experiment - 2010
Excerpt: The Delayed Choice experiment changes the boundary conditions of the Schrodinger equation after the particle enters the first beamsplitter.
http://www.physics.drexel.edu/~bob/TermPapers/WheelerDelayed.pdf

"Thus one decides the photon shall have come by one route or by both routes after it has already done its travel"
John A. Wheeler
Alain Aspect speaks on John Wheeler's Delayed Choice Experiment - video
http://vimeo.com/38508798
Genesis, Quantum Physics and Reality
Excerpt: Simply put, an experiment on Earth can be made in such a way that it determines if one photon comes along either on the right or the left side or if it comes (as a wave) along both sides of the gravitational lens (of the galaxy) at the same time. However, how could the photons have known billions of years ago that someday there would be an earth with inhabitants on it, making just this experiment? ,,, This is big trouble for the multi-universe theory and for the "hidden-variables" approach.
http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2000/PSCF3-00Zoeller-Greer.html.ori
This following experiment extended Wheeler's delayed choice double slit experiment to highlight the centrality of 'information' in the Double Slit Experiment and refutes any interference 'detector centered' arguments for why the wave collapses:

The Experiment That Debunked Materialism - video - (delayed choice quantum eraser)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xKUass7G8w
(Double Slit) A Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser - updated 2007
Excerpt: Upon accessing the information gathered by the Coincidence Circuit, we the observer are shocked to learn that the pattern shown by the positions registered at D0 (Detector Zero) at Time 2 depends entirely on the information gathered later at Time 4 and available to us at the conclusion of the experiment.
http://www.bottomlayer.com/bottom/kim-scully/kim-scully-web.htm

"It begins to look as we ourselves, by our last minute decision, have an influence on what a photon will do when it has already accomplished most of its doing... we have to say that we ourselves have an undeniable part in what we have always called the past. The past is not really the past until is has been registered. Or to put it another way, the past has no meaning or existence unless it exists as a record in the present."
- John Wheeler - The Ghost In The Atom - Page 66-68
It is also very interesting to note that some materialists seem to have a very hard time grasping the simple point of these extended double slit experiments, but to try to put it more clearly; To explain an event which defies time and space, as the quantum erasure experiment clearly does, you cannot appeal to any material entity in the experiment like interference from the detector, or any other 3D physical part of the experiment, which is itself constrained by the limits of time and space. To give an adequate explanation for defying time and space one is forced to appeal to a transcendent entity which is itself not confined by time or space. But then again I guess I can see why forcing someone, who claims to be a atheistic materialist, to appeal to a non-material transcendent entity, to give an adequate explanation for such a ‘spooky’ event, would invoke such utter confusion on their part. Yet to try to put it in even more ‘shocking’ terms for the atheists, the ‘shocking’ conclusion of the experiment is that a transcendent Mind, with a capital M, is integral to the experiment. Moreover, it is impossible for a human mind to ever ‘emerge’ from any 3-D material basis which is dependent on a preceding conscious cause. This is more than a slight problem for the atheistic-evolutionary materialist who insists that our minds simply ‘emerged’, or evolved, from some randomly selected conglomeration of 3D matter. In the following article Professor Henry puts it more clearly than I can:
The Mental Universe - Richard Conn Henry - Professor of Physics John Hopkins University
Excerpt: The only reality is mind and observations, but observations are not of things. To see the Universe as it really is, we must abandon our tendency to conceptualize observations as things.,,, Physicists shy away from the truth because the truth is so alien to everyday physics. A common way to evade the mental universe is to invoke "decoherence" - the notion that "the physical environment" is sufficient to create reality, independent of the human mind. Yet the idea that any irreversible act of amplification is necessary to collapse the wave function is known to be wrong: in "Renninger-type" experiments, the wave function is collapsed simply by your human mind seeing nothing. The universe is entirely mental,,,, The Universe is immaterial — mental and spiritual. Live, and enjoy.
http://henry.pha.jhu.edu/The.mental.universe.pdf
Astrophysicist John Gribbin comments on the Renninger experiment here:
Solving the quantum mysteries - John Gribbin
Excerpt: From a 50:50 probability of the flash occurring either on the hemisphere or on the outer sphere, the quantum wave function has collapsed into a 100 per cent certainty that the flash will occur on the outer sphere. But this has happened without the observer actually "observing" anything at all! It is purely a result of a change in the observer's knowledge about what is going on in the experiment.
http://www.lifesci.sussex.ac.uk/home/John_Gribbin/quantum.htm#Solving
i.e. The detector is completely removed as to being the primary cause of quantum wave collapse in the experiment. As Richard Conn Henry clearly implied previously, in the experiment it is found that 'The physical environment' IS NOT sufficient within itself to 'collapse the wave function', i.e. The wave function is collapsed by a conscious observer consciously 'knowing' which path the photon took!.
Why, who makes much of a miracle? As to me, I know of nothing else but miracles, Whether I walk the streets of Manhattan, Or dart my sight over the roofs of houses toward the sky,,,
Walt Whitman - Miracles
At the 5:45 minute mark of the following video the reason why detector interference does not explain quantum wave collapse is explained:

Quantum Mechanics - Double Slit and Delayed Choice Experiments - video
https://vimeo.com/87175892

Here is a good quote at the 9:10 minute mark of the preceding video
"That's the enigma. That our choice of what experiment to do determines the prior state of the electron. Somehow or other we had an influence on it which appears to travel backwards in time."
Fred Kuttner - Univ. Of California
Also of humorous note in the preceding video are Max Tegmark and Sean Carrol, who are both atheistic college professors who both believe in the epistemologically self-defeating many worlds scenario, are both basically scratching their heads and saying, 'We really don't know why conscious observation would have such a dramatic impact in the double slit experiment'.
'The short answer is we don't know. This is the fundamental mystery of quantum mechanics. The reason why quantum mechanics is 'difficult'. Mysteriously when we look at things we see particles, when we are not looking things are waves.'
Sean Carrol

"This is something we scientists have argued passionately about now for almost 100 years. And there is still no consensus"
Max Tegmark
Further notes:

The Renninger Negative Result Experiment - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3uzSlh_CV0
Elitzur–Vaidman bomb tester
Excerpt: In 1994, Anton Zeilinger, Paul Kwiat, Harald Weinfurter, and Thomas Herzog actually performed an equivalent of the above experiment, proving interaction-free measurements are indeed possible.[2] In 1996, Kwiat et al. devised a method, using a sequence of polarising devices, that efficiently increases the yield rate to a level arbitrarily close to one.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elitzur%E2%80%93Vaidman_bomb-testing_problem#Experiments
Experimental Realization of Interaction-Free Measurement - Paul G. Kwiat; H. Weinfurter, T. Herzog, A. Zeilinger, and M. Kasevich - 1994
http://www.univie.ac.at/qfp/publications3/pdffiles/1994-08.pdf

Interaction-Free Measurement - 1995
http://archive.is/AjexE

Realization of an interaction-free measurement - 1996
http://bg.bilkent.edu.tr/jc/topics/Interaction%20free%20measurements/papers/realization%20of%20an%20interaction%20free%20measurement.pdf

In related note to 'interaction-free measurement', it is proposed that non-local (spooky action at a distance) quantum entanglement is possible without the physical interaction of the particles first:
Qubits that never interact could exhibit past-future entanglement - July 30, 2012
Excerpt: Typically, for two particles to become entangled, they must first physically interact. Then when the particles are physically separated and still share the same quantum state, they are considered to be entangled. But in a new study, physicists have investigated a new twist on entanglement in which two qubits become entangled with each other even though they never physically interact.,,
In the current study, the physicists have proposed an experiment based on circuit quantum electrodynamics (QED) that is fully within reach of current technologies. They describe a set-up that involves a pair of superconducting qubits, P and F, with qubit P connected to a quantum field vacuum by a transmission line. During the first time interval, which the scientists call the past, P interacts with the field. Then P is quickly decoupled from the field for the second time interval. Finally, F is coupled to the field for a time interval called the future. Even though P and F never interact with the field at the same time or with each other at all, F’s interactions with the field cause it to become entangled with P. The physicists call this correlation “past-future entanglement.”

http://phys.org/news/2012-07-qubits-interact-past-future-entanglement.html
That the mind of a individual observer would play such an integral, yet not complete ‘closed loop’ role, in quantum mechanics, gives us clear evidence that our mind is a unique entity. A unique entity with a superior quality of existence when compared to the uncertain 3D particles of the material universe. This is clear evidence for the existence of the ‘mind’ of man that supersedes, and is transcendent of, any material basis that the mind has been purported to emerge from by materialists. I would also like to point out that the ‘effect’, of universal quantum wave collapse to each ‘central 3D observer’ in the universe (Wheeler; Delayed Choice, Wigner; Quantum Symmetries; Leggett's Inequality; Quantum Zeno Effect), gives us clear evidence of the extremely special importance that the ’cause’ of the ‘Infinite Mind of God’ places on each of our own individual souls/minds.
Psalm 139:17-18
How precious concerning me are your thoughts, O God! How vast is the sum of them! Were I to count them, they would outnumber the grains of sand. When I awake, I am still with you.
Here’s a recent variation of Wheeler’s Delayed Choice experiment, which highlights the ability of the conscious observer to effect 'spooky action into the past', thus further solidifying consciousness's centrality in reality. Furthermore in the following experiment, the claim that past material states determine future conscious choices (determinism) is falsified by the fact that present conscious choices effect past material states:
Experimental delayed-choice entanglement swapping - Oct. 2012
Abstract: Motivated by the question, which kind of physical interactions and processes are needed for the production of quantum entanglement, Peres has put forward the radical idea of delayed-choice entanglement swapping. There, entanglement can be "produced a posteriori, after the entangled particles have been measured and may no longer exist". In this work we report the first realization of Peres' gedanken experiment. Using four photons, we can actively delay the choice of measurement-implemented via a high-speed tunable bipartite state analyzer and a quantum random number generator-on two of the photons into the time-like future of the registration of the other two photons. This effectively projects the two already registered photons onto one definite of two mutually exclusive quantum states in which either the photons are entangled (quantum correlations) or separable (classical correlations). This can also be viewed as "quantum steering into the past".
http://arxiv.org/abs/1203.4834

Quantum physics mimics spooky action into the past - April 23, 2012
Excerpt: The authors experimentally realized a "Gedankenexperiment" called "delayed-choice entanglement swapping", formulated by Asher Peres in the year 2000. Two pairs of entangled photons are produced, and one photon from each pair is sent to a party called Victor. Of the two remaining photons, one photon is sent to the party Alice and one is sent to the party Bob. Victor can now choose between two kinds of measurements. If he decides to measure his two photons in a way such that they are forced to be in an entangled state, then also Alice's and Bob's photon pair becomes entangled. If Victor chooses to measure his particles individually, Alice's and Bob's photon pair ends up in a separable state. Modern quantum optics technology allowed the team to delay Victor's choice and measurement with respect to the measurements which Alice and Bob perform on their photons. "We found that whether Alice's and Bob's photons are entangled and show quantum correlations or are separable and show classical correlations can be decided after they have been measured", explains Xiao-song Ma, lead author of the study.
According to the famous words of Albert Einstein, the effects of quantum entanglement appear as "spooky action at a distance". The recent experiment has gone one remarkable step further. "Within a naïve classical world view, quantum mechanics can even mimic an influence of future actions on past events", says Anton Zeilinger.

http://phys.org/news/2012-04-quantum-physics-mimics-spooky-action.html
i.e. The preceding experiment clearly shows, and removes any doubt whatsoever, that the ‘material’ detector recording information in the double slit is secondary to the experiment and that a conscious observer being able to consciously know the 'which path' information of a photon with local certainty, is of primary importance in the experiment.
"If we attempt to attribute an objective meaning to the quantum state of a single system, curious paradoxes appear: quantum effects mimic not only instantaneous action-at-a-distance but also, as seen here, influence of future actions on past events, even after these events have been irrevocably recorded."
Asher Peres, Delayed choice for entanglement swapping. J. Mod. Opt. 47, 139-143 (2000).
You can see a more complete explanation of the startling results of the experiment at the 9:11 minute mark of the following video

Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser Experiment Explained - 2014 video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6HLjpj4Nt4

In the preceding experiment, besides the centrality of 'consciously knowing' to the experiment, it is also important to note that free will is of primary importance in the experiment as well:
What Does Quantum Physics Have to Do with Free Will? - By Antoine Suarez - July 22, 2013
Excerpt: What is more, recent experiments are bringing to light that the experimenter’s free will and consciousness should be considered axioms (founding principles) of standard quantum physics theory. So for instance, in experiments involving “entanglement” (the phenomenon Einstein called “spooky action at a distance”), to conclude that quantum correlations of two particles are nonlocal (i.e. cannot be explained by signals traveling at velocity less than or equal to the speed of light), it is crucial to assume that the experimenter can make free choices, and is not constrained in what orientation he/she sets the measuring devices.
To understand these implications it is crucial to be aware that quantum physics is not only a description of the material and visible world around us, but also speaks about non-material influences coming from outside the space-time.,,,

https://www.bigquestionsonline.com/content/what-does-quantum-physics-have-do-free-will
How Free Will Works (In Quantum Mechanics) - video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMp30Q8OGOE

In other words, if my conscious choices really are just merely the result of whatever state the material particles in my brain happen to be in in the past (deterministic) how in blue blazes are my choices instantaneously effecting the state of material particles into the past?,,, These experiments from quantum mechanics are simply impossible on a reductive materialism (determinism) view of reality!
I consider the preceding experimental evidence to be a vast, vast, improvement over the traditional 'uncertainty' argument for free will, from quantum mechanics, that had been used for decades to undermine the deterministic belief of materialists:

Why Quantum Physics (Uncertainty) Ends the Free Will Debate - Michio Kaku - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFLR5vNKiSw

Moreover, the distance of quantum erasure was extended far enough to ensure Einstein locality:
Of Einstein and entanglement: Quantum erasure deconstructs wave-particle duality - January 29, 2013
Excerpt: While previous quantum eraser experiments made the erasure choice before or (in delayed-choice experiments) after the interference – thereby allowing (the possibility of) communications between erasure and interference in the two systems, respectively – scientists in Prof. Anton Zeilinger's group at the Austrian Academy of Sciences and the University of Vienna recently reported a quantum eraser experiment in which they prevented this communications possibility by enforcing Einstein locality. They accomplished this using hybrid path-polarization entangled photon pairs distributed over an optical fiber link of 55 meters in one experiment and over a free-space link of 144 kilometers in another. Choosing the polarization measurement for one photon decided whether its entangled partner followed a definite path as a particle, or whether this path-information information was erased and wave-like interference appeared. They concluded that since the two entangled systems are causally disconnected in terms of the erasure choice, wave-particle duality is an irreducible feature of quantum systems with no naïve realistic explanation. The world view that a photon always behaves either definitely as a wave or definitely as a particle would require faster-than-light communication, and should therefore be abandoned as a description of quantum behavior.
http://phys.org/news/2013-01-einstein-entanglement-quantum-erasure-deconstructs.html
Of interest to this undermining of the space-time of General Relativity as a accurate description of reality, Einstein was asked (by a philosopher):
"Can physics demonstrate the existence of 'the now' in order to make the notion of 'now' into a scientifically valid term?"
Einstein's answer was categorical, he said:
"The experience of 'the now' cannot be turned into an object of physical measurement, it can never be a part of physics."
Quote was taken from the last few minutes of this following video:
Stanley L. Jaki: "The Mind and Its Now"
https://vimeo.com/10588094

The preceding statement was an interesting statement for Einstein to make since 'the now of the mind' has, from many recent experiments in quantum mechanics, undermined the space-time of Einstein's General Relativity as to being the absolute frame of reference for reality. i.e. 'the now of the mind', contrary to what Einstein thought possible for experimental physics, and according to advances in quantum mechanics, takes precedence over past events in time. Moreover, due to advances in quantum mechanics, it would now be much more appropriate to phrase Einstein's answer to the philosopher in this way:
"It is impossible for the experience of 'the now of the mind' to ever be divorced from physical measurement, it will always be a part of physics."
Here is a experiment which further clarifies the centrality of 'consciousness' in quantum mechanics
“I’m going to talk about the Bell inequality, and more importantly a new inequality that you might not have heard of called the Leggett inequality, that was recently measured. It was actually formulated almost 30 years ago by Professor Leggett, who is a Nobel Prize winner, but it wasn’t tested until about a year and a half ago (in 2007), when an article appeared in Nature, that the measurement was made by this prominent quantum group in Vienna led by Anton Zeilinger, which they measured the Leggett inequality, which actually goes a step deeper than the Bell inequality and rules out any possible interpretation other than consciousness creates reality when the measurement is made.” – Bernard Haisch, Ph.D., Calphysics Institute, is an astrophysicist and author of over 130 scientific publications.
Preceding quote taken from this following video;

Quantum Mechanics and Consciousness - A New Measurement - Bernard Haisch, Ph.D (Shortened version of entire video with notes in description of video)
http://vimeo.com/37517080
Quantum physics says goodbye to reality - Apr 20, 2007
Excerpt: Many realizations of the thought experiment have indeed verified the violation of Bell's inequality. These have ruled out all hidden-variables theories based on joint assumptions of realism, meaning that reality exists when we are not observing it; and locality, meaning that separated events cannot influence one another instantaneously. But a violation of Bell's inequality does not tell specifically which assumption – realism, locality or both – is discordant with quantum mechanics.
Markus Aspelmeyer, Anton Zeilinger and colleagues from the University of Vienna, however, have now shown that realism is more of a problem than locality in the quantum world. They devised an experiment that violates a different inequality proposed by physicist Anthony Leggett in 2003 that relies only on realism, and relaxes the reliance on locality. To do this, rather than taking measurements along just one plane of polarization, the Austrian team took measurements in additional, perpendicular planes to check for elliptical polarization.
They found that, just as in the realizations of Bell's thought experiment, Leggett's inequality is violated – thus stressing the quantum-mechanical assertion that reality does not exist when we're not observing it. "Our study shows that 'just' giving up the concept of locality would not be enough to obtain a more complete description of quantum mechanics," Aspelmeyer told Physics Web. "You would also have to give up certain intuitive features of realism."

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/27640
Quantum Physics – (material reality does not exist until we look at it) – Dr. Quantum video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1ezNvpFcJU
Lecture 11: Decoherence and Hidden Variables - Scott Aaronson
Excerpt: "Look, we all have fun ridiculing the creationists who think the world sprang into existence on October 23, 4004 BC at 9AM (presumably Babylonian time), with the fossils already in the ground, light from distant stars heading toward us, etc. But if we accept the usual picture of quantum mechanics, then in a certain sense the situation is far worse: the world (as you experience it) might as well not have existed 10^-43 seconds ago!"
http://www.scottaaronson.com/democritus/lec11.html
If you have trouble accepting the implications of the preceding video, don’t feel alone, Nobel prize winner Anthony Leggett, who developed Leggett’s inequality to try to prove that an objective material reality exists when we are not looking at it, still does not believe the results of the experiment that he himself was integral in devising, even though the inequality was violated by a stunning 80 orders of magnitude. He seems to have done this simply because the results contradicted the ‘realism’ he believes in (realism is the notion that an objective material reality exists apart from our conscious observation of it).
A team of physicists in Vienna has devised experiments that may answer one of the enduring riddles of science: Do we create the world just by looking at it? - 2008
Excerpt: In mid-2007 Fedrizzi found that the new realism model was violated by 80 orders of magnitude; the group was even more assured that quantum mechanics was correct.
Leggett agrees with Zeilinger that realism is wrong in quantum mechanics, but when I asked him whether he now believes in the theory, he answered only “no” before demurring, “I’m in a small minority with that point of view and I wouldn’t stake my life on it.” For Leggett there are still enough loopholes to disbelieve. I asked him what could finally change his mind about quantum mechanics. Without hesitation, he said sending humans into space as detectors to test the theory.,,,

(to which Anton Zeilinger responded)

When I mentioned this to Prof. Zeilinger he said, “That will happen someday. There is no doubt in my mind. It is just a question of technology.” Alessandro Fedrizzi had already shown me a prototype of a realism experiment he is hoping to send up in a satellite. It’s a heavy, metallic slab the size of a dinner plate.

http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/the_reality_tests/P3/
And to further solidify the case that 'consciousness precedes reality' the violation of Leggett's inequalities were extended:
Nonlocal "realistic" Leggett models can be considered refuted by the before-before experiment - 2008 - Antoine Suarez Center for Quantum Philosophy,
Excerpt: (page 3) The independence of quantum measurement from the presence of human consciousness has not been proved wrong by any experiment to date.,,,
"nonlocal correlations happen from outside space-time, in the sense that there is no story in space-time that tells us how they happen."

http://www.quantumphil.org/SuarezFOOP201R2.pdf

A simple approach to test Leggett’s model of nonlocal quantum correlations - 2009
Excerpt of Abstract: Bell's strong sentence "Correlations cry out for explanations" remains relevant,,,we go beyond Leggett's model, and show that one cannot ascribe even partially defined individual properties to the components of a maximally entangled pair.
http://www.mendeley.com/research/a-simple-approach-to-test-leggetts-model-of-nonlocal-quantum-correlations/

Violation of Leggett inequalities in orbital angular momentum subspaces - 2010
Main results. We extend the violation of Leggett inequalities to the orbital angular momentum (OAM) state space of photons, which is associated with their helical wavefronts. We define our measurements in a Bloch sphere for OAM and measure the Leggett parameter LN (where N is the number of settings for the signal photon) as we change the angle χ (see figure). We observe excellent agreement with quantum mechanical predictions (red line), and show a violation of five and six standard deviations for N = 3 and N = 4, respectively.
http://iopscience.iop.org/1367-2630/12/12/123007

Looking Beyond Space and Time to Cope With Quantum Theory - (Oct. 28, 2012)
Excerpt: To derive their inequality, which sets up a measurement of entanglement between four particles, the researchers considered what behaviours are possible for four particles that are connected by influences that stay hidden and that travel at some arbitrary finite speed.
Mathematically (and mind-bogglingly), these constraints define an 80-dimensional object. The testable hidden influence inequality is the boundary of the shadow this 80-dimensional shape casts in 44 dimensions. The researchers showed that quantum predictions can lie outside this boundary, which means they are going against one of the assumptions. Outside the boundary, either the influences can't stay hidden, or they must have infinite speed.,,,
The remaining option is to accept that (quantum) influences must be infinitely fast,,,
"Our result gives weight to the idea that quantum correlations somehow arise from outside spacetime, in the sense that no story in space and time can describe them," says Nicolas Gisin, Professor at the University of Geneva, Switzerland,,,

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121028142217.htm

Quantum theory survives latest challenge - Dec 15, 2010
Excerpt: Even assuming that entangled photons could respond to one another instantly, the correlations between polarization states still violated Leggett’s inequality. The conclusion being that instantaneous communication is not enough to explain entanglement and realism must also be abandoned.
This conclusion is now backed up by Sonja Franke-Arnold and collegues at the University of Glasgow and University of Strathclyde who have performed another experiment showing that entangled photons exhibit,, stronger correlations than allowed for particles with individually defined properties – even if they would be allowed to communicate constantly.

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2010/dec/15/quantum-theory-survives-latest-challenge
That quantum mechanics applies to the large, 'macro', scale of the universe was established here:
Macrorealism Emerging from Quantum Physics - Brukner, Caslav; Kofler, Johannes
American Physical Society, APS March Meeting, - March 5-9, 2007
Excerpt: for unrestricted measurement accuracy a violation of macrorealism (i.e. a violation of the Leggett-Garg inequalities) is possible for arbitrary large systems.,,
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007APS..MARB33005B
In the following article, Physics Professor Richard Conn Henry is quite blunt as to what quantum mechanics, specifically Leggett's Inequality, reveals to us about the 'primary cause' of our 3D reality:
Alain Aspect and Anton Zeilinger by Richard Conn Henry - Physics Professor - John Hopkins University
Excerpt: Why do people cling with such ferocity to belief in a mind-independent reality? It is surely because if there is no such reality, then ultimately (as far as we can know) mind alone exists. And if mind is not a product of real matter, but rather is the creator of the "illusion" of material reality (which has, in fact, despite the materialists, been known to be the case, since the discovery of quantum mechanics in 1925), then a theistic view of our existence becomes the only rational alternative to solipsism (solipsism is the philosophical idea that only one's own mind is sure to exist). (Dr. Henry's referenced experiment and paper - “An experimental test of non-local realism” by S. Gröblacher et. al., Nature 446, 871, April 2007 - “To be or not to be local” by Alain Aspect, Nature 446, 866, April 2007 (Leggett's Inequality: Verified to 80 orders of magnitude)
http://henry.pha.jhu.edu/aspect.html
Personally I felt the word "illusion" was a bit too strong from Dr. Henry to describe material reality in the precedin article and would myself have opted for his saying something a little more subtle like; "material reality is a "secondary reality" that is dependent on the primary reality of God's mind" to exist." The following comment from a blogger on UD reflects fairly closely how I, as a Christian Theist, view reality;
"I do believe in the physical, concrete universe as real. It isn’t just an illusion. However, being a Christian, I can say, also, that the spiritual realm is even more real than the physical. More real, in this sense, however, isn’t to be taken to mean that the physical is “less” real, but that it is less important. The physical, ultimately, really derives its significance from the spiritual, and not the other way around. I submit to you, though, that the spiritual reality, in some sense, needs the physical reality, just as a baseball game needs a place to be played. The game itself may be more important than the field, but the game still needs the field in order to be played. The players are the most important part of the game, but without bats, balls, and gloves, the players cannot play. Likewise, without a physical, concrete reality, the spiritual has “no place to play”. Love, without a concrete reality, has no place to act out its romance; joy has nothing to jump up and down on, and consciousness has nothing to wake up to." - Brent - UD Blogger
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/tozer-got-it/#comment-380294
But of course, the primary question still is, "What does our conscious observation have to do with anything in these quantum experiments?",,
What drives materialists crazy is that consciousness cannot be seen, tasted, smelled, touched, heard, or studied in a laboratory. But how could it be otherwise? Consciousness is the very thing that is DOING the seeing, the tasting, the smelling, etc… We define material objects by their effect upon our senses – how they feel in our hands, how they appear to our eyes. But we know consciousness simply by BEING it! - APM - UD Blogger
http://www.uncommondescent.com/neuroscience/another-atheist-checks-out-of-no-consciousnessno-free-will/comment-page-1/#comment-411601

“No, I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.”
Max Planck (1858–1947), the originator of quantum theory, The Observer, London, January 25, 1931

“Consciousness cannot be accounted for in physical terms. For consciousness is absolutely fundamental. It cannot be accounted for in terms of anything else.”
(Schroedinger, Erwin. 1984. “General Scientific and Popular Papers,” in Collected Papers, Vol. 4. Vienna: Austrian Academy of Sciences. Friedr. Vieweg & Sohn, Braunschweig/Wiesbaden. p. 334.)

"In any philosophy of reality that is not ultimately self-defeating or internally contradictory, mind – unlabeled as anything else, matter or spiritual – must be primary. What is “matter” and what is “conceptual” and what is “spiritual” can only be organized from mind. Mind controls what is perceived, how it is perceived, and how those percepts are labeled and organized. Mind must be postulated as the unobserved observer, the uncaused cause simply to avoid a self-negating, self-conflicting worldview. It is the necessary postulate of all necessary postulates, because nothing else can come first. To say anything else comes first requires mind to consider and argue that case and then believe it to be true, demonstrating that without mind, you could not believe that mind is not primary in the first place."
- William J. Murray
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/the-naturalists-conundrum/#comment-442672

The Science of Heaven by Dr. Eben Alexander - Nov. 18, 2012
Can consciousness exist when the body fails? One neurosurgeon says he has seen it firsthand—and takes on critics who vehemently disagree.
Excerpt: Many scientists who study consciousness would agree with me that, in fact, the hard problem of consciousness is probably the one question facing modern science that is arguably forever beyond our knowing, at least in terms of a physicalist model of how the brain might create consciousness. In fact, they would agree that the problem is so profound that we don’t even know how to phrase a scientific question addressing it. But if we must decide which produces which, modern physics is pushing us in precisely the opposite direction, suggesting that it is consciousness that is primary and matter secondary.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/11/18/the-science-of-heaven.html
Moreover, What is causing the quantum waves to collapse from their 'higher dimension' in the first place since we 'conscious' humans are definitely not the ones who are causing the photon waves to collapse to their 'uncertain 3D wave/particle' state? With the refutation of the materialistic 'hidden variable' argument and with the patent absurdity of the materialistic 'Many-Worlds' hypothesis, then I can only think of one sufficient explanation for quantum wave collapse to photon;
Psalm 118:27
God is the LORD, who hath shown us light:,,,
It is interesting to note that there is a very strong tradition in philosophy that holds that the most concrete thing that a person can know about reality is the fact that they are indeed conscious:
"Descartes remarks that he can continue to doubt whether he has a body; after all, he only believes he has a body as a result of his perceptual experiences, and so the demon could be deceiving him about this. But he cannot doubt that he has a mind, i.e. that he thinks. So he knows he exists even though he doesn’t know whether or not he has a body."
http://cw.routledge.com/textbooks/philosophy/downloads/a2/unit4/descartes/DescartesDualism.pdf

"Descartes said 'I think, therefore I am.' My bet is that God replied, 'I am, therefore think.'"
Art Battson - Access Research Group
Rene (I Think Therefore I Am) Decartes - 34 minute lecture
https://vimeo.com/48210238

Professor Henry's bluntness on the implications of quantum mechanics towards consciousness continues here:
Quantum Enigma:Physics Encounters Consciousness - Richard Conn Henry - Professor of Physics - John Hopkins University
Excerpt: It is more than 80 years since the discovery of quantum mechanics gave us the most fundamental insight ever into our nature: the overturning of the Copernican Revolution, and the restoration of us human beings to centrality in the Universe.
And yet, have you ever before read a sentence having meaning similar to that of my preceding sentence? Likely you have not, and the reason you have not is, in my opinion, that physicists are in a state of denial…

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/the-quantum-enigma-of-consciousness-and-the-identity-of-the-designer/
As Professor Henry pointed out, it has been known since the discovery of quantum mechanics itself, early last century, that the universe is indeed 'Mental', as is illustrated by this quote from Max Planck.
"As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter."
Max Planck - The Father Of Quantum Mechanics - Das Wesen der Materie [The Nature of Matter], speech at Florence, Italy (1944) (from Archiv zur Geschichte der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, Abt. Va, Rep. 11 Planck, Nr. 1797)(Of Note: Max Planck Planck was a devoted Christian from early life to death, was a churchwarden from 1920 until his death, and believed in an almighty, all-knowing, beneficent God.
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Max_Planck

Colossians 1:17
"He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together."
http://www.earthcareonline.org/bibleverses.html
I find it extremely interesting, and strange, that quantum mechanics tells us that instantaneous quantum wave collapse to its 'uncertain' 3-D state is centered on each individual observer in the universe, whereas, 4-D space-time cosmology (General Relativity) tells us each 3-D point in the universe is central to the expansion of the universe. These findings of modern science are pretty much exactly what we would expect to see if this universe were indeed created, and sustained, from a higher dimension by a omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, eternal Being who knows everything that is happening everywhere in the universe at the same time. These findings certainly seem to go to the very heart of the age old question asked of many parents by their children, “How can God hear everybody’s prayers at the same time?”,,, i.e. Why should the expansion of the universe, or the quantum wave collapse of the entire universe, even care that you or I, or anyone else, should exist? Only Theism offers a rational explanation as to why you or I, or anyone else, should have such undeserved significance in such a vast universe:
Hebrews 4:13
"And there is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are naked and open to the eyes of Him to Whom we must give account."

Psalm 33:13-15
The LORD looks from heaven; He sees all the sons of men. From the place of His dwelling He looks on all the inhabitants of the earth; He fashions their hearts individually; He considers all their works.

Psalm 139:7-14
Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence? If I go up to the heavens, you are there; if I make my bed in the depths, you are there. If I rise on the wings of the dawn, if I settle on the far side of the sea, even there your hand will guide me, your right hand will hold me fast. If I say, “Surely the darkness will hide me and the light become night around me,” even the darkness will not be dark to you; the night will shine like the day, for darkness is as light to you. For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well.
It is also interesting to note that 'higher dimensional' mathematics had to be developed before Einstein could elucidate General Relativity, or even before Quantum Mechanics could be elucidated;

The Mathematics Of Higher Dimensionality – Gauss and Riemann – video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/6199520/
Flatland - 3D to 4D shift - Carl Sagan - video
Excerpt from Notes: The state-space of quantum mechanics is an infinite-dimensional function space. Some physical theories are also by nature high-dimensional, such as the 4-dimensional general relativity.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnURElCzGc0

The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences - Eugene Wigner - 1960
Excerpt: We now have, in physics, two theories of great power and interest: the theory of quantum phenomena and the theory of relativity.,,, The two theories operate with different mathematical concepts: the four dimensional Riemann space and the infinite dimensional Hilbert space,
http://www.dartmouth.edu/~matc/MathDrama/reading/Wigner.html

Shape from Sound: Toward New Tools for Quantum Gravity - 2013
Excerpt: To unify general relativity and quantum theory is hard in part because they are formulated in two very different mathematical languages, differential geometry and functional analysis.,,,
http://prl.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v110/i12/e121301
Moreover, due to advances in quantum mechanics, the argument for God from consciousness can now be framed like this:
1. Consciousness either preceded all of material reality or is a 'epi-phenomena' of material reality.
2. If consciousness is a 'epi-phenomena' of material reality then consciousness will be found to have no special position within material reality. Whereas conversely, if consciousness precedes material reality then consciousness will be found to have a special position within material reality.
3. Consciousness is found to have a special, even central, position within material reality.
4. Therefore, consciousness is found to precede material reality.


Four intersecting lines of experimental evidence from quantum mechanics that shows that consciousness precedes material reality (Wigner’s Quantum Symmetries, Wheeler’s Delayed Choice, Leggett’s Inequalities, Quantum Zeno effect):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1G_Fi50ljF5w_XyJHfmSIZsOcPFhgoAZ3PRc_ktY8cFo/edit

Colossians 1:17
And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
Schrodinger’s cat and Wigner's Friend – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=qCTBygadaM4#t=510s
Logical Proofs of Infinite External Consciousness - January 18, 2012
Excerpt: (Proof # 2) If you believe in the theory of Quantum Mechanics, then you believe that conscious observation must be present to collapse a wave function. If consciousness did not exist prior to matter coming into existence, then it is impossible that matter could ever come into existence. Additionally, this rules out the possibility that consciousness is the result of quantum mechanical processes. Either consciousness existed before matter or QM is wrong, one or the other is indisputably true.
http://www.libertariannews.org/2012/01/18/logical-proofs-of-infinite-external-consciousness/
Twenty-one more famous Nobel Prize winners who rejected Darwinism as an account of consciousness - Dr. VJ Torley - April 2012
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/twenty-one-more-famous-nobel-prize-winners-who-rejected-darwinism-as-an-account-of-consciousness/

Edward Witten on consciousness - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6b3DjOnv3I
Quote from video: "I have a much easier time imagining how we would understand the big bang, even though we can't do it yet, than I can imagine understanding consciousness."
- Edward Witten - professor of mathematical physics at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey.
Mind and Cosmos - Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature is Almost Certainly False - Thomas Nagel
Excerpt: If materialism cannot accommodate consciousness and other mind-related aspects of reality, then we must abandon a purely materialist understanding of nature in general, extending to biology, evolutionary theory, and cosmology. Since minds are features of biological systems that have developed through evolution, the standard materialist version of evolutionary biology is fundamentally incomplete. And the cosmological history that led to the origin of life and the coming into existence of the conditions for evolution cannot be a merely materialist history.
http://ukcatalogue.oup.com/product/9780199919758.do

"I have argued patiently against the prevailing form of naturalism, a reductive materialism that purports to capture life and mind through its neo-Darwinian extension." "..., I find this view antecedently unbelievable---a heroic triumph of ideological theory over common sense".
Thomas Nagel - "Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False" - pg.128
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0199919755/ref=pe_240370_26181270_nrn_si_1_im

"For Nagel, the elephant in the room which has not been adequately explained by the theory of evolution, by a long shot, is the existence of Mind.,,,
On reflection, it is surprising that the existence of Mind has not been considered a major problem to address in evolutionary thought. This stems from the early commitment of Western science to a sharp distinction between observer and observed.,,, a complete removal of the observer from consideration."

David Snoke Book Review: Mind and Cosmos, by Thomas Nagel - February 22, 2014
http://www.christianscientific.org/book-review-mind-and-cosmos-by-thomas-nagel/

Nagel Asks, Is the World Really Knowable? - Joshua Youngkin - October 26, 2012
Excerpt: science even at its best could never offer a complete picture of the world. That is, science as science will necessarily lack the vocabulary to capture and express the myriad private worlds of subjective, conscious experience. To take Nagel's famous example, science could tell you everything you want to know about bats except what it is like to be a bat, to "see" via echolocation. Similarly, brain scientists could in principle learn every objective fact about your brain and how it works yet they wouldn't by virtue of this knowledge know what sugar tastes like to you.
In the final chapter of the book, Nagel sums the matter up this way:
"In attempting to understand consciousness as a biological phenomenon, it is too easy to forget how radical is the difference between the subjective and the objective, and to fall into the error of thinking about the mental in terms taken from our ideas of physical events and processes."

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/10/nagel_asks_is_t065761.html
Doubts on Darwinism (Per Thomas Nagel) – JP Moreland, PhD – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Oc1lvvt60Y

Here is a defense of Nagel's book against some 'higher level' critics:

The Unreasonableness of Naturalism - November 15, 2012
http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/the-unreasonableness-of-naturalism/
Irreducible Mind: Toward a Psychology for the 21st Century (Book - 2009)
Excerpt: Current mainstream opinion in psychology, neuroscience, and philosophy of mind holds that all aspects of human mind and consciousness are generated by physical processes occurring in brains. Views of this sort have dominated recent scholarly publication. The present volume, however, demonstrates_empirically_that this reductive materialism is not only incomplete but false.
http://www.amazon.com/Irreducible-Mind-Toward-Psychology-Century/dp/1442202068
I like this following interview where, around the 35 minute mark, Harvard neurosurgeon Dr. Eben Alexander, who had a unique ‘brain-death while on life support’ Near Death Experience, repeatedly refers to consciousness as being ‘non-local’, i.e. as being beyond mass, energy, space and time. He simply is very well articulated towards driving the point home on the ‘hard problem’ consciousness.

A Conversation with Eben Alexander III, M.D. - Near Death Experiencer - with Steve Paulson (Interviewer) - video
http://www.btci.org/bioethics/2012/videos2012/vid3.html

The following site is very interesting;

The Scale of The Universe - Part 2 - interactive graph (recently updated in 2012 with cool features)
http://htwins.net/scale2/scale2.swf?bordercolor=white

The preceding interactive graph points out that the smallest scale visible to the human eye (as well as a human egg) is at 10^-4 meters, which 'just so happens' to be directly in the exponential center of all possible sizes of our physical reality (not just ‘nearly’ in the exponential center!). i.e. 10^-4 is, exponentially, right in the middle of 10^-35 meters, which is the smallest possible unit of length, which is Planck length, and 10^27 meters, which is the largest possible unit of 'observable' length since space-time was created in the Big Bang, which is the diameter of the universe. This is very interesting for, as far as I can tell, the limits to human vision (as well as the size of the human egg) could have, theoretically, been at very different positions than directly in the exponential middle;

Also of note: Just as it makes no sense, from a space-time perspective, to ask, 'What was before the Big Bang?', it also makes no sense, from a space-time perspective, to ask, 'What is below the Planck length?'
Planck length – Theoretical significance
Excerpt: This implies that the Planck scale is the limit below which the very notions of space and length cease to exist.,,,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_length#Theoretical_significance
Also of related interest, this following website, is along the same line as the preceding graph, but the website missed the centrality that conscious observation of humans itself played in the universe. The website instead leaned towards emphasizing the 'rough' centrality of the height of humans in the universe;
The View from the Centre of the Universe by Nancy Ellen Abrams and Joel R. Primack
Excerpt: The size of a human being is near the centre of all possible sizes.
http://www.popularscience.co.uk/features/feat24.htm
related note:

Explore the stellar neighborhood with new Milky Way visualization - November 15, 2012
http://phys.org/news/2012-11-explore-stellar-neighborhood-milky-visualization.html

The expansion of every 3D point in the universe, and the quantum wave collapse of the entire universe to each point of conscious observation in the universe, is obviously a very interesting congruence in science between the very large (relativity) and the very small (quantum mechanics). A congruence that Physicists, and Mathematicians, seem to be having a extremely difficult time 'unifying' into a 'theory of everything'.(Einstein, Penrose).
The Physics Of The Large And Small: What Is the Bridge Between Them?
Roger Penrose
Excerpt: This, (the unification of General Relativity and Quantum Field theory), would also have practical advantages in the application of quantum ideas to subjects like biology - in which one does not have the clean distinction between a quantum system and its classical measuring apparatus that our present formalism requires. In my opinion, moreover, this revolution is needed if we are ever to make significant headway towards a genuine scientific understanding of the mysterious but very fundamental phenomena of conscious mentality.
http://www.pul.it/irafs/CD%20IRAFS%2702/texts/Penrose.pdf

Quantum Mechanics Not In Jeopardy: Physicists Confirm Decades-Old Key Principle Experimentally - July 2010
Excerpt: the research group led by Prof. Gregor Weihs from the University of Innsbruck and the University of Waterloo has confirmed the accuracy of Born’s law in a triple-slit experiment (as opposed to the double slit experiment). "The existence of third-order interference terms would have tremendous theoretical repercussions - it would shake quantum mechanics to the core," says Weihs. The impetus for this experiment was the suggestion made by physicists to generalize either quantum mechanics or gravitation - the two pillars of modern physics - to achieve unification, thereby arriving at a one all-encompassing theory. "Our experiment thwarts these efforts once again," explains Gregor Weihs. (of note: Born's Law is an axiom that dictates that quantum interference can only occur between pairs of probabilities, not triplet or higher order probabilities. If they would have detected higher order interference patterns this would have potentially allowed a reformulation of quantum mechanics that is compatible with, or even incorporates, gravitation.)
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/07/100722142640.htm

"There are serious problems with the traditional view that the world is a space-time continuum. Quantum field theory and general relativity contradict each other. The notion of space-time breaks down at very small distances, because extremely massive quantum fluctuations (virtual particle/antiparticle pairs) should provoke black holes and space-time should be torn apart, which doesn’t actually happen." - G J Chaitin
http://www.umcs.maine.edu/~chaitin/bookgoedel_6.pdf
The conflict of reconciling General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics appears to arise from the inability of either theory to successfully deal with the Zero/Infinity problem that crops up in different places of each theory:
THE MYSTERIOUS ZERO/INFINITY
Excerpt: The biggest challenge to today's physicists is how to reconcile general relativity and quantum mechanics. However, these two pillars of modern science were bound to be incompatible. "The universe of general relativity is a smooth rubber sheet. It is continuous and flowing, never sharp, never pointy. Quantum mechanics, on the other hand, describes a jerky and discontinuous universe. What the two theories have in common - and what they clash over - is zero.",, "The infinite zero of a black hole -- mass crammed into zero space, curving space infinitely -- punches a hole in the smooth rubber sheet. The equations of general relativity cannot deal with the sharpness of zero. In a black hole, space and time are meaningless.",, "Quantum mechanics has a similar problem, a problem related to the zero-point energy. The laws of quantum mechanics treat particles such as the electron as points; that is, they take up no space at all. The electron is a zero-dimensional object,,, According to the rules of quantum mechanics, the zero-dimensional electron has infinite mass and infinite charge.
http://www.fmbr.org/editoral/edit01_02/edit6_mar02.htm
Quantum Mechanics and Relativity – The Collapse Of Physics? – video – with notes as to plausible reconciliation that is missed by materialists
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/6597379/

Analogy between Classical Mechanics, Quantum Mechanics, and Godel's Incompleteness (Page 2)
http://www.univ-nancy2.fr/poincare/documents/CLMPS2011ABSTRACTS/14thCLMPS2011_C5_Tanaka-Nakatogawa-Nagata.pdf

How Quantum Gravity Destroys Physicalism - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NP4QmrbBww
If It Holds Up, What Might BICEP2′s (Gravitational Waves) Discovery Mean? - March 18, 2014 Excerpt: If there were any doubt that gravity is controlled, just like everything else, by quantum physics, it would erased; BICEP2′s observation (if they hold up) would imply that just like other fields, which are subject to quantum jitter, space and time (somewhat more precisely, the metric that determines distances) undergoes the same type of quantum fluctuations as other fields, fluctuations that any quantum version of Einstein’s theory of gravity would predict. No details about quantum gravity are needed for this conclusion. http://profmattstrassler.com/2014/03/18/if-its-holds-up-what-might-bicep2s-discovery-mean/
The following experiment, besides demonstrating quantum mechanics dominion over gravity, would also go a long way towards establishing the centrality of consciousness in the universe:
Physicists Eye Quantum-Gravity Interface -Oct. 31, 2013
Excerpt: Gravity curves space and time around massive objects. What happens when such objects are put in quantum superpositions, causing space-time to curve in two different ways?,,,
Markus Aspelmeyer, a professor of physics at the University of Vienna, is equally optimistic. His group is developing three separate experiments at the quantum-gravity interface — two for the lab and one for an orbiting satellite.,, Many physicists expect quantum theory to prevail. They believe the ball on a spring should, in principle, be able to exist in two places at once, just as a photon can. The ball’s gravitational field should be able to interfere with itself in a quantum superposition, just as the photon’s electromagnetic field does. “I don’t see why these concepts of quantum theory that have proven to be right for the case of light should fail for the case of gravity,” Aspelmeyer said.
But the incompatibility of general relativity and quantum mechanics itself suggests that gravity might behave differently.

https://www.simonsfoundation.org/quanta/20131031-physicists-eye-quantum-gravity-interface/
The following researcher thinks a 'theory of everything' may be possible if one can get away from the effects of the space-time curvature of gravity:

Testing Einstein's E=mc2 in outer space - January 4, 2013
http://phys.org/news/2013-01-einstein-emc2-outer-space.html
New principle may help explain why nature is quantum - May 14, 2013
"An information-theoretic principle implies that any discrete physical theory is classical", Nature Communications, (2013)
Excerpt: Corsin and Stephanie show that this principle rules out various theories of nature. They note particularly that a class of theories they call 'discrete' are incompatible with the principle. These theories hold that quantum particles can take up only a finite number of states, rather than choose from an infinite, continuous range of possibilities.,,,
,,discrete 'state space' has been linked to quantum gravitational theories proposing similar discreteness in spacetime, where the fabric of the universe is made up of tiny brick-like elements rather than being a smooth, continuous sheet.

http://phys.org/news/2013-05-principle-nature-quantum.html
Moreover, this extreme ‘mathematical difficulty', of reconciling General Relativity with Quantum Mechanics into the much sought after 'Theory of Everything', was actually somewhat foreseeable from previous work, earlier in the 20th century, in mathematics by Godel:
THE GOD OF THE MATHEMATICIANS – DAVID P. GOLDMAN – August 2010
Excerpt: we cannot construct an ontology that makes God dispensable. Secularists can dismiss this as a mere exercise within predefined rules of the game of mathematical logic, but that is sour grapes, for it was the secular side that hoped to substitute logic for God in the first place. Gödel’s critique of the continuum hypothesis has the same implication as his incompleteness theorems: Mathematics never will create the sort of closed system that sorts reality into neat boxes.
http://www.firstthings.com/article/2010/07/the-god-of-the-mathematicians
The following scientist offers a very interesting insight into this issue of 'reconciling' the mental universe of Quantum Mechanics with the space-time of General Relativity:
How the Power of Intention Alters Matter - Dr. William A. Tiller
Excerpt: "Most people think that the matter is empty, but for internal self consistency of quantum mechanics and relativity theory, there is required to be the equivalent of 10 to 94 grams of mass energy, each gram being E=MC2 kind of energy. Now, that's a huge number, but what does it mean practically? Practically, if I can assume that the universe is flat, and more and more astronomical data is showing that it's pretty darn flat, if I can assume that, then if I take the volume or take the vacuum within a single hydrogen atom, that's about 10 to the minus 23 cubic centimeters. If I take that amount of vacuum and I take the latent energy in that, there is a trillion times more energy there than in all of the mass of all of the stars and all of the planets out to 20 billion light-years. That's big, that's big. And if consciousness allows you to control even a small fraction of that, creating a big bang is no problem." - Dr. William Tiller - has been a professor at Stanford U. in the Department of materials science & Engineering
http://www.beyondtheordinary.net/williamtiller.shtml
This following experiment is really interesting as to establishing the plausibility of Tiller's preceding hypothesis:

Scientific Evidence That Mind Effects Matter - Random Number Generators - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4198007

I once asked a evolutionist, after showing him the preceding experiment, "Since you ultimately believe that the 'god of random chance/chaos' produced everything we see around us, what in the world is my mind doing pushing your god around?"

Yet, to continue on, the unification, into a 'theory of everything', between what is in essence the 'infinite Theistic world of Quantum Mechanics' and the 'finite Materialistic world of the space-time of General Relativity' seems to be directly related to what Jesus apparently joined together with His resurrection, i.e. related to the unification of infinite God with finite man. Dr. William Dembski in this following comment, though not directly addressing the Zero/Infinity conflict in General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, offers insight into this 'unification' of the infinite and the finite:
The End Of Christianity - Finding a Good God in an Evil World - Pg.31
William Dembski PhD. Mathematics
Excerpt: "In mathematics there are two ways to go to infinity. One is to grow large without measure. The other is to form a fraction in which the denominator goes to zero. The Cross is a path of humility in which the infinite God becomes finite and then contracts to zero, only to resurrect and thereby unite a finite humanity within a newfound infinity."
http://www.designinference.com/documents/2009.05.end_of_xty.pdf
Of note: I hold 'growing large without measure' to be a lesser quality infinity than a fraction in which the denominator goes to zero. The reason why I hold it to be a 'lesser quality infinity' is stated at the 4:30 minute mark of the following video:

Can A "Beginning-less Universe" Exist? - William Lane Craig - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8YN0fwo5J4

As well, the reason why 'growing large without measure' would be a lesser quality infinity than 'a fraction in which the denominator goes to zero' can be partially be grasped in this following video:

Georg Cantor – The Mathematics Of Infinity – video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4572335

Also of related interest to this ‘Zero/Infinity conflict of reconciliation’, between General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, is that a ‘uncollapsed’ photon, in its quantum wave state, is mathematically defined as ‘infinite’ information:
Wave function
Excerpt "wave functions form an abstract vector space",,, This vector space is infinite-dimensional, because there is no finite set of functions which can be added together in various combinations to create every possible function.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_function#Wave_functions_as_an_abstract_vector_space

Explaining Information Transfer in Quantum Teleportation: Armond Duwell †‡ University of Pittsburgh
Excerpt: In contrast to a classical bit, the description of a (photon) qubit requires an infinite amount of information. The amount of information is infinite because two real numbers are required in the expansion of the state vector of a two state quantum system (Jozsa 1997, 1)
http://www.cas.umt.edu/phil/faculty/duwell/DuwellPSA2K.pdf

Quantum Computing – Stanford Encyclopedia
Excerpt: Theoretically, a single qubit can store an infinite amount of information, yet when measured (and thus collapsing the Quantum Wave state) it yields only the classical result (0 or 1),,,
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-quantcomp/#2.1
Quantum Computation Basics and Reflections On Quantum Cognitive Science - video
Of note: Prisoner’s dilemma is solved by quantum computation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-qkQ86fXIs

Thus every time we see (observe) a single photon of ‘material’ reality we are actually seeing just a single bit of information that was originally created from a very specific set of infinite information that was known by the consciousness that preceded material reality. i.e. information known only by the infinite Mind of omniscient God!
Job 38:19-20
“What is the way to the abode of light? And where does darkness reside? Can you take them to their places? Do you know the paths to their dwellings?”

Hebrews 11:3
By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word of God, so that what is seen was made from things that are not visible.

Single photons to soak up data:
Excerpt: the orbital angular momentum of a photon can take on an infinite number of values. Since a photon can also exist in a superposition of these states, it could – in principle – be encoded with an infinite amount of information.
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/7201

“When I consider what marvelous things men have understood, what he has inquired into and contrived, I know only too clearly that the human mind is a work of God, and one of the most excellent.” Yet the potential of the human mind “… is separated from the Divine knowledge by an infinite interval.”
(Poupard, Cardinal Paul. Galileo Galilei. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press, 1983, p. 101.)
It is important to note that the following experiment actually encoded information into a photon while it was in its quantum wave state, thus destroying the notion, held by many, that the wave function was not 'physically real' but was merely 'abstract'. i.e. How can information possibly be encoded into something that is not physically real but merely abstract?
Ultra-Dense Optical Storage - on One Photon
Excerpt: Researchers at the University of Rochester have made an optics breakthrough that allows them to encode an entire image's worth of data into a photon, slow the image down for storage, and then retrieve the image intact.,,, As a wave, it passed through all parts of the stencil at once,,,
http://www.physorg.com/news88439430.html

“By its conventional definition, a photon is one unit of excitation of a mode of the electromagnetic field. The modes of the electromagnetic field constitute a countably infinite set of basis functions, and in this sense the amount of information that can be impressed onto an individual photon is unlimited.”
Robert W. Boyd – The Enabling Technology for Quantum Information Science 2013 - University of Rochester, Rochester, NY - lead researcher of the experiment which encoded information in a photon in 2010
Here is a more rigorous measurement of the wave function which establishes it as 'physically real';
Direct measurement of the quantum wavefunction - June 2011
Excerpt: The wavefunction is the complex distribution used to completely describe a quantum system, and is central to quantum theory. But despite its fundamental role, it is typically introduced as an abstract element of the theory with no explicit definition.,,, Here we show that the wavefunction can be measured directly by the sequential measurement of two complementary variables of the system. The crux of our method is that the first measurement is performed in a gentle way through weak measurement so as not to invalidate the second. The result is that the real and imaginary components of the wavefunction appear directly on our measurement apparatus. We give an experimental example by directly measuring the transverse spatial wavefunction of a single photon, a task not previously realized by any method.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v474/n7350/full/nature10120.html
The following paper mathematically corroborated the preceding experiments and cleaned up some pretty nasty probabilistic incongruities. Particularly incongruities with quantum entanglement that arose from a purely statistical, ‘abstract’, interpretation of the wave function.

The quantum (wave) state cannot be interpreted statistically - November 2011
http://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/1111.3328
Quantum Theory's 'Wavefunction' Found to Be Real Physical Entity: Scientific American - November 2011
Excerpt: Action at a distance occurs when pairs of quantum particles interact in such a way that they become entangled. But the new paper, by a trio of physicists led by Matthew Pusey at Imperial College London, presents a theorem showing that if a quantum wavefunction were purely a statistical tool, then even quantum states that are unconnected across space and time would be able to communicate with each other. As that seems very unlikely to be true, the researchers conclude that the wavefunction must be physically real after all.,,, "This strips away obscurity and shows you can't have an interpretation of a quantum state as probabilistic," he says.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=quantum-theorys-wavefunction

On the reality of the quantum state - Matthew F. Pusey, Jonathan Barrett & Terry Rudolph - May 2012
Abstract: Quantum states are the key mathematical objects in quantum theory. It is therefore surprising that physicists have been unable to agree on what a quantum state truly represents. One possibility is that a pure quantum state corresponds directly to reality. However, there is a long history of suggestions that a quantum state (even a pure state) represents only knowledge or information about some aspect of reality. Here we show that any model in which a quantum state represents mere information about an underlying physical state of the system, and in which systems that are prepared independently have independent physical states, must make predictions that contradict those of quantum theory. (i.e. Any model that holds the Quantum wave state as merely a abstract representation of reality, i.e. as not a real representation of reality, must make predictions that contradict those of quantum theory.)
http://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nphys2309.html
The preceding mathematical interpretation was empirically corroborated:
Of Einstein and entanglement: Quantum erasure deconstructs wave-particle duality – January 29, 2013
Excerpt: They concluded that since the two entangled systems are causally disconnected in terms of the erasure choice, wave-particle duality is an irreducible feature of quantum systems with no naïve realistic explanation. The world view that a photon always behaves either definitely as a wave or definitely as a particle would require faster-than-light communication, and should therefore be abandoned as a description of quantum behavior.
http://phys.org/news/2013-01-einstein-entanglement-quantum-erasure-deconstructs.html
The following experiment went even further:
Quantum theory survives latest challenge – Dec 15, 2010
Excerpt: Even assuming that entangled photons could respond to one another instantly, the correlations between polarization states still violated Leggett’s inequality. The conclusion being that instantaneous communication is not enough to explain entanglement and realism must also be abandoned.
This conclusion is now backed up by Sonja Franke-Arnold and collegues at the University of Glasgow and University of Strathclyde who have performed another experiment showing that entangled photons exhibit,, stronger correlations than allowed for particles with individually defined properties – even if they would be allowed to communicate constantly.

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2010/dec/15/quantum-theory-survives-latest-challenge
The following establishes the quantum wave function as 'real' from another angle of logic;
Does the quantum wave function represent reality? April 2012 by Lisa Zyga
Excerpt: “Similarly, our result that there is a one-to-one correspondence between the wave function and the elements of reality means that, if we know a system's wave function then we are exactly in such a favorable situation: any information that there exists in nature and which could be relevant for predicting the behavior of a quantum mechanical system is represented one-to-one by the wave function. In this sense, the wave function is an optimal description of reality.”
http://phys.org/news/2012-04-quantum-function-reality.html
Yet, it is also important to note that even the ‘real’ wave function must interpreted in a ‘non-local’, beyond space and time, manner:
Particle and Wave-Like Behavior of Light Measured Simultaneously - Nov. 1, 2012
Excerpt: Dr Peruzzo, Research Fellow at the Centre for Quantum Photonics, said: “The measurement apparatus detected strong nonlocality, which certified that the photon behaved simultaneously as a wave and a particle in our experiment. This represents a strong refutation of models in which the photon is either a wave or a particle.”
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/11/121101141107.htm
Also of interest, completely contrary to the many worlds materialistic presupposition that holds no beyond space and time actions are possible, without consideration of the particles first, it is now found to be possible to entangle particles without the particles even interacting first!:
Qubits that never interact could exhibit past-future entanglement – July 30, 2012
Excerpt: Typically, for two particles to become entangled, they must first physically interact. Then when the particles are physically separated and still share the same quantum state, they are considered to be entangled. But in a new study, physicists have investigated a new twist on entanglement in which two qubits become entangled with each other even though they never physically interact.,,
http://phys.org/news/2012-07-qubits-interact-past-future-entanglement.html
Now, I find the preceding set of articles to be absolutely fascinating! A photon, in its 'real' quantum wave state, is found to be mathematically defined as a ‘infinite-dimensional’ state, which requires an 'infinite amount of information’ to describe it properly, and this infinite dimensional quantum wave can be encoded with information in its 'infinite dimensional' state, and this ‘infinite dimensional’ photon is found to collapse, instantaneously, and thus ‘non-locally’, to just a ’1 or 0′ state, out of a infinite number of possibilities that the photon could have collapsed to instead! Moreover, consciousness is found to precede the collapse of the wavefunction to its particle state. Now my question to materialistic atheists is this, "Exactly what ’cause’ has been postulated throughout history to be completely independent of any space-time constraints, as well as possessing infinite knowledge, so as to be the ‘sufficient cause’ to explain what we see in the quantum wave collapse of a photon?
John 1:1-5
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.
,,,In my personal opinion, even though not hashed out in exhaustive detail yet, all this evidence is about as sweet as it can get in experimental science as to providing proof that Almighty God created and sustains this universe.,,,

Moreover there is actual physical evidence that lends strong support to the position that the 'Zero/Infinity conflict', we find between General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, was successfully dealt with by Christ:

The Center Of The Universe Is Life - General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, Entropy and The Shroud Of Turin - video
http://www.metacafe.com/w/5070355

General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, Entropy, and The Shroud Of Turin - updated video
http://vimeo.com/34084462
Acts 13:36-37
Now when David had served God’s purpose in his own generation, he fell asleep; he was buried with his ancestors and his body decayed. But the one whom God raised from the dead did not see decay.

Romans 11:36
For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To Him be the glory forever. Amen.
Turin Shroud Enters 3D Age - Pictures, Articles and Videos
https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1gDY4CJkoFedewMG94gdUk1Z1jexestdy5fh87RwWAfg

Condensed notes on The Authenticity of the Shroud of Turin
https://docs.google.com/document/d/15IGs-5nupAmTdE5V-_uPjz25ViXbQKi9-TyhnLpaC9U/edit

Turin Shroud 3-D Hologram - Face And Body - Dr. Petrus Soons - video
http://www.metacafe.com/w/5889891/
A Quantum Hologram of Christ's Resurrection? by Chuck Missler
Excerpt: “You can read the science of the Shroud, such as total lack of gravity, lack of entropy (without gravitational collapse), no time, no space—it conforms to no known law of physics.” The phenomenon of the image brings us to a true event horizon, a moment when all of the laws of physics change drastically. Dame Piczek created a one-fourth size sculpture of the man in the Shroud. When viewed from the side, it appears as if the man is suspended in mid air (see graphic, below), indicating that the image defies previously accepted science. The phenomenon of the image brings us to a true event horizon, a moment when all of the laws of physics change drastically.
http://www.khouse.org/articles/2008/847

THE EVENT HORIZON (Space-Time Singularity) OF THE SHROUD OF TURIN. - Isabel Piczek - Particle Physicist
Excerpt: We have stated before that the images on the Shroud firmly indicate the total absence of Gravity. Yet they also firmly indicate the presence of the Event Horizon. These two seemingly contradict each other and they necessitate the past presence of something more powerful than Gravity that had the capacity to solve the above paradox.
http://shroud3d.com/findings/isabel-piczek-image-formation

The absorbed energy in the Shroud body image formation appears as contributed by discrete values - Giovanni Fazio, Giuseppe Mandaglio - 2008
Excerpt: This result means that the optical density distribution,, can not be attributed at the absorbed energy described in the framework of the classical physics model. It is, in fact, necessary to hypothesize a absorption by discrete values of the energy where the 'quantum' is equal to the one necessary to yellow one fibril.
http://cab.unime.it/journals/index.php/AAPP/article/view/C1A0802004/271

Particle Radiation from the Body - July 2012 - M. Antonacci, A. C. Lind
Excerpt: The Shroud’s frontal and dorsal body images are encoded with the same amount of intensity, independent of any pressure or weight from the body. The bottom part of the cloth (containing the dorsal image) would have born all the weight of the man’s supine body, yet the dorsal image is not encoded with a greater amount of intensity than the frontal image. Radiation coming from the body would not only explain this feature, but also the left/right and light/dark reversals found on the cloth’s frontal and dorsal body images.
http://www.academicjournals.org/sre/PDF/pdf2012/30JulSpeIss/Antonacci.pdf
Turin Shroud: a medical forensic study of its blood marks and image (Body Position) - G.Lavoie - May 2010
http://www.acheiropoietos.info/proceedings/LavoieWeb.pdf
Shroud Of Turin Is Authentic, Italian Study Suggests - December 2011
Excerpt: Last year scientists were able to replicate marks on the cloth using highly advanced ultraviolet techniques that weren’t available 2,000 years ago — nor during the medieval times, for that matter.,,, Since the shroud and “all its facets” still cannot be replicated using today’s top-notch technology, researchers suggest it is impossible that the original image could have been created in either period.
http://www.thegopnet.com/shroud-of-turin-is-authentic-italian-study-suggests-87037

Scientific hypotheses on the origin of the body image of the Shroud - 2010
Excerpt: for example, if we consider the density of radiation that we used to color a single square centimeter of linen, to reproduce the entire image of the Shroud with a single flash of light would require fourteen thousand lasers firing simultaneously each on a different area of linen. In other words, it would take a laser light source the size of an entire building.
http://www.30giorni.it/articoli_id_22597_l3.htm

Scientists say Turin Shroud is supernatural - December 2011
Excerpt: After years of work trying to replicate the colouring on the shroud, a similar image has been created by the scientists.
However, they only managed the effect by scorching equivalent linen material with high-intensity ultra violet lasers, undermining the arguments of other research, they say, which claims the Turin Shroud is a medieval hoax.
Such technology, say researchers from the National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development (Enea), was far beyond the capability of medieval forgers, whom most experts have credited with making the famous relic.
"The results show that a short and intense burst of UV directional radiation can colour a linen cloth so as to reproduce many of the peculiar characteristics of the body image on the Shroud of Turin," they said.
And in case there was any doubt about the preternatural degree of energy needed to make such distinct marks, the Enea report spells it out: "This degree of power cannot be reproduced by any normal UV source built to date."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/scientists-say-turin-shroud-is-supernatural-6279512.html
Press release Video on preceding paper:

Scientists Claim 'Shroud of Turin' Could Not Have Been Faked - video
http://www.5min.com/Video/Scientists-Claim-Shroud-of-Turin-Could-Not-Have-Been-Faked-517232561

Also of note as to providing a viable 'mechanism' for the apparent 'burst of light' emanating from the body of Christ:

Chirality in biological molecules and Biological Laser Light
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1avwUZsP_AsB16L72tD68cpC4kir6aa0W9CkYJUvc-lI/edit
"Distant Intercellular Interactions in a System of Two Tissue Cultures,"
Psychoenergetic Systems, Vol. 1, No. 3, March 1976, pp 141-142.
Excerpt: Specifically, every cell emits mitogenetic radiation in the ultraviolet twice: when it is born and when it dies. The UV photon emitted at death contains the exact virtual state pattern of the condition of the cell at death.
http://www.cheniere.org/books/excalibur/death%20transmission.htm

Cellular Communication through Light
Excerpt: Information transfer is a life principle. On a cellular level we generally assume that molecules are carriers of information, yet there is evidence for non-molecular information transfer due to endogenous coherent light. This light is ultra-weak, is emitted by many organisms, including humans and is conventionally described as biophoton emission.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0005086

Biophotons - The Light In Our Cells - Marco Bischof - March 2005
Excerpt page 2: The Coherence of Biophotons: ,,, Biophotons consist of light with a high degree of order, in other words, biological laser light. Such light is very quiet and shows an extremely stable intensity, without the fluctuations normally observed in light. Because of their stable field strength, its waves can superimpose, and by virtue of this, interference effects become possible that do not occur in ordinary light. Because of the high degree of order, the biological laser light is able to generate and keep order and to transmit information in the organism.
http://www.international-light-association.eu/PDF/Biophotons.pdf

The Real Bioinformatics Revolution - Proteins and Nucleic Acids 'Singing' to One Another?
Excerpt: the molecules send out specific frequencies of electromagnetic waves which not only enable them to ‘see' and ‘hear' each other, as both photon and phonon modes exist for electromagnetic waves, but also to influence each other at a distance and become ineluctably drawn to each other if vibrating out of phase (in a complementary way).,,, More than 1 000 proteins from over 30 functional groups have been analysed. Remarkably, the results showed that proteins with the same biological function share a single frequency peak while there is no significant peak in common for proteins with different functions; furthermore the characteristic peak frequency differs for different biological functions. ,,, The same results were obtained when regulatory DNA sequences were analysed.
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/TheRealBioinformaticsRevolution.php

Are humans really beings of light?
Excerpt: "We now know, today, that man is essentially a being of light.",,, "There are about 100,000 chemical reactions happening in every cell each second. The chemical reaction can only happen if the molecule which is reacting is excited by a photon... Once the photon has excited a reaction it returns to the field and is available for more reactions... We are swimming in an ocean of light."
http://viewzone2.com/dna.html

Are humans really beings of light?
Excerpt: A particularly gifted student talked him into another experiment.,,, He also found that DNA could send out a wide range of frequencies, some of which seemed to be linked to certain functions. If DNA stored this light, it would naturally emit more light on being unzipped. These and other studies proved to Popp that one of the most essential sources of light and biophoton emissions was DNA.
http://viewzone2.com/dna.html

Bioactive peptide design using the Resonant Recognition Model - 2007
Excerpt: There is evidence that proteins and DNA have certain conducting properties [12]. If so, then charges would be moving through the backbone of the macromolecule and passing through different energy stages caused by the different side groups of various amino acids or nucleotides. This process provides sufficient conditions for the emission of electromagnetic waves.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1997124/

The mechanism and properties of bio-photon emission and absorption in protein molecules in living systems - May 2012
Excerpt: From the energy spectra, it was determined that the protein molecules could both radiate and absorb bio-photons with wavelengths of less than 3 μm and 5–7 μm, consistent with the energy level transitions of the excitons.,,,
http://jap.aip.org/resource/1/japiau/v111/i9/p093519_s1?isAuthorized=no

Proteins Conduct Electricity - November 25, 2012
Excerpt: "The team showed that the protein could carry large currents, equivalent to a human hair carrying one amp. The team also discovered that current flow could be regulated in much the same way as transistors, the tiny devices driving computers and smartphones, work but on a smaller scale: the proteins are only a quarter of the size of current silicon based transistors."
The finding represents a leap forward in measurement at the nano scale. “Prior to this work, measurement of millions, if not billions of proteins was only possible, so losing crucial details of how an individual molecule functions.” The team used scanning tunneling microscopy (STM) to read the electronics of a single molecule of cytochrome b562, a protein just 5 nanometers (billions of a meter) long.

http://crev.info/2012/11/proteins-conduct-electricity/

Symphony of Life, Revealed: New Imaging Technique Captures Vibrations of Proteins, Tiny Motions Critical to Human Life - Jan. 16, 2014
Excerpt: To observe the protein vibrations, Markelz' team relied on an interesting characteristic of proteins: The fact that they vibrate at the same frequency as the light they absorb.
This is analogous to the way wine glasses tremble and shatter when a singer hits exactly the right note. Markelz explained: Wine glasses vibrate because they are absorbing the energy of sound waves, and the shape of a glass determines what pitches of sound it can absorb. Similarly, proteins with different structures will absorb and vibrate in response to light of different frequencies.
So, to study vibrations in lysozyme, Markelz and her colleagues exposed a sample to light of different frequencies and polarizations, and measured the types of light the protein absorbed.
This technique, , allowed the team to identify which sections of the protein vibrated under normal biological conditions. The researchers were also able to see that the vibrations endured over time, challenging existing assumptions.
"If you tap on a bell, it rings for some time, and with a sound that is specific to the bell. This is how the proteins behave," Markelz said. "Many scientists have previously thought a protein is more like a wet sponge than a bell: If you tap on a wet sponge, you don't get any sustained sound."

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/01/140116084838.htm
Of note: AWG 44 wire is the wire size that is equivalent to the width of a human hair,,
Measurements and Gauge
Excerpt: An AWG # 44 wire is about the thickness of a human hair.
http://unimaxsupply.com/prc/pinstruct/measurements.htm
And AWG 44 wire is rated at well below the .014 Ampacity, the last Ampacity they have listed, for AWG 40 wire,,,

AWG Wire Table, AWG Copper Wire Gauge Chart
http://www.interfacebus.com/Copper_Wire_AWG_SIze.html

Thus, since 1 divided by .010 is 100, the ampacity (current carrying capacity) for the protein they measured is at least 100 times better than a copper or silver wire would be compared at the size of a human hair.

Also of note: The best manmade (intelligently designed) conductor of electricity beats copper and silver by only 30 to 50 times:
Graphene: How It Will Change the Future - Apr 12, 2012
Excerpt: Copper is a great conductor of electricity and heat. Only silver beats copper (by less than 10%). That is why we use copper wires to transmit electricity and data, and copper pots are prized by cooks.
Graphene conducts heat and electricity 30-50 times better than copper and silver: electrons flowing in graphene travel near the speed of light.

http://finchin.com/graphene-in-plain-english/
It is of interest to note that man is just now taking his first baby steps in using photons in circuits:
Synthetic Magnetism Used to Control Light: Opens Door to Nanoscale Applications That Use Light Instead of Electricity (Oct. 31, 2012)
Excerpt: The ability to use magnetic fields to redirect electrons is a founding principle of electronics, but a corollary for photons had not previously existed. When an electron approaches a magnetic field, it meets resistance and opts to follow the path of least effort, traveling in circular motion around the field. Similarly, this new device sends photons in a circular motion around the synthetic magnetic field.
The Stanford solution capitalizes on recent research into photonic crystals -- materials that can confine and release photons.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121031151609.htm
It is also of interest to note that photonic communication has much greater fidelity, and quality, of communication than molecular communication does:
Photonics
Excerpt: Unlike electrons, the driving force behind electronics, photons do not require any copper wires or other barriers to keep them from interacting with one another crossing and mingling photons have no adverse interactions whatsoever, where clashing electronics results in signal confusion and noise.,,,
Photonic systems greatly expand the amount of bandwidth available; photonic transmissions are measured in trillion hertz (terahertz), compared with less than 10 billion hertz (gigahertz) used to measure electronics.

http://ecommerce.hostip.info/pages/853/Photonics.html
Image - This first image shows one of the test subjects in full light. The middle image shows the body giving off weak emissions of visible light in totally dark conditions. The rightmost image of the subject, captured in infrared wavelengths, shows the heat emissions.
http://msnbcmedia1.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Photo/_new/090722-body-glow-1p.grid-6x2.jpg

Evidence of quantum nature of life in human photon emission - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=liIDKLZVRdM#t=1351s
Photocount distribution of photons emitted from three sites of a human body - 2006
Excerpt: Signals from three representative sites of low, intermediate and high intensities are selected for further analysis. Fluctuations in these signals are measured by the probabilities of detecting different numbers of photons in a bin. The probabilities have non-classical features and are well described by the signal in a quantum squeezed state of photons. Measurements with bins of three sizes yield same values of three parameters of the squeezed state.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16520060

Humans Glow in (Emit) Visible Light - July 2009
Excerpt: Past research has shown that the body emits visible light, 1,000 times less intense than the levels to which our naked eyes are sensitive. In fact, virtually all living creatures emit very weak light,
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32090918/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/humans-glow-visible-light/

Strange! Humans Glow in Visible Light - Charles Q. Choi - July 22, 2009
Schematic illustration of experimental setup that found the human body, especially the face, emits visible light in small quantities that vary during the day. B is one fo the test subjects. The other images show the weak emissions of visible light during totally dark conditions. The chart corresponds to the images and shows how the emissions varied during the day. The last image (I) is an infrared image of the subject showing heat emissions.
http://i.livescience.com/images/i/000/006/481/original/090722-body-glow-02.jpg?1296086873
http://www.livescience.com/7799-strange-humans-glow-visible-light.html

Exodus 34:29-30:
"Moses didn't realize as he came back down the mountain with the tablets that his face glowed from being in the presence of God. Because of this radiance upon his face, Aaron and the people of Israel were afraid to come near him."

Shroud of Turin - The Historical Trail
2004: Another result of the restoration was the discovery of the Shroud's double face image. Italian scientists, Giulio Fanti and Roberto Maggiolio of Padova University were able to analyze scans of the backside of the Shroud after it was removed from the backing cloth. This had never been done before. The previous backing cloth had been attached since 1534 as part of the restoration following the fire of 1532. Examining the scans revealed faint superficial images of the face and hands. The image occurs only on the top surface of the fibers, similar to the front side of the Shroud but there is no coloring of the threads in between.
http://shroud2000.com/FastFacts.html

’2nd face’ on Shroud points to supernatural origin – April 2010
Excerpt: The researchers, in other words, found a “doubly superficial” face image on both the front and back sides such that “if a cross-section of the fabric is made, one extremely superficial image appears above and one below, but there is nothing in the middle.”
The shroud, therefore, they concluded, was not created by paint soaking through the linen or by a photographic image printing through to the reverse side, because the front and back facial images are not identical and the center fibers show no image creation whatsoever.
Fanti and Maggiolo concluded the shroud image was created by a “corona discharge,” understood as a radiant burst of light and energy that scorched the body image of the crucified man on the topmost fibers of the shroud’s front and back sides, without producing any image on the centermost of its linen fibers.
“Imagine slicing a human hair lengthwise, from end to end, into 100 long thin slices; each slice one-tenth the width of a single red blood cell,” writes Daniel Porter, editor of ShroudStory.com. “The images on the Shroud of Turin, at their thickest, are this thin.”
Fanti and Maggiolo found the faint image of the face on the reverse side of the shroud contained the same 3-D information contained in the face and body image of the crucified man seen on the shroud’s front side.

http://www.wnd.com/2010/04/146689/

Matthew 17:1-2
After six days Jesus took with him Peter, James and John the brother of James, and led them up a high mountain by themselves. There he was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and his clothes became as white as the light.
Coast to Coast - Vicki's Near Death Experience (Blind From Birth) part 1 of 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e65KhcCS5-Y
Quote from preceding video: 'I was in a body and the only way that I can describe it was a body of energy, or of light. And this body had a form. It had a head. It had arms and it had legs. And it was like it was made out of light. And 'it' was everything that was me. All of my memories, my consciousness, everything.' -
Vicky Noratuk
Of note: Man is just now learning how to do things with light that would have been thought impossible not too long ago:
Beautiful physics: Tying knots in light - October 29, 2012
Excerpt: New research published today seeks to push the discovery that light can be tied in knots to the next level.,,,
Scientists have found that inducing knots to form in laser beams by introducing perturbations in the form of laser speckle only very rarely induces knots. "Our models suggest that you have to get the key parameters of the light in a certain range before you can easily tie the light in knots but once you do, the knots are virtually guaranteed," he said.,,,

http://phys.org/news/2012-10-beautiful-physics-tying.html

Bending light with a tiny chip - March 10, 2014
Excerpt: Imagine that you are in a meeting with coworkers or at a gathering of friends. You pull out your cell phone to show a presentation or a video on YouTube. But you don't use the tiny screen; your phone projects a bright, clear image onto a wall or a big screen. Such a technology may be on its way, thanks to a new light-bending silicon chip developed by researchers at Caltech.,,,
Traditional projectors—like those used to project a film or classroom lecture notes—pass a beam of light through a tiny image, using lenses to map each point of the small picture to corresponding, yet expanded, points on a large screen. The Caltech chip eliminates the need for bulky and expensive lenses and bulbs and instead uses a so-called integrated optical phased array (OPA) to project the image electronically with only a single laser diode as light source and no mechanically moving parts.
Hajimiri and his colleagues were able to bypass traditional optics by manipulating the coherence of light—a property that allows the researchers to "bend" the light waves on the surface of the chip without lenses or the use of any mechanical movement,,,
"By changing the relative timing of the waves, you can change the direction of the light beam," says Hajimiri. For example, if 10 people kneeling in line by a swimming pool slap the water at the exact same instant, they will make one big wave that travels directly away from them. But if the 10 separate slaps are staggered—each person hitting the water a half a second after the last—there will still be one big, combined wave, but with the wave bending to travel at an angle, he says.
Using a series of pipes for the light—called phase shifters—the OPA chip similarly slows down or speeds up the timing of the waves, thus controlling the direction of the light beam.

http://phys.org/news/2014-03-tiny-chip.html

"Miracles do not happen in contradiction to nature, but only in contradiction to that which is known to us of nature."
St. Augustine
It seems readily apparent from the evidence that we have now examined that when one allows God into math, as Godel indicated must ultimately be done to keep math from being 'incomplete', then there actually exists a very credible, empirically backed, reconciliation between Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity into a 'Theory of Everything'! Yet it certainly is one that many dogmatic Atheists, at least the ones I've dealt with, will try to deny the relevance of.,,, As a footnote; Godel, who proved you cannot have a mathematical ‘Theory of Everything’, without allowing God to bring completeness to the 'Theory of Everything', also had this to say:
The God of the Mathematicians – Goldman
Excerpt: As Gödel told Hao Wang, “Einstein’s religion [was] more abstract, like Spinoza and Indian philosophy. Spinoza’s god is less than a person; mine is more than a person; because God can play the role of a person.”
Kurt Gödel – (Gödel is considered one of the greatest logicians who ever existed)
http://www.firstthings.com/article/2010/07/the-god-of-the-mathematicians
At the 9:40 minute mark of the following video, C.S. Lewis comments on God 'playing the role of a person':

Finding Shakespeare by C.S. Lewis Doodle - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXlBCZ_5OYw
Colossians 1:15-20
The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.

Philippians 2: 5-11
Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
While I agree with a criticism, from a Christian, that was leveled against the preceding Shroud of Turin video, that God indeed needed no help from the universe in the resurrection event of Christ, I am, none-the-less, very happy to see that what is considered the number one problem of Physicists and Mathematicians in physics today, of a unification into a 'theory of everything' for what is in essence the finite materialistic world of General Relativity and the infinite Theistic world of Quantum Mechanics, does in fact seem to find a credible successful resolution for 'unification' within the resurrection event of Jesus Christ Himself. It seems almost overwhelmingly apparent to me from the 'scientific evidence' we now have that Christ literally ripped a hole in the finite entropic space-time of this universe to reunite infinite God with finite man. That modern science would even offer such a almost tangible glimpse into the mechanics of what happened in the tomb of Christ should be a source of great wonder and comfort for the Christian heart.
John 14:19
Before long, the world will not see me anymore, but you will see me. Because I live, you also will live.

1 Corinthians 15:55
"Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O death, is your sting?"
A shortened form of the evidence is here:

Centrality of Each Individual Observer In The Universe and Christ’s Very Credible Reconciliation Of General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics
https://docs.google.com/document/d/17SDgYPHPcrl1XX39EXhaQzk7M0zmANKdYIetpZ-WB5Y/edit?hl=en_US

I think it should be fairly clear by now that, much contrary to the mediocrity of earth and of humans brought about by the heliocentric discoveries of Galileo and Copernicus, the findings of modern science are very comforting to Theistic postulations in general, and even lends strong support of plausibility to the main tenet of Christianity which holds Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of God.
Matthew 28:18
And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and upon earth."
Of related note; there is a mysterious 'higher dimensional' component to life:
The predominance of quarter-power (4-D) scaling in biology
Excerpt: Many fundamental characteristics of organisms scale
with body size as power laws of the form:

Y = Yo M^b,

where Y is some characteristic such as metabolic rate, stride length or life span, Yo is a normalization constant, M is body mass and b is the allometric scaling exponent.
A longstanding puzzle in biology is why the exponent b is usually some simple multiple of 1/4 (4-Dimensional scaling) rather than a multiple of 1/3, as would be expected from Euclidean (3-Dimensional) scaling.

http://www.nceas.ucsb.edu/~drewa/pubs/savage_v_2004_f18_257.pdf
4-Dimensional Quarter Power Scaling In Biology - video
http://www.metacafe.com/w/5964041/
“Although living things occupy a three-dimensional space, their internal physiology and anatomy operate as if they were four-dimensional. Quarter-power scaling laws are perhaps as universal and as uniquely biological as the biochemical pathways of metabolism, the structure and function of the genetic code and the process of natural selection.,,, The conclusion here is inescapable, that the driving force for these invariant scaling laws cannot have been natural selection." Jerry Fodor and Massimo Piatelli-Palmarini, What Darwin Got Wrong (London: Profile Books, 2010), p. 78-79
http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/16037/
The reason why ’4-Dimensional’ metabolic pathways are impossible for Darwinism to explain is that Natural Selection operates on the 3-Dimensional phenotypes. ’4-Dimensional’ metabolic pathways are simply ‘invisible’ to natural selection. The reason why 4-Dimensional things are completely invisible to 3-Dimensional things is best illustrated by ‘flatland’:

Flatland – 3D to 4D shift – Carl Sagan – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnURElCzGc0

Of related note to 'invariant' patterns found in life that are inexplicable for natural selection to explain the origination of:
Chargaff’s “Grammar of Biology”: New Fractal-like Rules - 2011
Excerpt from Conclusion: It was shown that these rules are valid for a large set of organisms: bacteria, plants, insects, fish and mammals. It is noteworthy that no matter the word length the same pattern is observed (self-similarity). To the best of our knowledge, this is the first invariant genomic properties publish(ed) so far, and in Science invariant properties are invaluable ones and usually they have practical implications.
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1112/1112.1528.pdf
Though Jerry Fodor and Massimo Piatelli-Palmarini rightly find it inexplicable for 'random' Natural Selection to be the rational explanation for the invariant scaling of the physiology, and anatomy, of living things to four-dimensional parameters, they do not seem to fully realize the implications this 'four dimensional scaling' of living things presents. This 4-D scaling is something we should rightly expect from a Intelligent Design perspective. This is because Intelligent Design holds that ‘higher dimensional transcendent information’ is more foundational to life, and even to the universe itself, than either matter or energy are. This higher dimensional 'expectation' for life, from a Intelligent Design perspective, is directly opposed to the expectation of the Darwinian framework, which holds that information, and indeed even the essence of life itself, is merely an 'emergent' property of the 3-D material realm.
Earth’s crammed with heaven,
And every common bush afire with God;
But only he who sees, takes off his shoes,
The rest sit round it and pluck blackberries.

- Elizabeth Barrett Browning

Information and entropy – top-down or bottom-up development in living systems? A.C. McINTOSH - Dr Andy C. McIntosh is the Professor of Thermodynamics (the highest teaching/research rank in U.K. university hierarchy) Combustion Theory at the University of Leeds.
Excerpt: This paper highlights the distinctive and non-material nature of information and its relationship with matter, energy and natural forces. It is proposed in conclusion that it is the non-material information (transcendent to the matter and energy) that is actually itself constraining the local thermodynamics to be in ordered disequilibrium and with specified raised free energy levels necessary for the molecular and cellular machinery to operate.
http://journals.witpress.com/paperinfo.asp?pid=420

Information and Thermodynamics in Living Systems - Andy C. McIntosh - May 2013
Excerpt: The third view then that we have proposed in this paper is the top down approach. In this paradigm, the information is non-material and constrains the local thermodynamics to be in a non-equilibrium state of raised free energy. It is the information which is the active ingredient, and the matter and energy are passive to the laws of thermodynamics within the system.
As a consequence of this approach, we have developed in this paper some suggested principles of information exchange which have some parallels with the laws of thermodynamics which undergird this approach.,,,

http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/pdf/10.1142/9789814508728_0008

Quantum biology
Quantum biology refers to applications of quantum mechanics to biological objects and problems. Usually, it is taken to refer to applications of the "non-trivial" quantum features such as superposition, nonlocality, entanglement and tunneling, as opposed to the "trivial" applications such as chemical bonding which apply to biology only indirectly by dictating quantum chemistry.
Austrian born physicist and theoretical biologist Erwin Schrödinger was one of the first scientists to suggest a study of quantum biology in his 1946 book "What is Life?"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Biology

Quantum entanglement holds together life’s blueprint - 2010
Excerpt: When the researchers analysed the DNA without its helical structure, they found that the electron clouds were not entangled. But when they incorporated DNA’s helical structure into the model, they saw that the electron clouds of each base pair became entangled with those of its neighbours. “If you didn’t have entanglement, then DNA would have a simple flat structure, and you would never get the twist that seems to be important to the functioning of DNA,” says team member Vlatko Vedral of the University of Oxford.
http://neshealthblog.wordpress.com/2010/09/15/quantum-entanglement-holds-together-lifes-blueprint/

The relevance of continuous variable entanglement in DNA - July 2010
Excerpt: We consider a chain of harmonic oscillators with dipole-dipole interaction between nearest neighbours resulting in a van der Waals type bonding. The binding energies between entangled and classically correlated states are compared. We apply our model to DNA. By comparing our model with numerical simulations we conclude that entanglement may play a crucial role in explaining the stability of the DNA double helix.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1006.4053v1
Quantum Information/Entanglement In DNA - Elisabeth Rieper - short video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5936605/

Quantum Entanglement Holds DNA Together, Say Physicists - June 28, 2010
http://www.technologyreview.com/view/419590/quantum-entanglement-holds-dna-together-say-physicists/

Quantum entanglement between the electron clouds of nucleic acids in DNA - Elisabeth Rieper, Janet Anders and Vlatko Vedral - February 2011
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1006/1006.4053v2.pdf
Quantum Entanglement and Information
Quantum entanglement is a physical resource, like energy, associated with the peculiar nonclassical correlations that are possible between separated quantum systems. Entanglement can be measured, transformed, and purified. A pair of quantum systems in an entangled state can be used as a quantum information channel to perform computational and cryptographic tasks that are impossible for classical systems. The general study of the information-processing capabilities of quantum systems is the subject of quantum information theory.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-entangle/
In the following article, Dr. Hameroff expands on the quantum computation aspect of Rieper, Anders and Vedral paper:
Is DNA a quantum computer? Stuart Hameroff
Excerpt: DNA could function as a quantum computers with superpositions of base pair dipoles acting as qubits. Entanglement among the qubits, necessary in quantum computation is accounted for through quantum coherence in the pi stack where the quantum information is shared,,,
http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/dnaquantumcomputer1.htm

Quantum Computing in DNA – Stuart Hameroff
Excerpt of Hypothesis: DNA utilizes quantum information and quantum computation for various functions. Superpositions of dipole states of base pairs consisting of purine (A,G) and pyrimidine (C,T) ring structures play the role of qubits, and quantum communication (coherence, entanglement, non-locality) occur in the “pi stack” region of the DNA molecule.,,, We can then consider DNA as a chain of qubits (with helical twist).
Output of quantum computation would be manifest as the net electron interference pattern in the quantum state of the pi stack, regulating gene expression and other functions locally and nonlocally by radiation or entanglement.

http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/views/QuantumComputingInDNA.html

DNA as classical and quantum information system - Dec. 2005
Excerpt (pg. 118): Basic point to understand biological communication is synergy of classical and quantum process based on perfect numbers and the golden mean laws.
http://www.doiserbia.nb.rs/img/doi/0354-7310/2005/0354-73100504115K.pdf
Quantum Action confirmed in DNA by direct empirical research;
DNA Can Discern Between Two Quantum States, Research Shows - June 2011
Excerpt: -- DNA -- can discern between quantum states known as spin. - The researchers fabricated self-assembling, single layers of DNA attached to a gold substrate. They then exposed the DNA to mixed groups of electrons with both directions of spin. Indeed, the team's results surpassed expectations: The biological molecules reacted strongly with the electrons carrying one of those spins, and hardly at all with the others. The longer the molecule, the more efficient it was at choosing electrons with the desired spin, while single strands and damaged bits of DNA did not exhibit this property.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/03/110331104014.htm

Does DNA Have Telepathic Properties?-A Galaxy Insight - 2009
Excerpt: DNA has been found to have a bizarre ability to put itself together, even at a distance, when according to known science it shouldn't be able to.,,, The recognition of similar sequences in DNA’s chemical subunits, occurs in a way unrecognized by science. There is no known reason why the DNA is able to combine the way it does, and from a current theoretical standpoint this feat should be chemically impossible.
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2009/04/does-dna-have-t.html

The Real Bioinformatics Revolution - Proteins and Nucleic Acids 'Singing' to One Another?
Excerpt: the molecules send out specific frequencies of electromagnetic waves which not only enable them to ‘see' and ‘hear' each other, as both photon and phonon modes exist for electromagnetic waves, but also to influence each other at a distance and become ineluctably drawn to each other if vibrating out of phase (in a complementary way).,,, More than 1,000 proteins from over 30 functional groups have been analysed. Remarkably, the results showed that proteins with the same biological function share a single frequency peak while there is no significant peak in common for proteins with different functions; furthermore the characteristic peak frequency differs for different biological functions.,,, The same results were obtained when regulatory DNA sequences were analysed.
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/TheRealBioinformaticsRevolution.php
Can Quantum Mechanics Play a Role in DNA Damage Detection? (Short answer; YES!) – video - as well at about 27 Minute mark in the video - Fröhlich Condensation and Quantum Consciousness
http://www.scivee.tv/node/25476

It turns out that quantum information has been confirmed to be in protein structures as well;
Coherent Intrachain energy migration at room temperature - Elisabetta Collini and Gregory Scholes - University of Toronto - Science, 323, (2009), pp. 369-73
Excerpt: The authors conducted an experiment to observe quantum coherence dynamics in relation to energy transfer. The experiment, conducted at room temperature, examined chain conformations, such as those found in the proteins of living cells. Neighbouring molecules along the backbone of a protein chain were seen to have coherent energy transfer. Where this happens quantum decoherence (the underlying tendency to loss of coherence due to interaction with the environment) is able to be resisted, and the evolution of the system remains entangled as a single quantum state.
http://www.scimednet.org/quantum-coherence-living-cells-and-protein/

Quantum states in proteins and protein assemblies:
The essence of life? - STUART HAMEROFF, JACK TUSZYNSKI
Excerpt: It is, in fact, the hydrophobic effect and attractions among non-polar hydrophobic groups by van der Waals forces which drive protein folding. Although the confluence of hydrophobic side groups are small, roughly 1/30 to 1/250 of protein volumes, they exert enormous influence in the regulation of protein dynamics and function. Several hydrophobic pockets may work cooperatively in a single protein (Figure 2, Left). Hydrophobic pockets may be considered the “brain” or nervous system of each protein.,,, Proteins, lipids and nucleic acids are composed of constituent molecules which have both non-polar and polar regions on opposite ends. In an aqueous medium the non-polar regions of any of these components will join together to form hydrophobic regions where quantum forces reign.
http://www.tony5m17h.net/SHJTQprotein.pdf

Myosin Coherence
Excerpt: Quantum physics and molecular biology are two disciplines that have evolved relatively independently. However, recently a wealth of evidence has demonstrated the importance of quantum mechanics for biological systems and thus a new field of quantum biology is emerging. Living systems have mastered the making and breaking of chemical bonds, which are quantum mechanical phenomena. Absorbance of frequency specific radiation (e.g. photosynthesis and vision), conversion of chemical energy into mechanical motion (e.g. ATP cleavage) and single electron transfers through biological polymers (e.g. DNA or proteins) are all quantum mechanical effects.
http://www.energetic-medicine.net/bioenergetic-articles/articles/63/1/Myosin-Coherence/Page1.html

Persistent dynamic entanglement from classical motion: How bio-molecular machines can generate non-trivial quantum states - November 2011
Excerpt: We also show how conformational changes can be used by an elementary machine to generate entanglement even in unfavorable conditions. In biological systems, similar mechanisms could be exploited by more complex molecular machines or motors.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2126
Here is a analysis of the preceding paper:
Quantum entanglement in hot systems - 2011
Excerpt: The authors remark that this reverses the previous orthodoxy, which held that quantum effects could not exist in biological systems because of the amount of noise in these systems.,,, Environmental noise here drives a persistent and cyclic generation of new entanglement.,,, In summary, the authors say that they have demonstrated that entanglement can recur even in a hot noisy environment. In biological systems this can be related to changes in the conformation of macromolecules.
http://quantum-mind.co.uk/quantum-entanglement-hot-systems/

Life Uses Quantum Mechanics - September 25, 2012
Excerpt: it looks as if nature has worked out how to preserve (quantum) entanglement at body temperature over time scales that physicists can only dream about.
http://crev.info/2012/09/life-uses-quantum-mechanics/
Funny how dumb, blind, natural processes can out engineer our best engineers time after time!

Also of interest:
Einstein's 'spooky action' common in large quantum systems, mathematicians find - May 28, 2013
Excerpt: Entanglement is a property in quantum mechanics that seemed so unbelievable and so lacking in detail that, 66 years ago this spring, Einstein called it "spooky action at a distance." But a mathematician at Case Western Reserve University and two of his recent PhD graduates show entanglement is actually prevalent in large quantum systems and have identified the threshold at which it occurs.,,,
They found that, in systems in a random state, two subsystems that are each less than one-fifth of the whole are generally not entangled. Two subsystems that are each greater than one-fifth of the whole typically are entangled. In other words, in a system of 1,000 particles, two groups that are smaller than 200 each typically won't be entangled. Two groups larger than 200 each typically will.
Further, the research shows, "the change is abrupt when you reach the threshold of about 200," Szarek said.
The team also calculated the threshold for positive partial transpose, or PPT, a property related to entanglement. If the property is violated, entanglement is present.
"From these two perspectives, the calculations are very precise." Szarek said.
Harsh Mathur, a physics professor at Case Western Reserve whom Szarek consulted to better understand the science, said, "Their point is entanglement is hard to create from a small system, but much easier in a large system."
"And the thing that Einstein thought was so weird is the rule rather than the exception," Mathur added.
The researchers used mathematics where analysis, algebra and geometry meet, Szarek said. The math applies to hundreds, thousands or millions of dimensions.,,,

http://phys.org/news/2013-05-einstein-spooky-action-common-large.html
Of note: Quantum Entanglement allows greater fidelity of transmitting a signal than is allowed with transmitting through 'classical' channels:
Never mind the noise: Quantum entanglement allows channel information rate to exceed Shannon zero-error capacity - January 23, 2013
Excerpt: As developed by Claude Shannon, information theory defines channel capacity as the maximum rate at which information can be sent through the channel.,,,
Recently, scientists studying asymptotic behavior in entangled sender-receiver quantum systems,, have identified families of graphs for which entanglement allows the Shannon capacity to be exceeded.,,,
"The entanglement-assisted communication protocol we consider," Briët adds, "dates back at least as far as the work of Charles Bennett and others in 2002.",,,
,,,the sender could send any one of ten different messages with zero probability of error. Moreover, he adds, their main result shows that this number can be larger than the average number of messages that can be sent with zero error if no entanglement was used, thereby exceeding the zero-error Shannon capacity.

http://phys.org/news/2013-01-mind-noise-quantum-entanglement-channel.html
Moreover:
Into the Quantum Internet at the Speed of Light - Feb. 4, 2013
Excerpt: Northup report how they have directly transferred the quantum information stored in an atom onto a particle of light. Such information could then be sent over optical fiber to a distant atom.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/02/130204094602.htm
Here are two other ways to deduce quantum information in the entire protein structure:
Physicists Discover Quantum Law of Protein Folding – February 22, 2011
Quantum mechanics finally explains why protein folding depends on temperature in such a strange way.
Excerpt: First, a little background on protein folding. Proteins are long chains of amino acids that become biologically active only when they fold into specific, highly complex shapes. The puzzle is how proteins do this so quickly when they have so many possible configurations to choose from.
To put this in perspective, a relatively small protein of only 100 amino acids can take some 10^100 different configurations. If it tried these shapes at the rate of 100 billion a second, it would take longer than the age of the universe to find the correct one. Just how these molecules do the job in nanoseconds, nobody knows.,,,
Their astonishing result is that this quantum transition model fits the folding curves of 15 different proteins and even explains the difference in folding and unfolding rates of the same proteins.
That's a significant breakthrough. Luo and Lo's equations amount to the first universal laws of protein folding. That’s the equivalent in biology to something like the thermodynamic laws in physics.

http://www.technologyreview.com/view/423087/physicists-discover-quantum-law-of-protein/

Proteins with cruise control provide new perspective:
Excerpt: “A mathematical analysis of the experiments showed that the proteins themselves acted to correct any imbalance imposed on them through artificial mutations and restored the chain to working order.”
http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S22/60/95O56/
The preceding is solid confirmation that far more complex information resides in proteins than meets the eye, for the calculus equations used for ‘cruise control’, that must somehow reside within the quantum information that is ‘constraining’ the entire protein structure to its ‘normal’ state, is anything but ‘simple classical information’. For a sample of the equations that must be dealt with, to ‘engineer’ even a simple process control loop like cruise control along a entire protein structure, please see this following site:
PID controller
Excerpt: A proportional–integral–derivative controller (PID controller) is a generic control loop feedback mechanism (controller) widely used in industrial control systems. A PID controller attempts to correct the error between a measured process variable and a desired setpoint by calculating and then outputting a corrective action that can adjust the process accordingly and rapidly, to keep the error minimal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PID_controller
It is very interesting to note that quantum entanglement, which conclusively demonstrates that ‘information’ in its pure 'quantum form' is completely transcendent of any time and space constraints, should be found in molecular biology on such a massive scale, for how can the quantum entanglement 'effect' in biology possibly be explained by a material (matter/energy) 'cause' when the quantum entanglement 'effect' falsified material particles as its own 'causation' in the first place? (A. Aspect) Appealing to the probability of various configurations of material particles, as Darwinism does, simply will not help since a timeless/spaceless cause must be supplied which is beyond the capacity of the material particles themselves to supply! To give a coherent explanation for an effect that is shown to be completely independent of any time and space constraints one is forced to appeal to a cause that is itself not limited to time and space! i.e. Put more simply, you cannot explain a effect by a cause that has been falsified by the very same effect you are seeking to explain! Improbability arguments of various 'special' configurations of material particles, which have been a staple of the arguments against neo-Darwinism, simply do not apply since the cause is not within the material particles in the first place! Yet it is also very interesting to note, in Darwinism's inability to explain this 'transcendent quantum effect' adequately, that Theism has always postulated a transcendent component to man that is not constrained by time and space. i.e. Theism has always postulated a 'living soul' for man that lives past the death of the body.
Genesis 2:7
"And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul."
Falsification Of Neo-Darwinism by Quantum Entanglement/Information
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1p8AQgqFqiRQwyaF8t1_CKTPQ9duN8FHU9-pV4oBDOVs/edit?hl=en_US

Does Quantum Biology Support A Quantum Soul? – Stuart Hameroff - video (notes in description)
http://vimeo.com/29895068

Many Studies on the Reality and the Uniqueness of the Human mind/consciousness:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1izrS6JughxFR5uk54dk3k09hvET8F_0zgZt8Ps6cppM/edit

Let's switch back our focus to evidence for God from cosmology:

As to the fact that, as far as the solar system itself is concerned, the earth is not 'central', I find the fact that this seemingly insignificant earth is found to revolve around the much more massive sun to be a 'poetic reflection' of our true spiritual condition. In regards to God's 'kingdom of light', are we not to keep in mind our lives are to be guided by the much higher purpose which is tied to our future in God's kingdom of light? Are we not to avoid placing too much emphasis on what this world has to offer, since it is so much more insignificant than what heaven has to offer?

The Biggest Stars in the Universe - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bcz4vGvoxQA

Louie Giglio - How Great Is Our God - Part 2 - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfNiZrt5FjU
You could fit 262 trillion earths inside (the star of) Betelgeuse. If the Earth were a golfball that would be enough to fill up the Superdome (football stadium) with golfballs,,, 3000 times!!! When I heard that as a teenager that stumped me right there because most of my praying had been advising God, correcting God, suggesting things to God, drawing diagrams for God, reviewing things with God, counseling God. - Louie Giglio

"I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen. Not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else." -
C.S. Lewis
Sara Groves - You Are The Sun - Music video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/3993951/
Psalm 8: 3-4
When I consider Your heavens, the work of Your fingers, The moon and the stars, which You have ordained; What is man that You take thought of him, And the son of man that You care for him?
George Smoot: The design of the universe – (2008) video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c64Aia4XE1Y

Journey Through the Universe - George Smoot- Frank Turek - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/3993965/

The Catholic church put Galileo on trial for teaching planets revolve around the sun. They found him guilty of heresy; forced him to recant publicly what he had written; then placed him under house arrest. The religious leaders are said to have done this to Galileo because this supposed 'heresy' of Galileo is thought to have upset the basic biblical belief of man being made in God's image. Though the actual story of how science and religion became separated is a lot subtler than what is currently believed from the Galileo affair, (Why Galileo was Wrong, Even Though He was Right), this particular episode between the church and Galileo is now generally looked at as the start of what most people presume is a great divide between science and religion which has lasted for several centuries. Yet despite this common perception of a great divide, within the last century there has been a veritable avalanche of discovery, from many diverse fields of science, which has greatly narrowed this perception of a 'great divide' between science and religion.
The Return of the God Hypothesis - Stephen Meyer
Abstract: Historian of science Frederic Burnham has stated that the God hypothesis is now a more respectable hypothesis than at any time in the last one hundred years. This essay explores recent evidence from cosmology, physics, and biology, which provides epistemological support, though not proof, for belief in God as conceived by a theistic worldview. It develops a notion of epistemological support based upon explanatory power, rather than just deductive entailment. It also evaluates the explanatory power of theism and its main metaphysical competitors with respect to several classes of scientific evidence. The conclusion follows that theism explains a wide ensemble of metaphysically-significant evidences more adequately and comprehensively than other major worldviews or metaphysical systems. Thus, unlike much recent scholarship that characterizes science as either conflicting with theistic belief or entirely neutral with respect to it, this essay concludes that scientific evidence actually supports such belief.
http://www.arn.org/docs/meyer/sm_returnofgod.pdf
The Return of the God Hypothesis - Stephen Meyer - video lecture:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ueEpWIfXao8

Challenges to Scientific Materialism – Dr. Stephen Meyer – video – 2013
http://www.focusonthefamily.com/popups/media_player.aspx?MediaId={0EBEB954-4C0A-401D-961B-0086CE48C9D5}&FAMILYTYPE=null

Multiple Competing Worldviews - Stephen Meyer - 13:00 minute mark of video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Rw4WCmp7t0#t=793

Richard Dawkins Lies About William Lane Craig AND Logic! - video and article defending each argument
https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1P6L_QtpZ1pSyOjWvuEOXBWqLFZPdSAWor-MTzKbpVC0

Evidence For the Existence of God - William Lane Craig - video lecture defending each argument
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hW3ceQYxic

The narrowing of this great divide started with astronomer Edwin Hubble's (1889-1953) discovery, in 1929, of galaxies speeding away from each other. This, as well as many other discoveries confirming the Big Bang, has firmly established the universe actually had a beginning just as theologians have always claimed that it does.

Beyond The Big Bang: William Lane Craig Templeton Foundation Lecture (HQ) 1/6 - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esqGaLSWgNc

William Lane Craig vs Peter Millican: "Does God Exist?", Birmingham University, October 2011 - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEw8VzzXcjE

The Scientific Evidence For The Big Bang - Michael Strauss PhD. - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4323668

Evidence Supporting the Big Bang
http://www.astronomynotes.com/cosmolgy/s7.htm

Denyse O’Leary has an excellent condensed history of 'Big Bang denialism' by atheistic scientists:
Big Bang Exterminator Wanted, Will Train - Denyse O'Leary - October 20, 2013
Excerpt: "Perhaps the best argument in favor of the thesis that the Big Bang supports theism is the obvious unease with which it is greeted by some atheist physicists. At times this has led to scientific ideas, such as continuous creation or an oscillating universe, being advanced with a tenacity which so exceeds their intrinsic worth that one can only suspect the operation of psychological forces lying very much deeper than the usual academic desire of a theorist to support his/her theory."
Cosmologist Christopher Isham
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/10/big_bang_exterm077961.html
Further notes on the Big Bang
International team strengthens Big Bang Theory Jun 06, 2013
Excerpt: The fundamental observations that corroborate the Big Bang are the cosmic microwave radiation and the chemical abundances of the light elements described in the Big Bang nucleosynthesis theory.
"The predictions of Big Bang nucleosynthesis have been one of the main successes of the standard Big Bang model," said lead author Lind. "Our findings remove much of the stark tension between 6Li and 7Li abundances in stars and standard BBN, even opening up the door for a full reconciliation. This further consolidates a model resting heavily on the pillars of the cosmic microwave background and the expanding Universe."

http://phys.org/news/2013-06-international-team-big-theory.html#nwlt
Direct (Distance) Measurements Place Universe’s Age at 13.79 Billion Years – Hugh Ross – May 2013 – podcast
http://www.reasons.org/podcasts/science-news-flash/direct-measurements-place-universe-s-age-at-13.79-billion-years

The Megamaser Cosmology Project. V. An Angular Diameter Distance to NGC 6264 at 140 Mpc;
http://arxiv.org/abs/1207.7292

Quantum Evidence for a Theistic Big Bang
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1agaJIWjPWHs5vtMx5SkpaMPbantoP471k0lNBUXg0Xo/edit

It is also very interesting to note that among all the 'holy' books, of all the major religions in the world, only the Holy Bible was correct in its claim for a transcendent origin of the universe. Some later 'holy' books, such as the Mormon text "Pearl of Great Price" and the Qur'an, copy the concept of a transcendent origin from the Bible but also include teachings that are inconsistent with that now established fact. (Hugh Ross; Why The Universe Is The Way It Is; Pg. 228; Chpt.9; note 5)

The Uniqueness Of The Bible Among 'holy books' and Evidence of God in Creation (Hugh Ross) – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjYSz1OYG8Y

The Most Important Verse in the Bible - Prager University - video
http://www.prageruniversity.com/Religion-Philosophy/The-Most-Important-Verse-in-the-Bible.html

The Uniqueness of Genesis 1:1 - William Lane Craig - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBXdQCkISo0

Do new Big Bang (Gravitational Waves) findings support the Bible? - Mar. 21, 2014 - video
Dr. William Lane Craig says new discoveries are proof the scriptures are true
http://video.foxnews.com/v/3372449786001/do-new-big-bang-findings-support-the-bible--/#sp=show-clips
The best data we have [concerning the Big Bang] are exactly what I would have predicted, had I nothing to go on but the five books of Moses, the Psalms, the bible as a whole.
Dr. Arno Penzias, Nobel Laureate in Physics - co-discoverer of the Cosmic Background Radiation - as stated to the New York Times on March 12, 1978

“Certainly there was something that set it all off,,, I can’t think of a better theory of the origin of the universe to match Genesis”
Robert Wilson – Nobel laureate – co-discover Cosmic Background Radiation
http://www.evidenceforchristianity.org/index.php?option=com_custom_content&task=view&id=3594

“There is no doubt that a parallel exists between the big bang as an event and the Christian notion of creation from nothing.”
George Smoot – Nobel laureate in 2006 for his work on COBE

"Now we see how the astronomical evidence supports the biblical view of the origin of the world. The details differ, but the essential elements in the astronomical and biblical accounts of Genesis are the same: the chain of events leading to man commenced suddenly and sharply at a definite moment in time, in a flash of light and energy."
Robert Jastrow – Founder of NASA’s Goddard Institute – Pg.15 ‘God and the Astronomers’

“The Bible is frequently dismissed as being anti-scientific because it makes no predictions. Oh no, that is incorrect. It makes a brilliant prediction. For centuries it has been saying there was a beginning. And if scientists had taken that a bit more seriously they might have discovered evidence for a beginning a lot earlier than they did.”
John Lennox
Quote taken from the 1:58 minute mark of the following video,,,
John Lennox – Science Is Impossible Without God – Quotes – video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/6287271/

,,, 'And if you're curious about how Genesis 1, in particular, fairs. Hey, we look at the Days in Genesis as being long time periods, which is what they must be if you read the Bible consistently, and the Bible scores 4 for 4 in Initial Conditions and 10 for 10 on the Creation Events'
Hugh Ross - Evidence For Intelligent Design Is Everywhere; video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4347236

"I now believe that the universe was brought into existence by an infinite intelligence. I believe that the universe's intricate laws manifest what scientists have called the Mind of God. I believe that life and reproduction originate in a divine Source. Why do I believe this, given that I expounded and defended atheism for more than a half century? The short answer is this: this is the world picture, as I see it, that has emerged from modern science."
Anthony Flew - world's leading intellectual atheist for most of his adult life until a few years shortly before his death
The Case for a Creator - Lee Strobel (Nov. 25, 2012) - video
http://www.saddleback.com/mc/m/ee32d/
Here’s a radio recording of Fred Hoyle, around 1950, disparagingly naming the creation event of the universe as ‘The Big Bang’: (He personally favored the ‘steady state' model for the universe)

History of the Big Bang - Simon Singh, PhD - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=7UTpGKbkS2g#t=2340s

The 'Big Bang' is really a wrong word picture for capturing what went on at the creation event of the universe, for the creation of the universe was certainly not anything like we would normally envision an ordinary explosion to be like:
"The Big Bang represents an immensely powerful, yet carefully planned and controlled release of matter, energy, space and time. All this is accomplished within the strict confines of very carefully fine-tuned physical constants and laws. The power and care this explosion reveals exceeds human mental capacity by multiple orders of magnitude."
Prof. Henry F. Schaefer - closing statement of the following video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=901f7oC_Pik&feature=player_detailpage#t=360s
Prof. Henry F. Schaefer cites several interesting quotes, from leading scientists in the field of Big Bang cosmology, about the Theological implications of the Big Bang in the following video:

The Big Bang and the God of the Bible - Henry Schaefer PhD. - video
http://www.metacafe.com/w/5222493
"There has arisen a curious consilience between the findings of modern cosmology and some traditional understandings of the creation of the universe. For example, theists have noted that the model known as the Big Bang has a certain consistency with the Judeo-Christian notion of creation ex nihilo, a consistency not seen in other cosmologies that postulated an eternally existent universe. (In fact, when the astronomer-priest Georges Lemaître first postulated the theory, he was met with such skepticism by proponents of an eternal universe that the name "Big Bang" was coined by his opponents -- as a term of ridicule.) Likewise, many cosmologists have articulated various forms of what is known as the "anthropic principle" -- that is, the observation that the basic laws of the universe seem to be "fine-tuned" in such a way as to be favorable to life, including human life."
- Austin L. Hughes, evolutionary biologist - "The Folly of Scientism," The New Atlantis (Fall, 2012):32-50.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/12/evolutionary_bi067491.html
Cosmology and Ultimate Causality - George Ellis - video
https://vimeo.com/20681475
'Amazing fine-tuning occurs in the laws that make this [complexity] possible. Realization of the complexity of what is accomplished makes it very difficult not to use the word “miraculous” without taking a stand as to the ontological status of that word.'
- George Ellis
Of note; George Ellis was a colleague of Stephen Hawking and mathematician Roger Penrose. As a team, Hawking, Penrose, and Ellis were instrumental in refining General Relativity to a point to reveal that not only did mass-energy have a absolute (singular) beginning in the Big Bang, but that space and time also had an absolute (singular) beginning:
"Every solution to the equations of general relativity guarantees the existence of a singular boundary for space and time in the past."
(Hawking, Penrose, Ellis) - 1970
http://www.leaderu.com/real/ri9404/bigbang.html

Big Bang Theory - An Overview of the main evidence
Excerpt: Steven Hawking, George Ellis, and Roger Penrose turned their attention to the Theory of Relativity and its implications regarding our notions of time. In 1968 and 1970, they published papers in which they extended Einstein's Theory of General Relativity to include measurements of time and space.1, 2 According to their calculations, time and space had a finite beginning that corresponded to the origin of matter and energy."3
Steven W. Hawking, George F.R. Ellis, "The Cosmic Black-Body Radiation and the Existence of Singularities in our Universe," Astrophysical Journal, 152, (1968) pp. 25-36.
Steven W. Hawking, Roger Penrose, "The Singularities of Gravitational Collapse and Cosmology," Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, series A, 314 (1970) pp. 529-548.
http://www.big-bang-theory.com/
Of note:
"When this paper was published (referring to the circa 1970 Hawking, Penrose paper) we could only prove General Relativity's reliability to 1% precision, today we can prove it to 15 places of decimal."
Hugh Ross PhD. Astrophysics - quote taken from 8:40 mark of the following link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UF1xSErF_f4

The Most Precisely Tested Theory in the History of Science - May 5, 2011
Excerpt: So, which of the two (general relativity or QED) is The Most Precisely Tested Theory in the History of Science?
It’s a little tough to quantify a title like that, but I think relativity can claim to have tested the smallest effects. Things like the aluminum ion clock experiments showing shifts in the rate of a clock set moving at a few m/s, or raised by a foot, measure relativistic shifts of a few parts in 10^16. That is, if one clock ticks 10,000,000,000,000,000 times, the other ticks 9,999,999,999,999,999 times. That’s an impressively tiny effect, but the measured value is in good agreement with the predictions of relativity.
In the end, though, I have to give the nod to QED, because while the absolute effects in relativity may be smaller, the precision of the measurements in QED is more impressive. Experimental tests of relativity measure tiny shifts, but to only a few decimal places. Experimental tests of QED measure small shifts, but to an absurd number of decimal places. The most impressive of these is the “anomalous magnetic moment of the electron,” expressed is terms of a number g whose best measured value is:
g/2 = 1.001 159 652 180 73 (28)
Depending on how you want to count it, that’s either 11 or 14 digits of precision (the value you would expect without QED is exactly 1, so in some sense, the shift really starts with the first non-zero decimal place), which is just incredible. And QED correctly predicts all those decimal places (at least to within the measurement uncertainty, given by the two digits in parentheses at the end of that).

http://scienceblogs.com/principles/2011/05/05/the-most-precisely-tested-theo/
Hugh Ross - Scientific Evidences for the Christian Faith - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epDHo0qPdQ8

The Creation Of The Universe (Kalam Cosmological Argument)- Lee Strobel - William Lane Craig - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/3993987/

Dr. William Lane Craig defends the Kalam Cosmological argument for the existence of God against various attempted refutations - video playlist
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=916E17EE70E98A68

Here is a very well done presentation of the Kalam Cosmological Argument:

The Kalam Cosmological Argument - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COJ0ED1mV7s

Hugh Ross PhD. - Evidence For The Transcendent Origin Of The Universe - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4347185

What Atheists Just Don't Get (About God) - Video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/3192755/

What Contemporary Physics and Philosophy Tell Us About Nature and God - Fr. Spitzer & Dr. Bruce Gordon (Dr. Gordon speaks for the last 25 minutes) - video
http://www.mefeedia.com/watch/32512834

Formal Proof For The Transcendent Origin Of the Universe - William Lane Craig - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4170233
Are Many Worlds and the Multiverse the Same Idea? - Sean Carroll
Excerpt: When cosmologists talk about “the multiverse,” it’s a slightly poetic term. We really just mean different regions of spacetime, far away so that we can’t observe them, but nevertheless still part of what one might reasonably want to call “the universe.” In inflationary cosmology, however, these different regions can be relatively self-contained — “pocket universes,” as Alan Guth calls them.
http://unitedgeorgians.blogspot.com/2011/08/are-many-worlds-and-multiverse-same.html

"The prediction of the standard model that the universe began to exist remains today as secure as ever—indeed, more secure, in light of the Borde-Guth-Vilenkin theorem and that prediction’s corroboration by the repeated and often imaginative attempts to falsify it. The person who believes that the universe began to exist remains solidly and comfortably within mainstream science." - William Lane Craig
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6115

Inflationary spacetimes are not past-complete - Borde-Guth-Vilenkin - 2003
Excerpt: inflationary models require physics other than inflation to describe the past boundary of the inflating region of spacetime.
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0110012

“In this context, a proposal that the universe was created from empty space is no more fundamental than a proposal that the universe was spawned by a piece of rubber. It might be true, but one would still want to ask where the piece of rubber came from.” – Alan Guth
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/cosmology-hawking-replaces-god-with-hocus-pocus/

Here is a video of Alan Guth,,,

Did Our Universe have a Beginning? (Alan Guth) - video
http://www.closertotruth.com/video-profile/Did-Our-Universe-have-a-Beginning-Alan-Guth-/856

,,,Where towards the very end of the video, after considering some fairly exotic materialistic scenarios of 'eternal inflation' of 'pocket universes', Alan Guth concedes that "The ultimate theory for the origin of the universe is still very much up for grabs".

Alexander Vilenkin is far more direct than Alan Guth:

"It is said that an argument is what convinces reasonable men and a proof is what it takes to convince even an unreasonable man. With the proof now in place, cosmologists can long longer hide behind the possibility of a past eternal universe. There is no escape, they have to face the problem of a cosmic beginning." Alexander Vilenkin - Many Worlds In One - Pg. 176

"The conclusion is that past-eternal inflation is impossible without a beginning."
Alexander Vilenkin - from pg. 35 'New Proofs for the Existence of God' by Robert J. Spitzer (of note: A elegant thought experiment of a space traveler traveling to another galaxy, that Borde, Guth, and Vilenkin, used to illustrate the validity of the proof, is on pg. 35 of the book as well.)

“All the evidence we have says that the universe had a beginning.” -
Cosmologist Alexander Vilenkin of Tufts University in Boston - paper delivered at Stephen Hawking's 70th birthday party (Characterized as 'Worst Birthday Present Ever')
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/vilenkins-verdict-all-the-evidence-we-have-says-that-the-universe-had-a-beginning/

Hugh Ross vs Lewis Wolpert - Is There Evidence For A Cosmic Creator? (uploaded Sept. 5 2012) - video
Description: Ross brings evidence for God from Big Bang cosmology, explaining why scientific advance provides a testable model of biblical creation. Wolpert says that belief in God is a by-product of evolution and nothing more.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UF1xSErF_f4

Mathematics of Eternity Prove The Universe Must Have Had A Beginning - April 2012
Excerpt: Cosmologists use the mathematical properties of eternity to show that although universe may last forever, it must have had a beginning.,,, They go on to show that cyclical universes and universes of eternal inflation both expand in this way. So they cannot be eternal in the past and must therefore have had a beginning. "Although inflation may be eternal in the future, it cannot be extended indefinitely to the past," they say.
They treat the emergent model of the universe differently, showing that although it may seem stable from a classical point of view, it is unstable from a quantum mechanical point of view. "A simple emergent universe model...cannot escape quantum collapse," they say.
The conclusion is inescapable. "None of these scenarios can actually be past-eternal," say Mithani and Vilenkin.
Since the observational evidence is that our universe is expanding, then it must also have been born in the past. A profound conclusion (albeit the same one that lead to the idea of the big bang in the first place).

http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/27793/

The Universe Is Not Eternal - Johanan Raatz - March 1, 2014
Excerpt: One thing known for certain about quantum gravity is something called the holographic principle. Precisely put, the holographic principle tells us that the entropy of a region of space (measured in terms of information) is directly proportional to a quarter of its surface area. The volume of this region is then actually a hologram of this information on its surface.
Except this tells us something interesting about the universe as well. Entropy, or the amount of disorder present, always increases with time. In fact not only is this law inviolate, it is also how the flow of time is defined. Without entropy, there is no way to discern forwards and backwards in time.
But if the holographic principle links the universe’s entropy and its horizon area then going back in time, all of space-time eventually vanishes to nothing at zero entropy. Thus Carroll’s argument is unsound. We already have enough knowledge about what happens beyond the BVG theorem that Craig cites. The universe is not eternal but created.
It is interesting to note that this also undermines claims made by atheists like Hawking and Krauss that the universe could have fluctuated into existence from nothing. Their argument rests on the assumption that there was a pre-existent zero-point field or ZPF. The only trouble is that the physics of a ZPF requires a space-time to exist in. No space-time means no zero-point field, and without a zero-point field, the universe can not spontaneously fluctuate into existence.

http://blog.proofdirectory.org/2014/03/universe-not-eternal/
God Is the Best Explanation for the Origin of the Universe - William Lane Craig - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwRR5WTgpp8

The Universe Had a Beginning - Alexander Vilenkin - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QSZNpLzcCw

How Atheists Take Alexander Vilenkin (& the BVG Theorem) Out Of Context - William Lane Craig - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z79FGmh50Xo

William Lane Craig posts full Vilenkin e-mail (that was dishonestly) misrepresented by Krauss in their debate - Sept. 23, 2013
http://winteryknight.wordpress.com/2013/09/23/william-lane-craig-posts-full-text-of-vilenkin-e-mail-misrepresnted-by-lawrence-krauss/

Quantum Entanglement and Teleportation - video - (Implications for the beginning of the universe discussed in description of video)
http://vimeo.com/38463906/
Genesis 1:1-3
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters. Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light.
This following article and video give a very small glimpse at the power involved when God said 'Let there be light':
US lab reaches Big Bang heat of four trillion degrees Celsius - 17 Feb 2010
Excerpt: US physicists have created matter at around four trillion degrees Celsius, the hottest temperature ever reached in a laboratory, simulating the "quark soup" that scientists believe existed at the universe's birth.
A spokesman for the Department of Energy lab where the record-breaking temperature was reached said the effect was achieved by slamming together gold ions travelling at nearly the speed of light inside the Brookhaven National Laboratory's Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) - an "atom smasher" with a 2.4-mile (3.8-kilometer) circumference.
The ultra-high temperature is higher than that needed to melt protons and neutrons into a plasma of quarks and gluons, the substance that filled the universe a few microseconds after it came into existence 13.7 billion years ago, according to the spokesperson.
The plasma of four trillion degrees Celsius (7.2 trillion degrees Fahrenheit) - 250,000 times hotter than the center of the sun - existed for only a few microseconds after the birth of the universe.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/expat/expatnews/7256685/US-lab-reaches-Big-Bang-heat-of-four-trillion-degrees-Celsius.html
God's Creative and Sustaining Word - Dr. Don Johnson - video
http://vimeo.com/12995464

The following video and articles are very suggestive as to providing almost tangible proof for God 'speaking' reality into existence:

The Deep Connection Between Sound & Reality - Evan Grant - Allosphere - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4672092
Photons and Phonons
Excerpt: You see, the primary Planck-Law (E=hf) is metaphysical and independent on the inertia distribution of the solid states.,,,
Both, photon and phonon carry massequivalent energy m=E/c2=hf/c2.
The matter-light interaction so is rendered electromagnetically noninertial for the photon and becomes acoustically inertial for the phonons; both however subject to Bose-Einstein stochastic wave mechanics incorporative the Planck-Law.,,
Where, how and why does E=hf correctly and experimentally verifiably describe the quantum mechanics of energy propagation?,,,

http://www.tonyb.freeyellow.com/id135.html

Phonon
Excerpt: In physics, a phonon,, represents an excited state in the quantum mechanical quantization of the modes of vibrations,,
The name phonon,, translates as sound or voice because long-wavelength phonons give rise to sound.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonon

semi related: Sound waves precisely position nanowires - June 19. 2013
Excerpt: The smaller components become, the more difficult it is to create patterns in an economical and reproducible way, according to an interdisciplinary team of Penn State researchers who, using sound waves, can place nanowires in repeatable patterns for potential use in a variety of sensors, optoelectronics and nanoscale circuits.
http://phys.org/news/2013-06-precisely-position-nanowires.html

Music of the sun recorded by scientists - June 2010
Excerpt: The sun has been the inspiration for hundreds of songs, but now scientists have discovered that the star at the centre of our solar system produces its own music.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/7840201/Music-of-the-sun-recorded-by-scientists.html

Big Bang Sound Recording 'Remix' Created By Physicist - 04/04/2013
Excerpt: While you might think that because space is a vacuum the explosion of a singularity wouldn't make any sound at all, Cramer told QMI that "the Big Bang is the exception to this, because the medium that pervaded the universe in the first 100,000 years or so was far more dense than the atmosphere of the Earth."
In other words, matter was so dense in the early Universe that it carried sounds waves in much the same way air does on Earth.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/04/04/big-bang-sound-recording-john-cramer_n_3007975.html

Do Physical Laws Make Things Happen? - Stephen L. Talbott
Excerpt: While there are many complex and diverse movements of mind as we speak, it is fair to say very generally that we first have an idea, inchoate though it may be, and then we seek to capture and clothe this idea in words. Each word gains its full meaning — becomes the word it now is — through the way it is conjoined with other words under the influence of the originating idea. The word simply didn't exist as this particular word before — as a word with these nuances of meaning.
So an antecedent whole (an idea) becomes immanent in and thereby transforms and constitutes its parts (words), making them what they are. In terms of active agency, it is less that the parts constitute the whole than the other way around.

http://www.natureinstitute.org/txt/st/mqual/ch03.htm#fn3.0
The following video is cool:

What pi sounds like (when put to music) - cool video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOQb_mtkEEE

This discovery, of a beginning for the universe, has crushed the materialistic belief that postulated the universe has always existed and had no beginning.

Little known by most people is the fact that almost every, if not every, major branch of modern science has been founded by a scientist who believed in Christ:
Christianity and The Birth of Science - Michael Bumbulis, Ph.D
Excerpt: Furthermore, many of these founders of science lived at a time when others publicly expressed views quite contrary to Christianity - Hume, Hobbes, Darwin, etc. When Boyle argues against Hobbe's materialism or Kelvin argues against Darwin's assumptions, you don't have a case of "closet atheists."
http://ldolphin.org/bumbulis/
http://www.tektonics.org
Christianity Gave Birth To Each Scientific Discipline - Dr. Henry Fritz Schaefer - video
http://vimeo.com/16523153

The Judeo-Christian Origin of Modern Science - Peter Hodgson - video
http://www.counterbalance.org/cosmcrea/hodg-frame.html

As well, these following videos are at the preceding site:

John Polkinghorne: The Friendship of Science and Religion - video
http://www.counterbalance.org/cosmcrea/polk-frame.html

Stephen Meyer: The New Cosmology - video
http://www.counterbalance.org/cosmcrea/newcosm-frame.html

Stephen Meyer: The New Cosmology: Theistic Implications - video
http://www.counterbalance.org/cosmcrea/meyer-frame.html

Stephen Meyer: Quantum Cosmology - video
http://www.counterbalance.org/cosmcrea/meyerqm-frame.html

In this following short video, Dr. Stephen Meyer notes that the early scientists were Christians whose faith motivated them to learn more about their Creator…

Dr. Meyer on the Christian History of Science - video
http://www.thetruthproject.org/about/culturefocus/A000000287.cfm

A Short List Of The Christian Founders Of Modern Science
http://www.creationsafaris.com/wgcs_toc.htm

Founders of Modern Science Who Believe in GOD - Tihomir Dimitrov - (pg. 222)
http://www.academia.edu/2739607/Scientific_GOD_Journal

50 Nobel Laureates and other great scientists who believed in God by Tihomir Dimitrov
http://www.nobelists.net/

The following is a good essay, by Robert C. Koons, in which the popular misconception of a war between science and religion, that neo-Darwinists often use in public to defend their, ironically, pseudo-scientific position, is in fact a gross misrepresentation of the facts. For not only does Robert Koons find Theism, particularly Chistian Theism, absolutely vital to the founding of modern science, but also argues that the Theistic worldview is necessary for the long term continued success of science into the future:
Science and Theism: Concord, not Conflict* – Robert C. Koons
IV. The Dependency of Science Upon Theism (Page 21)
Excerpt: Far from undermining the credibility of theism, the remarkable success of science in modern times is a remarkable confirmation of the truth of theism. It was from the perspective of Judeo-Christian theism—and from the perspective alone—that it was predictable that science would have succeeded as it has. Without the faith in the rational intelligibility of the world and the divine vocation of human beings to master it, modern science would never have been possible, and, even today, the continued rationality of the enterprise of science depends on convictions that can be reasonably grounded only in theistic metaphysics.
http://www.robkoons.net/media/69b0dd04a9d2fc6dffff80b3ffffd524.pdf

The God Particle: Not the God of the Gaps, But the Whole Show - Monday, Aug. 2012
Excerpt: C. S. Lewis put it this way: "Men became scientific because they expected law in nature and they expected law in nature because they believed in a lawgiver."
http://www.christianpost.com/news/the-god-particle-not-the-god-of-the-gaps-but-the-whole-show-80307/

The Origin of Science
Excerpt: Modern science is not only compatible with Christianity, it in fact finds its origins in Christianity.
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/a/science_origin.html

In The Happy Atheist, PZ Myers Offers One Lousy Bargain - Casey Luskin - October 21, 2013
Excerpt: what PZ is really saying comes down to this (again, my characterization): "I won't make the crazy claim that Christianity is compatible with serial killing, if you won't make the reasonable and justified claim that Christianity is compatible with science since, after all, it (Christianity) pretty much gave birth to science." That seems like a pretty lousy bargain.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/10/in_the_happy_at078121.html

Kelvin's conundrum: Is it possible to believe in God and science? - 20 October 2013
Excerpt: Some years ago, the scientist Joseph Needham made an epic study of technological development in China. He wanted to find out why China, for all its early gifts of innovation, had fallen so far behind Europe in the advancement of science.
He reluctantly came to the conclusion that European science had been spurred on by the widespread belief in a rational creative force, known as God, which made all scientific laws comprehensible," Lennox said.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/0/24535331

Jerry Coyne on the Scientific Method and Religion - Michael Egnor - June 2011
Excerpt: The scientific method -- the empirical systematic theory-based study of nature -- has nothing to so with some religious inspirations -- Animism, Paganism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Shintoism, Islam, and, well, atheism. The scientific method has everything to do with Christian (and Jewish) inspiration. Judeo-Christian culture is the only culture that has given rise to organized theoretical science. Many cultures (e.g. China) have produced excellent technology and engineering, but only Christian culture has given rise to a conceptual understanding of nature.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/06/jerry_coyne_on_the_scientific_047431.html

"Did Christianity (and Other Religions) Promote the Rise Of Science?" - Michael Egnor October 24, 2013
Excerpt: Neither the Greeks nor Islam produced modern theoretical science. The Greeks produced sublime philosophy and mathematics, but no theoretical science. They excelled in mathematics but never applied mathematical models to the systematic study of nature.
Islam produced no real theoretical science. It invaded the Christian Middle East, Christian North Africa and Christian Spain, and expropriated the culture and work of Christians and Jews and pagans in the conquered lands. Centralized government and fresh availability of booty fostered a modest bit of science produced by the conquered locals -- the vast majority of whom were not Muslim for centuries.
It took several centuries before most of the conquered peoples under the Islamic boot converted to Islam -- Islamic rulers coveted the dhimmi taxes and were not quick to force conversion -- and when Islamic lands became wholly Islamic, science became wholly dead.

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/10/did_christianit078281.html
podcast - Dr. Michael Egnor: Judeo-Christianity and the Rise of Modern Science - March 2014
http://intelligentdesign.podomatic.com/entry/2014-03-03T12_53_03-08_00
The War against the War Between Science and Faith Revisited - July 2010
Excerpt: …as Whitehead pointed out, it is no coincidence that science sprang, not from Ionian metaphysics, not from the Brahmin-Buddhist-Taoist East, not from the Egyptian-Mayan astrological South, but from the heart of the Christian West, that although Galileo fell out with the Church, he would hardly have taken so much trouble studying Jupiter and dropping objects from towers if the reality and value and order of things had not first been conferred by belief in the Incarnation. (Walker Percy, Lost in the Cosmos),,,
Jaki notes that before Christ the Jews never formed a very large community (priv. comm.). In later times, the Jews lacked the Christian notion that Jesus was the monogenes or unigenitus, the only-begotten of God. Pantheists like the Greeks tended to identify the monogenes or unigenitus with the universe itself, or with the heavens. Jaki writes: Herein lies the tremendous difference between Christian monotheism on the one hand and Jewish and Muslim monotheism on the other. This explains also the fact that it is almost natural for a Jewish or Muslim intellectual to become a patheist. About the former Spinoza and Einstein are well-known examples. As to the Muslims, it should be enough to think of the Averroists. With this in mind one can also hope to understand why the Muslims, who for five hundred years had studied Aristotle’s works and produced many commentaries on them failed to make a breakthrough. The latter came in medieval Christian context and just about within a hundred years from the availability of Aristotle’s works in Latin,,

http://www.scifiwright.com/2010/08/the-war-against-the-war-between-science-and-faith-revisited/
Christ and Science - Stanley L. Jaki
http://www.realviewbooks.com/catalogb.html#chriscie

The Blackwell Companion to Science and Christianity - book
http://books.google.com/books?id=qqGRqJT4aNQC&pg=PA3&lpg=PA3&dq#v=onepage&q&f=false

Christianity Is a Science-Starter, Not a Science-Stopper By Nancy Pearcey
http://www.pearceyreport.com/archives/2005/09/post_4.php

The 'Person Of Christ' was, and is, necessary for science to start and persist!
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/she-said-it-nancey-pearceys-thoughtful-article-on-how-%E2%80%9Cchristianity-is-a-science-starter-not-a-science-stopper%E2%80%9D/#comment-385265
Bruce Charlton's Miscellany - October 2011
Excerpt: I had discovered that over the same period of the twentieth century that the US had risen to scientific eminence it had undergone a significant Christian revival. ,,,The point I put to (Richard) Dawkins was that the USA was simultaneously by-far the most dominant scientific nation in the world (I knew this from various scientometic studies I was doing at the time) and by-far the most religious (Christian) nation in the world. How, I asked, could this be - if Christianity was culturally inimical to science?
http://charltonteaching.blogspot.com/2011/10/meeting-richard-dawkins-and-his-wife.html
In spite of the fact that modern science can be forcefully argued to owe its very existence to Christianity, many scientists before Hubble's discovery had been swayed by the materialistic philosophy and had thus falsely presumed the universe itself was infinite in size as well as falsely presumed it was eternal in duration. This 'simplistic' conclusion of theirs seems to stem from the fact that it is self evident that something cannot come from nothing, and they simply could not envision the logical necessity of a eternal transcendent Being who created this material realm. The materialistic philosophy was slightly supported by the first law of thermodynamics which states energy can neither be created nor destroyed by any material means. This belief of the universe having no beginning had held the upper hand in scientific circles even though the very next law, the second law of thermodynamics, 'entropy', or the law of universal decay into equilibrium, had raised some serious doubts about the validity of believing the universe had no beginning. As well in mathematics, in overlapping congruence with entropy, the mathematical impossibility of a temporal infinite regression of causes demanded a beginning for the universe; i.e. the existence of a material reality within time called for an 'Alpha', an 'Uncaused Cause', for the material universe that transcends the material universe.

William Lane Craig - Hilbert's Hotel - The Absurdity Of An Infinite Regress Of 'Things' - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/3994011/

Time Cannot Be Infinite Into The Past - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xg0pdUvQdi4

If there's a beginning, must there be a cause for that beginning? - Stephen Meyer - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7z6l8AUet4

Does God Exist? - Argument From The Origin Of Nature - Kirk Durston - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4171846/
entire video:
http://vimeo.com/1786558

The First Cause Must Be Different From All Other Causes - T.G. Peeler
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/genomic-junk-and-evolution/#comment-358648

Einstein's general relativity equation has now been extended to confirm not only did matter and energy have a beginning in the Big Bang, but space-time also had a beginning. i.e. The Big Bang was an absolute origin of space-time, matter-energy, and as such demands a cause which transcends space-time, matter-energy.
"Every solution to the equations of general relativity guarantees the existence of a singular boundary for space and time in the past."
(Hawking, Penrose, Ellis) - 1970
http://www.leaderu.com/real/ri9404/bigbang.html
In conjunction with the mathematical, and logical, necessity of an 'Uncaused Cause' to explain the beginning of the universe, in philosophy it has been shown that,,,
Not Understanding Nothing – A review of A Universe from Nothing – Edward Feser - June 2012
Excerpt: A critic might reasonably question the arguments for a divine first cause of the cosmos. But to ask “What caused God?” misses the whole reason classical philosophers thought his existence necessary in the first place. So when physicist Lawrence Krauss begins his new book by suggesting that to ask “Who created the creator?” suffices to dispatch traditional philosophical theology, we know it isn’t going to end well. ,,,
,,, But Krauss simply can’t see the “difference between arguing in favor of an eternally existing creator versus an eternally existing universe without one.” The difference, as the reader of Aristotle or Aquinas knows, is that the universe changes while the unmoved mover does not, or, as the Neoplatonist can tell you, that the universe is made up of parts while its source is absolutely one; or, as Leibniz could tell you, that the universe is contingent and God absolutely necessary. There is thus a principled reason for regarding God rather than the universe as the terminus of explanation.

http://www.firstthings.com/article/2012/05/not-understanding-nothing

"The 'First Mover' is necessary for change occurring at each moment."
Michael Egnor - Aquinas’ First Way
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2009/09/jerry_coyne_and_aquinas_first.html
I find this centuries old philosophical argument, for the necessity of a 'First Mover' accounting for change occurring at each moment, to be validated by quantum mechanics. One line of evidence arises from the smallest indivisible unit of time; Planck time:
Planck time
Excerpt: One Planck time is the time it would take a photon travelling at the speed of light to cross a distance equal to one Planck length. Theoretically, this is the smallest time measurement that will ever be possible,[3] roughly 10^−43 seconds. Within the framework of the laws of physics as we understand them today, for times less than one Planck time apart, we can neither measure nor detect any change. As of May 2010, the smallest time interval that was directly measured was on the order of 12 attoseconds (12 × 10^−18 seconds),[4] about 10^24 times larger than the Planck time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_time
The 'first mover' is further warranted to be necessary from quantum mechanics since the possibility for the universe to be considered a self-sustaining 'closed loop' of cause and effect is removed with the refutation of the 'hidden variable' argument, as first postulated by Einstein, in quantum entanglement experiments. As well, there also must be a sufficient transcendent cause (God/First Mover) to explain quantum wave collapse for 'each moment' of the universe.

God is the ultimate existence which grounds all of reality
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yHEwK2ZOlyiobVOJ9i-_FiFz37pVj0sQ-viPZu9V_dA/edit
Why Do We Live in a Huge, Yet Finite, Expanding Universe? - Rob Sheldon - March 7, 2014
Excerpt: Philosophers from the time of Plato and Epicurus have wanted a static universe, infinite in extent, infinite in time.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2014/03/why_do_we_live082961.html
I find it very interesting that the materialistic belief of the universe being stable, and infinite in duration, was so deeply rooted in scientific thought that Albert Einstein (1879-1955), when he was shown his general relativity equation indicated a universe that was unstable and would ‘draw together’ under its own gravity,,,

Einstein and The Belgian Priest, George Lemaitre - The "Father" Of The Big Bang Theory - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4279662

,, added a cosmological constant to his equation to reflect a stable universe rather than entertain the thought that the universe had a beginning. Einstein ended up calling the cosmological constant, he had added to his equation, the 'biggest blunder' of his life.
Cosmological constant
Excerpt: Einstein included the cosmological constant as a term in his field equations for general relativity because he was dissatisfied that otherwise his equations did not allow, apparently, for a static universe: gravity would cause a universe which was initially at dynamic equilibrium to contract. To counteract this possibility, Einstein added the cosmological constant.[1] However, soon after Einstein developed his static theory, observations by Edwin Hubble indicated that the universe appears to be expanding; this was consistent with a cosmological solution to the original general-relativity equations that had been found by the mathematician Friedmann, working on the Einstein equations of general-relatvity. Einstein later referred to his failure to accept the validaton of his equations; when they had predicted the expansion of the universe in theory, before it was demonstrated in observation of the cosmological red shift, as the “biggest blunder” of his life.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_constant#History

Einstein’s Greatest Blunder – The Cosmological Constant
"Much later, when I was discussing cosmological problems with Einstein, he remarked that the introduction of the cosmological term was the biggest blunder of his life."
— George Gamow, My World Line, 1970
http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/~jpl/cosmo/blunder.html
David Berlinski at "Socrates in the City" speaking on 'Einstein's Blunder' - podcast
http://intelligentdesign.podomatic.com/entry/2012-10-03T17_34_17-07_00

The Universe Had a Definite Beginning - Einstein and Edwin Hubble - Stephen Meyer on the John Ankerberg show - video
http://www.lightsource.com/ministry/ankerberg-show/discovery-onethe-universe-had-a-definite-beginning-222144.html

To reiterate, when astronomer Edwin Hubble published empirical evidence indicating a beginning for the universe, Einstein ended up calling the cosmological constant, that he had added to his equation, the biggest blunder of his life. But then again mathematically speaking, Einstein’s ‘fudge factor’ was not so much of a blunder after all. A number of observations including the discovery of cosmic acceleration in 1998 have revived the cosmological constant. In the late 1990′s a highly modified cosmological constant, a constant which is termed ‘Dark Energy’, was reintroduced into general relativity equations to account for the accelerated expansion of the universe, and (I believe) to help explain the discrepancy between the ages of the oldest stars in the Milky Way galaxy and the age of the universe. Far from providing a materialistic solution, which would have enabled the universe to be stable and infinite as Einstein had originally envisioned, the finely-tuned cosmological constant, finely-tuned to 1 part in 10^120, has, upon refinement, turned into one of the most powerful evidences of the design of the universe for life. It is the most finely tuned constant, from many finely-tuned universal constants of the universe, which are necessary to be almost precisely as they are in order for biological life to be possible anywhere in the universe.
Cosmological constant
Excerpt: the measured cosmological constant is smaller than this by a factor of 10^-120. This discrepancy has been called “the worst theoretical prediction in the history of physics!”.[14]
Some supersymmetric theories require a cosmological constant that is exactly zero, which further complicates things. This is the cosmological constant problem, the worst problem of fine-tuning in physics: there is no known natural way to derive the tiny cosmological constant used in cosmology from particle physics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_constant#Predictions
And this quote-unquote “‘worst problem’ of fine tuning in physics” shows no signs of ever letting materialists have any room to try to ‘explain it away’:
Dark energy alternatives to Einstein are running out of room – January 9, 2013
Excerpt: Last month, a group of European astronomers, using a massive radio telescope in Germany, made the most accurate measurement of the proton-to-electron mass ratio ever accomplished and found that there has been no change in the ratio to one part in 10 million at a time when the universe was about half its current age, around 7 billion years ago. When Thompson put this new measurement into his calculations, he found that it excluded almost all of the dark energy models using the commonly expected values or parameters.
If the parameter space or range of values is equated to a football field, then almost the whole field is out of bounds except for a single 2-inch by 2-inch patch at one corner of the field. In fact, most of the allowed values are not even on the field. “In effect, the dark energy theories have been playing on the wrong field,” Thompson said. “The 2-inch square does contain the area that corresponds to no change in the fundamental constants, (a ‘true cosmological constant’), and that is exactly where Einstein stands.”

http://phys.org/news/2013-01-dark-energy-alternatives-einstein-room.html
These transcendent universal constants, such as the cosmological constant, and despite many repeated attempts by materialists to 'explain them away, have no other apparent reason for being at precise unchanging values they have than to enable carbon-based biological life to be possible in this universe. These constants dramatically demonstrate the need for a infinitely powerful transcendent Creator, to account for the fact that the universe 'had us in mind all along'. If the avalanche of incoming scientific evidence keeps going in the same direction as it has been going for the last century, and there is no hint the evidence will change directions, human beings, warts and all, could once again be popularly viewed as God's ultimate purpose for creating this universe. Man and the earth beneath his feet could very well be looked at as the 'center of the universe' by both scientists, theologians and the public at large.
Genesis 1:26-27
Then God said, "Let us make man in Our image, according to Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion ..."
So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.
God Of Wonders - City On A Hill - music video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/3994616

of note: Also of note, this was not the last time Einstein’s base materialistic philosophy had severely misled him. He was also severely misled in the Bohr–Einstein debates in which he was repeatedly proven wrong in challenging the 'spooky action at a distance' postulations of the emerging field of quantum mechanics. This following video, which I listed earlier, bears worth repeating since it highlights the Bohr/Einstein debate and the decades long struggle to 'scientifically' resolve the disagreement between them in quantum mechanics:

The Failure Of Local Realism or Reductive Materialism - Alain Aspect - video
http://www.metacafe.com/w/4744145
“We are all agreed that your (Einstein’s) theory is crazy. The question which divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct. My own feeling is that it is not crazy enough.” -Niels Bohr
My feeling is that Bohr might have found the following experimental proof from quantum mechanics ‘crazy enough to have a chance of being correct’.
Quantum physics says goodbye to reality – Apr 20, 2007
Excerpt: They found that, just as in the realizations of Bell’s thought experiment, Leggett’s inequality is violated – thus stressing the quantum-mechanical assertion that reality does not exist when we’re not observing it. “Our study shows that ‘just’ giving up the concept of locality would not be enough to obtain a more complete description of quantum mechanics,” Aspelmeyer told Physics Web. “You would also have to give up certain intuitive features of realism.”
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/27640
The following is an interesting exchange between Bohr and Einstein:
God does not play dice with the cosmos.
Albert Einstein

In response Niels Bohr said,
Do not presume to tell God what to do.
Though many words could be written on the deep underlying philosophical issues of that exchange between Bohr and Einstein, my take on the whole matter is summed up nicely, and simply, in the following verse and video:
Proverbs 16:33
The lot is cast into the lap, But its every decision is from the LORD.
Chance vs. God: The Battle of First Causes – John MacArthur - 10 minute audio
http://www.vimeo.com/11812625

As a interesting sidelight to this, Einstein hated the loss of determinism that quantum mechanics brought forth to physics, as illustrated by his infamous 'God does not play dice' quote. Yet on a deeper philosophical level, I’ve heard one physics professor say something to the effect that the lack of strict determinism in quantum wave collapse actually restored the free will of man to its rightful place, or probably more correctly he said something more like this,,, ‘The proof of free will is found in the indeterminacy of the quantum wave collapse'.

Why Quantum Physics (Uncertainty) Ends the Free Will Debate - Michio Kaku - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFLR5vNKiSw

Moreover, advances in quantum mechanics have shown that 'free will' conscious observation is primary to quantum wave collapse of a quasi-3D particle state. With 'free will choice' even effecting the state of 'particles' into the past:
Quantum physics mimics spooky action into the past - April 23, 2012
Excerpt: According to the famous words of Albert Einstein, the effects of quantum entanglement appear as "spooky action at a distance". The recent experiment has gone one remarkable step further. "Within a naïve classical world view, quantum mechanics can even mimic an influence of future actions on past events", says Anton Zeilinger.
http://phys.org/news/2012-04-quantum-physics-mimics-spooky-action.html
In other words, if my conscious choices really are just merely the result of whatever state the material particles in my brain happen to be in in the past (deterministic) how in blue blazes are my choices instantaneously effecting the state of material particles into the past?

Moreover as is quite obvious to most people, free will is taken as seriously true by all societies, or else why should we spank our children or punish anybody in jails if they truly had no free will to control their actions? Indeed what right would God have to judge anyone if they truly had no free will?

It is also interesting to note that materialists, instead of honestly dealing with the obvious theistic implications of quantum mechanics, will many times invoke something called Everett's Many Worlds interpretation when dealing with quantum mechanics. Yet this 'solution' ends up creating profound absurdities of logic rather than providing any real rational solutions:
Quantum mechanics
Excerpt: The Everett many-worlds interpretation, formulated in 1956, holds that all the possibilities described by quantum theory simultaneously occur in a multiverse composed of mostly independent parallel universes.[39] This is not accomplished by introducing some new axiom to quantum mechanics, but on the contrary by removing the axiom of the collapse of the wave packet:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics
Perhaps some may say that Everett’s Many Worlds interpretation of infinite parallel universes is not so absurd after all, if so,, then in some other parallel universe in which you also live, Elvis just so happens to be president of the United states, and you just so happen to come to the opposite conclusion, in that parallel universe, that Many Worlds is in fact absurd! For me, I find that type of 'flexible thinking', stemming from Many Worlds, to be completely absurd!!! Moreover, that one example from Many Worlds, of Elvis being President, is just small potatoes to the levels of absurdity that we would actually be witnessing if Many Worlds were the truth for how reality was constructed.

Though I feel very, very, comfortable with how the evidence fits the Theistic model of Quantum Mechanics, in which God is the cause of wave function/packet collapse to each unique observer in the universe, and feel that the matter is 'settled' as far as the science is concerned, the following article deconstructs many, if not all, of the 'alternative' non-Theistic Quantum Mechanic Models.
The Metaphysics of Quantum Mechanics - James Daniel Sinclair - October 2010
Abstract: Is the science of Quantum Mechanics the greatest threat to Christianity? Some years ago the journal Christianity Today suggested precisely that. It is true that QM is a daunting subject. This barrier is largely responsible for the fear. But when the veil is torn away, the study of QM builds a remarkably robust Christian apologetic. When pragmatic & logically invalid interpretations are removed, there remain four possibilities for the nature of reality (based on the work of philosopher Henry Stapp). Additional analysis shows two are exclusive to theism. The third can be formulated with or without God. The last is consistent only with atheism. By considering additional criteria, options that deny God can be shown to be false.
http://www.reasons.org/resources/non-staff-papers/the-metaphysics-of-quantum-mechanics
This following video is very good, and easy to understand, for pointing out some of the unanswerable dilemmas that quantum mechanics presents to the atheistic philosophy of materialism:

Dr. Quantum - Double Slit Experiment and Entanglement - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4096579/

A straight-forward interpretation of the anthropic hypothesis is simple in its proposition. It proposes the entire universe, in all its grandeur, was purposely created by an infinitely powerful transcendent Creator specifically with human beings in mind as the end result. Therefore a strict interpretation of the anthropic hypothesis would propose that each level of the universe's development towards man may reflect the handiwork of such a Creator. Here are some resources reflecting that approach:

"Creation as Science" - Hugh Ross - A Testable Creation Model - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LuEYjYDrKH4

Is There Scientific Evidence for the Existence of God? - Walter Bradley
http://www.leaderu.com/real/ri9403/evidence.html

Creation of the Cosmos - Walter Bradley - video
http://www.vimeo.com/9238831

God Is Not Dead Yet - William Lane Craig - The Revival of Theism In Philosophy since the 1960's
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2008/july/13.22.html?start=1

William Lane Craig lecture on Richard Dawkins book 'The God Delusion' - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3HCthi2i_o

The investigative tool for the hypothesis is this: all the universe's 'links of chain' to the appearance of man may be deduced as 'intelligently designed' with what is termed 'irreducible complexity'. The term 'irreducible complexity' was coined in molecular biology by biochemist Michael Behe PhD. (1952-present) in his book 'Darwin's Black Box'. A list of several articles by Michael Behe defending irreducible complexity in molecular biology are here:

Did Michael Behe State Exaptation has been "Shown" to Produce Irreducible Complexity? Casey Luskin - August 2012
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/08/did_michael_beh063271.html
ID theorist Mike Behe was refused a response in Microbe - September 22, 2013
Excerpt: Dr. Lacey, most publications consider it responsible journalism to publish letters by well-known advocates of views attacked in articles. The purpose, of course, is to avoid misleading readers of the journal by unknowingly misstating or caricaturing a position. In order that your readers will not form a mistaken view of what the intelligent design argument actually states, I ask you to reconsider the decision not to publish my letter.
– Best wishes, Mike Behe
http://www.uncommondescent.com/irreducible-complexity/id-theorist-mike-behe-was-refused-a-response-in-microbe/
Irreducible complexity is best understood by comparison. It is similar to saying each major part of a finely made Swiss watch is necessary for the watch to operate. Take away any part and the watch will fail to operate. Though individual parts of the watch, or even a watch itself, may have some other purpose in some other system, the principle of integration for a specific singular purpose is a very anti-Darwinian concept that steadfastly resists materialistic explanation. In molecular biology the best known example for irreducible complexity, and thus for Intelligent Design, has become the bacterial flagellum.

Bacterial Flagellum - A Sheer Wonder Of Intelligent Design - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/3994630
Souped-Up Hyper-Drive Flagellum Discovered - December 3, 2012
Excerpt: Get a load of this -- a bacterium that packs a gear-driven, seven-engine, magnetic-guided flagellar bundle that gets 0 to 300 micrometers in one second, ten times faster than E. coli.
If you thought the standard bacterial flagellum made the case for intelligent design, wait till you hear the specs on MO-1,,,
Harvard's mastermind of flagellum reverse engineering, this paper describes the Ferrari of flagella.
"Instead of being a simple helically wound propeller driven by a rotary motor, it is a complex organelle consisting of 7 flagella and 24 fibrils that form a tight bundle enveloped by a glycoprotein sheath.... the flagella of MO-1 must rotate individually, and yet the entire bundle functions as a unit to comprise a motility organelle."
To feel the Wow! factor, jump ahead to Figure 6 in the paper. It shows seven engines in one, arranged in a hexagonal array, stylized by the authors in a cross-sectional model that shows them all as gears interacting with 24 smaller gears between them. The flagella rotate one way, and the smaller gears rotate the opposite way to maximize torque while minimizing friction. Download the movie from the Supplemental Information page to see the gears in action.

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/12/souped-up_flage066921.html
How Does a Flagellum Know How Long to Grow? - September 11, 2012
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/09/how_flagella_kn064071.html

An excellent overview on the debate over the Bacterial Flagellum is in the following article (the overview starts about 1/3 of the way into the article).

Libby Anne: Portrait of an atheist feminist - V.J. Torley - November 8, 2012
www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/libby-anne-portrait-of-an-atheist-feminist/

Electron Microscope Photograph of Flagellum Hook-Basal Body
http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/08-08-20images/figure03.jpg
Bacterial Flagellum: Visualizing the Complete Machine In Situ
Excerpt: Electron tomography of frozen-hydrated bacteria, combined with single particle averaging, has produced stunning images of the intact bacterial flagellum, revealing features of the rotor, stator and export apparatus.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S096098220602286X

The Flagellar Filament Cap: Up close micro-photograph and animations of cap - Jonathan M. - August 2013
Excerpt: We are so used to thinking about biological machines at a macroscopic level that it is all too easy to overlook the molecular structure of their individual components. The closer we inspect biochemical systems, such as flagella, the more the elegant design -- as well as the magnitude of the challenge to Darwinism -- becomes apparent.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/08/the_flagellar_f075101.html

Engineering at Its Finest: Bacterial Chemotaxis and Signal Transduction - JonathanM - September 2011
Excerpt: The bacterial flagellum represents not just a problem of irreducible complexity. Rather, the problem extends far deeper than that. What we are now observing is the existence of irreducibly complex systems within irreducibly complex systems. How random mutations, coupled with natural selection, could have assembled such a finely set-up system is a question to which I defy any Darwinist to give a sensible answer.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/09/engineering_at_its_finest_bact050911.html
Biologist Howard Berg at Harvard calls the Bacterial Flagellum
“the most efficient machine in the universe."
The flagellum has steadfastly resisted all attempts to elucidate its plausible origination by Darwinian processes, much less has anyone ever actually evolved a flagellum from scratch in the laboratory;
Genetic Entropy Refutation of Nick Matzke's TTSS (type III secretion system) to Flagellum Evolutionary Narrative:
Excerpt: Comparative genomic analysis show that flagellar genes have been differentially lost in endosymbiotic bacteria of insects. Only proteins involved in protein export within the flagella assembly pathway (type III secretion system and the basal-body) have been kept...
http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/msn153v1

Excerpt: I am convinced that the T3SS is almost certainly younger than the flagellum. If one aligns the amino acid sequences of the flagellar proteins (that have homologous counterparts in the T3SS), and if one also aligns the amino acid sequences of the T3SS proteins, one finds that the T3SS protein amino acid sequences are much more conserved than the amino acid sequences of the flagellar proteins.,,, - LivingstoneMorford - experimental scientist - UD blogger
https://docs.google.com/document/d/19zuJr2ssTYvnH-zlbnlz23sOokPw4WGPHpvbdm7KFv8/edit
Stephen Meyer - T3SS Derived From Bacterial Flagellum (Successful ID Prediction) - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3c-EAzJ8_4U
Phylogenetic Analyses of the Constituents of Type III Protein Secretion Systems
Excerpt: We suggest that the flagellar apparatus was the evolutionary precursor of Type III protein secretion systems.
http://www.horizonpress.com/jmmb/v2/v2n2/02.pdf

Peer-Reviewed Paper Investigating Origin of Information Endorses Irreducible Complexity and Intelligent Design - A.C. McIntosh per Casey Luskin - July 2010
Excerpt: many think that that debate has been settled by the work of Pallen and Matzke where an attempt to explain the origin of the bacterial flagellum rotary motor as a development of the Type 3 secretory system has been made. However, this argument is not robust simply because it is evident that there are features of both mechanisms which are clearly not within the genetic framework of the other.

Presenting the Positive Case for Design - Casey Luskin - February 14, 2012
Excerpt: If you think of the flagellum like an outboard motor, and the T3SS like a squirt gun, the parts they share are the ones that allow them to be mounted on the bracket of a boat. But the parts that give them their distinct functions -- propulsion or injection -- are not shared. I said that thinking you can explain the flagellum simply by referring me to the T3SS is like saying if you can account for the origin of the mounting-bracket on the back of you boat, then you've explained the origin of the motor too -- which obviously makes no sense.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/02/at_north_dakota056351.html

"One fact in favour of the flagellum-first view is that bacteria would have needed propulsion before they needed T3SSs, which are used to attack cells that evolved later than bacteria. Also, flagella are found in a more diverse range of bacterial species than T3SSs. ‘The most parsimonious explanation is that the T3SS arose later,"
Howard Ochman - Biochemist - New Scientist (Feb 16, 2008)
The Non-Flagellar Type III Secretion System Evolved from the Bacterial Flagellum and Diversified into Host-Cell Adapted Systems - September 2012 - Institut Pasteur, Paris, France
http://www.plosgenetics.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pgen.1002983

Michael Behe on Falsifying Intelligent Design - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8jXXJN4o_A
Orr maintains that the theory of intelligent design is not falsifiable. He’s wrong. To falsify design theory a scientist need only experimentally demonstrate that a bacterial flagellum, or any other comparably complex system, could arise by natural selection. If that happened I would conclude that neither flagella nor any system of similar or lesser complexity had to have been designed. In short, biochemical design would be neatly disproved.- Dr Behe in 1997

Genetic analysis of coordinate flagellar and type III - Scott Minnich and Stephen Meyer
Molecular machines display a key signature or hallmark of design, namely, irreducible complexity. In all irreducibly complex systems in which the cause of the system is known by experience or observation, intelligent design or engineering played a role the origin of the system.
http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-download.php?id=389
Michael Behe Hasn't Been Refuted on the Flagellum - March 2011
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/03/michael_behe_hasnt_been_refute044801.html

Bacterial Flagella: A Paradigm for Design – Scott Minnich – Video
http://www.vimeo.com/9032112
The Bacterial Flagellum: A Paradigm for Design - Jonathan M. - Sept. 2012
Excerpt: Indeed, so striking is the appearance of intelligent design that researchers have modelled the assembly process (of the bacterial flagellum) in view of finding inspiration for enhancing industrial operations (McAuley et al.). Not only does the flagellum manifestly exhibit engineering principles, but the engineering involved is far superior to humanity’s best achievements. The flagellum exhibits irreducible complexity in spades. In all of our experience of cause-and-effect, we know that phenomena of this kind are uniformly associated with only one type of cause – one category of explanation – and that is intelligent mind. Intelligent design succeeds at precisely the point at which evolutionary explanations break down.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/106728402/The-Bacterial-Flagellum

Ken Miller's Inaccurate and Biased Evolution Curriculum - Casey Luskin - 2011
Excerpt: One mutation, one part knock out, it can't swim. Put that single gene back in we restore motility. ... knock out one part, put a good copy of the gene back in, and they can swim. By definition the system is irreducibly complex. We've done that with all 35 components of the flagellum, and we get the same effect. - Scott Minnich
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/07/ken_millers_inaccurate_and_bia048321.html
Flagellum - Sean D. Pitman, M.D.
http://www.detectingdesign.com/flagellum.html

The Bacterial Flagellum – Truly An Engineering Marvel! - December 2010
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/the-bacterial-flagellum-truly-an-engineering-marvel/

Here the flagellum is shown to be subject to 'non-local' quantum effects. Non-local quantum effects simply are not with the classical materialistic framework of neo-Darwinism to explain.
INFORMATION AND ENERGETICS OF QUANTUM FLAGELLA MOTOR
Hiroyuki Matsuura, Nobuo Noda, Kazuharu Koide Tetsuya Nemoto and Yasumi Ito
Excerpt from bottom page 7: Note that the physical principle of flagella motor does not belong to classical mechanics, but to quantum mechanics. When we can consider applying quantum physics to flagella motor, we can find out the shift of energetic state and coherent state.
http://www2.ktokai-u.ac.jp/~shi/el08-046.pdf

"we don’t even fully understand the mechanism of rotation (for the flagellum)!"
Jonathan McLatchie, who has studied the flagellum extensively, and was assigned to do his research dissertation project on the importance of RNA-Protein interactions in Caulobacter flagellar gene regulation, under the supervision of Dr. Phil Aldridge, who is an internationally known expert on bacterial flagella
Further confirmation of non-local quantum entanglement in molecular machines:
Persistent dynamic entanglement from classical motion: How bio-molecular machines can generate non-trivial quantum states – November 2011
Excerpt: We also show how conformational changes can be used by an elementary machine to generate entanglement even in unfavorable conditions. In biological systems, similar mechanisms could be exploited by more complex molecular machines or motors.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2126
The manner in which bacteria with flagella move is also very interesting;
Structures and Mechanisms of Bacterial Motility - Marty Player
Excerpt: motile bacteria move in a random running and tumbling pattern when in an isotonic solution. While this type of movement may be totally random in some situations, in others motile bacteria bias this random walk.
http://zebra.sc.edu/smell/marty/marty_doc.html
Bacteria (Hyper-swarming and nylonase) and Evolution - Ian Juby - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DubjzG5r358

Towards the end of the following video is a excellent animation of the 'running and tumbling' motion of bacteria with flagella;

Animations from E O Wilson’s Lord of the Ants - Drew Berry – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hX2e0il1qpg
"A Bit Unprepossessing": Plantinga on the Logic of Dawkins's Blind Watchmaker - Jay W. Richards February 9, 2012
Excerpt: what Dawkins has in mind is something like this: If it's unlikely that a bacterial flagellum could have arisen by chance or the Darwinian mechanism, then any agent that designed the flagellum would be even less likely.
Plantinga finds a fatal problem here. Dawkins defines complexity as the property of something that has parts "arranged in a way that is unlikely to have arisen by chance alone." But God is immaterial and so doesn't have parts in this sense. According to Dawkins's own definition of complexity, therefore, God is not complex. One can make a similar point without invoking God. It doesn't follow that because an agent can produce organized complexity, that the agent is complex. (Frankly, I don't think it makes sense to refer to any agent as "complex.") Organized complexity might very well be a reliable sign of an intelligent agent. So Dawkins's argument against the improbability of God's existence, and, a fortiori, the improbability of intelligent design, fails.

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/02/a_bit_unpreposs056161.html
As well, it has now been demonstrated that the specific sequence complexity, of a functional protein, can be mathematically quantified as functional information bits(Fits).
Functional information and the emergence of bio-complexity:
Robert M. Hazen, Patrick L. Griffin, James M. Carothers, and Jack W. Szostak:
Abstract: Complex emergent systems of many interacting components, including complex biological systems, have the potential to perform quantifiable functions. Accordingly, we define 'functional information,' I(Ex), as a measure of system complexity. For a given system and function, x (e.g., a folded RNA sequence that binds to GTP), and degree of function, Ex (e.g., the RNA-GTP binding energy), I(Ex)= -log2 [F(Ex)], where F(Ex) is the fraction of all possible configurations of the system that possess a degree of function > Ex. Functional information, which we illustrate with letter sequences, artificial life, and biopolymers, thus represents the probability that an arbitrary configuration of a system will achieve a specific function to a specified degree. In each case we observe evidence for several distinct solutions with different maximum degrees of function, features that lead to steps in plots of information versus degree of functions.
http://www.pnas.org/content/104/suppl.1/8574.full
Mathematically Defining Functional Information In Molecular Biology - Kirk Durston - short video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/3995236
Entire video:
http://vimeo.com/1775160

and this paper:
Measuring the functional sequence complexity of proteins - Kirk K Durston, David KY Chiu, David L Abel and Jack T Trevors - 2007
Excerpt: We have extended Shannon uncertainty by incorporating the data variable with a functionality variable. The resulting measured unit, which we call Functional bit (Fit), is calculated from the sequence data jointly with the defined functionality variable. To demonstrate the relevance to functional bioinformatics, a method to measure functional sequence complexity was developed and applied to 35 protein families.,,,
http://www.tbiomed.com/content/4/1/47
At the 17 minute mark of the following video, Winston Ewert speaks on how functional information is measured in proteins:

Proposed Information Metric: Conditional Kolmogorov Complexity (Ewert) - July 2012 - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fm3mm3ofAYU

Here is a brief discussion on a plausible way to more precisely measure the complete information content of a cell as well as measuring Landauer's principle in a cell:
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/uh-oh-is-he-going-to-get-gould-ed/#comment-367651

It is interesting to note that many evolutionists are very evasive if questioned by someone to precisely define functional information. In fact I've seen some die-hard evolutionists deny that information even exists in a cell. Many times evolutionists will try to say information is generated using Claude Shannon's broad definition of information, since 'non-functional' information bits may be considered information in his broad definition of information, yet, when looked at carefully, Shannon information completely fails to explain the generation of functional information.
The Evolution-Lobby’s Useless Definition of Biological Information - Feb. 2010
Excerpt: By wrongly implying that Shannon information is the only “sense used by information theorists,” the NCSE avoids answering more difficult questions like how the information in biological systems becomes functional, or in its own words, “useful.”,,,Since biology is based upon functional information, Darwin-skeptics are interested in the far more important question of, Does neo-Darwinism explain how new functional biological information arises?
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/02/the_evolutionlobbys_useless_de.html

Mutations, epigenetics and the question of information
Excerpt: By definition, a mutation in a gene results in a new allele. There is no question that mutation (defined as any change in the DNA sequence) can increase variety in a population. However, it is not obvious that this necessarily means there is an increase in genomic information.,, If one attempts to apply Shannon’s theory of information, then this can be viewed as an increase. However, Shannon’s theory was not developed to address biological information. It is entirely unsuitable for this since an increase of information by Shannon’s definition can easily be lethal (and an increase in randomness increases Shannon ‘information’).
http://creation.com/mutations-epigenetics-information

Three subsets of sequence complexity and their relevance to biopolymeric information - Abel, Trevors
Excerpt: Three qualitative kinds of sequence complexity exist: random (RSC), ordered (OSC), and functional (FSC).,,, Shannon information theory measures the relative degrees of RSC and OSC. Shannon information theory cannot measure FSC. FSC is invariably associated with all forms of complex biofunction, including biochemical pathways, cycles, positive and negative feedback regulation, and homeostatic metabolism. The algorithmic programming of FSC, not merely its aperiodicity, accounts for biological organization. No empirical evidence exists of either RSC of OSC ever having produced a single instance of sophisticated biological organization. Organization invariably manifests FSC rather than successive random events (RSC) or low-informational self-ordering phenomena (OSC).,,,

Testable hypotheses about FSC

What testable empirical hypotheses can we make about FSC that might allow us to identify when FSC exists? In any of the following null hypotheses [137], demonstrating a single exception would allow falsification. We invite assistance in the falsification of any of the following null hypotheses:

Null hypothesis #1
Stochastic ensembles of physical units cannot program algorithmic/cybernetic function.

Null hypothesis #2
Dynamically-ordered sequences of individual physical units (physicality patterned by natural law causation) cannot program algorithmic/cybernetic function.

Null hypothesis #3
Statistically weighted means (e.g., increased availability of certain units in the polymerization environment) giving rise to patterned (compressible) sequences of units cannot program algorithmic/cybernetic function.

Null hypothesis #4
Computationally successful configurable switches cannot be set by chance, necessity, or any combination of the two, even over large periods of time.

We repeat that a single incident of nontrivial algorithmic programming success achieved without selection for fitness at the decision-node programming level would falsify any of these null hypotheses. This renders each of these hypotheses scientifically testable. We offer the prediction that none of these four hypotheses will be falsified.

http://www.tbiomed.com/content/2/1/29
Kirk Durston - Functional Information In Biopolymers - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMEjF9ZH0x8

The following site has a fairly concise definition for functional information (dFSCI; digital functionally specified complex information) by a blogger called gpuccio:
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/why-secular-and-theistic-darwinists-fear-id/comment-page-2/#comment-363528

As well it is found that Claude Shannon's work on 'communication of information' actually fully supports Intelligent Design as is illustrated in the following video and article:

Shannon Information - Channel Capacity - Perry Marshall - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5457552/

Skeptic's Objection to Information Theory #1:
"DNA is Not a Code"
http://cosmicfingerprints.com/dnanotcode.htm

As well, William Dembski and Robert Marks have shown that the information found in life can be measured. And since the information can be measured it can be used to falsify Darwinian evolution:
"LIFE’S CONSERVATION LAW: Why Darwinian Evolution Cannot Create Biological Information":
Excerpt: Though not denying Darwinian evolution or even limiting its role in the history of life, the Law of Conservation of Information shows that Darwinian evolution is inherently teleological. Moreover, it shows that this teleology can be measured in precise information-theoretic terms. http://evoinfo.org/publications/lifes-conservation-law/
William Dembski Is Interviewed By Casey Luskin About Conservation Of Information - Audio
http://intelligentdesign.podomatic.com/player/web/2009-10-15T13_14_01-07_00

Dr. William Dembski, "An Informative-Theoretic Proof of God's Existence" - video - June 2012
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuarexO9p0g

William Dembski - Order and Design: Philosophical Issues - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUnj5Uvjvdo

Dr. Dembski has emphasized that the Law of Conservation of Information (LCI) is clearly differentiated from the common definition of Theistic Evolution since mainstream Theistic evolutionists, such as Ken Miller and Francis Collins, hold that the Design/Information found in life is not separable from the purely material processes of the universe, whereas Dembski and Marks are clearly saying the Design/Information found in life is detectable, can be separated from the material processes we see in the universe, and "can be measured in precise information-theoretic terms". In other words, the Dembski-Marks paper shows in order for gradual evolution to actually be true it cannot be random Darwinian evolution and that a 'Intelligent Designer' will have to somehow provide the additional functional information needed to make gradual evolution of increased functional complexity possible. Thus now the theoretical underpinnings, of random functional information generation by material processes, are completely removed from Darwinian ideology.
Yet even though God could very well have created life gradually, did God use gradual processes to create life on Earth? I don't think so. There are many solid lines of evidence pointing to the fact that the principle of Genetic Entropy (loss of functional information) is the true principle for all biological adaptations and that no gradual 'material processes' are involved in the "evolution" a lifeform, to greater heights of functional complexity, once God has created a Parent Kind/Species. This following site has a general outline of the evidence that argues forcefully against the gradual model of Theistic evolutionists:

Why Secular and Theistic Darwinists Fear ID - September 2010
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/why-secular-and-theistic-darwinists-fear-id/#comment-363425

The main problem, for the secular model of neo-Darwinian evolution to overcome, is that no one has ever seen purely material processes generate functional 'prescriptive' information.
The Capabilities of Chaos and Complexity: David L. Abel - Null Hypothesis For Information Generation - 2009
Excerpt of conclusion pg. 42: "To focus the scientific community’s attention on its own tendencies toward overzealous metaphysical imagination bordering on “wish-fulfillment,” we propose the following readily falsifiable null hypothesis, and invite rigorous experimental attempts to falsify it: “Physicodynamics cannot spontaneously traverse The Cybernetic Cut: physicodynamics alone cannot organize itself into formally functional systems requiring algorithmic optimization, computational halting, and circuit integration.” A single exception of non trivial, unaided spontaneous optimization of formal function by truly natural process would falsify this null hypothesis."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2662469/
Can We Falsify Any Of The Following Null Hypothesis (For Information Generation)
1) Mathematical Logic
2) Algorithmic Optimization
3) Cybernetic Programming
4) Computational Halting
5) Integrated Circuits
6) Organization (e.g. homeostatic optimization far from equilibrium)
7) Material Symbol Systems (e.g. genetics)
8) Any Goal Oriented bona fide system
9) Language
10) Formal function of any kind
11) Utilitarian work

http://mdpi.com/1422-0067/10/1/247/ag

Is Life Unique? David L. Abel - January 2012
Concluding Statement: The scientific method itself cannot be reduced to mass and energy. Neither can language, translation, coding and decoding, mathematics, logic theory, programming, symbol systems, the integration of circuits, computation, categorizations, results tabulation, the drawing and discussion of conclusions. The prevailing Kuhnian paradigm rut of philosophic physicalism is obstructing scientific progress, biology in particular. There is more to life than chemistry. All known life is cybernetic. Control is choice-contingent and formal, not physicodynamic.
http://www.mdpi.com/2075-1729/2/1/106/

"Nonphysical formalism not only describes, but preceded physicality and the Big Bang
Formalism prescribed, organized and continues to govern physicodynamics."

http://www.mdpi.com/2075-1729/2/1/106/ag

The Law of Physicodynamic Insufficiency - Dr David L. Abel - November 2010
Excerpt: “If decision-node programming selections are made randomly or by law rather than with purposeful intent, no non-trivial (sophisticated) function will spontaneously arise.”,,, After ten years of continual republication of the null hypothesis with appeals for falsification, no falsification has been provided. The time has come to extend this null hypothesis into a formal scientific prediction: “No non trivial algorithmic/computational utility will ever arise from chance and/or necessity alone.”
http://www-qa.scitopics.com/The_Law_of_Physicodynamic_Insufficiency.html

The Law of Physicodynamic Incompleteness - David L. Abel - August 2011
Summary: “The Law of Physicodynamic Incompleteness” states that inanimate physicodynamics is completely inadequate to generate, or even explain, the mathematical nature of physical interactions (the purely formal laws of physics and chemistry). The Law further states that physicodynamic factors cannot cause formal processes and procedures leading to sophisticated function. Chance and necessity alone cannot steer, program or optimize algorithmic/computational success to provide desired non-trivial utility.
http://www.scitopics.com/The_Law_of_Physicodynamic_Incompleteness.html

The GS (genetic selection) Principle – David L. Abel – 2009
Excerpt: Stunningly, information has been shown not to increase in the coding regions of DNA with evolution. Mutations do not produce increased information. Mira et al (65) showed that the amount of coding in DNA actually decreases with evolution of bacterial genomes, not increases. This paper parallels Petrov’s papers starting with (66) showing a net DNA loss with Drosophila evolution (67). Konopka (68) found strong evidence against the contention of Subba Rao et al (69, 70) that information increases with mutations. The information content of the coding regions in DNA does not tend to increase with evolution as hypothesized. Konopka also found Shannon complexity not to be a suitable indicator of evolutionary progress over a wide range of evolving genes. Konopka’s work applies Shannon theory to known functional text. Kok et al. (71) also found that information does not increase in DNA with evolution. As with Konopka, this finding is in the context of the change in mere Shannon uncertainty. The latter is a far more forgiving definition of information than that required for prescriptive information (PI) (21, 22, 33, 72). It is all the more significant that mutations do not program increased PI. Prescriptive information either instructs or directly produces formal function. No increase in Shannon or Prescriptive information occurs in duplication. What the above papers show is that not even variation of the duplication produces new information, not even Shannon “information.”
http://www.bioscience.org/fbs/getfile.php?FileName=/2009/v14/af/3426/3426.pdf
http://www.us.net/life/index.htm
Dr. Don Johnson explains the difference between Shannon Information and Prescriptive Information, as well as explaining 'the cybernetic cut', in this following Podcast:

Programming of Life - Dr. Donald Johnson interviewed by Casey Luskin - audio podcast
http://www.idthefuture.com/2010/11/programming_of_life.html

Programming of Life - Information - Shannon, Functional & Prescriptive - video
http://www.youtube.com/user/Programmingoflife#p/c/AFDF33F11E2FB840/1/h3s1BXfZ-3w

While neo-Darwinian evolution has no evidence that material processes can generate functional prescriptive information, Intelligent Design does have 'proof of principle' that information can 'locally' violate the second law and generate potential energy:
Maxwell's demon demonstration (knowledge of a particle's position) turns information into energy - November 2010
Excerpt: Until now, demonstrating the conversion of information to energy has been elusive, but University of Tokyo physicist Masaki Sano and colleagues have succeeded in demonstrating it in a nano-scale experiment. In a paper published in Nature Physics they describe how they coaxed a Brownian particle to travel upwards on a "spiral-staircase-like" potential energy created by an electric field solely on the basis of information on its location. As the particle traveled up the staircase it gained energy from moving to an area of higher potential, and the team was able to measure precisely how much energy had been converted from information.
http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-11-maxwell-demon-energy.html

Demonic device converts information to energy - 2010
Excerpt: "This is a beautiful experimental demonstration that information has a thermodynamic content," says Christopher Jarzynski, a statistical chemist at the University of Maryland in College Park. In 1997, Jarzynski formulated an equation to define the amount of energy that could theoretically be converted from a unit of information2; the work by Sano and his team has now confirmed this equation. "This tells us something new about how the laws of thermodynamics work on the microscopic scale," says Jarzynski.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=demonic-device-converts-inform

“It is CSI that enables Maxwell’s demon to outsmart a thermodynamic system tending toward thermal equilibrium”
William Dembki Intelligent Design, pg. 159
http://www.uncommondescent.com/physics/landmark-1929-physics-paper-on-the-decrease-of-entropy-in-a-thermodynamic-system-by-the-intervention-of-intelligent-beings/#comment-483427
Maxwell's Demon and the Nature of Information - video
http://www.uncommondescent.com/physics/csi-and-maxwells-demon/

Two papers investigate the thermodynamics of quantum systems – July 8, 2013
Excerpt: As one of the pillars of the natural sciences, thermodynamics plays an important role in all processes that involve heat, energy, and work. While the principles of thermodynamics can predict the amount of work done in classical systems, for quantum systems there is instead a distribution of many possible values of work. Two new papers published in Physical Review Letters have proposed theoretical schemes that would significantly ease the measurement of the statistics of work done by quantum systems.,,,
“Fundamentally, we could start exploring quantum thermodynamics, which puts together a genuine quantum approach and the rock-solid foundations of thermodynamics,” he said. “We (and a few other researchers) are trying to do it from an information theoretic viewpoint, hoping to get new insight into this fascinating area.,,,

http://phys.org/news/2013-07-papers-thermodynamics-quantum.html
Maxwell's demon can use quantum information to generate work - Dec. 18, 2013
http://phys.org/news/2013-12-maxwell-demon-quantum.html
"Is there a real connection between entropy in physics and the entropy of information? ....The equations of information theory and the second law are the same, suggesting that the idea of entropy is something fundamental..."
Siegfried, Dallas Morning News, 5/14/90, [Quotes Robert W. Lucky, Ex. Director of Research, AT&T, Bell Laboratories & John A. Wheeler, of Princeton & Univ. of TX, Austin]
How Could God Interact with the World? (William Dembski)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5Cn8NQL0rM

After much reading, research, and debate with evolutionists, I find the principle of Genetic Entropy (loss of functional information) to be the true principle for all 'beneficial' biological adaptations which directly contradicts unguided neo-Darwinian evolution. As well, unlike Darwinian evolution which can claim no primary principles in science to rest its claim on for the generation of functional information, Genetic Entropy can rest its foundation in science directly on the twin pillars of the Second Law of Thermodynamics and on the Law of Conservation Of Information(LCI; Dembski,Marks)(Null Hypothesis;Abel). The first phase of Genetic Entropy, any life-form will go through, holds all sub-speciation adaptations away from a parent species, which increase fitness/survivability to a new environment for the sub-species, will always come at a cost of the functional information that is already present in the parent species genome. This is, for the vast majority of times, measurable as loss of genetic diversity in genomes. This phase of Genetic Entropy is verified, in one line of evidence, by the fact all population genetics' studies show a consistent loss of genetic diversity from a parent species for all sub-species that have adapted away (Maciej Giertych). This fact is also well testified to by plant and animal breeders who know there are strict limits to the amount of variability you can expect when breeding for any particular genetic trait. The second line of evidence, this primary phase of the principle of Genetic Entropy is being rigorously obeyed, is found in the fact the 'Fitness Test' against a parent species of bacteria has never been violated by any sub-species of a parent bacteria.
Testing Evolution in the Lab With Biologic Institute's Ann Gauger - podcast with link to peer-reviewed paper
Excerpt: Dr. Gauger experimentally tested two-step adaptive paths that should have been within easy reach for bacterial populations. Listen in and learn what Dr. Gauger was surprised to find as she discusses the implications of these experiments for Darwinian evolution. Dr. Gauger's paper, "Reductive Evolution Can Prevent Populations from Taking Simple Adaptive Paths to High Fitness,".
http://intelligentdesign.podomatic.com/entry/2010-05-10T15_24_13-07_00
For a broad outline of the 'Fitness test', required to be passed to show a violation of the principle of Genetic Entropy, please see the following video and articles:

Is Antibiotic Resistance evidence for evolution? - 'The Fitness Test' - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/3995248

This following study demonstrated that bacteria which had gained antibiotic resistance by mutation are less fit than wild type bacteria::
Testing the Biological Fitness of Antibiotic Resistant Bacteria - 2008
Excerpt: Therefore, in order to simulate competition in the wild, bacteria must be grown on minimal media. Minimal media mimics better what bacteria experience in a natural environment over a period of time. This is the place where fitness can be accurately assessed. Given a rich media, they grow about the same.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/aid/v2/n1/darwin-at-drugstore
Also of note; there appears to be a in-built (designed) mechanism, which kicks in during starvation, which allows wild type bacteria to more robustly resist antibiotics than 'well fed' bacteria;

Starving bacteria fight antibiotics harder? - November 2011
http://www.uncommondescent.com/news/starving-bacteria-fight-antibiotics-harder/
Thank Goodness the NCSE Is Wrong: Fitness Costs Are Important to Evolutionary Microbiology
Excerpt: it (an antibiotic resistant bacterium) reproduces slower than it did before it was changed. This effect is widely recognized, and is called the fitness cost of antibiotic resistance. It is the existence of these costs and other examples of the limits of evolution that call into question the neo-Darwinian story of macroevolution.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/03/thank_goodness_the_ncse_is_wro.html

Scientists unlock a 'microbial Pompeii' - February 23, 2014
Excerpt: "...The researchers discovered that the ancient human oral microbiome already contained the basic genetic machinery for antibiotic resistance more than eight centuries before the invention of the first therapeutic antibiotics in the 1940s..."
http://phys.org/news/2014-02-scientists-microbial-pompeii.html

A Tale of Two Falsifications of Evolution - September 2011
Excerpt: “Scientists were surprised at how fast bacteria developed resistance to the miracle antibiotic drugs when they were developed less than a century ago. Now scientists at McMaster University have found that resistance has been around for at least 30,000 years.”
http://crev.info/content/110904-a_tale_of_two_falsifications_of_evolution

(Ancient) Cave bacteria resistant to antibiotics - April 2012
Excerpt: Antibiotic-resistant bacteria cut off from the outside world for more than four million years have been found in a deep cave. The discovery is surprising because drug resistance is widely believed to be the result of too much treatment.,,, “Our study shows that antibiotic resistance is hard-wired into bacteria. It could be billions of years old, but we have only been trying to understand it for the last 70 years,” said Dr Gerry Wright, from McMaster University in Canada, who has analysed the microbes.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/health/cave-bacteria-resistant-to-antibiotics-1-2229183#
Antibiotic resistance is ancient - September 2011
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v477/n7365/full/nature10388.html?WT.ec_id=NATURE-20110922

Evolution - Tested And Falsified - Don Patton - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4036803

List Of Degraded Molecular Abilities Of Antibiotic Resistant Bacteria:
http://www.trueorigin.org/bacteria01.asp

Of related note to developing an antibiotic that is beyond Dr. Behe's 'Edge of Evolution' (2 protein-protein binding site limit)
New class of antibiotics discovered by chemists - March 7, 2014
Excerpt: Researchers who screened 1.2 million compounds found that the oxadiazole inhibits a penicillin-binding protein, PBP2a, and the biosynthesis of the cell wall that enables MRSA to resist other drugs.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/03/140307165953.htm
The following study surveys four decades of experimental work, and solidly backs up the preceding conclusion that there has never been an observed violation of genetic entropy:
“The First Rule of Adaptive Evolution”: Break or blunt any functional coded element whose loss would yield a net fitness gain - Michael Behe - December 2010
Excerpt: In its most recent issue The Quarterly Review of Biology has published a review by myself of laboratory evolution experiments of microbes going back four decades.,,, The gist of the paper is that so far the overwhelming number of adaptive (that is, helpful) mutations seen in laboratory evolution experiments are either loss or modification of function. Of course we had already known that the great majority of mutations that have a visible effect on an organism are deleterious. Now, surprisingly, it seems that even the great majority of helpful mutations degrade the genome to a greater or lesser extent.,,, I dub it “The First Rule of Adaptive Evolution”: Break or blunt any functional coded element whose loss would yield a net fitness gain.
http://behe.uncommondescent.com/2010/12/the-first-rule-of-adaptive-evolution/
Michael Behe talks about the preceding paper on this podcast:

Michael Behe: Challenging Darwin, One Peer-Reviewed Paper at a Time - December 2010
http://intelligentdesign.podomatic.com/player/web/2010-12-23T11_53_46-08_00

Are You Looking for the Simplest and Clearest Argument for Intelligent Design? - Granville Sewell (2nd Law) - video
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/02/looking_for_the056711.html
Physicist Rob Sheldon offers some thoughts on Sal Cordova vs. Granville Sewell on 2nd Law Thermo - July 5, 2012
Excerpt: This is where Granville derives the potency of his argument, since a living organism certainly shows unusual permutations of the atoms, and thus has stat mech entropy that via Boltzmann, must obey the 2nd law. If life violates this, then it must not be lawfully possible for evolution to happen (without an input of work or information.)
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/physicist-rob-sheldon-offers-some-thoughts-on-sal-cordova-vs-granville-sewell-on-2nd-law-thermo/
Where's the substantiating evidence for neo-Darwinism?
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1q-PBeQELzT4pkgxB2ZOxGxwv6ynOixfzqzsFlCJ9jrw/edit

The previously listed 'fitness test', and paper by Dr. Behe, fairly conclusively demonstrates 'optimal information' was originally encoded within a parent bacteria/bacterium by God, and has not been added to by any 'teleological' methods in the beneficial adaptations of the sub-species of bacteria. Thus the inference to Genetic Entropy, i.e. that God has not specifically moved within nature in a teleological manner, to gradually increase the functional information of a genome, still holds as true for the principle of Genetic Entropy.

It seems readily apparent to me that to conclusively demonstrate God has moved within nature, in a teleological manner, to provide the sub-species bacteria with additional functional information over the 'optimal' genome of its parent species, then the fitness test must be passed by the sub-species against the parent species. If the fitness test is shown to be passed then the new molecular function, which provides the more robust survivability for the sub-species, must be calculated to its additional Functional Information Bits (Fits) it has gained in the beneficial adaptation, and then be found to be greater than 140 Fits. 140 Fits is what has now been generously set by Kirk Durston as the maximum limit of Functional Information which can reasonably be expected to be generated by the natural processes of the universe over the entire age of the universe (The actual limit is most likely to be around 40 Fits)(Of note: I have not seen any evidence to suggest that purely material processes can exceed the much more constrained '2 protein-protein binding site limit', for functional information/complexity generation, found by Michael Behe in his book "The Edge Of Evolution"). This fitness test, and calculation, must be done to rigorously establish materialistic processes did not generate the functional information (Fits), and to rigorously establish that teleological processes were indeed involved in the increase of Functional Complexity of the beneficially adapted sub-species. The second and final phase of Genetic Entropy, outlined by John Sanford in his book Genetic Entropy & the Mystery of the Genome, is when 'slightly detrimental' mutations, which are far below the power of natural selection to remove from a genome, slowly build up in a species/kind over long periods of time and lead to Genetic Meltdown.

Evolution Vs Genetic Entropy - Andy McIntosh - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4028086

The first effect to be obviously noticed in the evidence, for the Genetic Entropy principle, is the loss of potential for morphological variability of individual sub-species of a kind. This loss of potential for morphological variability first takes place for the extended lineages of sub-species within a kind, and increases with time, and then gradually works in to the more ancient lineages of the kind, as the 'mutational load' of slightly detrimental mutations slowly builds up over time. This following paper, though of evolutionary bent, offers a classic example of the effects of Genetic Entropy over deep time of millions of years:
A Cambrian Peak in Morphological Variation Within Trilobite Species; Webster
Excerpt: The distribution of polymorphic traits in cladistic character-taxon matrices reveals that the frequency and extent of morphological variation in 982 trilobite species are greatest early in the evolution of the group: Stratigraphically old and/or phylogenetically basal taxa are significantly more variable than younger and/or more derived taxa.
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/317/5837/499
The final effect of Genetic Entropy is when the entire spectrum of the species of a kind slowly start to succumb to 'Genetic Meltdown', and to go extinct in the fossil record. The occurs because the mutational load, of the slowly accumulating 'slightly detrimental mutations' in the genomes, becomes too great for each individual species of the kind to bear. From repeated radiations from ancient lineages in the fossil record, and from current adaptive radiation studies which show strong favor for ancient lineages radiating, the ancient lineages of a kind appear to have the most 'robust genomes' and are thus most resistant to Genetic Meltdown. All this consistent evidence makes perfect sense from the Genetic Entropy standpoint, in that Genetic Entropy holds God created each parent kind with a optimal genome for all future sub-speciation events. My overwhelming intuition, from all the evidence I've seen so far, and from Theology, is this; Once God creates a parent kind, the parent kind is encoded with optimal information for the specific purpose to which God has created the kind to exist, and God has chosen, in His infinite wisdom, to strictly limit the extent to which He will act within nature to 'evolve' the sub-species of the parent kind to greater heights of functional complexity. Thus the Biblically compatible principle of Genetic Entropy is found to be in harmony with the second law of thermodynamics and with the strict limit found for material processes ever generating any meaningful amount of functional information on their own (LCI: Dembski - Marks)(Abel; Null Hypothesis).

As a side light to this, it should be clearly pointed out that we know, for 100% certainty, that Intelligence can generate functional information i.e. irreducible complexity. We generate a large amount of functional information, which is well beyond the reach of the random processes of the universe, every time we write a single paragraph of a letter (+700 Fits average). The true question we should be asking is this, "Can totally natural processes ever generate functional information?", especially since totally natural processes have never been observed generating any functional information whatsoever from scratch (Kirk Durston). This following short video lays out the completely legitimate scientific basis for inferring Intelligent Design from what we presently observe:

Stephen Meyer: What is the origin of the digital information found in DNA? - short video
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/08/stephen_meyer_on_intelligent_d037271.html

As well, 'pure transcendent information' is now shown to be 'conserved'. (i.e. it is shown that all transcendent information which can possibly exist, for all possible physical/material events, past, present, and future, already must exist.) This is since transcendent information exercises direct dominion of the foundational 'material' entity of this universe, energy, which cannot be created or destroyed by any known 'material' means. i.e. First Law of Thermodynamics.

Conservation Of Transcendent/Quantum Information - 2007 - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/3995275

This following experiment verified the 'conservation of transcendent/quantum information' using a far more rigorous approach;
Quantum no-hiding theorem experimentally confirmed for first time
Excerpt: In the classical world, information can be copied and deleted at will. In the quantum world, however, the conservation of quantum information means that information cannot be created nor destroyed. This concept stems from two fundamental theorems of quantum mechanics: the no-cloning theorem and the no-deleting theorem. A third and related theorem, called the no-hiding theorem, addresses information loss in the quantum world. According to the no-hiding theorem, if information is missing from one system (which may happen when the system interacts with the environment), then the information is simply residing somewhere else in the Universe; in other words, the missing information cannot be hidden in the correlations between a system and its environment. (This experiment provides experimental proof that the teleportation of quantum information in this universe must be complete and instantaneous.)
http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-03-quantum-no-hiding-theorem-experimentally.html
These following studies verified the violation of the first law of thermodynamics that I had suspected in the preceding 2007 video:
How Teleportation Will Work -
Excerpt: In 1993, the idea of teleportation moved out of the realm of science fiction and into the world of theoretical possibility. It was then that physicist Charles Bennett and a team of researchers at IBM confirmed that quantum teleportation was possible, but only if the original object being teleported was destroyed. --- As predicted, the original photon no longer existed once the replica was made.
http://science.howstuffworks.com/teleportation1.htm

Quantum Teleportation - IBM Research Page
Excerpt: "it would destroy the original (photon) in the process,,"
http://researcher.ibm.com/view_project.php?id=2862

The Origins of Quantum Teleportation - Charles Bennett - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00ZvkPgy7-Y

Researchers Succeed in Quantum Teleportation of Light Waves - April 2011
Excerpt: In this experiment, researchers in Australia and Japan were able to transfer quantum information from one place to another without having to physically move it. It was destroyed in one place and instantly resurrected in another, “alive” again and unchanged. This is a major advance, as previous teleportation experiments were either very slow or caused some information to be lost.
http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-04/quantum-teleportation-breakthrough-could-lead-instantanous-computing

Unconditional Quantum Teleportation - abstract
Excerpt: This is the first realization of unconditional quantum teleportation where every state entering the device is actually teleported,,
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/282/5389/706
Of note: conclusive evidence for the violation of the First Law of Thermodynamics is firmly found in the preceding experiment when coupled with the complete displacement of the infinite transcendent information of "Photon c":
http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AYmaSrBPNEmGZGM4ejY3d3pfMzBmcjR0eG1neg

In extension to the 2007 video, the following video and article shows quantum teleportation breakthroughs have actually shed a little light on exactly what, or more precisely on exactly Whom, has created this universe:

Scientific Evidence For God (Logos) Creating The Universe - 2008 - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/3995300

Quantum Evidence for a Theistic Universe
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1agaJIWjPWHs5vtMx5SkpaMPbantoP471k0lNBUXg0Xo/edit

Can Photons really come from literally 'Nothing' as Lawrence Krauss maintains???
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BMIBqtuT1haTuDRAvPIrVaiZh7glnC7ypnVB8pNnMyc/edit

It is also very interesting to note that the quantum state of a photon is actually defined as 'infinite information' in its uncollapsed quantum wave state:
Quantum Computing - Stanford Encyclopedia
Excerpt: Theoretically, a single qubit can store an infinite amount of information, yet when measured (and thus collapsing the Quantum Wave state) it yields only the classical result (0 or 1),,,
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-quantcomp/#2.1

Explaining Information Transfer in Quantum Teleportation: Armond Duwell †‡ University of Pittsburgh
Excerpt: In contrast to a classical bit, the description of a (photon) qubit requires an infinite amount of information. The amount of information is infinite because two real numbers are required in the expansion of the state vector of a two state quantum system (Jozsa 1997, 1) --- Concept 2. is used by Bennett, et al. Recall that they infer that since an infinite amount of information is required to specify a (photon) qubit, an infinite amount of information must be transferred to teleport.
http://www.cas.umt.edu/phil/faculty/duwell/DuwellPSA2K.pdf
It should be noted in the preceding paper that Duwell, though he never challenges the mathematical definition of a photon qubit as infinite information, tries to refute Bennett's interpretation of infinite information transfer in teleportation because of what he believes are 'time constraints' which would prohibit teleporting 'backwards in time'. Yet Duwell fails to realize that information is its own completely unique transcendent entity, completely separate from any energy-matter, space-time, constraints in the first place.

This following recent paper and experiments, on top of the previously listed 'conservation of quantum information' papers, pretty much blew a hole in Duwell's objection to Bennett, of teleporting infinite information 'backwards in time', simply because he believed there was no such path, or mechanism, to do so:
Time travel theory avoids grandfather paradox - July 2010
Excerpt: “In the new paper, the scientists explore a particular version of CTCs based on combining quantum teleportation with post-selection, resulting in a theory of post-selected CTCs (P-CTCs). ,,,The formalism of P-CTCs shows that such quantum time travel can be thought of as a kind of quantum tunneling backwards in time, which can take place even in the absence of a classical path from future to past,,, “P-CTCs might also allow time travel in spacetimes without general-relativistic closed timelike curves,” they conclude. “If nature somehow provides the nonlinear dynamics afforded by final-state projection, then it is possible for particles (and, in principle, people) to tunnel from the future to the past.”
http://www.physorg.com/news198948917.html

Physicists describe method to observe timelike entanglement - January 2011
Excerpt: In "ordinary" quantum entanglement, two particles possess properties that are inherently linked with each other, even though the particles may be spatially separated by a large distance. Now, physicists S. Jay Olson and Timothy C. Ralph from the University of Queensland have shown that it's possible to create entanglement between regions of spacetime that are separated in time but not in space, and then to convert the timelike entanglement into normal spacelike entanglement. They also discuss the possibility of using this timelike entanglement from the quantum vacuum for a process they call "teleportation in time." "To me, the exciting aspect of this result (that entanglement exists between the future and past) is that it is quite a general property of nature and opens the door to new creativity, since we know that entanglement can be viewed as a resource for quantum technology," Olson told PhysOrg.com.
http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-01-physicists-method-timelike-entanglement.html

Physics team entangles photons that never coexisted in time - May 28, 2013
Excerpt: Researchers at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem have succeeded in causing entanglement swapping between photons that never coexisted in time.,, The idea seems not just counterintuitive, but impossible—that photons could be entangled that never existed at the same time,,,
In this new effort, the team in Israel,, has proven it's possible by actually doing it.
Entanglement is, of course, where the quantum states of two particles are linked—what happens to one happens to the other regardless of the distance between them. This new work shows that they can be linked via time as well.
To prove it, the researchers first used a laser to cause entanglement between a pair of photons, P1, P2. They then measured the polarization of P1, which was immediately followed by the entangling of another pair of photons, P3, P4. This was followed by measuring P2 and P3 simultaneously and causing them to become entangled with one another—a process known as projective measurement. Then, P4 was measured. Measuring P1 caused its demise of course—before P4 was born—but the measurement of P4 showed that it had become entangled with P1 nevertheless, if only for a very short period of time.
The researchers suggest that the outcome of their experiment shows that entanglement is not a truly physical property, at least not in a tangible sense. To say that two photons are entangled, they write, doesn't mean they have to exist at the same time. It shows that quantum events don't always have a parallel in the observable world.

http://phys.org/news/2013-05-physics-team-entangles-photons-coexisted.html
Hmmm, entanglement being able to transcend not only space but now transcend time as well. But aren't events that transcend time and space suppose to be impossible in the atheist's materialistic worldview? It should also be noted that the preceding experiments pretty much dots all the i's and crosses all the t's as far as concretely establishing 'transcendent information' as its own unique entity. Its own unique entity that is completely separate from, and dominate of, space-time, matter and energy.

The following excerpt is also of interest to this issue of time constraints in quantum mechanics:
Solving the quantum mysteries - John Gribbin
Excerpt: As all physicists learn at university (and most promptly forget) the full version of the wave equation has two sets of solutions -- one corresponding to the familiar simple Schrödinger equation, and the other to a kind of mirror image Schrödinger equation describing the flow of negative energy into the past.
http://www.lifesci.sussex.ac.uk/home/John_Gribbin/quantum.htm#Solving
As well, I also have another reason to object to Duwell's complaint of 'no mechanism' for information travel to the past, in that I firmly believe Biblical prophecy has actually been precisely fulfilled by Israel's 'miraculous' rebirth as a nation in 1948, as this following video makes clear:

The Precisely Fulfilled Prophecy Of Israel Becoming A Nation In 1948 - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4041241

Restoration Of Israel and Jerusalem In Prophecy (doing the math) - Chuck Missler – video
http://www.metacafe.com/w/8598581

This following video shows one reason why I personally know there is much more going on in the world than what the materialistic philosophy would lead us to believe:

Miracle Testimony - One Easter Sunday Sunrise Service - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/3995314

More supporting evidence for the transcendent nature of information, and how it interacts with energy, is found in these following studies:
Single photons to soak up data:
Excerpt: the orbital angular momentum of a photon can take on an infinite number of values. Since a photon can also exist in a superposition of these states, it could – in principle – be encoded with an infinite amount of information.
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/7201
Ultra-Dense Optical Storage - on One Photon
Excerpt: Researchers at the University of Rochester have made an optics breakthrough that allows them to encode an entire image’s worth of data into a photon, slow the image down for storage, and then retrieve the image intact.,,, Quantum mechanics dictates some strange things at that scale, so that bit of light could be thought of as both a particle and a wave. As a wave, it passed through all parts of the stencil at once, carrying the "shadow" of the UR with it.
http://www.physorg.com/news88439430.html
This following experiment clearly shows information is not an 'emergent property' of any solid material basis as is dogmatically asserted by some materialists:
Converting Quantum Bits: Physicists Transfer Information Between Matter and Light
Excerpt: A team of physicists at the Georgia Institute of Technology has taken a significant step toward the development of quantum communications systems by successfully transferring quantum information from two different groups of atoms onto a single photon.
http://gtresearchnews.gatech.edu/newsrelease/quantumtrans.htm
The following articles show that even atoms (Ions) are subject to teleportation:

Of note: An ion is an atom or molecule in which the total number of electrons is not equal to the total number of protons, giving it a net positive or negative electrical charge.
Ions have been teleported successfully for the first time by two independent research groups
Excerpt: In fact, copying isn't quite the right word for it. In order to reproduce the quantum state of one atom in a second atom, the original has to be destroyed. This is unavoidable - it is enforced by the laws of quantum mechanics, which stipulate that you can't 'clone' a quantum state. In principle, however, the 'copy' can be indistinguishable from the original (that was destroyed),,,
http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/Issues/2004/October/beammeup.asp
Atom takes a quantum leap - 2009
Excerpt: Ytterbium ions have been 'teleported' over a distance of a metre.,,,
"What you're moving is information, not the actual atoms," says Chris Monroe, from the Joint Quantum Institute at the University of Maryland in College Park and an author of the paper. But as two particles of the same type differ only in their quantum states, the transfer of quantum information is equivalent to moving the first particle to the location of the second.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2171769/posts

Physicists set new record for quantum teleportation with matter qubits - Apr 16, 2013
Excerpt: "The greatest significance of our work is the dramatic increase in efficiency compared to previous realizations of matter-matter teleportation," Nölleke said. "Besides, it is the first demonstration of matter-matter teleportation between truly independent systems and constitutes the current record in distance of 21 m. The previous record was 1 m."
http://phys.org/news/2013-04-physicists-quantum-teleportation-qubits.html
Quantum Entanglement and Teleportation - Anton Zeilinger - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5705317/

New Breakthrough in (Quantum) Teleportation - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xqZI31udJg
Quote from preceding video:
"There are 10^28 atoms in the human body.,, The amount of data contained in the whole human,, is 3.02 x 10^32 gigabytes of information. Using a high bandwidth transfer that data would take about 4.5 x 10^18 years to teleport 1 time. That is 350,000 times the age of the universe."
for comparison sake:
"The theoretical (information) density of DNA is you could store the total world information, which is 1.8 zetabytes, at least in 2011, in about 4 grams of DNA." (a zettabyte is one billion trillion or 10^21 bytes of digital data)
Sriram Kosuri PhD. - Wyss Institute
This following paper is fairly good for establishing the primacy of transcendent information in the 'reality' of this universe:

What is Truth?
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dc8z67wz_3g3vnsmcn

It is also interesting to note that a Compact Disc crammed with information on it weighs exactly the same as a CD with no information on it whatsoever.,, Here are a few videos reflecting on some of the characteristics of transcendent information:

Information – Elusive but Tangible – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WytNkw1xOIc

Information? What Is It Really? Professor Andy McIntosh - video
http://www.metacafe.com/w/4739025

Information? - What is it really? Brief Discussion on the Quantum view of information:
https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1l1Qo10-oC-x6uEVQWWP9smT7xYduByADxLmuoOTvE-0

The role of each conscious observer, and the choice(s) of each conscious observer, and the specific operations of logic, used to achieve quantum teleportation in the teleportation experiment are summarized on the following site:
Quantum Teleportation - A summary
Excerpt: Assume that Alice and Bob share an entangled qubit ab. That is, Alice has one half, a, and Bob has the other half, b. Let c denote the qubit Alice wishes to transmit to Bob.
Alice applies a unitary operation on the qubits ac and measures (i.e. consciously observes) the result to obtain two classical bits. In this process, the two qubits are destroyed. Bob's qubit, b, now contains information about c; however, the information is somewhat randomized. More specifically, Bob's qubit b is in one of four states uniformly chosen at random and Bob cannot obtain any information about c from his qubit.
Alice provides her two measured classical bits, which indicate which of the four states Bob possesses. Bob applies a unitary transformation which depends on the classical bits he obtains from Alice, transforming his qubit into an identical re-creation of the qubit c.
,,,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_teleportation#A_summary

summary of logical operations
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_teleportation#The_result
But to reflect just a bit more on the teleportation experiment itself, is interesting to note that scientists can only 'destroy' a photon in these quantum teleportation experiments. No one has 'created' a photon as of yet. I firmly believe man shall never do as such, since I hold only God is infinite, and perfect, in information/knowledge.
Job 38:19-20
“What is the way to the abode of light? And where does darkness reside? Can you take them to their places? Do you know the paths to their dwellings?"
Further reflection on the quantum teleportation experiment:

That a photon would actually be destroyed upon the teleportation (separation) of its 'infinite' information to another photon is a direct controlled violation of the first law of thermodynamics. (i.e. a photon 'disappeared' from the 'material' universe when the entire information content of a photon was 'transcendently displaced' from the material universe by the experiment, when photon “c” transcendently became transmitted photon “a”). Thus, Quantum teleportation is direct empirical validation for the primary tenet of the Law of Conservation of Information (i.e. 'transcendent' information cannot be created or destroyed). This conclusion is warranted because information exercises direct dominion of energy, telling energy exactly what to be and do in the experiment. Thus, this experiment provides a direct line of logic that transcendent information cannot be created or destroyed and, in information demonstrating transcendence, and dominion, of space-time and matter-energy, becomes the only known entity that can satisfactorily explain where all energy came from as far as the origination of the universe is concerned. That is transcendent information is the only known entity which can explain where all the energy came from in the Big Bang without leaving the bounds of empirical science as the postulated multiverse does. Clearly anything that exercises dominion of the fundamental entity of this physical universe, a photon of energy, as transcendent information does in teleportation, must of necessity possess the same, as well as greater, qualities as energy does possess in the first law of thermodynamics (i.e. Energy cannot be created or destroyed by any known material means according to the first law). To reiterate, since information exercises dominion of energy in quantum teleportation then all information that can exist, for all past, present and future events of energy, already must exist.
As well, the fact that quantum teleportation shows an exact 'location dominion', of a photon of energy by 'specified infinite information', satisfies a major requirement for the entity needed to explain the missing Dark Matter. The needed transcendent explanation would have to dominate energy in a very similar 'specified location' fashion, as is demonstrated by the infinite information of quantum teleportation, to satisfy what is needed to explain the missing dark matter.
Colossians 1:17
He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.
From the 38:38 minute mark to the 40:32 minute mark of the following video, the quantum teleportation experiments between the Canary Islands of La Palma and Tenerife are more clearly explained. The snippet features a small clip of Anton Zeilinger.

Anton Zeilinger on Quantum Teleportation - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=EGhQmNZhlqw#t=2318s

Quantum Teleportation Of A Human? - video
https://vimeo.com/75163272

As to the old complaint from materialists that quantum spookiness only applies at the small scale, please note exactly what highly sensitive instruments were used which enabled the teleportation experiment to be successful:
Quantum Spookiness Spans the Canary Islands - March 2007
Excerpt: A team has transmitted entangled photons some 144 kilometers (89 miles) between La Palma and Tenerife, two of Spain's Canary Islands off the coast of Morocco.,,,
Using a laser, the researchers created entangled pairs of photons on La Palma and fired one member of each pair to a European Space Agency (ESA) telescope on Tenerife, ,,
Hughes says his group employed highly sensitive detectors normally used in astronomy,,,

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=entangled-photons-quantum-spookiness

LIVING IN A QUANTUM WORLD - Vlatko Vedral - 2011
Excerpt: Thus, the fact that quantum mechanics applies on all scales forces us to confront the theory’s deepest mysteries. We cannot simply write them off as mere details that matter only on the very smallest scales. For instance, space and time are two of the most fundamental classical concepts, but according to quantum mechanics they are secondary. The entanglements are primary. They interconnect quantum systems without reference to space and time. If there were a dividing line between the quantum and the classical worlds, we could use the space and time of the classical world to provide a framework for describing quantum processes. But without such a dividing line—and, indeed, with­out a truly classical world—we lose this framework. We must ex­plain space and time (4D space-time) as somehow emerging from fundamental­ly spaceless and timeless physics.
http://phy.ntnu.edu.tw/~chchang/Notes10b/0611038.pdf

Macrorealism Emerging from Quantum Physics – Brukner, Caslav; Kofler, Johannes
American Physical Society, APS March Meeting, – March 5-9, 2007
Excerpt: for unrestricted measurement accuracy a violation of macrorealism (i.e., a violation of the Leggett-Garg inequalities) is possible for arbitrary large systems.,,
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007APS..MARB33005B

Bohemian Gravity - Rob Sheldon - September 19, 2013
Excerpt: Quanta magazine carried an article about a hypergeometric object that is as much better than Feynman diagrams as Feynman was better than Heisenberg's S-matrices. But the discoverers are candid about it,
"The amplituhedron, or a similar geometric object, could help by removing two deeply rooted principles of physics: locality and unitarity. “Both are hard-wired in the usual way we think about things,” said Nima Arkani-Hamed, a professor of physics at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, N.J., and the lead author of the new work, which he is presenting in talks and in a forthcoming paper. “Both are suspect.”"
What are these suspect principles? None other than two of the founding principles of materialism--that there do not exist "spooky-action-at-a-distance" forces, and that material causes are the only ones in the universe.,,,

http://rbsp.info/PROCRUSTES/bohemian-gravity/

A Jewel at the Heart of Quantum Physics - September 17, 2013
Excerpt: The amplituhedron itself does not describe gravity. But Arkani-Hamed and his collaborators think there might be a related geometric object that does.,,,
But the new amplituhedron research suggests space-time, and therefore dimensions, may be illusory anyway.,,, Even without unitarity and locality, the amplituhedron formulation of quantum field theory does not yet incorporate gravity. But researchers are working on it.,,,
Beyond making (quantum field theory) calculations easier or possibly leading the way to quantum gravity, the discovery of the amplituhedron could cause an even more profound shift, Arkani-Hamed said. That is, giving up space and time as fundamental constituents of nature and figuring out how the Big Bang and cosmological evolution of the universe arose out of pure geometry.

https://www.simonsfoundation.org/quanta/20130917-a-jewel-at-the-heart-of-quantum-physics/
Moreover, the fact that simple quantum entanglement shows 'coordinated universal control' of entangled photons of energy, by transcendent information, regardless of distance, satisfies a major requirement for the entity which must explain the missing Dark Energy. i.e. The transcendent entity, needed to explain Dark Energy, must explain why the entire space of the universe is expanding in such a finely-tuned, coordinated, degree, and would have to employ a mechanism of control very similar to what we witness in the quantum entanglement experiment.
Job 9:8
He stretches out the heavens by Himself and walks on the waves of the sea.
Thus 'infinite transcendent information' provides a coherent picture of overarching universal control, and specificity, that could possibly unify gravity with the other forces. It very well may be possible to elucidate, mathematically, the overall pattern God has chosen to implement infinite information in this universe. The following articles back up this assertion:
Is Unknown Force In Universe Acting On Dark Matter?
Excerpt: Is Unknown Force In Universe Acting On Dark Matter?
Excerpt: It is possible that a non-gravitational fifth force is ruling the dark matter with an invisible hand, leaving the same fingerprints on all galaxies, irrespective of their ages, shapes and sizes.” ,,Dr Famaey added, “If we account for our observations with a modified law of gravity, it makes perfect sense to replace the effective action of hypothetical dark matter with a force closely related to the distribution of visible matter.”

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091022154644.htm

Dark Matter Halos of Disk Galaxies
Excerpt: Dark matter’s properties can only be inferred indirectly by observing the motions of the stars and gas (of a galaxy).
http://chandra.as.utexas.edu/~kormendy/dm-halo-pic.html

"I discovered that nature was constructed in a wonderful way, and our task is to find out its mathematical structure"
Albert Einstein - The Einstein Factor - Reader's Digest
Reflections on the 'infinite transcendent information' framework, as well as on the 'eternal' and 'temporal' frameworks:

The energy needed to accelerate a particle (with mass) becomes infinite at the speed of light,
"By special relativity, the energy needed to accelerate a particle (with mass) grow super-quadratically when the speed is close to c, and is infinite when it is c.
Since you can't supply infinite energy to the particle, it is not possible to get (a particle with mass) to 100% c."

http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/1557/accelerating-particles-to-the-speed-of-light/1558#1558
http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/1686/why-does-the-mass-of-an-object-increase-when-its-speed-approaches-that-of-light/1696#1696
Thus a particle (with mass) can never be accelerated to the speed of light by energy. Yet, mass would disappear from our sight if it could go the speed of light, because, from our non-speed of light perspective, distance in direction of travel will shrink to zero for the mass going the speed of light. Whereas conversely, if a particle (with mass) could travel at the speed of light, its size will stay the same while all other frames of reference not traveling the speed of light will disappear from its sight.

Special Relativity - Time Dilation and Length Contraction - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSRIyDfo_mY

Of note; the following recent study, through a fairly ingenious thought experiment, challenged the assumption of length contraction as being valid for 'photon clocks'. In doing so, they cleared up some loose ends in relativity concerning time's relation to space. Loose ends that had been ample fodder for much of the speculation of time travel being possible in relativity:
Physicists continue work to abolish time as fourth dimension of space - April 2012
Excerpt: “The rate of photon clocks in faster inertial systems will not slow down with regard to the photon clocks in a rest inertial system because the speed of light is constant in all inertial systems,” he said. “The rate of atom clocks will slow down because the 'relativity' of physical phenomena starts at the scale of pi mesons.”
He also explained that, without length contraction, time dilation exists but in a different way than usually thought. “Time dilatation exists not in the sense that time as a fourth dimension of space dilates and as a result the clock rate is slower,” he explained. “Time dilatation simply means that, in a faster inertial system, the velocity of change slows down and this is valid for all observers.,, Our research confirms Gödel's vision: time is not a physical dimension of space through which one could travel into the past or future.”

http://phys.org/news/2012-04-physicists-abolish-fourth-dimension-space.html
Well, to borrow Tipler’s term (but not his ideas), in so far as the “Physics of Immortality” are concerned, I’ve found black holes to lend strong support for the Theistic contention of eternal life after death. In Theism, particularly Christian Theism, it is held that there are two ultimate destinies for our eternal souls. Heaven or Hell! And in physics we find two very different ‘eternities’ just as Theism has held for millenia. One eternity in physics is found ‘if’ a hypothetical observer were to accelerate to the speed of light. In this scenario time, as we understand it, would come to a complete stop for the hypothetical observer. To grasp the whole ‘time coming to a complete stop at the speed of light’ concept a little more easily, imagine moving away from the face of a clock at the speed of light. Would not the hands on the clock stay stationary as you moved away from the face of the clock at the speed of light? Moving away from the face of a clock at the speed of light happens to be the same ‘thought experiment’ that gave Einstein his breakthrough insight into e=mc2.

Albert Einstein - Special Relativity - Insight Into Eternity - 'thought experiment' video
http://www.metacafe.com/w/6545941/

Save for 'quantum information', they are correct in their 'like everything else' statement of the following article.
Einstein was right, neutrino researchers admit - June 2012
Excerpt: Scientists on Friday said that an experiment which challenged Einstein's theory on the speed of light had been flawed and that sub-atomic particles (neutrinos) -- like everything else -- are indeed bound by the universe's speed limit.
http://phys.org/news/2012-06-einstein-neutrino.html

Best Constraint On Mass of Photons, Using Observations of Super-Massive Black Holes - Sept. 2015
Excerpt: This paper details how the scientists, who work in Portugal, Italy, Japan and the U.S., found a way to use astrophysical observations to test a fundamental aspect of the Standard Model -- namely, that photons have no mass -- better than anyone before.
"The test works like this: if photons had a mass, they would trigger an instability that would spin down all black holes in the universe," Berti said. "But astronomers tell us that the gigantic, super-massive black holes at galactic centers are spinning, so this instability cannot be too strong.,,,
With this technique, we have succeeded in constraining the mass of the photon to unprecedented levels: the mass must be one hundred billion of billions times smaller than the present constraint on the neutrino mass, which is about two electron-volts."

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/09/120925142605.htm
,,,Yet, even though light has this 'eternal' attribute in regards to our temporal framework of time, for us to hypothetically travel at the speed of light, in this universe, will still only get us to first base as far as quantum entanglement, or teleportation, is concerned.

Light and Quantum Entanglement Reflect Some Characteristics Of God - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4102182

Science vs God: Bryan Enderle at TEDxUCDavis - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sn7YQOzNuSc

That is to say, traveling at the speed of light will only get us to the place where time, as we understand it, comes to complete stop for light, i.e. gets us to the eternal, 'past and future folding into now', framework of time. This higher dimension, 'eternal', inference for the time framework of light is warranted because light is not 'frozen within time' yet it is shown that time, as we understand it, does not pass for light.
"I've just developed a new theory of eternity."
Albert Einstein - The Einstein Factor - Reader's Digest - 2005
http://www.readersdigest.co.za/article/10170%26pageno=3
Some may think that time, as we understand it, coming to a complete stop at the speed of light is pure science fiction, but, as incredible as it sounds, Einstein’s infamous thought experiment has many lines of evidence now supporting it.

Velocity time dilation tests
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation#Velocity_time_dilation_tests
"The laws of relativity have changed timeless existence from a theological claim to a physical reality. Light, you see, is outside of time, a fact of nature proven in thousands of experiments at hundreds of universities. I don’t pretend to know how tomorrow can exist simultaneously with today and yesterday. But at the speed of light they actually and rigorously do. Time does not pass."
Richard Swenson - More Than Meets The Eye, Chpt. 12
This following confirmation of time dilation is my favorite since they have actually caught time dilation on film
(of note: light travels approx. 1 foot in a nanosecond (billionth of a second) whilst the camera used in the experiment takes a trillion pictures a second):

Amazing --- light filmed at 1,000,000,000,000 Frames/Second! - video (so fast that at 9:00 Minute mark of video the time dilation effect of relativity is caught on film)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_9vd4HWlVA

This higher dimension, ‘eternal’, inference for the time framework of light is warranted, by logic, because light is not ‘frozen within time’, i.e. light appears to move to us in our temporal framework of time, yet it is shown that time, as we understand it, does not pass for light. The only way this is possible is if light is indeed of a higher dimensional value of time than our temporal time is otherwise light would simply be ‘frozen in time’ to our temporal point of observation. Another line of evidence that supports the inference that ‘tomorrow can exist simultaneously with today and yesterday’, at the ‘eternal’ speed of light, is visualizing what would happen if a hypothetical observer were to approach the speed of light. Please note, at the 3:22 minute mark of the following video, when the 3-Dimensional world ‘folds and collapses’ into a tunnel shape as a ‘hypothetical’ observer moves towards the ‘higher dimension’ of the speed of light, (Of note: This following video was made by two Australian University Physics Professors with a supercomputer.).

Approaching The Speed Of Light - Optical Effects - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5733303/

Here is an interesting confirmation of special relativity:
Light bursts out of a flying mirror - April 24, 2013
Excerpt: the physicists managed to carry out a Gedankenexperiment (thought experiment) formulated in 1905 by Albert Einstein stating that the reflection from a mirror moving close to the speed of light could in principle result in bright light pulses in the short wavelength range.,,,
In stark contrast to a mirror at rest, light reflected from a mirror that is moving is changed in its colour (that is in its wavelength) as the reflected photons gain momentum from the mirror. This process is very similar to a ball that bounces off a racket and thereby accelerates to higher speed. However, instead of moving faster (photons already travel at the speed of light), the reflected light is shifted in its frequency. This phenomenon is very similar to the Dopplereffect observed from an ambulance siren, which sounds higher (louder) or deeper (quieter) depending on whether the ambulance is moving towards or away from the observer. In the experiment, the incredibly high velocity of the electron mirror gave rise to a change in frequency upon reflection from the near infrared to the extreme ultraviolet up to a wavelength of 60 to 80 nanometres.

http://phys.org/news/2013-04-mirror.html
It is also very interesting to note that we have two very different ‘eternities of time’ revealed by our time dilation experiments. One ‘eternity’ for being deeper in a gravitation well and another ‘eternity’ for accelerating towards the speed of light:

Time Dilation - General and Special Relativity - Chuck Missler - video
http://www.metacafe.com/w/7013215/
Time dilation
Excerpt: Time dilation: special vs. general theories of relativity:
In Albert Einstein's theories of relativity, time dilation in these two circumstances can be summarized:
1. --In special relativity (or, hypothetically far from all gravitational mass), clocks that are moving with respect to an inertial system of observation are measured to be running slower. (i.e. For any observer accelerating, hypothetically, to the speed of light, time, as we understand it, will come to a complete stop).
2.--In general relativity, clocks at lower potentials in a gravitational field—such as in closer proximity to a planet—are found to be running slower.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation
i.e. As with any observer accelerating to the speed of light, it is found that for any ‘hypothetical’ observer falling to the event horizon of a black hole, that time, as we understand it, will come to a complete stop for them. This is because the accelerative force of gravity at black holes is so intense that not even light can escape its grip:

Space-Time of a Black hole - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0VOn9r4dq8

— But of particular interest to the ‘eternal framework’ found for General Relativity at black holes;… It is interesting to note that entropic decay (Randomness), which is the primary reason why things grow old and eventually die in this universe, is found to be greatest at black holes. Thus the ‘eternity of time’ at black holes can rightly be called ‘eternities of decay and/or eternities of destruction’.
Entropy of the Universe - Hugh Ross - May 2010
Excerpt: Egan and Lineweaver found that supermassive black holes are the largest contributor to the observable universe’s entropy. They showed that these supermassive black holes contribute about 30 times more entropy than what the previous research teams estimated.
http://www.reasons.org/entropy-universe

Roger Penrose – How Special Was The Big Bang?
“But why was the big bang so precisely organized, whereas the big crunch (or the singularities in black holes) would be expected to be totally chaotic? It would appear that this question can be phrased in terms of the behaviour of the WEYL part of the space-time curvature at space-time singularities. What we appear to find is that there is a constraint WEYL = 0 (or something very like this) at initial space-time singularities-but not at final singularities-and this seems to be what confines the Creator’s choice to this very tiny region of phase space."

"Einstein's equation predicts that, as the astronaut reaches the singularity (of the black-hole), the tidal forces grow infinitely strong, and their chaotic oscillations become infinitely rapid. The astronaut dies and the atoms which his body is made become infinitely and chaotically distorted and mixed-and then, at the moment when everything becomes infinite (the tidal strengths, the oscillation frequencies, the distortions, and the mixing), spacetime ceases to exist."
Kip S. Thorne - "Black Holes and Time Warps: Einstein's Outrageous Legacy" pg. 476
http://books.google.com/books?id=GzlrW6kytdoC&pg=PA476#v=onepage&q&f=false
i.e. Black Holes are found to be ‘timeless’ singularities of destruction and disorder rather than singularities of creation and order such as the extreme order we see at the creation event of the Big Bang. Needless to say, the implications of this ‘eternity of destruction’ should be fairly disturbing for those of us who are of the ‘spiritually minded' persuasion!

Two very different ‘eternities’ revealed by physics:
http://www.uncommondescent.com/cosmology/the-no-black-holes-uproar-a-week-later/#comment-489771

In light of this dilemma that the two very different eternities present to us spiritually minded people, and the fact that Gravity is, in so far as we can tell, completely incompatible with Quantum Mechanics, it is interesting to point out a subtle nuance on the Shroud of Turin. Namely that Gravity was overcome in the resurrection event of Christ:
A Quantum Hologram of Christ’s Resurrection? by Chuck Missler
Excerpt: “You can read the science of the Shroud, such as total lack of gravity, lack of entropy (without gravitational collapse), no time, no space—it conforms to no known law of physics.” The phenomenon of the image brings us to a true event horizon, a moment when all of the laws of physics change drastically. Dame Piczek created a one-fourth size sculpture of the man in the Shroud. When viewed from the side, it appears as if the man is suspended in mid air (see graphic, below), indicating that the image defies previously accepted science. The phenomenon of the image brings us to a true event horizon, a moment when all of the laws of physics change drastically.
http://www.khouse.org/articles/2008/847

THE EVENT HORIZON (Space-Time Singularity) OF THE SHROUD OF TURIN. – Isabel Piczek – Particle Physicist
Excerpt: We have stated before that the images on the Shroud firmly indicate the total absence of Gravity. Yet they also firmly indicate the presence of the Event Horizon. These two seemingly contradict each other and they necessitate the past presence of something more powerful than Gravity that had the capacity to solve the above paradox.
http://shroud3d.com/findings/isabel-piczek-image-formation
Personally, considering the extreme difficulty that many brilliant minds have had in trying to reconcile Quantum Mechanics and special relativity, i.e. QED, with Gravity, I consider the preceding nuance on the Shroud of Turin to be a subtle, but powerful, evidence substantiating Christ’s primary claim as to being our Savior from sin, death, and hell:
John 8:23-24
But he continued, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world. I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am he, you will indeed die in your sins.
G.O.S.P.E.L. – (the grace of propitiation) – poetry slam – video
https://vimeo.com/20960385
Matthew 10:28
“Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.
On the Mystery, and Plasticity, Of Space-Time
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FFKL3FeyebpNNyal1DQ64y20zlplVrjkaLXrM0P5ES4/edit?hl=en_US

Space-Time and Our Place In It
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1e8UQhmnX1Y7SbXB06VP0pF_IBCkM0fZwGcOfBihy7zI/edit

It is also interesting to note that special relativity is found to 'merge' with quantum mechanics whereas general relativity does not 'merge' with quantum mechanics:
Theories of the Universe: Quantum Mechanics vs. General Relativity
Excerpt: The first attempt at unifying relativity and quantum mechanics took place when special relativity was merged with electromagnetism. This created the theory of quantum electrodynamics, or QED. It is an example of what has come to be known as relativistic quantum field theory, or just quantum field theory. QED is considered by most physicists to be the most precise theory of natural phenomena ever developed.
In the 1960s and '70s, the success of QED prompted other physicists to try an analogous approach to unifying the weak, the strong, and the gravitational forces. Out of these discoveries came another set of theories that merged the strong and weak forces called quantum chromodynamics, or QCD, and quantum electroweak theory, or simply the electroweak theory, which you've already been introduced to.
If you examine the forces and particles that have been combined in the theories we just covered, you'll notice that the obvious force missing is that of gravity.

http://www.infoplease.com/cig/theories-universe/quantum-mechanics-vs-general-relativity.html

Precise measurements test quantum electrodynamics, constrain possible fifth fundamental force - June 04, 2013
Excerpt: Quantum electrodynamics (QED) – the relativistic quantum field theory of electrodynamics – describes how light and matter interact – achieves full agreement between quantum mechanics and special relativity.,, QED solves the problem of infinities associated with charged pointlike particles and, perhaps more importantly, includes the effects of spontaneous particle-antiparticle generation from the vacuum.,,, Recently, scientists,, tested QED to extreme precision..,,, can be interpreted in terms of constraints on possible fifth-force interactions beyond the Standard Model of physics,,
http://phys.org/news/2013-06-precise-quantum-electrodynamics-constrain-fundamental.html

“It always bothers me that in spite of all this local business, what goes on in a tiny, no matter how tiny, region of space, and no matter how tiny a region of time, according to laws as we understand them today, it takes a computing machine an infinite number of logical operations to figure out. Now how can all that be going on in that tiny space? Why should it take an infinite amount of logic to figure out what one stinky tiny bit of space-time is going to do?"
- Richard Feynman – one of the founding fathers of QED (Quantum Electrodynamics)
Quote taken from the 6:45 minute mark of the following video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obCjODeoLVw

THE INFINITY PUZZLE: Quantum Field Theory and the Hunt for an Orderly Universe
Excerpt: In quantum electrodynamics, which applies quantum mechanics to the electromagnetic field and its interactions with matter, the equations led to infinite results for the self-energy or mass of the electron. After nearly two decades of effort, this problem was solved after World War II by a procedure called renormalization, in which the infinities are rolled up into the electron’s observed mass and charge, and are thereafter conveniently ignored. Richard Feynman, who shared the 1965 Nobel Prize with Julian Schwinger and Sin-Itiro Tomonaga for this breakthrough, referred to this sleight of hand as “brushing infinity under the rug.”
http://www.americanscientist.org/bookshelf/pub/tackling-infinity
I don’t know about Feynman, but as for myself, being a Christian Theist, I find it rather comforting to know that it takes an ‘infinite amount of logic to figure out what one stinky tiny bit of space-time is going to do’:
John1:1
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
of note: ‘the Word’ in John1:1 is translated from ‘Logos’ in Greek. Logos is the root word from which we derive our modern word logic
http://etymonline.com/?term=logic

It is also very interesting to note that this strange higher dimensional, eternal, framework for time, found in both special relativity and general relativity, finds corroboration in Near Death Experience testimonies:
'In the 'spirit world,,, instantly, there was no sense of time. See, everything on earth is related to time. You got up this morning, you are going to go to bed tonight. Something is new, it will get old. Something is born, it's going to die. Everything on the physical plane is relative to time, but everything in the spiritual plane is relative to eternity. Instantly I was in total consciousness and awareness of eternity, and you and I as we live in this earth cannot even comprehend it, because everything that we have here is filled within the veil of the temporal life. In the spirit life that is more real than anything else and it is awesome. Eternity as a concept is awesome. There is no such thing as time. I knew that whatever happened was going to go on and on.'
Mickey Robinson - Near Death Experience testimony - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4045544
semi-related note:

Scientists Map the Wiring of the Biological Clock (In The Brain) - June 5, 2013
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/06/130605130107.htm
'When you die, you enter eternity. It feels like you were always there, and you will always be there. You realize that existence on Earth is only just a brief instant.'
Dr. Ken Ring - has extensively studied Near Death Experiences

'Earthly time has no meaning in the spirit realm. There is no concept of before or after. Everything - past, present, future - exists simultaneously.'
- Kimberly Clark Sharp - NDE Experiencer

'There is no way to tell whether minutes, hours or years go by. Existence is the only reality and it is inseparable from the eternal now.'
- John Star - NDE Experiencer
http://www.near-death.com/experiences/research13.html

What Will Heaven be Like? by Rich Deem
Excerpt: Since heaven is where God lives, it must contain more physical and temporal dimensions than those found in this physical universe that God created. We cannot imagine, nor can we experience in our current bodies, what these extra dimensions might be like.
http://www.godandscience.org/doctrine/heaven.html
It is also very interesting to point out that the 'light at the end of the tunnel', reported in many Near Death Experiences(NDEs), is also corroborated by Special Relativity when considering the optical effects for traveling at the speed of light. Please compare the similarity of the optical effect, noted at the 3:22 minute mark of the following video, when the 3-Dimensional world ‘folds and collapses’ into a tunnel shape around the direction of travel as a 'hypothetical' observer moves towards the ‘higher dimension’ of the speed of light, with the ‘light at the end of the tunnel’ reported in very many Near Death Experiences: (Of note: This following video was made by two Australian University Physics Professors with a supercomputer.)

Approaching The Speed Of Light - Optical Effects - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5733303/

Here is the interactive website, with link to the relativistic math at the bottom of the page, related to the preceding video;

Seeing Relativity
http://www.anu.edu.au/Physics/Searle/
Ask the Experts: What Is a Near-Death Experience (NDE)? - article with video
Excerpt: "Very often as they're moving through the tunnel, there's a very bright mystical light ... not like a light we're used to in our earthly lives. People call this mystical light, brilliant like a million times a million suns..."
- Jeffrey Long M.D. - has studied NDE's extensively
http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/beyondbelief/experts-death-experience/story?id=14221154#.T_gydvW8jbI

The NDE and the Tunnel - Kevin Williams' research conclusions
Excerpt: "I started to move toward the light. The way I moved, the physics, was completely different than it is here on Earth. It was something I had never felt before and never felt since. It was a whole different sensation of motion. I obviously wasn't walking or skipping or crawling. I was not floating. I was flowing. I was flowing toward the light. I was accelerating and I knew I was accelerating, but then again, I didn't really feel the acceleration. I just knew I was accelerating toward the light. Again, the physics was different - the physics of motion of time, space, travel. It was completely different in that tunnel, than it is here on Earth. I came out into the light and when I came out into the light, I realized that I was in heaven."
Barbara Springer - Near Death Experience - The Tunnel - video
https://vimeo.com/79072924
Near Death Experience - The Tunnel - video
http://www.vimeo.com/29021432
"Regardless, it is impossible for me to adequately describe what I saw and felt. When I try to recount my experiences now, the description feels very pale. I feel as though I'm trying to describe a three-dimensional experience while living in a two-dimensional world. The appropriate words, descriptions and concepts don't even exist in our current language. I have subsequently read the accounts of other people's near-death experiences and their portrayals of heaven and I able to see the same limitations in their descriptions and vocabulary that I see in my own."
Mary C. Neal, MD - To Heaven And Back pg. 71
Dr. Quantum in Flatland - 3D in a 2D world – video
http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/9395/Dr_Quantum_Flatland_Explanation_3D_in_a_2D_world/

Near Death Experience – The Tunnel, The Light, The Life Review – video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4200200/

At the 17:45 minute mark of the following Near Death Experience documentary, the Life Review portion of the Near Death Experience is highlighted, with several testimonies relating how every word, deed, and action, of a person's life (all the 'information' of a person's life) is gone over in the presence of God:

Near Death Experience Documentary - commonalities of the experience - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTuMYaEB35U
“I was in a body, and the only way that I can describe it was a body of energy, or of light. And this body had a form. It had a head, it had arms and it had legs. And it was like it was made out of light. And it was everything that was me. All of my memories, my consciousness, everything.”,,, “And then this vehicle formed itself around me. Vehicle is the only thing, or tube, or something, but it was a mode of transportation that’s for sure! And it formed around me. And there was no one in it with me. I was in it alone. But I knew there were other people ahead of me and behind me. What they were doing I don’t know, but there were people ahead of me and people behind me, but I was alone in my particular conveyance. And I could see out of it. And it went at a tremendously, horrifically, rapid rate of speed. But it wasn’t unpleasant. It was beautiful in fact. I was reclining in this thing, I wasn’t sitting straight up, but I wasn’t lying down either. I was sitting back. And it was just so fast. I can’t even begin to tell you where it went or whatever it was just fast!"
Vicki’s NDE – Blind since birth - quote taken from first part of the following video
Near Death Experience Tunnel - Speed Of Light - Turin Shroud - video
http://www.vimeo.com/18371644

As well, as with the scientifically verified tunnel for special relativity, we also have scientific confirmation of extreme ‘tunnel curvature’, within space-time, to a eternal ‘event horizon’ at black holes;

Space-Time of a Black hole
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0VOn9r4dq8

As well, as with the tunnel being mentioned in heavenly NDE's, we also have mention of tunnels in hellish NDE testimonies;

A man, near the beginning of this video, gives testimony of falling down a 'tunnel' in the transition stage from this world to hell:

Hell - A Warning! - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4131476/

The man, in this following video, also speaks of 'tumbling down' a tunnel in his transition stage to hell:

Bill Wiese on Sid Roth – video
http://vimeo.com/21230371

But, as you can see if you watched the preceding short videos, there is no mention of the extreme acceleration in the tunnel as with the positive near death experiences. The way I have reconciled this discrepancy between the two types of tunnels is to note that in the bible 'Hades' is referred to as being different from hell. In fact death and ‘Hades’ are both thrown into hell, i.e. thrown into ‘the lake of fire’, at the final judgement according to the bible:
Revelation 20:13-15
The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done. Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.
Thus perhaps the reason negative Near Death experiences don’t have the extreme acceleration as is noted in positive near death experiences is that complete separation from God is reserved until the final judgement.

Here are a few more notes confirming the reality of blackholes:

How Can Black Holes Be Detected? - video
http://www.space.com/10257-black-holes-detected.html

NASA's Black-Hole-Hunter Catches Its First 10 Supermassive Black Holes - Sep. 9, 2013 —
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130909154918.htm

These consistent findings, that corroborate NDE testimonies, especially the hellish NDE tunnels and blackholes, should be fairly disturbing for those of us of a 'spiritual' leaning,,,, but to continue on with the main topic,,, hypothetically traveling at the speed of light in this universe would be instantaneous travel for the person going at the speed of light. This is because time does not pass for them, yet, and this is a very big ‘yet’ to take note of; this ‘timeless’ travel is still not instantaneous and transcendent to our temporal framework of time (as quantum teleportation is), i.e. Speed of light travel, to our temporal frame of reference, is still not completely transcendent of our framework since light appears to take time to travel from our temporal perspective. Yet, in quantum teleportation of information, the ‘time not passing’, i.e. ‘eternal’, framework is not only achieved in the speed of light framework/dimension, but is also ‘instantaneously’ achieved in our temporal framework. That is to say, the instantaneous teleportation/travel of quantum information is instantaneous to both the temporal and speed of light frameworks, not just the speed of light framework. Information teleportation/travel is not limited by time, nor space, in any way, shape or form, in any frame of reference, as light is seemingly limited to us in this temporal framework. Thus ‘pure transcendent information’ (in quantum teleportaion experiments) is shown to be timeless (eternal) and completely transcendent of all material frameworks. Moreover, concluding from all lines of evidence we now have (many of which I have not specifically listed here); transcendent, eternal, infinite information is indeed real and the framework in which ‘It’ resides is the primary reality (highest dimension) that can exist, (in so far as our limited perception of a primary reality, highest dimension, can be discerned).
"An illusion can never go faster than the speed limit of reality"
Akiane Kramarik - Child Prodigy -
Artwork homepage - http://www.artakiane.com/ -
Music video - http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4204586
The 'Top Down' Theistic Structure Of The Universe and Of The Human Body
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NhA4hiQnYiyCTiqG5GelcSJjy69e1DT3OHpqlx6rACs/edit

Logic also dictates 'a decision' must have been made, by the 'transcendent, eternal, infinite information' from the primary timeless (eternal) reality 'It' inhabits, in order to purposely create a temporal reality with highly specified, irreducible complex, parameters from a infinite set of possibilities in the proper sequential order. Thus this infinite transcendent information, which is the primary reality of our reality, is shown to be alive by yet another line of evidence besides the necessity for a ‘first mover’ to explain quantum wave collapse.

The First Cause Must Be A Personal Being - William Lane Craig - video
http://www.metacafe.com/w/4813914

What Properties Must the Cause of the Universe Have? - William Lane Craig - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SZWInkDIVI
Psalm 115:2-3 Wherefore should the heathen say, Where is now their God?
Our God is in heaven; he does whatever pleases him.
Steven Curtis Chapman - God is God (Original Version) - music video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qz94NQ5HRyk

As a side light to this, leading quantum physicist Anton Zeilinger has followed in John Archibald Wheeler's footsteps (1911-2008) by insisting reality, at its most foundational level, is 'information'.
"it from bit” Every “it”— every particle, every field of force, even the space-time continuum itself derives its function, its meaning, its very existence entirely—even if in some contexts indirectly—from the apparatus-elicited answers to yes-or-no questions, binary choices, bits. “It from bit” symbolizes the idea that every item of the physical world has a bottom—a very deep bottom, in most instances, an immaterial source and explanation, that which we call reality arises in the last analysis from the posing of yes-no questions and the registering of equipment—evoked responses, in short all matter and all things physical are information-theoretic in origin and this is a participatory universe."
– Princeton University physicist John Wheeler (1911–2008) (Wheeler, John A. (1990), “Information, physics, quantum: The search for links”, in W. Zurek, Complexity, Entropy, and the Physics of Information (Redwood City, California: Addison-Wesley))

Why the Quantum? It from Bit? A Participatory Universe?
Excerpt: In conclusion, it may very well be said that information is the irreducible kernel from which everything else flows. Thence the question why nature appears quantized is simply a consequence of the fact that information itself is quantized by necessity. It might even be fair to observe that the concept that information is fundamental is very old knowledge of humanity, witness for example the beginning of gospel according to John: "In the beginning was the Word."
Anton Zeilinger - a leading expert in quantum teleportation:
http://www.metanexus.net/archive/ultimate_reality/zeilinger.pdf

Zeilinger's principle
Zeilinger's principle states that any elementary system carries just one bit of information. This principle was put forward by Austrian physicist Anton Zeilinger in 1999 and subsequently developed by him to derive several aspects of quantum mechanics. Some have reasoned that this principle, in certain ways, links thermodynamics with information theory. [1]
http://www.eoht.info/page/Zeilinger%27s+principle

In the beginning was the bit - New Scientist
Excerpt: Zeilinger's principle leads to the intrinsic randomness found in the quantum world. Consider the spin of an electron. Say it is measured along a vertical axis (call it the z axis) and found to be pointing up. Because one bit of information has been used to make that statement, no more information can be carried by the electron's spin. Consequently, no information is available to predict the amounts of spin in the two horizontal directions (x and y axes), so they are of necessity entirely random. If you then measure the spin in one of these directions, there is an equal chance of its pointing right or left, forward or back. This fundamental randomness is what we call Heisenberg's uncertainty principle.
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2001-02/NS-Tmoq-1302101.php
So, unlike the entropic randomness of space-time which is governed/bounded by Boltzmann’s constant, the ‘unbounded’ randomness found in Quantum Mechanics is a necessary consequence of the fact that the universe is ‘quantized information’ at it most foundational level, and we may only freely choose how we may consciously observe a particle for any one particular characteristic at any given time.

Here is a interesting argument for God's existence that plays on the information theoretic foundation that is found for the universe:

Digital Physics Argument for God's Existence - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2Xsp4FRgas
Digital Physics Argument
Premise 1: Simulations can only exist is a computer or a mind.
Premise 2: The universe is a simulation.
Premise 3: A simulation on a computer still must be simulated in a mind.
Premise 4: Therefore, the universe is a simulation in a mind (2,3).
Premise 5: This mind is what we call God.
Conclusion: Therefore, God exists.
Refutation of ‘We Are Living In A Computer Simulation’ Argument from the unfathomable complexity found in molecular biology
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/nyt-columnist-asks-is-intelligent-design-theory-a-form-of-parallel-universes-theory/#comment-490686

Materialism had postulated for centuries that everything reduced to, or emerged from material atoms, yet the correct structure of reality is now found by science to be as follows:
1. material particles (mass) normally reduces to energy (e=mc^2)
2. energy and mass both reduce to information (quantum teleportation)
3. information reduces to consciousness (geometric centrality of conscious observation in universe dictates that consciousness must precede quantum wave collapse to its single bit state)
In the following video, at the 37:00 minute mark, Anton Zeilinger, a leading researcher in quantum teleportation with many breakthroughs under his belt, humorously reflects on just how deeply determinism has been undermined by quantum mechanics by saying such a deep lack of determinism may provide some of us a loop hole when they meet God on judgment day.

Prof Anton Zeilinger speaks on quantum physics. at UCT - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3ZPWW5NOrw

Just how deeply the materialistic notion of determinism is undermined by quantum mechanics is captured here:
People Keep Making Einstein’s (Real) Greatest Blunder - July 2011
Excerpt: It was in these debates (with Bohr) that Einstein declared his real greatest blunder:
“God does not play dice with the Universe.”
As much as we all admire Einstein,,

http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/files/2011/07/einstein_dice.20gi8eym86skww00cow4wkg00.cu4yycxak5ws8wwo80k0occg8.th_.jpeg
,, don’t keep making his (real) greatest blunder. I’ll leave the last word to Bohr, who allegedly said,
“Don’t tell God what to do with his dice.”
,,, To clarify, it isn’t simply that there’s randomness; that at some level, “God plays dice.” Even local, real interpretations of quantum mechanics with hidden variables can do that. It’s that we know something about the type of dice that the Universe plays. And the dice cannot be both local and real; people claiming otherwise have experimental data to answer to.

http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2011/07/01/people-keep-making-einsteins-g/
Personally, I feel that such a deep undermining of determinism by quantum mechanics, far from providing a 'loop hole' on judgement day as Dr. Zeilinger stated, actually restores free will to its rightful place in the grand scheme of things, thus making God's final judgments on men's souls all the more fully binding since man truly is a 'free moral agent' as Theism has always maintained.

Podcast - Dr. Michael Egnor: Do Humans Have Free Will? Listen in as Dr. Egnor explains why the argument against free will is self-refuting and shows how determinism as a theory in quantum physics is dead.
http://intelligentdesign.podomatic.com/entry/2014-02-03T15_58_01-08_00

To solidify this theistic claim for the importance of free will and how reality is actually constructed, the following study came along a few months after I had seen Dr. Zeilinger’s 'loop hole' video:
Can quantum theory be improved? - July 23, 2012
Excerpt: Being correct 50% of the time when calling heads or tails on a coin toss won’t impress anyone. So when quantum theory predicts that an entangled particle will reach one of two detectors with just a 50% probability, many physicists have naturally sought better predictions. The predictive power of quantum theory is, in this case, equal to a random guess. Building on nearly a century of investigative work on this topic, a team of physicists has recently performed an experiment whose results show that, despite its imperfections, quantum theory still seems to be the optimal way to predict measurement outcomes.,
However, in the new paper, the physicists have experimentally demonstrated that there cannot exist any alternative theory that increases the predictive probability of quantum theory by more than 0.165, with the only assumption being that measurement (*conscious observation) parameters can be chosen independently (free choice/free will assumption) of the other parameters of the theory.,,,
,, the experimental results provide the tightest constraints yet on alternatives to quantum theory. The findings imply that quantum theory is close to optimal in terms of its predictive power, even when the predictions are completely random.

http://phys.org/news/2012-07-quantum-theory.html

*What does the term "measurement" mean in quantum mechanics?
"Measurement" or "observation" in a quantum mechanics context are really just other ways of saying that the observer is interacting with the quantum system and measuring the result in toto.
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=597846
So just as I had suspected after watching Dr. Zeilinger’s video, it is found that a required (axiomatic) assumption of ‘free will’ in quantum mechanics is what necessarily drives the completely random (non-deterministic) aspect of quantum mechanics. Moreover, it was shown in the paper that one cannot ever improve the predictive power of quantum mechanics by ever removing free will as a starting assumption in Quantum Mechanics! But what was really unprecedented in the paper, as impressive as it was in its breadth and scope, is that they were able to perform an experiment showing that Quantum Theory will never be exceeded in predictive power by a future theory. In my opinion, that represents a milestone in science that should certainly be worthy of a Nobel Prize (or at least far more notice than it has received thus far)!
Moreover, as if that was not enough, Zeilinger himself solidified the inference to free will’s axiomatic position in Quantum Mechanics with this following experiment. In the following experiment, the claim that past material states determine future conscious choices (determinism) is directly falsified by the fact that present conscious choices are, in fact, effecting past material states:

Quantum physics mimics spooky action into the past – April 23, 2012
http://phys.org/news/2012-04-quantum-physics-mimics-spooky-action.html

In other words, if my conscious choices really are just merely the result of whatever state the material particles in my brain happen to be in in the past (deterministic) how in blue blazes are my choices instantaneously effecting the state of material particles into the past? This experiment is simply impossible for any coherent materialistic presupposition! Here is another experiment along the same line:
Steering by peeking: Physicists control quantum particles by looking at them - Feb 17, 2014
Excerpt: By varying the strength of the coupling between the nucleus and the electron, the scientists could carefully tune the measurement strength. A weaker measurement reveals less information, but also has less back-action. An analysis of the nuclear spin after such a weak measurement showed that the nuclear spin remained in a (slightly altered) superposition of two states. In this way, the scientists verified that the change of the state (induced by the back-action) precisely matched the amount of information that was gained by the measurement.
Steering by peeking
The scientists realised that it is possible to steer the nuclear spin by applying sequential measurements with varying measurement strength. Since the outcome of a measurement is not known in advance, the researchers implemented a feedback loop in the experiment. They chose the strength of the second measurement depending on the outcome of the first measurement. In this way the scientists could steer the nucleus towards a desired superposition state,,,,

http://phys.org/news/2014-02-peeking-physicists-quantum-particles.html
In other words, if you don't like that the cat might be dead (nucleus pointing down), you back off the strength of your measurement until you get a reading telling you that the cat might be more alive than dead (nucleus pointing up) and then once you get that reading you increase the strength of the measurement, as long as the measurement continues to give you the desired more alive than dead state, until you finally have complete knowledge that the cat is fully alive (nucleus pointing up). The preceding experiment obviously seems to be another fairly strong confirmation of free will's axiomatic position within quantum mechanics.

Antoine Suarez has also done some very fine work in this area establishing free will’s primacy in Quantum Mechanics,,

Free will and nonlocality at detection: Basic principles of quantum physics – Antoine Suarez – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhMrrmlTXl4
What Does Quantum Physics Have to Do with Free Will? - By Antoine Suarez - July 22, 2013
Excerpt: What is more, recent experiments are bringing to light that the experimenter’s free will and consciousness should be considered axioms (founding principles) of standard quantum physics theory. So for instance, in experiments involving “entanglement” (the phenomenon Einstein called “spooky action at a distance”), to conclude that quantum correlations of two particles are nonlocal (i.e. cannot be explained by signals traveling at velocity less than or equal to the speed of light), it is crucial to assume that the experimenter can make free choices, and is not constrained in what orientation he/she sets the measuring devices.
To understand these implications it is crucial to be aware that quantum physics is not only a description of the material and visible world around us, but also speaks about non-material influences coming from outside the space-time.,,,

https://www.bigquestionsonline.com/content/what-does-quantum-physics-have-do-free-will
Here are a few more notes along that line:

Henry Stapp on the Conscious Choice and the Non-Local Quantum Entangled Effects - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJN01s1gOqA

How Free Will Works (In Quantum Mechanics) – video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMp30Q8OGOE

Free Will and Consciousness defended by Quantum Mechanics
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/can-a-darwinist-consistently-condemn/#comment-453600

Needless to say, finding ‘free will conscious observation’ to be ‘built into’ our best description of foundational reality, quantum mechanics, as a starting assumption, 'free will observation' which is indeed the driving aspect of randomness in quantum mechanics, is VERY antithetical to the entire materialistic philosophy which demands that a 'non-telological randomness' be the driving force of creativity in Darwinian evolution! Also of interest:

Scientific Evidence That Mind Effects Matter – Random Number Generators – video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4198007

I once asked a evolutionist, after showing him the preceding experiments, “Since you ultimately believe that the ‘god of random chance’ produced everything we see around us, what in the world is my mind doing pushing your god around?”

Here is another piece of evidence that solidly demarcates the randomness of the universe from the randomness that would be necessarily inherent with creatures created by God with free will:
Quantum Zeno effect
Excerpt: The quantum Zeno effect is,,, an unstable particle, if observed continuously, will never decay.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/tonights-feature-presentation-epigenetics-the-next-evolutionary-cliff/#comment-445840
This is just fascinating! Particles are held to 'randomly' decay. Why in blue blazes should conscious observation put a freeze on entropic decay, unless consciousness was/is more foundational to reality than 'random' entropic decay is?

Of related note:
An attention-getting paper in Nature states that “Attention enhances synaptic efficacy and the signal-to-noise ratio in neural circuits.” In other words, when you focus your attention on a sight or sound, your neurons obey, all the way to the level of synapses between neurons. “The results demonstrate that attention finely tunes neuronal communication at the synaptic level by selectively altering synaptic weights, enabling enhanced detection of salient events in the noisy sensory environment.” Philosophers of free will, take note.
http://crev.info/2013/07/remarkable-cell-processes-that-keep-you-alive/

"The impossibility of conceiving that this grand and wondrous universe, with our conscious selves, arose through chance, seems to me the chief argument for the existence of God."
Charles Darwin to Doedes, N. D. - Letter - 2 Apr 1873
http://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/entry-8837
The 'Spirituality' of Mathematics
https://docs.google.com/document/d/13VBciybSK3D7uJoz6ltldPPSvhL4HJaJAmCmOMkmQxg/edit

Of note: since our free will choices figure so prominently in how reality is actually found to be constructed in our understanding of quantum mechanics, I think a Christian perspective on just how important our choices are in this temporal life, in regards to our eternal destiny, is very fitting:

Is God Good? (Free will and the problem of evil) - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rfd_1UAjeIA

If God, Why Evil? (1 of 4) – Norm Geisler – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSTzJ-kbfkc
“There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, "Thy will be done," and those to whom God says, in the end, "Thy will be done." All that are in Hell, choose it. Without that self-choice there could be no Hell."
- C.S. Lewis, The Great Divorce
Two very different ‘eternities’ revealed by physics:
http://www.uncommondescent.com/cosmology/the-no-black-holes-uproar-a-week-later/#comment-489771

Also of note to the 'problem of evil', both Charles Darwin and Abraham Lincoln were born on the same day and shared many strange similarities in their lives, but the one common thing they shared that separated the two men drastically was the way they choose to handle the evil that happened in their lives. Darwin, though drifting away from God for a long while, was permanently driven away from God because of what he perceived to be the 'unjust' death of his daughter, Whereas Lincoln, on the other hand, was driven from his mild skepticism into a deep reliance upon God because of the death of his son.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/philosophy/is-atheism-rationally-justifiable/#comment-443197

Held- Natalie Grant - music video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yk_y9204TBM

Ravi Zacharias - How To Measure Your Choices - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Op_S5syhKI
You must measure your choices by the measure of
1) eternity
2) morality
3) accountability
4) charity
of related note:
Sam Harris's Free Will: The Medial Pre-Frontal Cortex Did It - Martin Cothran - November 9, 2012
Excerpt: There is something ironic about the position of thinkers like Harris on issues like this: they claim that their position is the result of the irresistible necessity of logic (in fact, they pride themselves on their logic). Their belief is the consequent, in a ground/consequent relation between their evidence and their conclusion. But their very stated position is that any mental state -- including their position on this issue -- is the effect of a physical, not logical cause.
By their own logic, it isn't logic that demands their assent to the claim that free will is an illusion, but the prior chemical state of their brains. The only condition under which we could possibly find their argument convincing is if they are not true. The claim that free will is an illusion requires the possibility that minds have the freedom to assent to a logical argument, a freedom denied by the claim itself. It is an assent that must, in order to remain logical and not physiological, presume a perspective outside the physical order.

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/11/sam_harriss_fre066221.html

Algorithmic Information Theory, Free Will and the Turing Test - Douglas S. Robertson
Excerpt: For example, the famous “Turing test” for artificial intelligence could be defeated by simply asking for a new axiom in mathematics. Human mathematicians are able to create axioms, but a computer program cannot do this without violating information conservation. Creating new axioms and free will are shown to be different aspects of the same phenomena: the creation of new information.
http://cires.colorado.edu/~doug/philosophy/info8.pdf

(Materialistic) Scientists say free will probably doesn’t exist, but urge: “Don’t stop believing!” -2010
Excerpt: Studies found people who were told there is no such thing as free will were more likely to cheat under experimental conditions. "One of the most striking findings to emerge recently in the science of free will is that when people believe—or are led to believe—that free will is just an illusion, they tend to become more antisocial." For example, in an experiment involving money, some participants were randomly assigned to what was called a determinism condition:
They were asked to read statements such as, “A belief in free will contradicts the known fact that the universe is governed by lawful principles of science.” Those participants stole more money than those who had been randomly assigned to read statements from what was called a free-will condition--who had read statements such as, “Avoiding temptation requires that I exert my free will."

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/bering-in-mind/2010/04/06/scientists-say-free-will-probably-doesnt-exist-but-urge-dont-stop-believing/
In fact the primary source of randomness in the 'materialistic universe' is found to be very destructive supermassive Blackholes. Which begs the question, could these two very different sources of randomness found in Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity, respectively, be one of the primary reasons for their failure to be unified?

Randomness - Entropic and Quantum
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1St4Rl5__iKFraUBfSZCeRV6sNcW5xy6lgcqqKifO9c8/edit?usp=sharing

Further notes:
"Is there a real connection between entropy in physics and the entropy of information? ....The equations of information theory and the second law are the same, suggesting that the idea of entropy is something fundamental..."
Tom Siegfried, Dallas Morning News, 5/14/90 - Quotes attributed to Robert W. Lucky, Ex. Director of Research, AT&T, Bell Laboratories & John A. Wheeler, of Princeton & Univ. of TX, Austin in the article

"Gain in entropy always means loss of information, and nothing more."
Gilbert Newton Lewis - Eminent Chemist

Is it possible to find the radius of an electron?
The honest answer would be, nobody knows yet. The current knowledge is that the electron seems to be a 'point particle' and has refused to show any signs of internal structure in all measurements. We have an upper limit on the radius of the electron, set by experiment, but that's about it. By our current knowledge, it is an elementary particle with no internal structure, and thus no 'size'.
http://www4.hcmut.edu.vn/~huynhqlinh/olympicvl/tailieu/physlink_askexpert/ae114.cfm.htm

'Quantum Magic' Without Any 'Spooky Action at a Distance' - June 2011
Excerpt: A team of researchers led by Anton Zeilinger at the University of Vienna and the Institute for Quantum Optics and Quantum Information of the Austrian Academy of Sciences used a system which does not allow for entanglement, and still found results which cannot be interpreted classically.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/06/110624111942.htm
Quantum Entanglement and Teleportation - Anton Zeilinger - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5705317/

Here are some more interesting videos that also arrive at a 'information basis' for reality from a slightly different perspective:

A Very Unusual Proof for the Existence of God - video - (Collapse of wave function)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kj8UdHuP5l8

You Are Made Of Information - video - (Don't believe me? Any ontology other than information monism leads to self-contradiction)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ciWYGvpGII

Continued comments:

The restriction imposed by our physical limitations of us ever accessing complete infinite information to our temporal space-time framework/dimension (Wheeler; Zeilinger) does not detract, in any way, from the primacy and dominion of the infinite transcendent information framework that is now established by the quantum teleportation experiment as the primary reality of our reality. Of note: All of this evidence meshes extremely well with the theistic postulation of God possessing infinite and perfect knowledge. This seems like a fitting place for this following quote and verse:
"To see the world in a grain of sand, and to see heaven in a wild flower, hold infinity in the palm of your hands, and eternity in an hour."
William Blake

Psalm 19:1-2
The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands. Day after day they pour forth speech; night after night they display knowledge.
As well, it is important to note that, counter-intuitive to materialistic thought (and to every kid who has ever taken a math exam), a computer does not consume energy during computation but will only consume energy when information is erased from it. This counter-intuitive fact is formally known as Landauer’s Principle.
Landauer's principle
Of Note: "any logically irreversible manipulation of information, such as the erasure of a bit or the merging of two computation paths, must be accompanied by a corresponding entropy increase ,,, Specifically, each bit of lost information will lead to the release of an (specific) amount (at least kT ln 2) of heat.,,, Landauer’s Principle has also been used as the foundation for a new theory of dark energy, proposed by Gough (2008).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landauer%27s_principle
It should be noted that Rolf Landauer himself maintained that the information in a computer was merely ‘physical’. i.e. He held that information in a computer was merely an ‘emergent’ property of a material basis, and thus he held that the information programmed into a computer was not really it’s own independent entity. Landauer held this ‘materialistic’ position in spite of objections from people like Roger Penrose who held that information is indeed real and has its own independent existence separate from matter-energy. Landauer held this ‘materialistic’ position since he thought that ‘it ALWAYS took energy to erase information from a computer and therefore the information in the computer must be ‘merely physical’ (merely emergent). Yet the validity of that fairly narrowly focused objection from Landauer, to the reality of ‘transcendent ‘information’ encoded within the computer, has now been overturned, because now information is known to erasable from a computer without consuming energy.
Quantum knowledge cools computers: New understanding of entropy - June 2011
Excerpt: No heat, even a cooling effect;
In the case of perfect classical knowledge of a computer memory (zero entropy), deletion of the data requires in theory no energy at all. The researchers prove that "more than complete knowledge" from quantum entanglement with the memory (negative entropy) leads to deletion of the data being accompanied by removal of heat from the computer and its release as usable energy. This is the physical meaning of negative entropy.
Renner emphasizes, however, "This doesn't mean that we can develop a perpetual motion machine." The data can only be deleted once, so there is no possibility to continue to generate energy. The process also destroys the entanglement, and it would take an input of energy to reset the system to its starting state. The equations are consistent with what's known as the second law of thermodynamics: the idea that the entropy of the universe can never decrease. Vedral says "We're working on the edge of the second law. If you go any further, you will break it."

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/06/110601134300.htm

Scientists show how to erase information without using energy - January 2011
Excerpt: Until now, scientists have thought that the process of erasing information requires energy. But a new study shows that, theoretically, information can be erased without using any energy at all. Instead, the cost of erasure can be paid in terms of another conserved quantity, such as spin angular momentum.,,, "Landauer said that information is physical because it takes energy to erase it. We are saying that the reason it is physical has a broader context than that.", Vaccaro explained.
http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-01-scientists-erase-energy.html
Further comments:
"Those devices (computers) can yield only approximations to a structure (of information) that has a deep and "computer independent" existence of its own." -
Roger Penrose - The Emperor's New Mind - Pg 147

"Information is information, not matter or energy. No materialism which does not admit this can survive at the present day."
Norbert Weiner - MIT Mathematician -(Cybernetics, 2nd edition, p.132) Norbert Wiener created the modern field of control and communication systems, utilizing concepts like negative feedback. His seminal 1948 book Cybernetics both defined and named the new field.
http://www.informationphilosopher.com/solutions/scientists/wiener/

“One of the things I do in my classes, to get this idea across to students, is I hold up two computer disks. One is loaded with software, and the other one is blank. And I ask them, ‘what is the difference in mass between these two computer disks, as a result of the difference in the information content that they posses’? And of course the answer is, ‘Zero! None! There is no difference as a result of the information. And that’s because information is a mass-less quantity. Now, if information is not a material entity, then how can any materialistic explanation account for its origin? How can any material cause explain it’s origin?
And this is the real and fundamental problem that the presence of information in biology has posed. It creates a fundamental challenge to the materialistic, evolutionary scenarios because information is a different kind of entity that matter and energy cannot produce.
In the nineteenth century we thought that there were two fundamental entities in science; matter, and energy. At the beginning of the twenty first century, we now recognize that there’s a third fundamental entity; and its ‘information’. It’s not reducible to matter. It’s not reducible to energy. But it’s still a very important thing that is real; we buy it, we sell it, we send it down wires.
Now, what do we make of the fact, that information is present at the very root of all biological function? In biology, we have matter, we have energy, but we also have this third, very important entity; information. I think the biology of the information age, poses a fundamental challenge to any materialistic approach to the origin of life.”

-Dr. Stephen C. Meyer earned his Ph.D. in the History and Philosophy of science from Cambridge University for a dissertation on the history of origin-of-life biology and the methodology of the historical sciences.
Intelligent design: Why can't biological information originate through a materialistic process? - Stephen Meyer - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqiXNxyoof8

John Lennox – Is There Evidence of Something Beyond Nature? (Semiotic Information) – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6rd4HEdffw

Finding transcendent information to be foundational to reality, in the many preceding experiments, articles, and proofs, I have listed is very suggestive to the Theistic ‘postulation’ of John 1:1 that holds ‘Logos’ (The Word) to be the ultimate foundation of our matter-energy reality in the first place.
John 1:1-3
In the beginning, the Word existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through Him all things were made; without Him nothing was made that has been made.
(of note: 'Word' in Greek is 'Logos', and is the root word from which we get our word 'Logic')

Of note, I don’t remember exactly who said this, but I think it is a very profound thought:
"It is deeply ironic that information should be found bursting at the seams in the DNA of life, and even in the proteins of life, for neo-Darwinian atheists have insisted for many years that life on earth has no ultimate meaning or purpose, yet to find information in life is equivalent to finding meaning in life, for information itself requires meaning to exist, and even purpose to exist, before information can exist."
This strange anomaly between lack of energy consumption and the computation of information, noted in Landauer's principle, appears to hold for the human mind as well.
Appraising the brain's energy budget:
Excerpt: In the average adult human, the brain represents about 2% of the body weight. Remarkably, despite its relatively small size, the brain accounts for about 20% of the oxygen and, hence, calories consumed by the body. This high rate of metabolism is remarkably constant despite widely varying mental and motoric activity. The metabolic activity of the brain is remarkably constant over time.
http://www.pnas.org/content/99/16/10237.full

THE EFFECT OF MENTAL ARITHMETIC ON CEREBRAL CIRCULATION AND METABOLISM
Excerpt: Although Lennox considered the performance of mental arithmetic as "mental work", it is not immediately apparent what the nature of that work in the physical sense might be if, indeed, there be any. If no work or energy transformation is involved in the process of thought, then it is not surprising that cerebral oxygen consumption is unaltered during mental arithmetic.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC438861/pdf/jcinvest00624-0127.pdf

Does Thinking Really Hard Burn More Calories? - By Ferris Jabr - July 2012
Excerpt: Unlike physical exercise, mental workouts probably do not demand significantly more energy than usual. Believing we have drained our brains, however, may be enough to induce weariness,,,
Although the average adult human brain weighs about 1.4 kilograms, only 2 percent of total body weight, it demands 20 percent of our resting metabolic rate (RMR)—the total amount of energy our bodies expend in one very lazy day of no activity.,,,
—Resting metabolic rate: 1300 kilocalories, or kcal, the kind used in nutrition
—1,300 kcal over 24 hours = 54.16 kcal per hour = 15.04 gram calories per second
—15.04 gram calories/sec = 62.93 joules/sec = about 63 watts
—20 percent of 63 watts = 12.6 watts
So a typical adult human brain runs on around 12 watts—a fifth of the power required by a standard 60 watt lightbulb. Compared with most other organs, the brain is greedy; pitted against man-made electronics, it is astoundingly efficient.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=thinking-hard-calories

Scaling of Brain Metabolism with a Fixed Energy Budget per Neuron:
Excerpt: This suggests that the energy budget of the whole brain per neuron is fixed across species and brain sizes,
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0017514

Scaling of Brain Metabolism and Blood Flow in Relation to Capillary and Neural Scaling - 2011
Excerpt: Brain is one of the most energy demanding organs in mammals, and its total metabolic rate scales with brain volume raised to a power of around 5/6. This value is significantly higher than the more common exponent 3/4 (Quarter Power Scaling) relating whole body resting metabolism with body mass and several other physiological variables in animals and plants.,,,
Moreover, cerebral metabolic, hemodynamic, and microvascular variables scale with allometric exponents that are simple multiples of 1/6, rather than 1/4, which suggests that brain metabolism is more similar to the metabolism of aerobic than resting body. Relation of these findings to brain functional imaging studies involving the link between cerebral metabolism and blood flow is also discussed.,,
General Discussion Excerpt:
,,It should be underlined that both CBF and CMR scale with brain volume with the exponent about 1/4 which is significantly different from the exponent 1/4 relating whole body resting specific metabolism with body volume [1], [2], [3]. Instead, the cerebral exponent 1/6 is closer to an exponent,, characterizing maximal body specific metabolic rate and specific cardiac output in strenuous exercise [43], [44]. In this sense, the brain metabolism and its hemodynamics resemble more the metabolism and circulation of exercised muscles than other resting organs, which is in line with the empirical evidence that brain is an energy expensive organ [10], [17], [18]. This may also suggest that there exists a common plan for the design of microcirculatory system in different parts of the mammalian body that uses the same optimization principles [45].,,

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3203885/
The preceding experiments are very unexpected to materialists since materialists hold that 'mind' is merely a 'emergent property' of the physical processes of a material brain. But why should 'thought' which is presupposed to be result of, and subservient to, the material processes of the brain constrain the material brain to operate at such a constant and optimal metabolic rate whereas the rest of body fluctuates in its metabolic activity? The most parsimonious explanation for such a optimal constraint on the brain's metabolic activity is that the material brain was designed, first and foremost, to house the mind and give the mind the most favorable metabolic environment possible at all times. Moreover the brain, in terms of almost unbelievable complexity, is shown to have more switches than all the computers on earth put together, and yet the brain consumes far less energy than a computer does, which strongly suggests to me, because of Landauer's principle, that the information of the mind (memories) must be stored on a 'spiritual' level rather than on a material level.

Are computers conscious?
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1aLRzzzDXZoADkoOIubQECLTiD2ceAhzk_0XzSjds2r4/edit?usp=sharing

Related note;

Human Brain Has More Switches Than All Computers on Earth - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5516446/
Human brain has more switches than all computers on Earth - November 2010
Excerpt: They found that the brain's complexity is beyond anything they'd imagined, almost to the point of being beyond belief, says Stephen Smith, a professor of molecular and cellular physiology and senior author of the paper describing the study: ...One synapse, by itself, is more like a microprocessor--with both memory-storage and information-processing elements--than a mere on/off switch. In fact, one synapse may contain on the order of 1,000 molecular-scale switches. A single human brain has more switches than all the computers and routers and Internet connections on Earth.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-27083_3-20023112-247.html

Could the Internet ever be conscious? Definitely not before 2115, even if you’re a materialist. - Dr. Torley - December 7, 2012
Excerpt: So there you have it. A microprocessor with around 1 billion transistors is in the same mental ballpark as … a worm. Rather an underwhelming result, don’t you think?
“What about the Internet as a whole?” you might ask. As we saw above, the number of transistors (N) in the entire Internet is 10^18, so log(N) is 18. log(Z) is log(2) or about 0.3, so C=(18*0.3)=5.4. That’s right: on Deamer’s scale, the complexity of the entire Internet is a miserable 5.4, or 40 orders of magnitude less than that of the human brain, which stands at 45.5.
Remember that Deamer’s formula is a logarithmic one, using logarithms to base 10. What that means is that the human brain is, in reality, 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times more complex than the entire Internet! And that’s based on explicitly materialistic assumptions about consciousness.

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/could-the-internet-ever-be-conscious-definitely-not-before-2115-even-if-youre-a-materialist/

Project Brain: Our Prediction – June 28, 2013
Excerpt: The goal of the Human Brain Project is to provide the most detailed simulation ever of the complexity of human brain. The computing power for this will require super-computers thousands of times more powerful than what we have available today. So an aim of the larger research initiative is to develop computers with that kind of power.,,,
Our prediction? Simply this. Much as in the case of the human genome, the study of the physical makeup of the brain will provide remarkable insight into its components and structure. However it will also unlock layers upon layers of (unfathomable) complexity.

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/06/project_brain073831.html
Ben Carson - leading pediatric neurosurgeon on the Thought Process (paraphrase, 'I don't have enough faith to be an atheist') - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qdo6rT064KA

Joshua Foer: Amazing feats of memory anyone can do - video
http://www.ted.com/talks/joshua_foer_feats_of_memory_anyone_can_do.html
Algorithmic Information Theory, Free Will and the Turing Test - Douglas G. Robertson - 1999
Excerpt: Chaitin’s Algorithmic Information Theory shows that information is conserved under formal mathematical operations and, equivalently, under computer operations. This conservation law puts a new perspective on many familiar problems related to artificial intelligence. For example, the famous “Turing test” for artificial intelligence could be defeated by simply asking for a new axiom in mathematics. Human mathematicians are able to create axioms, but a computer program cannot do this without violating information conservation. Creating new axioms and free will are shown to be different aspects of the same phenomenon: the creation of new information.
“… no operation performed by a computer can create new information.”

http://cires.colorado.edu/~doug/philosophy/info8.pdf

Evolutionary Informatics - William Dembski and Robert Marks
Excerpt: The principal theme of the lab’s research is teasing apart the respective roles of internally generated and externally applied information in the performance of evolutionary systems.,,, Evolutionary informatics demonstrates a regress of information sources. At no place along the way need there be a violation of ordinary physical causality. And yet, the regress implies a fundamental incompleteness in physical causality's ability to produce the required information. Evolutionary informatics, while falling squarely within the information sciences, thus points to the need for an ultimate information source qua intelligent designer.
http://evoinfo.org/
Information. What is it? - Robert Marks - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7seCcS_gPk

Estimating Active Information in Adaptive Mutagenesis
http://www.blythinstitute.org/images/data/attachments/0000/0005/EstimatingActiveInformationPoster_final.pdf
“Computers are no more able to create information than iPods are capable of creating music.”
Robert Marks

"So, to sum up: computers can reshuffle specifications and perform any kind of computation implemented in them. They are mechanical, totally bound by the laws of necessity (algorithms), and non conscious. Humans can continuously create new specification, and also perform complex computations like a computer, although usually less efficiently. They can create semantic output, make new unexpected inferences, recognize and define meanings, purposes, feelings, and functions, and certainly conscious representations are associated with all those kinds of processes."
Uncommon Descent blogger - gpuccio
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/atheisms-not-so-hidden-assumptions/#comment-357770
,,,thus these findings strongly imply that we humans have a 'higher informational component' to our being,, i.e. these findings offer another line of corroborating evidence which is very suggestive to the idea that humans have a mind which is transcendent of the physical brain and which is part of a 'unique soul from God'. Moreover this unique mind that each human has seems to be capable of a special and intimate communion with God that is unavailable to other animals, i.e. we are capable of communicating information with "The Word" as described in John 1:1.

I also liked this insight, from a computer programmer with a PhD in Physics, about a fundamental difference between human consciousness and computer programs:
The simple fact is this, despite years of experience writing many complex codes, I can not write a computer program that disobeys me. I don’t even know how to do it. I can write computer programs that have bugs and don’t perform what I thought they were going to do; I can write computer programs that make pseudo-random choices. I do not know how to write a program that disobeys. I would contend it can’t be done. But the ability to disobey the Creator is the essence of consciousness. Otherwise it’s just complicated programming with random choices.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/human-consciousness/#comment-363067
Also of related interest is Dr. Werner Gitt's lecture on information:

In The Beginning Was Information - Werner Gitt - video
http://vimeo.com/22652852

You may download Dr. Gitt's book, In The Beginning Was Information, at this website:
http://www.sedin.org/propeng/informat.htm

Thus now, with the mathematical definition of functional information in place for molecular biology, and with 'infinite transcendent information' shown to be 'conserved' and 'consciousness' found to be foundational to our reality, and with Genetic Entropy outlined as the primary principle for biological adaptations, Intelligent Design can now be scientifically tested against any materialistic theory of blind chance proposing a certain system arose by random material processes and was not the handiwork of God.

I would like to point out that when a molecular sub-system of a biological organism passes the probability threshold of one in 10^150 orders of magnitude (that’s a one with 150 zeros to the right) then it is considered, by very stringent guidelines which allow for far more 'quantum events' than will ever happen in the universe, to be overwhelmingly impossible for the universe to ever account for the system arising by chance alone. (Dembski, Abel)

Here is how the base line for the universe's probabilistic resources are calculated:
Signature in the Cell - Book Review - Ken Peterson
Excerpt: "there are about 10 to the 80th elementary particles in our observable universe. Assuming a Big Bang about 13 billion years ago, there have been about 10 to the 16th seconds of time. Finally, if we take the time required for light to travel one Plank length we will have found “the shortest time in which any physical effect can occur.” This turns out to be 10 to the minus 43rd seconds. Or turning it around we can say that the most interactions possible in a second is 10 to the 43rd. Thus, the “probabilistic resources” of the universe would be to multiply the total number of seconds by the total number of interactions per second by the total number of particles theoretically interacting. The math turns out to be 10 to the 139th."
http://www.spectrummagazine.org/reviews/book_reviews/2009/10/06/signature_cell

The Universal Plausibility Metric (UPM) & Principle (UPP) - Abel - Dec. 2009
Excerpt: Mere possibility is not an adequate basis for asserting scientific plausibility. A precisely defined universal bound is needed beyond which the assertion of plausibility, particularly in life-origin models, can be considered operationally falsified. But can something so seemingly relative and subjective as plausibility ever be quantified? Amazingly, the answer is, "Yes.",,,

cΩu = Universe = 10^13 reactions/sec X 10^17 secs X 10^78 atoms = 10^108

cΩg = Galaxy = 10^13 X 10^17 X 10^66 atoms = 10^96

cΩs = Solar System = 10^13 X 10^17 X 10^55 atoms = 10^85

cΩe = Earth = 10^13 X 10^17 X 10^40 atoms = 10^70


http://www.tbiomed.com/content/6/1/27
Programming of Life - Probability - Defining Probable, Possible, Feasible etc.. - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kckv0wVBYpA

New Peer-Reviewed Paper Demolishes Fallacious Objection: “Aren’t There Vast Eons of Time for Evolution?” - Dec. 2009
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2009/12/new_peerreviewed_paper_demolis.html

Sequences Probability Calculator v.1.1
http://progettocosmo.altervista.org/spc.php
Nobel Prize-Winning Physicist Wolfgang Pauli on the Empirical Problems with Neo-Darwinism - Casey Luskin - February 27, 2012
Excerpt: "In discussions with biologists I met large difficulties when they apply the concept of 'natural selection' in a rather wide field, without being able to estimate the probability of the occurrence in a empirically given time of just those events, which have been important for the biological evolution. Treating the empirical time scale of the evolution theoretically as infinity they have then an easy game, apparently to avoid the concept of purposesiveness. While they pretend to stay in this way completely 'scientific' and 'rational,' they become actually very irrational, particularly because they use the word 'chance', not any longer combined with estimations of a mathematically defined probability, in its application to very rare single events more or less synonymous with the old word 'miracle.'" Wolfgang Pauli (pp. 27-28) -
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/02/nobel_prize-win056771.html
Darwinism Not Proved Impossible Therefore Its True - Alvin Plantinga - video
http://www.metacafe.com/w/10285716

This 'universal limit' for functional information generation is generously set at 140 Functional Information Bits (Fits) by Kirk Durston. The molecular sub-system is considered to be irreducibly complex in its functional information content, and thus it is considered to be intelligently designed. Though irreducible complexity is primarily used by Intelligent Design proponents for deducing design in molecular biology, the concept of irreducible complexity can also be applied, in an overarching form, to the entire universe to find if man is indeed God's primary purpose for creating this universe. Thus irreducible complexity can also be used to verify the anthropic hypothesis.

Irreducible Complexity and the Anthropic Principle - John Clayton - video
http://vimeo.com/22648466

The following are some basic questions that need to be answered, to find if either the anthropic hypothesis or some materialistic hypothesis is correct.

I. What evidence is found for the universe's ability to support life?

II. What evidence is found for the earths ability to support life?

III. What evidence is found for the first life on earth?

IV. What evidence is found for the appearance of all species of life on earth, and is man the last species to appear on earth?

V. What evidence is found for God's personal involvement with man?


Before we start answering these five basic questions, I would like to reiterate, as clearly as possible, that any 'solid material particle' foundation for this universe, which was the primary postulation of materialism in the first place, has now been completely crushed by our present understanding of quantum mechanics. Little do most people realize there is actually no solid indestructible particle, at all, at the basis of our reality in the atom somewhere. Each and every sub-atomic particle in the atom, (proton, neutron, electron etc..) is subject to the laws of quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics is about as far away from the solid material particle/atom, that materialism had predicted as the basis of reality, as can be had. These following videos and articles make this point clear:

Science vs God: Bryan Enderle at TEDxUCDavis - video (how much empty space is in the atom is at the beginning of the video)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sn7YQOzNuSc

As to the empty space in an atom which Enderle talked about in the preceding video, the following video goes a bit further:

Just how small is an atom? – Jonathan Bergmann – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQP4UJhNn0I

And although, despite the atom being shown to be somewhere around 99.99999999999999% empty space, it was still presumed, in both the Bryan Enderle video and the Jonathan Bergmann video, that the nucleus and electron of the atom are ‘solid’ material particles. That presumption simply is not so. For anyone who still believes that atoms are composed of little billiard ball type particles (i.e. Reductive Materialism as it was conceived of by ancient Greeks and was only recently overturned last century), the following images and the last part of the following video will cure you of that false materialistic notion:

Photographs of atoms, produced by the scanning tunnel microscope
http://physics.unipune.ernet.in/~spm/images/image.gif
http://researcher.watson.ibm.com/researcher/files/us-flinte/cover7.tif
http://researcher.watson.ibm.com/researcher/files/us-flinte/stm15.jpg

Uncertainty Principle - The 'Uncertain Non-Particle' Basis Of Material Reality - video and article
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4109172
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-uncertainty/

In this following video,,,

Is information the basic substance of the universe after all? (With video of various 'fields') July 23, 2013
http://www.uncommondescent.com/informatics/is-information-the-basic-substance-of-the-universe-after-all/

,,in the preceding video the narrator lists these fields ‘co-mingling with one another’:

1. Magnetic Field
2. Electric Field
3. Gravitational Field
4. Electron Field
5. Higgs Field
6. Quark Field
7. Gluon Field


in the preceding video the narrator also states,
‘in fact every type of elementary particle has its own field’
But what are these elementary particle fields made of? As mentioned previously, both John Archibald Wheeler and Anton Zeilinger hold that these elementary particle fields are composed of information.
John Wheeler (1911–2008) summarizes his life in physics - February 2014
Excerpt: "I think of my lifetime in physics as divided into three periods. In the first period, extending from the beginning of my career until the early 1950′s, I was in the grip of the idea that Everything Is Particles. I was looking for ways to build all basic entities – neutrons, protons, mesons, and so on – out of the lightest, most fundamental particles, electrons, and photons.
I call my second period Everything Is Fields. From the time I fell in love with general relativity and gravitation in 1952 until late in my career, I pursued the vision of a world made of fields, one in which the apparent particles are really manifestations of electric and magnetic fields, gravitational fields, and space-time itself.
Now I am in the grip of a new vision, that Everything Is Information. The more I have pondered the mystery of the quantum and our strange ability to comprehend this world in which we live, the more I see possible fundamental roles for logic and information as the bedrock of physical theory."

– J. A. Wheeler, K. Ford, Geons, Black Hole, & Quantum Foam: A Life in Physics New York W.W. Norton & Co, 1998, pp 63-64.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/informatics/john-wheeler-1911-2008-summarizes-his-life-in-physics/
And Wheeler’s and Zeilinger’s contention, that reality at its foundation is ‘information theoretic’, is pretty convincing because it is now shown that ‘material’ atoms can be reduced to quantum information and teleported. In fact, all the ‘material’ atoms of an entire human body can, theoretically, be reduced to quantum information and teleported to another position in the universe:

Quantum Teleportation of a Human? – video
https://vimeo.com/75163272

Of related note, Ms. O’Leary (of UD News) has wisely noted previously:

“But information is fundamentally relational”
&
“If information underlies the universe, then meaning underlies the universe. Pass it on.”


Thus, since information is ‘fundamentally relational’ then this ‘relational’ fact provides an answer for why the universe coheres as a whole (see Pastor Joe Boot video 'Defending The Christian Faith' and verse John 1:1).

Further notes:
The First Image Ever of a Hydrogen Atom's Orbital Structure - with photo - 20 May 2013
Excerpt: how to magnify the microscopic states of a quantum particle? The answer, according to a team of international researchers, is the quantum microscope — a device that uses photoionization microscopy to visualize atomic structures directly.
Writing in Physical Review Letters, Aneta Stodolna of the FOM Institute for Atomic and Molecular Physics (AMOLF) in the Netherlands describes how she and her team mapped the nodal structure of an electronic orbital of a hydrogen atom placed in a static (dc) electric field.
After zapping the atom with laser pulses, ionized electrons escaped and followed a particular trajectory to a 2D detector (a dual microchannel plate [MCP] detector placed perpendicular to the field itself). There are many trajectories that can be taken by the electrons to reach the same point on the detector, thus providing the researchers with a set of interference patterns — patterns that reflected the nodal structure of the wave function.

http://io9.com/the-first-image-ever-of-a-hydrogen-atoms-orbital-struc-509684901

Researchers demonstrate Heisenberg uncertainty principle at macro level - February 15, 2013
Excerpt: It was Heisenberg who famously noted that it was impossible to measure the momentum of an object and its position at the same time. As an example, he pointed out that using a microscope to look at a single electron, would require shining light on it. Those photons would cause the electron to move slightly, changing its momentum. Up till now, researchers testing or demonstrating this principle have worked at the micro level because attempting to do so with objects large enough to be seen with the naked eye seemed impossible due to the many variables at play. In this new research, the team in Colorado showed that this not necessarily the case.
They started by building a square drum frame out of silicon, with each side 0.5 millimeters long. They then stretched a thin film of silicon nitride over the skin to create the drum head. The drum was placed in a vacuum between two very tiny mirrors and was chilled to just 4 degrees above absolute zero to eliminate extraneous noise. The experiment was conducted by shooting a laser at the drum and measuring how much the head was distended by the photons striking it as they were bounced back and forth between the mirrors. As more photons struck the drum, greater fluctuations occurred in the measurements recorded, distorting the readings, and proving that the Heisenberg uncertainty principle can indeed be demonstrated with objects large enough to be seen with the naked eye.

http://phys.org/news/2013-02-heisenberg-uncertainty-principle-macro.html

Breaking the limits of classical physics - June 2012
Excerpt: In the quantum world objects can also have a position and a velocity, but not at the same time. At the atomic level, quantum mechanics says that nature behaves quite differently than you might think. It is not just that we do not know the position and the velocity, rather, these two things simply do not exist simultaneously.,,, In classical physics, light possesses both an electric and a magnetic field. “What our study demonstrated was that light can have both an electric and a magnetic field, but not at the same time. We thus provide a simple proof that an experiment breaks the classical principles. That is to say, we showed light possesses quantum properties, and we can expand this to other systems as well” says Eran Kot.
http://phys.org/news/2012-06-limits-classical-physics.html

Electron diffraction
Excerpt: The de Broglie hypothesis, formulated in 1926, predicts that particles should also behave as waves. De Broglie's formula was confirmed three years later for electrons (which have a rest-mass) with the observation of electron diffraction in two independent experiments. At the University of Aberdeen George Paget Thomson passed a beam of electrons through a thin metal film and observed the predicted interference patterns. At Bell Labs Clinton Joseph Davisson and Lester Halbert Germer guided their beam through a crystalline grid. Thomson and Davisson shared the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1937 for their work.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_diffraction
As well, many of the actions of the electron blatantly defy out concepts of time and space:

The Electron - The Supernatural Basis of Reality - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5312315/

Quantum Mechanics - Double Slit Experiment. Is anything really physical? (Prof. Anton Zeilinger) - video
Quote: “The path taken by the photon is not an element of reality. We are not allowed to talk about the photon passing through this or this slit. Neither are we allowed to say the photon passed through both slits. All this kind of language is not applicable.” - Anton Zeilinger
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayvbKafw2g0
Electron entanglement near a superconductor and bell inequalities
Excerpt: The two electrons of these pairs have entangled spin and orbital degrees of freedom.,,, We formulate Bell-type inequalities in terms of current-current cross-correlations associated with contacts with varying magnetization orientations. We find maximal violation (as in photons) when a superconductor is the particle source. (i.e. electrons have a 'non-local', beyond space and time, cause sustaining them.)
http://www.springerlink.com/content/e2830ur84h856618/

Double-slit experiment
Excerpt: (Though normally done with photons) The double slit experiment can also be performed (using different apparatus) with particles of matter such as electrons with the same results, demonstrating that they also show particle-wave duality.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment

Feynman’s double-slit experiment brought to life – March 13, 2013
Excerpt: The precise methodology of Richard Feynman’s famous double-slit thought-experiment – a cornerstone of quantum mechanics that showed how electrons behave as both a particle and a wave – has been followed in full for the very first time.
Although the particle-wave duality of electrons has been demonstrated in a number of different ways since Feynman popularised the idea in 1965, none of the experiments have managed to fully replicate the methodology set out in Volume 3 of Feynman’s famous Lectures on Physics.,,,
,,specifically the opening and closing of both slits at will and the ability to detect electrons one at a time.,,,
In 1965, Feynman popularised that electrons – historically thought to be particles – would actually produce the pattern of a wave in the double-split experiment.,,,
,,,Feynman highlighted that when electrons are fired at the wall one at a time, an interference pattern is still produced.

http://phys.org/news/2013-03-feynman-double-slit-brought-life.html

Quantum Mechanics – Quantum Results, Theoretical Implications Of Quantum Mechanics
Excerpt: Bohr proposed that electrons existed only in certain orbits and that, instead of traveling between orbits, electrons made instantaneous quantum leaps or jumps between allowed orbits.,,, The electron quantum leaps between orbits proposed by the Bohr model accounted for Plank’s observations that atoms emit or absorb electromagnetic radiation in quanta. Bohr’s model also explained many important properties of the photoelectric effect described by Albert Einstein (1879–1955).
http://science.jrank.org/pages/5607/Quantum-Mechanics.html

"Atoms are not things"
Werner Heisenberg

"Anyone who is not shocked by quantum theory has not understood it."
Niels Bohr
This following article is interesting for it shows that very small quantum events can have dramatic effects on large objects:
How 'spooky' quantum mechanical laws may affect everyday objects (Update) - July 2010
Excerpt: "The difference in size between the two parts of the system is really extreme," Blencowe explained. "To give a sense of perspective, imagine that the 10,000 electrons correspond to something small but macroscopic, like a flea. To complete the analogy, the crystal would have to be the size of Mt. Everest. If we imagine the flea jumping on Mt. Everest to make it move, then the resulting vibrations would be on the order of meters!"
http://www.physorg.com/news197120339.html
What blows most people away, when they first encounter quantum mechanics, is the quantum foundation of our material reality blatantly defies our concepts of time and space. Most people consider defying time and space to be a 'miraculous & supernatural' event. I know I certainly do! There is certainly nothing within quantum mechanics that precludes miracles from being possible:

How can an Immaterial God Interact with the Physical Universe? (Alvin Plantinga) - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kfzD3ofUb4

This 'miraculous and supernatural' foundation for our physical reality can easily be illuminated by the famous 'double slit' experiment. (It should be noted the double slit experiment was originally devised, in 1801, by a Christian polymath named Thomas Young). Though I've listed this preceding video before, it is well worth revisiting it here:

Double Slit Experiment – Explained By Prof Anton Zeilinger (a leader in quantum mechanics) – video
Quote: "We know what the particle is doing at the source when it is created. We know what it is doing at the detector when it is registered, but we do not know what it is doing in-between"
- Anton Zeilinger
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/6101627/

Dr. Quantum - Double Slit Experiment and Entanglement - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4096579
Double-slit experiment
Excerpt: In 1999 objects large enough to see under a microscope, buckyball (interlocking carbon atom) molecules (diameter about 0.7 nm, nearly half a million times that of a proton), were found to exhibit wave-like interference.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment
This following site offers a more formal refutation of materialism:
Why Quantum Theory Does Not Support Materialism - By Bruce L Gordon:
Excerpt: Because quantum theory is thought to provide the bedrock for our scientific understanding of physical reality, it is to this theory that the materialist inevitably appeals in support of his worldview. But having fled to science in search of a safe haven for his doctrines, the materialist instead finds that quantum theory in fact dissolves and defeats his materialist understanding of the world.
http://www.4truth.net/fourtruthpbscience.aspx?pageid=8589952939
Here is a new paradox from quantum mechanics that is humorously inexplicable to the atheist’s materialistic worldview.
Physicists add 'quantum Cheshire Cats' to list of quantum paradoxes - November 25, 2013
Excerpt: Given all the weird things that can occur in quantum mechanics—from entanglement to superposition to teleportation—not much seems surprising in the quantum world. Nevertheless, a new finding that an object's physical properties can be disembodied from the object itself is not something we're used to seeing on an everyday basis. In a new paper, physicists have theoretically shown that this phenomenon, which they call a quantum Cheshire Cat, is an inherent feature of quantum mechanics,,,
The physicists begin their paper with an excerpt from Lewis Carroll's 1865 novel Alice in Wonderland:
'All right', said the Cat; and this time it vanished quite slowly, beginning with the end of the tail, and ending with the grin, which remained some time after the rest of it had gone.
'Well! I've often seen a cat without a grin', thought Alice, 'but a grin without a cat!
It's the most curious thing I ever saw in my life!'
Just as the grin is a property of a cat, polarization is a property of a photon. In their paper, the physicists explain how, "in the curious way of quantum mechanics, photon polarization may exist where there is no photon at all." ,,,when the photon's location and polarization are measured simultaneously, the results are identical to those of the original experiment: the photon is in the left arm while the polarization is in the right arm.

http://phys.org/news/2013-11-physicists-quantum-cheshire-cats-paradoxes.html
It should also be noted that the 'uncertainty principle' for 3-D material particles is extended even to the point of not even being able to determine the exact radius for an electron that is at complete rest:
Is it possible to find the radius of an electron?
The honest answer would be, nobody knows yet. The current knowledge is that the electron seems to be a 'point particle' and has refused to show any signs of internal structure in all measurements. We have an upper limit on the radius of the electron, set by experiment, but that's about it. By our current knowledge, it is an elementary particle with no internal structure, and thus no 'size'.
http://www4.hcmut.edu.vn/~huynhqlinh/olympicvl/tailieu/physlink_askexpert/ae114.cfm.htm
It would also like to point out that the hardest, most solid, indestructible 'thing' in a material object, such as a rock, are not any of the wave/particles in any of the atoms of a rock, but are the unchanging, transcendent, universal, constants which exercise overriding 'non-chaotic' dominion of all the wave/particle quantum events in the atoms of the rock. i.e. It is the unchanging stability of the universal 'transcendent information' constants, which have not varied one iota from the universe's creation as far as scientists can tell, that allows a rock to be 'rock solid' in the first place.

What is Truth?
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dc8z67wz_3g3vnsmcn
Stability of Coulomb Systems in a Magnetic Field - Charles Fefferman
Excerpt of Abstract: I study N electrons and M protons in a magnetic field. It is shown that the total energy per particle is bounded below by a constant independent of M and N, provided the fine structure constant is small. Here, the total energy includes the energy of the magnetic field.
http://www.jstor.org/pss/2367659?cookieSet=1

Testing Creation Using the Proton to Electron Mass Ratio
Excerpt: The bottom line is that the electron to proton mass ratio unquestionably joins the growing list of fundamental constants in physics demonstrated to be constant over the history of the universe.,,,
http://www.reasons.org/TestingCreationUsingtheProtontoElectronMassRatio
Unchanging universal constant rules our materialistic theories for Dark Energy
Dark energy alternatives to Einstein are running out of room - January 9, 2013
Excerpt: Last month, a group of European astronomers, using a massive radio telescope in Germany, made the most accurate measurement of the proton-to-electron mass ratio ever accomplished and found that there has been no change in the ratio to one part in 10 million at a time when the universe was about half its current age, around 7 billion years ago. When Thompson put this new measurement into his calculations, he found that it excluded almost all of the dark energy models using the commonly expected values or parameters.
If the parameter space or range of values is equated to a football field, then almost the whole field is out of bounds except for a single 2-inch by 2-inch patch at one corner of the field. In fact, most of the allowed values are not even on the field. "In effect, the dark energy theories have been playing on the wrong field," Thompson said. "The 2-inch square does contain the area that corresponds to no change in the fundamental constants, and that is exactly where Einstein stands."

http://phys.org/news/2013-01-dark-energy-alternatives-einstein-room.html
As well, it seems fairly obvious the actions observed in the double slit experiment, as well as other experiments, are only possible if our reality has its actual basis in a 'higher transcendent dimension':

Explaining The Unseen Higher Dimension - Dr. Quantum - Flatland - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4119478

Of related interest:
Does the atom have a designer? When science and spirituality meet - LAKHI GOENKA an Engineer - May 2012
Excerpt: Atoms are machines that enable the physical, electromagnetic (including light), nuclear, chemical, and biological (including life) functioning of the universe. Atoms are a complex assembly of interacting particles that enable the entire functioning of the universe. They are the machine that enables all other machines. It is virtually impossible to explain the structure, complexity, internal dynamics, and resulting functionality of the atom from chance events or through evolutionary mechanisms. The atom is a machine that provides multiple functions, and every machine is the product of intelligence. The atom must have a designer.
http://www.annarbor.com/news/opinion/does-the-atom-have-a-designer/
These following videos and articles on Dark Energy and Matter put the another nail in the coffin for the materialistic philosophy (as if it was not already completely falsified by quantum mechanics):
REPORT OF THE DARK ENERGY TASK FORCE
The abstract of the September 2006 Report of the Dark Energy Task Force says: “Dark energy appears to be the dominant component of the physical Universe, yet there is no persuasive theoretical explanation for its existence or magnitude. The acceleration of the Universe is, along with dark matter, the observed phenomenon that most directly demonstrates that our (materialistic) theories of fundamental particles and gravity are either incorrect or incomplete. Most experts believe that nothing short of a revolution in our understanding of fundamental physics will be required to achieve a full understanding of the cosmic acceleration. For these reasons, the nature of dark energy ranks among the very most compelling of all outstanding problems in physical science. These circumstances demand an ambitious observational program to determine the dark energy properties as well as possible.”
http://jdem.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/Decadal_Survey-Dark_Energy_Task_Force_report.pdf
The Mathematical Anomaly Of Dark Matter - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4133609
Dark matter halo
Excerpt: The dark matter halo is the single largest part of the Milky Way Galaxy as it covers the space between 100,000 light-years to 300,000 light-years from the galactic center. It is also the most mysterious part of the Galaxy. It is now believed that about 95% of the Galaxy is composed of dark matter, a type of matter that does not seem to interact with the rest of the Galaxy's matter and energy in any way except through gravity. The dark matter halo is the location of nearly all of the Milky Way Galaxy's dark matter, which is more than ten times as much mass as all of the visible stars, gas, and dust in the rest of the Galaxy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter_halo

Gas rich galaxies confirm prediction of modified gravity theory (MOND) - February 2011
Excerpt: Almost everyone agrees that on scales of large galaxy clusters and up, the Universe is well described by dark matter - dark energy theory. However, according to McGaugh this cosmology does not account well for what happens at the scales of galaxies and smaller. "MOND is just the opposite," he said. "It accounts well for the 'small' scale of individual galaxies, but MOND doesn't tell you much about the larger universe.
http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-02-gas-rich-galaxies-gravity-theory.html
Hubble Finds Ring of Dark Matter - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4133618

The Elusive "non-Material" Foundation For Gravity:
http://docs.google.com/View?id=dc8z67wz_38d7zmrn9v

Study Sheds Light On Dark Energy - video
http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/space-study-sheds-light-on-dark-energy.html

Hugh Ross PhD. - Scientific Evidence For Dark Energy - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4347218
What The Universe Is Made Of?: - Pie Chart Graph
96% Invisible "Stuff" vs. 4% Visible Material (Of Note: as of 2008 visible matter only accounts for less than .27% of everything that exists in the universe)
http://hetdex.org/images/dark_energy/universe_made_of.jpg

Dark Matter:
Despite comprehensive maps of the nearby universe that cover the spectrum from radio to gamma rays, we are only able to account for 10% of the mass that must be out there.(actually it is now known to be only .27%) "It's a fairly embarrassing situation to admit that we can't find 90 percent of the universe." Astronomer Bruce H. Margon
http://docs.kde.org/stable/en/kdeedu/kstars/ai-darkmatter.html
Table 2.1
Inventory of All the Stuff That Makes Up the Universe (Visible vs. Invisible)

Dark Energy - 72.1%
Exotic Dark Matter - 23.3%
Ordinary Dark Matter - 4.35%
Ordinary Bright Matter (Stars) - 0.27%
Planets - 0.0001%

Invisible portion - Universe - 99.73%
Visible portion - Universe - .27%


of note: The preceding 'inventory' of the universe is updated to the second and third releases of the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe's (WMAP) results in 2006; 2008; (Why The Universe Is The Way It Is; Hugh Ross; pg. 37)
The Era of Neutrino Astronomy Has Begun - Nov. 21, 2013
Excerpt: "The era of neutrino astronomy has begun," Sullivan said as the IceCube Collaboration announced the observation of 28 very high-energy particle events that constitute the first solid evidence for astrophysical neutrinos from cosmic sources.,,
Billions of them pass through our bodies unnoticed every second. These extremely high-energy particles maintain their speed and direction unaffected by magnetic fields.,,,

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/11/131121142259.htm
Now let's look at the five questions I listed earlier, starting with the first question and working our way to the last.
Romans 1:20
For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
To answer our first question (What evidence is found for the universe's ability to support life?) we will look at the universe and see how its 'parts' are put together. Let's start with carbon. Carbon is shown to be the only element, from the periodic table of elements, by which the complex molecules of life in this universe may be built. The carbon atom is a marvel in and of itself. Carbon is the sixth element on the periodic table and makes up two tenths of one percent of the earths crust. It is the backbone of which all life is built or can be built. It makes up 18% of the mass of our body. In its pure form it is recognized as soot, pencil lead or diamonds. Diamonds are the hardest substance known. Carbon fiber is the strongest fiber known. Carbon fiber is used in the construction of high performance airplanes, tennis rackets and bicycles, just to name a few. Man-made carbon-based molecules have allowed breakthroughs in low temperature super-conductors. Carbon-60 is a recent discovery, from the 1980's, called the buckyball. It is a molecule of sixty interlocking carbon atoms and is the roundest substance known in all molecular science. Graphene, which is a more recent 'revolutionary' discovery within the last decade, is a remarkably flat molecule made of carbon atoms arranged in hexagonal rings, and is the thinnest material possible. Graphene is made of ordinary carbon atoms arranged in a "chicken-wire" lattice. These layers, sometimes just a single atom thick, conduct electricity with virtually no resistance, very little heat generation -- and less power consumption than silicon. Graphene conducts electricity better than any other known material at room temperature and is ten times stronger than steel. Graphene promises to greatly outperform silicon in computer chips in the near future.
Removing Processing Flaw, Graphene Retains Extreme Strength at Macro-Scale - May 31, 2013
Excerpt: In its perfect crystalline form, graphene (a one-atom-thick carbon layer) is the strongest material ever measured, as the Columbia Engineering team reported in Science in 2008 -- so strong that, as Hone observed, "it would take an elephant, balanced on a pencil, to break through a sheet of graphene the thickness of Saran Wrap.",,,
Currently, scientists can grow sheets of graphene as large as a television screen by using chemical vapor deposition (CVD), in which single layers of graphene are grown on copper substrates in a high-temperature furnace.,,,
,,they found that the chemical most commonly used to remove the copper substrate also causes damage to the graphene, severely degrading its strength.,,
,,,"Our work shows that grain boundaries in 2D materials can be much more sensitive to processing than in 3D materials. This is due to all the atoms in graphene being surface atoms, so surface damage that would normally not degrade the strength of 3D materials can completely destroy the strength of 2D materials. However with appropriate processing that avoids surface damage, grain boundaries in 2D materials, especially graphene, can be nearly as strong as the perfect, defect-free structure.",,,
,,,"This is an exciting result for the future of graphene, because it provides experimental evidence that the exceptional strength it possesses at the atomic scale can persist all the way up to samples inches or more in size," says Hone. "This strength will be invaluable as scientists continue to develop new flexible electronics and ultrastrong composite materials."
Strong, large-area graphene can be used for a wide variety of applications such as flexible electronics and strengthening components -- potentially, a television screen that rolls up like a poster or ultrastrong composites that could replace carbon fiber. Or, the researchers speculate, a science fiction idea of a space elevator that could connect an orbiting satellite to Earth by a long cord that might consist of sheets of CVD graphene, since graphene (and its cousin material, carbon nanotubes) is the only material with the high strength-to-weight ratio required for this kind of hypothetical application.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/05/130531114733.htm
Carbon also has the unique ability to form long chains of complex molecules that have a high degree of stability. Stable complex molecules are required to build sugars, to build DNA, to build RNA, to build amino acids, to build proteins, to build cells, and finally, to build all living organisms on earth. Substances formed around carbon far out-number all other substances combined. No other element comes close to forming the wide variety of stable compounds as does carbon. Yet if it were not for this unique ability to form complex molecules, life could not exist. Organic chemistry, the study of carbon compounds, and their profuse and intricate behavior, is a dedicated science in its own right.

Of related note: Synthetic carbon compound rivals diamonds in hardness:
Diamond in the rough: Half-century puzzle solved - July 20, 2012
Excerpt: In fact, “Our study shows that M-carbon is extremely incompressible and hard, rivaling the extreme properties of diamond so much that it damages diamond,” said principal investigator Kanani K.M. Lee
http://phys.org/news/2012-07-diamond-rough-half-century-puzzle.html
The only element similar to carbon, which has a similar atomic structure to form macro (large) molecules, is silicon. Yet silicon, though having a similar atomic structure, is severely limited in its ability to make complex macro-molecules. Silicon-based molecules are comparatively unstable and sometimes highly reactive. Thus from this, and many other evidences against silicon, carbon is found to be the only element from which life in this universe may be built. Carbon and other 'heavy' elements also provides one, of several, reasons why the universe must be as old and as large as it is. 'Heavy' elements did not form in the Big Bang. Thus, they had to be synthesized in stars and exploded into space before they were available to form a planet on which carbon-based life could exist. Carbon is the first of the 'heavy' elements that is exclusively formed in the interiors of stars. All the elements below carbon were exclusively, or semi-exclusively, formed within the Big Bang of the universe. The delicate balance at which carbon is synthesized in stars is truly a work of art. Fred Hoyle (1915-2001), a famed astrophysicist, is the scientist who established the nucleo-synthesis of heavier elements within stars as mathematically valid in 1946. Years after Sir Fred discovered the stunning precision with which carbon is synthesized in stars he stated:
From 1953 onward, Willy Fowler and I have always been intrigued by the remarkable relation of the 7.65 MeV energy level in the nucleus of 12 C to the 7.12 MeV level in 16 O. If you wanted to produce carbon and oxygen in roughly equal quantities by stellar nucleosynthesis, these are the two levels you would have to fix, and your fixing would have to be just where these levels are actually found to be. Another put-up job? ... I am inclined to think so. A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super intellect has “monkeyed” with the physics as well as the chemistry and biology, and there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. -
Sir Fred Hoyle, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 20 (1982): 16.

The Fine-Tuning of the Universe for Life Just Got Finer - March 15, 2013
Excerpt: In new lattice calculations done at the Juelich Supercomputer Centre [in Germany] the physicists found that just a slight variation in the light quark mass will change the energy of the Hoyle state, and this in turn would affect the production of carbon and oxygen in such a way that life as we know it wouldn't exist.
"The Hoyle state of carbon is key," Lee says. "If the Hoyle state energy was at 479 keV [479,000 electron volts] or more above the three alpha particles [helium-4 nuclei], then the amount of carbon produced would be too low for carbon-based life. "The same holds true for oxygen," he adds. "If the Hoyle state energy were instead within 279 keV of the three alphas, then there would be plenty of carbon. But the stars would burn their helium into carbon much earlier in their life cycle. As a consequence, the stars would not be hot enough to produce sufficient oxygen for life. In our lattice simulations, we find that more than a 2 or 3 percent change in the light quark mass would lead to problems with the abundance of either carbon or oxygen in the universe."

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/03/the_fine-tuning_1070091.html
Sir Fred also stated:
I do not believe that any physicist who examined the evidence could fail to draw the inference that the laws of nuclear physics have been deliberately designed with regard to the consequences they produce within stars.
Sir Fred Hoyle - "The Universe: Past and Present Reflections." Engineering and Science, November, 1981. pp. 8–12
Michael Denton - We Are Stardust - Uncanny Balance Of The Elements - Atheist Fred Hoyle's conversion to a Deist/Theist - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4003877

"Dr. Michael Denton on Evidence of Fine-Tuning in the Universe" (Remarkable balance of various key elements for life)- podcast
http://intelligentdesign.podomatic.com/entry/2012-08-21T14_43_59-07_00

Peer-Reviewed Paper Argues for an Engineered Universe - January 2012 - podcast
http://intelligentdesign.podomatic.com/entry/2012-01-23T14_26_19-08_00

God's Creation - The Miracle Of Carbon and Water - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4193487

What could make a scientist who was such a staunch atheist, as Hoyle was before his discoveries, make such a statement? The reason he made such a statement is because Hoyle was expertly trained in the exacting standards of mathematics. He knew numbers cannot lie when correctly used and interpreted. What he found was a staggering numerical balance to the many independent universal constants needed to synthesize carbon in stars. These independent constants were of such a high degree of precision as to leave no room for blind chance whatsoever. Thus, with no wiggle room for the blind chance of materialism, Fred Hoyle had to admit the evidence he found was compelling to the proposition of intelligent design by a infinitely powerful, and transcendent, Creator. Let's look at some of these exacting mathematical standards, and finely tuned universal constants, to see the precision of 'intelligent design' he saw for the math, and for the foundational building blocks of the transcendent universal 'information' constants, for this universe.

Sometimes atheists will appeal to chaos theory to explain how complexity can arise from simplicity. A vivid example of what they are proposing is here:

Mandelbrot Set Zoom - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEw8xpb1aRA

Yet in criticism to complexity ‘naturally’ arising from simplicity, as is assumed in chaos/fractal theory, it should be noted that, at the very least, two very different equations, rather than chaos/fractal equations, govern the foundational structure of the universe. One equation governs micro actions of the universe, and the other equation governs the macro shape of the universe: The following is the equation that governs ‘micro’ actions:

Finely Tuned Big Bang, Elvis In The Multiverse, and the Schroedinger Equation - Granville Sewell - audio
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4233012

At the 4:00 minute mark of the preceding audio, Dr. Sewell comments on the ‘transcendent’ and ‘constant’ Schroedinger’s Equation;
‘In chapter 2, I talk at some length on the Schroedinger Equation which is called the fundamental equation of chemistry. It’s the equation that governs the behavior of the basic atomic particles subject to the basic forces of physics. This equation is a partial differential equation with a complex valued solution. By complex valued I don’t mean complicated, I mean involving solutions that are complex numbers, a+bi, which is extraordinary that the governing equation, basic equation, of physics, of chemistry, is a partial differential equation with complex valued solutions. There is absolutely no reason why the basic particles should obey such a equation that I can think of except that it results in elements and chemical compounds with extremely rich and useful chemical properties. In fact I don’t think anyone familiar with quantum mechanics would believe that we’re ever going to find a reason why it should obey such an equation, they just do! So we have this basic, really elegant mathematical equation, partial differential equation, which is my field of expertise, that governs the most basic particles of nature and there is absolutely no reason why, anyone knows of, why it does, it just does. British physicist Sir James Jeans said “From the intrinsic evidence of His creation, the great architect of the universe begins to appear as a pure mathematician”, so God is a mathematician to’.
i.e. the Materialist is at a complete loss to explain why this should be so, whereas the Christian Theist presupposes such ‘transcendent’ control of our temporal, material, reality,,,

John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

of note; 'the Word' is translated from the Greek word ‘Logos’. Logos happens to be the word from which we derive our modern word ‘Logic’.

The following is the very 'different' equation that is found to govern the 'macro' structure of the universe:

0 = 1 + e ^(i*pi) — Euler

Believe it or not, the five most important numbers in mathematics are tied together, through the complex domain in Euler's number, And that points, ever so subtly but strongly, to a world of reality beyond the immediately physical. Many people resist the implications, but there the compass needle points to a transcendent reality that governs our 3D 'physical' reality.
God by the Numbers - Connecting the constants
Excerpt: The final number comes from theoretical mathematics. It is Euler's (pronounced "Oiler's") number: e^pi*i. This number is equal to -1, so when the formula is written e^pi*i+1 = 0, it connects the five most important constants in mathematics (e, pi, i, 0, and 1) along with three of the most important mathematical operations (addition, multiplication, and exponentiation). These five constants symbolize the four major branches of classical mathematics: arithmetic, represented by 1 and 0; algebra, by i; geometry, by pi; and analysis, by e, the base of the natural log. e^pi*i+1 = 0 has been called "the most famous of all formulas," because, as one textbook says, "It appeals equally to the mystic, the scientist, the philosopher, and the mathematician.",,,
The discovery of this number gave mathematicians the same sense of delight and wonder that would come from the discovery that three broken pieces of pottery, each made in different countries, could be fitted together to make a perfect sphere. It seemed to argue that there was a plan where no plan should be.,,,
Today, numbers from astronomy, biology, and theoretical mathematics point to a rational mind behind the universe.,,, The apostle John prepared the way for this conclusion when he used the word for logic, reason, and rationality—logos—to describe Christ at the beginning of his Gospel: "In the beginning was the logos, and the logos was with God, and the logos was God." When we think logically, which is the goal of mathematics, we are led to think of God.

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2006/march/26.44.html?start=3
(of note; Euler's Number (equation) is more properly called Euler's Identity in math circles.)

This is interesting. Euler's formula (the most famous of all formulas), when plotted in 3D, results in the fundamental geometry of DNA: a helix!

The following images show the graph of the complex exponential function, complex exponential function, e^{ix}, by plotting the Taylor series of e^{ix} in the 3D complex space (a helix)
http://www.songho.ca/math/euler/euler.html

The Physics of Illusion - video (Euler's Identity as a spiral at 23:00 minute mark)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ht3sAP-GQrk

Alexander Vilenkin comments on the beauty of mathematics being ideally suited for describing our physical universe (particularly e^ipi+1=0)
Quote: "It appears that the Creator shares the mathematicians' sense of beauty." - Alexander Vilenkin http://rfforum.websitetoolbox.com/post?id=3754268

A Theology of Mathematics - 2008
http://www.elliotnelson.net/2008/05/theology-of-mathematics.html

Leonhard Euler, the son of a Christian pastor, and a fervent Christian all his life, is simply unparalleled in mathematics:

An Evening with Leonhard Euler - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-DV26x6n_Q

A Tribute to Euler - Harvard Lecture - William Dunham - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEWj93XjON0

Moreover Euler’s Identity, rather than just being the most enigmatic equation in math, finds striking correlation to how our 3D reality is actually structured,,,

The following picture, Bible verses, article, and videos are very interesting since, with the discovery of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR), the universe is found to actually be a circular sphere which 'coincidentally' corresponds to the circle of pi within Euler's identity:

Picture of CMBR
http://new-universe.org/zenphoto/albums/Chapter4/Illustrations/Abrams47.jpg
Proverbs 8:26-27
While as yet He had not made the earth or the fields, or the primeval dust of the world. When He prepared the heavens, I was there, when He drew a circle on the face of the deep,

Job 26:10
He has inscribed a circle on the face of the waters at the boundary between light and darkness.
The Known Universe by AMNH – video - (please note the 'centrality' of the Earth in the universe at the 3:36 minute mark in the video)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17jymDn0W6U

Planck's view of the Universe (layers of filtering) - Oct. 18, 2013 - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fn0FgOwyu0w

Planck Cruise to L2 (mapping CMBR) - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=piYn0nbbJcs

Planck satellite unveils the Universe -- now and then (w/ Video showing the mapping of the 'sphere' of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation with the satellite) - 2010
http://phys.org/news197534140.html#nRlv
Best Map Ever Made of Universe's Oldest Light (CMBR): Planck Mission Brings Universe Into Sharp Focus - Mar. 21, 2013
Excerpt: The Planck space mission has released the most accurate and detailed map ever made of the oldest light in the universe, revealing new information about its age, contents and origins.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/03/130321084221.htm
Enlarged Image of Cosmic Background Radiation - March 21, 2013
http://cdn.physorg.com/newman/gfx/news/hires/2013/planck_cmb.jpg
Also of related note is how precise, and mysterious, the 'roundness' of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation is:
The Cosmic Background Radiation
Excerpt: These fluctuations are extremely small, representing deviations from the average of only about 1/100,000 of the average temperature of the observed background radiation. The highly isotropic nature of the cosmic background radiation indicates that the early stages of the Universe were almost completely uniform. This raises two problems for (a naturalistic understanding of) the big bang theory.
First, when we look at the microwave background coming from widely separated parts of the sky it can be shown that these regions are too separated to have been able to communicate with each other even with signals traveling at light velocity. Thus, how did they know to have almost exactly the same temperature? This general problem is called the horizon problem.
Second, the present Universe is homogenous and isotropic, but only on very large scales. For scales the size of superclusters and smaller the luminous matter in the universe is quite lumpy, as illustrated in the following figure. ,,, Thus, the discovery of small deviations from smoothness (anisotopies) in the cosmic microwave background is welcome, for it provides at least the possibility for the seeds around which structure formed in the later Universe. However, as we shall see, we are still far from a quantitative understanding of how this came to be.

http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr162/lect/cosmology/cbr.html

Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe - Main result
Excerpt: The microwave background is very homogeneous in temperature (the relative variations from the mean, which presently is still 2.7 kelvins, are only of the order of 5x10−5.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilkinson_Microwave_Anisotropy_Probe#Main_result
From initial entropic considerations, the precision of the initial isotropic (uniform) condition of the 'sphere of the universe' really stands out:
The Physics of the Small and Large: What is the Bridge Between Them? Roger Penrose
Excerpt: "The time-asymmetry is fundamentally connected to with the Second Law of Thermodynamics: indeed, the extraordinarily special nature (to a greater precision than about 1 in 10^10^123, in terms of phase-space volume) can be identified as the "source" of the Second Law (Entropy)."

How special was the big bang? - Roger Penrose
Excerpt: This now tells us how precise the Creator's aim must have been: namely to an accuracy of one part in 10^10^123.
(from the Emperor’s New Mind, Penrose, pp 339-345 - 1989)
Also of interest is two other places in the universe where 'unexpected roundness' is found:
Sun's Almost Perfectly Round Shape Baffles Scientists - (Aug. 16, 2012) —
Excerpt: The sun is nearly the roundest object ever measured. If scaled to the size of a beach ball, it would be so round that the difference between the widest and narrow diameters would be much less than the width of a human hair.,,, They also found that the solar flattening is remarkably constant over time and too small to agree with that predicted from its surface rotation.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/08/120816150801.htm
and this 'unexpected roundness':
Bucky Balls - Andy Gion
Excerpt: Buckyballs (C60; Carbon 60) are the roundest and most symmetrical large molecule known to man. Buckministerfullerine continues to astonish with one amazing property after another. C60 is the third major form of pure carbon; graphite and diamond are the other two. Buckyballs were discovered in 1985,,,
http://www.3rd1000.com/bucky/bucky.htm
The delicate balance at which carbon is synthesized in stars is truly a work of art. Fred Hoyle (1915-2001), a famed astrophysicist, is the scientist who established the nucleo-synthesis of heavier elements within stars as mathematically valid in 1946. He is said to have converted from staunch atheism into being a Theist after discovering the precise balance at which carbon is synthesized in stars. Years after Sir Fred discovered the stunning precision with which carbon is synthesized in stars he stated this:
"I do not believe that any physicist who examined the evidence could fail to draw the inference that the laws of nuclear physics have been deliberately designed with regard to the consequences they produce within stars."
Sir Fred Hoyle - "The Universe: Past and Present Reflections." Engineering and Science, November, 1981. pp. 8–12
Michael Denton - We Are Stardust - Uncanny Balance Of The Elements - and Atheist Fred Hoyle's conversion from atheism to being a Deist/Theist - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4003877

The flatness of the ‘entire’ universe, which 'coincidentally' corresponds to the diameter of pi in Euler’s identity, is found on this following site; (of note this flatness of the universe is an extremely finely tuned condition for the universe that could have, in reality, been a multitude of different values than 'flat'):
Did the Universe Hyperinflate? – Hugh Ross – April 2010
Excerpt: Perfect geometric flatness is where the space-time surface of the universe exhibits zero curvature (see figure 3). Two meaningful measurements of the universe’s curvature parameter, ½k, exist. Analysis of the 5-year database from WMAP establishes that -0.0170 < ½k < 0.0068.4 Weak gravitational lensing of distant quasars by intervening galaxies places -0.031 < ½k < 0.009.5 Both measurements confirm the universe indeed manifests zero or very close to zero geometric curvature,,,
http://www.reasons.org/did-universe-hyperinflate
Refutation Of Oscillating Universe - Michael Strauss PhD. - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4323673
Why astronomers say we live in a remarkably flat universe—and what that really means - January 2014
Excerpt: the universe appears remarkably flat. It takes a lot of effort to find any curvature at all,
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/why-astronomers-say-we-live-in-a-remarkably-flat-universe-and-what-that-really-means/
The curvature of the space time of the universe is 'flat' to at least 1 in 10^15 places of accuracy
http://books.google.com/books?id=O_beAVEoR7sC&pg=PT88&lpg=PT88&dq#v=onepage&q&f=false
Job 38:4-5
“Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation?
Tell me, if you understand.
Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know!
Who stretched a measuring line across it?
Here are a few notes on the transcendence and 'infinity' of pi and the failed attempt by materialists to 'explain away' the fact that the universe is 'structured' on pi':
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/further-fun-friday-is-pi-day/#comment-492865

This following video shows that the universe also has a primary characteristic of expanding/growing equally in all places, which 'coincidentally' strongly corresponds to the 'e' in Euler's identity. 'e' is the constant that is used in equations of math for finding what the true rates of growth and decay are for any given mathematical problem trying to find as such in this universe:

Centrality of Earth Within The 4-Dimensional Space-Time of General Relativity - video
http://www.metacafe.com/w/8421879

This following video shows how finely tuned the '4-Dimensional' expansion of the universe is (1 in 10^120);

Fine Tuning Of Dark Energy and Mass of the Universe - Hugh Ross - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4007682

Here are the verses in the Bible, which were written over 2000 years before the discovery of the finely tuned expansion of the universe by ‘Dark Energy’, that speak of God ‘Stretching out the Heavens’; Job 9:8; Isaiah 40:22; Isaiah 40:24; Isaiah 48:13; Zechariah 12:1; Psalm 104:2; Isaiah 42:5; Isaiah 45:12; Isaiah 51:13; Jeremiah 51:15; Jeremiah 10:12. The following verse is one of my favorites out of the group of verses:
Job 9:8
He alone stretches out the heavens and treads on the waves of the sea.
Towards the end of the following video, Michael Denton speaks of the square root of negative 1 being necessary to understand the foundational quantum behavior of this universe. The square root of -1 is also 'coincidentally' found in Euler's identity:

Michael Denton – Mathematical Truths Are Transcendent And Beautiful – Square root of -1 is built into the fabric of reality – video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4003918"

I find it extremely strange that the enigmatic Euler's identity, which was deduced centuries ago, would find such striking correlation to how reality is actually found to be structured by modern science. In pi we have correlation to the 'sphere of the universe' as revealed by the Cosmic Background radiation, as well pi correlates to the finely-tuned 'geometric flatness' within the 'sphere of the universe' that has now been found. In 'e' we have the fundamental constant that is used for ascertaining exponential growth in math that strongly correlates to the fact that space-time is 'expanding/growing equally' in all places of the universe. In the square root of -1 we have what is termed a 'imaginary number', which was first proposed to help solve equations like x2+ 1 = 0 back in the 17th century, yet now, as Michael Denton pointed out in the preceding video, it is found that the square root of -1 is required to explain the behavior of quantum mechanics in this universe. The correlation of Euler's identity, to the foundational characteristics of how this universe is constructed and operates, points overwhelmingly to a transcendent Intelligence, with a capital I, which created this universe! It should also be noted that these mathematical constants, pi,e, and square root -1, were at first thought by many to be completely transcendent of any material basis, to find that these transcendent constants of Euler's identity in fact 'govern' material reality, in such a foundational way, should be enough to send shivers down any mathematicians spine.

Further discussion relating Euler's identity to General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics:

In the equation e^pi*i + 1 = 0 we find that pi is required in General Relativity (Einstein’s Equation),and we also find that the square root of negative 1 is required in Quantum Mechanics (Schrödinger’s Equations)

The Five Foundational Equations of the Universe
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UlGuMC76IbUDZEqFjeG3zqGw9KHto-ifhYh6CjGObHk/edit

Quantum Mechanics (Schrödinger’s Equations) more detail:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%B6dinger_equation

,,and we also find that 'e' is important in mathematics in that 'e' is required in wave equations, in finding the distribution of prime numbers, in electrical theory, and is also found to be foundational to trigonometry. The number 'e' also appears in banking, because it is the maximum limit for growth of compound interest.

Some of the various uses and equations of 'e' are listed at the bottom of the following page:
http://www.biblemaths.com/pag03_pie/img0.gif

Of note natural log e (which is found in Euler's identity and John 1:1) is also found to be necessary for calculating 'growth' of the 'golden spiral' of the Fibonacci number;
The Logarithmic Spiral
1. r increases proportionally and remains in proportion with the golden ratio as theta increases if we define the equation as above, multiplied by e^(a*phi). The reasons for this are more thoroughly discussed by Mukhopadhyay.
http://goldenratiomyth.weebly.com/the-logarithmic-spiral.html
"Like a Shakespearean sonnet that captures the very essence of love, or a painting that brings out the beauty of the human form that is far more than just skin deep, Euler's Equation reaches down into the very depths of existence."
Stanford University mathematics professor - Dr. Keith Devlin
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euler%27s_identity#Mathematical_beauty
Here are some very well done videos, showing the stringent 'mathematical proofs' of Euler's Identity:

Euler's Formula and Euler's Identity: Rationale for Euler's Formula and Euler's Identity - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgNtPOgFje0

Euler's identity - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zApx1UlkpNs

The mystery doesn't stop there, this following video shows how pi and e are found in Genesis 1:1 and John 1:1

Euler's Identity - God Created Mathematics - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4003905

This following website, and video, has the complete working out of the math of Pi and e in the Bible, in the Hebrew and Greek languages respectively, for Genesis 1:1 and John 1:1:
http://www.biblemaths.com/pag03_pie/

Fascinating Bible code – Pi and natural log – Amazing – video (of note: correct exponent for base of Nat Log found in John 1:1 is 10^40, not 10^65 as stated in the video)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wg9LiiSVaes

I don’t how much this will effect the mathematical tastes of some people, but Dr. William Dembski has even related 1 and 0, which are also found in Euler’s identity, to theology here:
The End Of Christianity – Finding a Good God in an Evil World – Pg.31
William Dembski PhD. Mathematics
Excerpt: “In mathematics there are two ways to go to infinity. One is to grow large without measure. The other is to form a fraction in which the denominator goes to zero. The Cross is a path of humility in which the infinite God becomes finite and then contracts to zero, only to resurrect and thereby unite a finite humanity within a newfound infinity.”
http://www.designinference.com/documents/2009.05.end_of_xty.pdf
Of note: I hold ‘growing large without measure’ to be a lesser quality infinity than a fraction in which the denominator goes to zero. The reason why I hold it to be a ‘lesser quality infinity’ is stated at the 4:30 minute mark of the following video:

Can A “Beginning-less Universe” Exist? – William Lane Craig – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8YN0fwo5J4

Another transcendent mathematical structure that is found imbedded throughout our reality is Fibonacci's Number;
The golden ratio (tau) is seen in some surprising areas of mathematics. The ratio of consecutive Fibonacci numbers (1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13 . . ., each number being the sum of the previous two numbers) approaches the golden ratio, as the sequence gets infinitely long. The sequence is sometimes defined as starting at 0, 1, 1, 2, 3
http://www.jimloy.com/geometry/golden.htm
The Signs HD (Atheism VS Theism) Full Documentary - Fibonacci at 45 minute mark - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=UASU-AjPA7M#t=2661s

Nature by Numbers – The Fingerprint of God – video
https://vimeo.com/9953368

Fibonacci Numbers – The Fingerprint of God - video - (See video description for a look at Euler’s Identity)
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5988843/

Golden Ratio in Human Body - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=085KSyQVb-U

What Phi (the golden ratio) Sounds Like - music
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_Ob-X6DMI4

The following, somewhat related, article is very interesting;
The Man Who Draws Pi - A Case of Acquired Savant Syndrome and Synesthesia Following a Brutal Assault:
Excerpt: Despite his lack of prior training, JP is the only person in the world to have ever handdrawn meticulously accurate approximations of mathematical fractals using only straight lines. He can predict the vectors for prime numbers in his drawings, and his drawing of hf = mc^2, which contains all the style elements of his earliest drawings, is remarkably similar to an actual picture of electron interference patterns, which he found years after first drawing the pattern (see Fig 7, 8).
http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B0GEjtSycjTKNDU4ZmVhNjktNDk2OC00MjBhLTk5ZmQtYzBhYTRkM2ZlNmU4&hl=en

Romans 11:33
Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracing out!
The following video makes you wonder about the preeminence of pi over Tau (2pi):

No, really, pi is wrong: The Tau Manifesto by Michael Hartl - video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H69YH5TnNXI

And Hartl has a solid point about Tau having a certain elegance over pi in many mathematical situations. It is also interesting to note that even though pi has a certain beauty to it when put to music,,,

What pi sounds like when put to music – cool video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOQb_mtkEEE

,,,That Tau (2pi) has an even deeper beauty to it when put to music:

What Tau (2 pi) Sounds Like - music
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3174T-3-59Q

This following video is very interesting for revealing how difficult it was for mathematicians to actually 'prove' that mathematics was even true in the first place:

Georg Cantor - The Mathematics Of Infinity - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4572335
entire video: BBC-Dangerous Knowledge - Part 1
https://vimeo.com/30482156
Part 2
https://vimeo.com/30641992

Kurt Godel's part in bringing the incompleteness theorem to fruition can be picked up here

Kurt Gödel - Incompleteness Theorem - video
http://www.metacafe.com/w/8462821

Kurt Gödel - Incompleteness Theorem as it applies to material particles and the universe
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GN9MSnMhp6a67TvDvW1DusssdidK0Aq1qYC2updfqvw/edit

As you can see, somewhat from the preceding 'Dangerous Knowledge' video, mathematics cannot be held to be 'true' unless an assumption for a highest transcendent infinity is held to be true. A highest infinity which Cantor, and even Godel, held to be God.
BRUCE GORDON: Hawking’s irrational arguments – October 2010
Excerpt: This transcendent reality cannot merely be a Platonic realm of mathematical descriptions, for such things are causally inert abstract entities that do not affect the material world,,,
Rather, the transcendent reality on which our universe depends must be something that can exhibit agency – a mind that can choose among the infinite variety of mathematical descriptions and bring into existence a reality that corresponds to a consistent subset of them. This is what “breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to describe.” Anything else invokes random miracles as an explanatory principle and spells the end of scientific rationality.,,,
Universes do not “spontaneously create” on the basis of abstract mathematical descriptions, nor does the fantasy of a limitless multiverse trump the explanatory power of transcendent intelligent design. What Mr. Hawking’s contrary assertions show is that mathematical savants can sometimes be metaphysical simpletons. Caveat emptor.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/oct/1/hawking-irrational-arguments/
The Laws of Nature (Have Never 'Caused' Anything) by C.S. Lewis - doodle video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_20yiBQAIlk
"Joel Primack, a cosmologist at the University of California, Santa Cruz, once posed an interesting question to the physicist Neil Turok: “What is it that makes the electrons continue to follow the laws.” Turok was surprised by the question; he recognized its force. Something seems to compel physical objects to obey the laws of nature, and what makes this observation odd is just that neither compulsion nor obedience are physical ideas. (p.132) In a Landscape in which anything is possible, nothing is necessary. In a universe in which nothing is necessary, anything is possible. It is nothing that makes the electron follow any laws.
Which, then, is it to be: God, logic, or nothing?
This is the question to which all discussions of the Land-scape and the Anthropic Principle are tending, and because the same question can be raised with respect to moral thought, it is a question with an immense and disturbing intellectual power.
For scientific atheists, the question answers itself: Better logic than nothing, and better nothing than God. (…) The laws of nature, as Isaac Newton foresaw, are not laws of logic, nor are they like the laws of logic. Physicists since Einstein have tried to see in the laws of nature a formal structure that would allow them to say to themselves, “Ah, that is why they are true,” and they have failed."
(p.133)
Berlinski, The Devil’s Delusion pg. 132-133
Thus, as the 'incompleteness theorem', and the preceding critique on the laws of nature show, the 'truthfulness' of any mathematical equation is not held within the equation, or laws, themself but is dependent on God to derive its ultimate truthfulness:
Gödel’s Incompleteness: The #1 Mathematical Breakthrough of the 20th Century
Excerpt: Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem says:
“Anything you can draw a circle around cannot explain itself without referring to something outside the circle - something you have to assume to be true but cannot prove "mathematically" to be true.”

http://www.cosmicfingerprints.com/blog/incompleteness/
THE GOD OF THE MATHEMATICIANS - DAVID P. GOLDMAN - August 2010
Excerpt: we cannot construct an ontology that makes God dispensable. Secularists can dismiss this as a mere exercise within predefined rules of the game of mathematical logic, but that is sour grapes, for it was the secular side that hoped to substitute logic for God in the first place. Gödel's critique of the continuum hypothesis has the same implication as his incompleteness theorems: Mathematics never will create the sort of closed system that sorts reality into neat boxes.
http://www.firstthings.com/article/2010/07/the-god-of-the-mathematicians

Godel and Physics - John D. Barrow
Excerpt (page 5-6): "Clearly then no scientific cosmology, which of necessity must be highly mathematical, can have its proof of consistency within itself as far as mathematics go. In absence of such consistency, all mathematical models, all theories of elementary particles, including the theory of quarks and gluons...fall inherently short of being that theory which shows in virtue of its a priori truth that the world can only be what it is and nothing else. This is true even if the theory happened to account for perfect accuracy for all phenomena of the physical world known at a particular time."
Stanley Jaki - Cosmos and Creator - 1980, pg. 49
http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0612253.pdf

A Biblical View of Mathematics - Vern Poythress - doctorate in theology, PhD in Mathematics (Harvard)
Excerpt: only on a thoroughgoing Biblical basis can one genuinely understand and affirm the real agreement about mathematical truths.
http://www.theologynetwork.org/theology-of-everything/going-on/a-biblical-view-of-mathematics.htm

Taking God Out of the Equation - Biblical Worldview - by Ron Tagliapietra - January 1, 2012
Excerpt: Kurt Gödel (1906–1978) proved that no logical systems (if they include the counting numbers) can have all three of the following properties.
1. Validity ... all conclusions are reached by valid reasoning.
2. Consistency ... no conclusions contradict any other conclusions.
3. Completeness ... all statements made in the system are either true or false.
The details filled a book, but the basic concept was simple and elegant. He summed it up this way: “Anything you can draw a circle around cannot explain itself without referring to something outside the circle—something you have to assume but cannot prove.” For this reason, his proof is also called the Incompleteness Theorem.
Kurt Gödel had dropped a bomb on the foundations of mathematics. Math could not play the role of God as infinite and autonomous. It was shocking, though, that logic could prove that mathematics could not be its own ultimate foundation.
Christians should not have been surprised. The first two conditions are true about math: it is valid and consistent. But only God fulfills the third condition. Only He is complete and therefore self-dependent (autonomous). God alone is “all in all” (1 Corinthians 15:28), “the beginning and the end” (Revelation 22:13). God is the ultimate authority (Hebrews 6:13), and in Christ are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge (Colossians 2:3).

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v7/n1/equation#

The God of the Mathematicians - Goldman
Excerpt: As Gödel told Hao Wang, “Einstein’s religion [was] more abstract, like Spinoza and Indian philosophy. Spinoza’s god is less than a person; mine is more than a person; because God can play the role of a person.” - Kurt Gödel - (Gödel is considered one of the greatest logicians who ever existed)
http://www.firstthings.com/article/2010/07/the-god-of-the-mathematicians
God is the foundation of math
http://www.uncommondescent.com/biology/darwin-doubting-mathematician-david-berlinski-on-why-math-is-really-important/#comment-455440

This following site is a easy to use, and understand, interactive website that takes the user through what is termed 'Presuppositional apologetics'. The website clearly shows that our use of the laws of logic, mathematics, science and morality cannot be accounted for unless we believe in God who guarantees our perceptions and reasoning are trustworthy in the first place.

Presuppositional Apologetics - easy to use interactive website
http://www.proofthatgodexists.org/index.php
The Great Debate: Does God Exist? - Justin Holcomb - audio of the 1985 Greg Bahnsen debate available at the bottom of the site
Excerpt: The transcendental proof for God’s existence is that without Him it is impossible to prove anything. The atheist worldview is irrational and cannot consistently provide the preconditions of intelligible experience, science, logic, or morality. The atheist worldview cannot allow for laws of logic, the uniformity of nature, the ability for the mind to understand the world, and moral absolutes. In that sense the atheist worldview cannot account for our debate tonight.,,,
http://justinholcomb.com/2012/01/17/the-great-debate-does-god-exist/

“If you do not assume the law of non-contradiction, you have nothing to argue about. If you do not assume the principles of sound reason, you have nothing to argue with. If you do not assume libertarian free will, you have no one to argue against. If you do not assume morality to be an objective commodity, you have no reason to argue in the first place.”
- William J Murray
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/the-naturalists-conundrum/#comment-442117
Random Chaos vs. Uniformity Of Nature - Presuppositional Apologetics - video
http://www.metacafe.com/w/6853139

Theism, not atheism, presupposes unchanging universal constants and laws
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RvvRxeFmWnj5SyiGMl7YUIYKUBxLFXnfgRa7T4GO1pc/edit

In fact it is shown that,,,
Comprehensibility of the world
Excerpt: ,,,Bottom line: without an absolute Truth, (there would be) no logic, no mathematics, no beings, no knowledge by beings, no science, no comprehensibility of the world whatsoever.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/mathematics/comprehensibility-of-the-world/

"If the multiverse idea is correct, then the historic mission of physics to explain all the properties of our universe in terms of fundamental principles — to explain why the properties of our universe must necessarily be what they are — is futile, a beautiful philosophical dream that simply isn’t true. Our universe is what it is because we are here."
Alan Lightman
,,, that 'science' would have never gotten off the ground without 'improperly' injecting the Theistic philosophy into science. Sure science is dependent on empirical evidence for validating various competing 'interpretations' within the Theistic philosophy that science is dependent on to be rationally practiced, but we must never forget that unless Theism is held as unconditionally true throughout an investigation then the entire enterprise of science winds up in epistemological failure (Boltzmann’s Brain; Plantinga’s Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism). It is not that Theists are demanding that Theism is the only answer allowed to be considered true prior to investigation, as atheists demand with their artificial imposition of methodological naturalism onto science, it is that if Theism is not held as unconditionally true prior to any scientific investigation then nothing else can ever be held as unconditionally true there afterwards!,,,
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/optimus-replying-to-kn-on-id-as-ideology-summarises-the-case-for-design-in-the-natural-world/#comment-451663

Amazingly, many atheistic Darwinists, who are apparently completely oblivious to this shattering fact from presuppositional apologetics against atheism, (i.e. That it is impossible to rationally practice science unless God is held as true in the first place), insist that Intelligent Design proponents are the ones who are 'denying science':

Chris Mooney's The Republican Brain: Self-Therapeutic and Self-Refuting - Casey Luskin - October 29, 2012
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/10/the_republica065781.html

Albert Einstein commented on the 'miracle' of finding such order, instead of chaos, here:
"You find it strange that I consider the comprehensibility of the world (to the extent that we are authorized to speak of such a comprehensibility) as a miracle or as an eternal mystery. Well, a priori, one should expect a chaotic world, which cannot be grasped by the mind in any way.. the kind of order created by Newton's theory of gravitation, for example, is wholly different. Even if a man proposes the axioms of the theory, the success of such a project presupposes a high degree of ordering of the objective world, and this could not be expected a priori. That is the 'miracle' which is constantly reinforced as our knowledge expands."
Albert Einstein - Goldman - Letters to Solovine p 131.
http://kirtimukha.com/Krishnaswamy/Einstein/on_atheism.htm
Is Randomness really the rational alternative to the ‘First Mover’ of Theists?
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1pSSfbR2QFZ5JAJTOsrEXQDqkJ_6zPTvYNGwcI4YDvRY/edit

Presuppositional Apologetics (1 of 5) - video - Atheist vs. Christian debate on the street (Law of Non-Contradiction featured prominently in the debate)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=056zh7VPxDc

Alvin Plantinga: Divine Action - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5DPneR-Rtc

Epistemology – Why Should The Human Mind Even Be Able To Comprehend Reality? – Stephen Meyer - video – (Notes in description)
http://vimeo.com/32145998

Why should the human mind be able to comprehend reality so deeply? - referenced article
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qGvbg_212biTtvMschSGZ_9kYSqhooRN4OUW_Pw-w0E/edit
The Heretic - Who is Thomas Nagel and why are so many of his fellow academics condemning him? - March 25, 2013
Excerpt: Neo-Darwinism insists that every phenomenon, every species, every trait of every species, is the consequence of random chance, as natural selection requires. And yet, Nagel says, “certain things are so remarkable that they have to be explained as non-accidental if we are to pretend to a real understanding of the world.”
Among these remarkable, nonaccidental things are many of the features of the manifest image. Consciousness itself, for example: You can’t explain consciousness in evolutionary terms, Nagel says, without undermining the explanation itself. Evolution easily accounts for rudimentary kinds of awareness. Hundreds of thousands of years ago on the African savannah, where the earliest humans evolved the unique characteristics of our species, the ability to sense danger or to read signals from a potential mate would clearly help an organism survive.
So far, so good. But the human brain can do much more than this. It can perform calculus, hypothesize metaphysics, compose music—even develop a theory of evolution. None of these higher capacities has any evident survival value, certainly not hundreds of thousands of years ago when the chief aim of mental life was to avoid getting eaten. Could our brain have developed and sustained such nonadaptive abilities by the trial and error of natural selection, as neo-Darwinism insists? It’s possible, but the odds, Nagel says, are “vanishingly small.” If Nagel is right, the materialist is in a pickle. The conscious brain that is able to come up with neo-Darwinism as a universal explanation simultaneously makes neo-Darwinism, as a universal explanation, exceedingly unlikely.,,,
,,,Fortunately, materialism is never translated into life as it’s lived. As colleagues and friends, husbands and mothers, wives and fathers, sons and daughters, materialists never put their money where their mouth is. Nobody thinks his daughter is just molecules in motion and nothing but; nobody thinks the Holocaust was evil, but only in a relative, provisional sense. A materialist who lived his life according to his professed convictions—understanding himself to have no moral agency at all, seeing his friends and enemies and family as genetically determined robots—wouldn’t just be a materialist: He’d be a psychopath.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/heretic_707692.html?page=3

Existential Argument against Atheism - November 1, 2013 by Jason Petersen
1. If a worldview is true then you should be able to live consistently with that worldview.
2. Atheists are unable to live consistently with their worldview.
3. If you can’t live consistently with an atheist worldview then the worldview does not reflect reality.
4. If a worldview does not reflect reality then that worldview is a delusion.
5. If atheism is a delusion then atheism cannot be true.
Conclusion: Atheism is false.

http://answersforhope.com/existential-argument-atheism/
Moreover, this psychopathic characteristic inherent to the atheistic philosophy is born out empirically, in that people who do not believe in a soul tend to be more psychopathic than the majority of normal people in America who do believe in a soul. You can pick that psychopathic study of atheists around the 14:30 minute mark of this following video:

Anthony Jack, Why Don’t Psychopaths Believe in Dualism? – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?list=UUmmObUi8Fq9g1Zcuzqbt0_g&feature=player_detailpage&v=XRGWe-61zOk#t=862s
Neo-Darwinism's Death? - Benjamin Wiker - April 2013
Excerpt: That is why Thomas Nagel made his fellow atheists hopping mad. They realize—and I think rightly so—that Nagel, an atheist, is doing two things that would ultimately reduce their established secular worldview to rubble.
First, he is daring to question the reductionist, materialist assumptions because, on their own terms, they are proving to be incoherent and inadequate. To state the obvious, a view of science that asserts that reason cannot know the truth is at odds with that science's own claims to being true.,,,

http://www.tothesource.org/4_24_2013/4_24_2013.htm
At about the 1 hour mark of the video, which I have ‘current time’ linked here:

Is Faith in God Reasonable? FULL DEBATE with William Lane Craig and Alex Rosenberg - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhfkhq-CM84&feature=player_detailpage#t=3641s

Dr Craig states that Dr. Rosenberg blurs together:
Epistemological Naturalism: which holds that science is the only source of knowledge and, Metaphysical Naturalism: which holds that only physical things exist
As to, Epistemological Naturalism, which holds that science is the only source of knowledge, Dr. Craig states it is a false theory of knowledge since,,,
a). it is overly restrictive
and
b) it is self refuting
Moreover Dr Craig states, epistemological naturalism does not imply metaphysical naturalism.,, In fact a Empistemological Naturalist can and should be a Theist, according to Dr. Craig, because Metaphysical Naturalism is reducto ad absurdum on (at least) these eight following points:
1.) Argument from intentionality
1. If naturalism is true, I cannot think about anything.
2. I am thinking about naturalism.
3. Therefore naturalism is not true.

2.) The argument from meaning
1. If naturalism is true, no sentence has any meaning.
2. Premise (1) has meaning.
3. Therefore naturalism is not true.

3.) The argument from truth
1. If naturalism is true, there are no true sentences.
2. Premise (1) is true.
3. Therefore naturalism is not true.

4.) The argument from moral blame and praise
1. If naturalism is true, I am not morally praiseworthy or blameworthy for any of my actions.
2. I am morally praiseworthy or blameworthy for some of my actions.
3. Therefore naturalism is not true.

5.) Argument from freedom
1. If naturalism is true, I do not do anything freely.
2. I am free to agree or disagree with premise (1).
3. Therefore naturalism is not true.

6.) The argument from purpose
1. If naturalism is true, I do not plan to do anything.
2. I (Dr. Craig) planned to come to tonight's debate.
3. Therefore naturalism is not true.

7.) The argument from enduring
1. If naturalism is true, I do not endure for two moments of time.
2. I have been sitting here for more than a minute.
3. Therefore naturalism is not true.

8.) The argument from personal existence
1. If naturalism is true, I do not exist.
2. I do exist!
3. Therefore naturalism is not true.
I strongly suggest watching Dr. Craig’s presentation, that I have linked, to get a full feel for just how insane the metaphysical naturalist’s position actually is.

Is Metaphysical Naturalism Viable? - William Lane Craig - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzS_CQnmoLQ

The Atheist’s Guide to Intellectual Suicide – James N. Anderson PhD. - video
https://vimeo.com/75897668
Comprehensibility of the world - April 4, 2013
Excerpt: I have to deduce that Einstein hadn’t an understanding of traditional metaphysics. Otherwise he would neither have spoken about the comprehensibility of the universe as “the most incomprehensible thing” or a “miracle”, nor he would have been surprised that math is so “appropriate to the objects of reality”. In fact metaphysics postulates “universal intelligibility”,,,
,,,So, for materialism, the Einstein’s question remains unanswered. Logic and math (that is fully based on logic), to be so effective, must be universal truths. If they are only states of the brain of one or more individuals – as materialists maintain – they cannot be universal at all. Universal truths must be objective and absolute, not just subjective and relative. Only in this way can they be shared among all intelligent beings.,,,
,,,Bottom line: without an absolute Truth, (there would be) no logic, no mathematics, no beings, no knowledge by beings, no science, no comprehensibility of the world whatsoever.

http://www.uncommondescent.com/mathematics/comprehensibility-of-the-world/
Around the 13:20 minute mark of the following video Pastor Joe Boot comments on the self-defeating nature of the atheistic worldview in regards to absolute truth:

Defending the Christian Faith – Pastor Joe Boot – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqE5_ZOAnKo
"If you have no God, then you have no design plan for the universe. You have no prexisting structure to the universe.,, As the ancient Greeks held, like Democritus and others, the universe is flux. It's just matter in motion. Now on that basis all you are confronted with is innumerable brute facts that are unrelated pieces of data. They have no meaningful connection to each other because there is no overall structure. There's no design plan. It's like my kids do 'join the dots' puzzles. It's just dots, but when you join the dots there is a structure, and a picture emerges. Well, the atheists is without that (final picture). There is no preestablished pattern (to connect the facts given atheism)."
Pastor Joe Boot
The scientist in the following video, who works within the field of Quantum Mechanics, scientifically confirms Pastor Joe Boots intuition and shows how conservation of energy in the universe requires quantum non-locality to be true in order for the universe to have coherence.

Is Richard Dawkins proving the existence of God after all? - Antoine Suarez - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIXXqv9zKEw

Moreover, even atheists themselves cannot rid themselves of 'design thinking':
Design Thinking Is Hardwired in the Human Brain. How Come? - October 17, 2012
Excerpt: "Even Professional Scientists Are Compelled to See Purpose in Nature, Psychologists Find." The article describes a test by Boston University's psychology department, in which researchers found that "despite years of scientific training, even professional chemists, geologists, and physicists from major universities such as Harvard, MIT, and Yale cannot escape a deep-seated belief that natural phenomena exist for a purpose" ,,,
Most interesting, though, are the questions begged by this research. One is whether it is even possible to purge teleology from explanation.

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/10/design_thinking065381.html
Alan Turing and Kurt Godel - Incompleteness Theorem and Human Intuition - video (notes in video description)
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/8516356/
"Either mathematics is too big for the human mind or the human mind is more than a machine."
- Kurt Gödel

“If the price of avoiding non-locality is to make an intuitive explanation impossible, one has to ask whether the cost is too great.”
David Bohm et al. Physc. Rep. 144, 321 (1987)
Kurt Gödel: Modern Development of the Foundations Of Mathematics In Light Of Philosophy (1961) - A reading of the best lecture never delivered - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CgZ_9gQfitc

Are Humans merely Turing Machines?
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cvQeiN7DqBC0Z3PG6wo5N5qbsGGI3YliVBKwf7yJ_RU/edit
Godel and Physics - John D. Barrow
Excerpt (page 6): "I don't see any reason why we should have less confidence in this kind of perception, i.e., in mathematical intuition, than in sense perception, which induces us to build up physical theories and to expect that future sense perceptions will agree with them and, moreover, to believe that a question not decidable now has meaning and may be decided in the future"
Kurt Godel - What Is Cantor's Contiuum Problem? - pg. 483
http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0612253.pdf

Dennett on Competence without Comprehension - William A. Dembski - June 2012
Excerpt: As it turns out, there are problems in mathematics that can be proved to be beyond resolution by any algorithm (e.g., the halting problem).
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/06/dennett_on_comp061451.html

Another reason why the human mind is not like a computer - June 2012
Excerpt: In computer chess, there is something called the “horizon effect”. It is an effect innate in the algorithms that underpin it. Due to the mathematically staggering number of possibilities, a computer by force has to restrict itself, to establish a fixed search depth. Otherwise the calculations would never end. This fixed search depth means that a ‘horizon’ comes into play, a horizon beyond which the software engine cannot peer.
Anand has shown time and again that he can see beyond this algorithm-imposed barrier, to find new ways, methods of changing the game. Just when every successive wave of peers and rivals thinks they have got his number, Anand sees that one, all important, absolute move.”

http://www.uncommondescent.com/computer-science/another-reason-why-the-human-mind-is-not-like-a-computer/

No nontrivial formal utility has ever been observed to arise as a result of either chance or necessity. - David L. Abel:
Excerpt: Decision nodes, logic gates and configurable switch settings can theoretically be set randomly or by invariant law, but no nontrivial formal utility has ever been observed to arise as a result of either. Language, logic theory, mathematics, programming, computation, algorithmic optimization, and the scientific method itself all require purposeful choices at bona fide decision nodes.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/david-l-abel-%E2%80%9Cno-nontrivial-formal-utility-has-ever-been-observed-to-arise-as-a-result-of-either-chance-or-necessity-%E2%80%9D/
Materialism simply dissolves into absurdity when pushed to extremes and certainly offers no guarantee to us for believing our perceptions and reasoning within science are trustworthy in the first place:
BRUCE GORDON: Hawking's irrational arguments - October 2010
Excerpt: What is worse, multiplying without limit the opportunities for any event to happen in the context of a multiverse - where it is alleged that anything can spontaneously jump into existence without cause - produces a situation in which no absurdity is beyond the pale. For instance, we find multiverse cosmologists debating the "Boltzmann Brain" problem: In the most "reasonable" models for a multiverse, it is immeasurably more likely that our consciousness is associated with a brain that has spontaneously fluctuated into existence in the quantum vacuum than it is that we have parents and exist in an orderly universe with a 13.7 billion-year history. This is absurd. The multiverse hypothesis is therefore falsified because it renders false what we know to be true about ourselves. Clearly, embracing the multiverse idea entails a nihilistic irrationality that destroys the very possibility of science.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/oct/1/hawking-irrational-arguments/

Big Brain Theory: Have Cosmologists Lost Theirs? - January 2008
Excerpt: it’s hard for nature to make a whole universe. It’s much easier to make fragments of one, like planets, yourself maybe in a spacesuit or even — in the most absurd and troubling example — a naked brain floating in space.,, Alan Guth, a cosmologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology,,, pointed out that some calculations result in an infinite number of free-floating brains for every normal brain, making it “infinitely unlikely for us to be normal brains.” Nature tends to do what is easiest, from the standpoint of energy and probability. And so these fragments — in particular the brains — would appear far more frequently than real full-fledged universes, or than us.,,
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/15/science/15brain.html?_r=3&pagewanted=1&8dpc
Dr. Bruce Gordon - The Absurdity Of The Multiverse and Materialism in General - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5318486/

Here is the entire video:

The Absurdity of Inflation, String Theory and The Multiverse - Dr. Bruce Gordon - video
http://vimeo.com/34468027

This 'lack of a guarantee', for trusting our perceptions and reasoning in science to be trustworthy in the first place, even extends into evolutionary naturalism itself;
Should You Trust the Monkey Mind? - Joe Carter
Excerpt: Evolutionary naturalism assumes that our noetic equipment developed as it did because it had some survival value or reproductive advantage. Unguided evolution does not select for belief except insofar as the belief improves the chances of survival. The truth of a belief is irrelevant, as long as it produces an evolutionary advantage. This equipment could have developed at least four different kinds of belief that are compatible with evolutionary naturalism, none of which necessarily produce true and trustworthy cognitive faculties.
http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2010/09/should-you-trust-the-monkey-mind

Is Atheism Irrational? By GARY GUTTING - NY Times - February 9, 2014
Excerpt: GG: So your claim is that if materialism is true, evolution doesn’t lead to most of our beliefs being true.
Plantinga: Right. In fact, given materialism and evolution, it follows that our belief-producing faculties are not reliable.
Here’s why. If a belief is as likely to be false as to be true, we’d have to say the probability that any particular belief is true is about 50 percent. Now suppose we had a total of 100 independent beliefs (of course, we have many more). Remember that the probability that all of a group of beliefs are true is the multiplication of all their individual probabilities. Even if we set a fairly low bar for reliability — say, that at least two-thirds (67 percent) of our beliefs are true — our overall reliability, given materialism and evolution, is exceedingly low: something like .0004. So if you accept both materialism and evolution, you have good reason to believe that your belief-producing faculties are not reliable.
But to believe that is to fall into a total skepticism, which leaves you with no reason to accept any of your beliefs (including your beliefs in materialism and evolution!). The only sensible course is to give up the claim leading to this conclusion: that both materialism and evolution are true. Maybe you can hold one or the other, but not both. So if you’re an atheist simply because you accept materialism, maintaining your atheism means you have to give up your belief that evolution is true. Another way to put it: The belief that both materialism and evolution are true is self-refuting. It shoots itself in the foot. Therefore it can’t rationally be held.

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/02/09/is-atheism-irrational/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

Scientific Peer Review is in Trouble: From Medical Science to Darwinism - Mike Keas - October 10, 2012
Excerpt: Survival is all that matters on evolutionary naturalism. Our evolving brains are more likely to give us useful fictions that promote survival rather than the truth about reality. Thus evolutionary naturalism undermines all rationality (including confidence in science itself). Renown philosopher Alvin Plantinga has argued against naturalism in this way (summary of that argument is linked on the site:).
Or, if your short on time and patience to grasp Plantinga's nuanced argument, see if you can digest this thought from evolutionary cognitive psychologist Steve Pinker, who baldly states:
"Our brains are shaped for fitness, not for truth; sometimes the truth is adaptive, sometimes it is not."
Steven Pinker, evolutionary cognitive psychologist, How the Mind Works (W.W. Norton, 1997), p. 305.

http://blogs.christianpost.com/science-and-faith/scientific-peer-review-is-in-trouble-from-medical-science-to-darwinism-12421/

Why No One (Can) Believe Atheism/Naturalism to be True - video
Excerpt: "Since we are creatures of natural selection, we cannot totally trust our senses. Evolution only passes on traits that help a species survive, and not concerned with preserving traits that tell a species what is actually true about life."
Richard Dawkins - quoted from "The God Delusion"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4QFsKevTXs
Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism by Alvin Plantinga - video
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL80CAECC36901BCEE

"Refuting Naturalism by Citing our own Consciousness" Dr. Alvin Plantinga - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r34AIo-xBh8

Content and Natural Selection - Alvin Plantinga - 2011
http://www.andrewmbailey.com/ap/Content_Natural_Selection.pdf
Philosopher Sticks Up for God
Excerpt: Theism, with its vision of an orderly universe superintended by a God who created rational-minded creatures in his own image, “is vastly more hospitable to science than naturalism,” with its random process of natural selection, he (Plantinga) writes. “Indeed, it is theism, not naturalism, that deserves to be called ‘the scientific worldview.’”
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/14/books/alvin-plantingas-new-book-on-god-and-science.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

The Historical Alliance of Christianity and Science - Kenneth Richard Samples
Excerpted quote: "Modern science was conceived, and born, and flourished in the matrix of Christian theism. Only liberal doses of self-deception and double-think, I believe, will permit it to flourish in the context of Darwinian naturalism."
~ Alvin Plantinga
http://www.apu.edu/cris/pdfs/historical_alliance.pdf
Can atheists trust their own minds? - William Lane Craig On Alvin Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byN38dyZb-k
The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences - Eugene Wigner - 1960
Excerpt: certainly it is hard to believe that our reasoning power was brought, by Darwin's process of natural selection, to the perfection which it seems to possess.,,,
http://www.dartmouth.edu/~matc/MathDrama/reading/Wigner.html

“One absolutely central inconsistency ruins [the popular scientific philosophy]. The whole picture professes to depend on inferences from observed facts. Unless inference is valid, the whole picture disappears… unless Reason is an absolute, all is in ruins. Yet those who ask me to believe this world picture also ask me to believe that Reason is simply the unforeseen and unintended by-product of mindless matter at one stage of its endless and aimless becoming. Here is flat contradiction. They ask me at the same moment to accept a conclusion and to discredit the only testimony on which that conclusion can be based.”
—C.S. Lewis, Is Theology Poetry (aka the Argument from Reason)
C.S. Lewis, Reason, and Naturalism: An Interview with Dr. Jay Richards - audio
http://www.idthefuture.com/2012/12/cs_lewis_reason_and_naturalism.html

The Argument From Reason - resource page
http://www.reasonsforgod.org/the-argument-from-reason/

In the following video, Victor Reppert, Jay Richards, and Angus Menuge explain the specifics of C.S. Lewis's Argument from Reason.

What is the Argument from Reason? - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-B8n__9CEj4

The Argument from Reason - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKX-QtEo2fI

Animated Apologetics: CS Lewis on Miracles, Science, and the Laws of Nature
http://www.youtube.com/user/CSLewisDoodle/videos

Of related note to Plantinga’s Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism (EAAN):
Bad Decisions Arise from Faulty Information, Not Faulty Brain Circuits - Apr. 15, 2013
Excerpt: Making decisions involves a gradual accumulation of facts that support one choice or another.,,,
,,,if the wrong choice is made, Princeton University researchers have found that it might be the information rather than the brain's decision-making process that is to blame.,,, erroneous decisions tend to arise from errors, or "noise," in the information coming into the brain rather than errors in how the brain accumulates information.
These findings address a fundamental question among neuroscientists about whether bad decisions result from noise in the external information -- or sensory input -- or because the brain made mistakes when tallying that information.,,,
Princeton research,, separated sensory inputs from the internal mental process to show that the former can be noisy while the latter is remarkably reliable,,, "To our great surprise, the internal mental process was perfectly noiseless. All of the imperfections came from noise in the sensory processes,",,,
The study suggests that information represented and processed in the brain's neurons must be robust to noise, Brody said. "In other words, the 'neural code' may have a mechanism for inherent error correction,",,,

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130415172429.htm
Sometimes Atheists will go so far as to say quantum mechanics refutes the rules of right reason that are at the basis of science. The following site shows why that assertion is not only just plain silly (sawing the tree branch off that you are sitting on) but also completely false:

The Law Of Non-Contradiction as it is related to the discovery of the laws of Quantum Mechanics in the early 20th century
http://www.uncommondescent.com/faq/#LNC
Physicalism and Reason - May 2013
Summary: So we find ourselves affirming two contradictory propositions:
1. Everything is governed by cause-and-effect.
2. Our brains can process and be changed by ground-consequent logical relationships.
To achieve consistency, we must either deny that everything is governed by cause-and-effect, and open our worldviews to something beyond physicalism, or we must deny that our brains are influenced by ground-consequence reasoning, and abandon the idea that we are rational creatures.
Ask yourself: are humans like falling dominoes, entirely subject to natural law, or may we stand up and walk in the direction that reason shows us?

http://www.reasonsforgod.org/2012/09/physicalism-and-reason/

Do the New Atheists Own the Market on Reason? - On the terms of the New Atheists, the very concept of rationality becomes nonsensical - By R. Scott Smith, May 03, 2012
Excerpt: If atheistic evolution by NS were true, we'd be in a beginningless series of interpretations, without any knowledge. Yet, we do know many things. So, naturalism & atheistic evolution by NS are false -- non-physical essences exist. But, what's their best explanation? Being non-physical, it can't be evolution by NS. Plus, we use our experiences, form concepts and beliefs, and even modify or reject them. Yet, if we're just physical beings, how could we interact with and use these non-physical things? Perhaps we have non-physical souls too. In all, it seems likely the best explanation for these non-physical things is that there exists a Creator after all.
http://www.patheos.com/Evangelical/Atheists-Own-the-Market-on-Reason-Scott-Smith-05-04-2012?offset=1&max=1
Blunders in Reasoning by Evolutionists - Dr. Jason Lisle - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rIqWJelXcU

The following interview is sadly comical as a evolutionary psychologist realizes that neo-Darwinism can offer no guarantee that our faculties of reasoning will correspond to the truth, not even for the truth that he is purporting to give in the interview, (which begs the question of how was he able to come to that particular truthful realization, in the first place, if neo-Darwinian evolution were actually true?);
Evolutionary guru: Don't believe everything you think - October 2011
Interviewer: You could be deceiving yourself about that.(?)
Evolutionary Psychologist: Absolutely.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21128335.300-evolutionary-guru-dont-believe-everything-you-think.html
Related article;

Evolutionary Guru Deceives Himself - October 12, 2011
http://crev.info/content/111012-evolutionary_guru_deceives_himself
Evolutionists Are Now Saying Their Thinking is Flawed (But Evolution is Still a Fact) - Cornelius Hunter - May 2012
Excerpt: But the point here is that these “researchers” are making an assertion (human reasoning evolved and is flawed) which undermines their very argument. If human reasoning evolved and is flawed, then how can we know that evolution is a fact, much less any particular details of said evolutionary process that they think they understand via their “research”?
http://darwins-god.blogspot.com/2012/05/evolutionists-are-now-saying-their.html
An atheist said the following to me in response to Dr. Plantinga's evolutionary argument against naturalism:
'Creatures inveterately wrong in their inductions have a pathetic but praiseworthy tendency to die before reproducing their kind.'
Yet we find,,,

Babies are born THEISTS - Dr. Olivera Petrovich - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rQKmye5_BQ
Children are born believers in God, academic claims - Telegraph - November 2008
Excerpt: "The preponderance of scientific evidence for the past 10 years or so has shown that a lot more seems to be built into the natural development of children's minds than we once thought, including a predisposition to see the natural world as designed and purposeful and that some kind of intelligent being is behind that purpose,"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/3512686/Children-are-born-believers-in-God-academic-claims.html

'Believers' gene' will spread religion , says academic - January 2011
Excerpt: The World Values Survey, which covered 82 nations from 1981 to 2004, found that adults who attended religious services more than once a week had 2.5 children on average; while those who went once a month had two; and those who never attended had 1.67.
Prof Rowthorn wrote: "The more devout people are, the more children they are likely to have."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/8252939/Believers-gene-will-spread-religion-says-academic.html

Why do atheists have such a low retention rate? - July 2012
Excerpt: Only about 30 percent of those who grow up in an atheist household remain atheists as adults. This “retention rate” was the lowest among the 20 separate categories in the study.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/why-do-atheists-have-such-a-low-retention-rate/
No wonder militant atheists have to be so persistent, and dogmatic, in 'evangelizing' their false nihilistic religion. Even their own children have a inherent tendency to not believe what they are saying.

Thus either the atheist is right and evolution is producing a true belief, and that true belief is Theism, since atheists have a 'praiseworthy tendency to die before reproducing their kind', or Dr. Plantinga is right and there is no guarantee that the results of Darwinian evolution will produce true beliefs about the nature of reality! Which is it? Either answer is a self defeater for evolutionary naturalism!

Of related note:
"nobody to date has yet found a demarcation criterion according to which Darwin(ism) can be described as scientific" - Imre Lakatos (November 9, 1922 – February 2, 1974) a philosopher of mathematics and science, quote was as stated in 1973 LSE Scientific Method Lecture
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imre_Lakatos#Darwin.27s_theory
Science and Pseudoscience - Imre Lakatos - exposing Darwinism as a ‘degenerate science program’, as a pseudoscience, using Lakatos's rigid criteria
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LpGd3smTV1RwmEXC25IAEKMjiypBl5VJq9ssfv4JgeM/edit
"But then with me the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man’s mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey’s mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind?"
- Charles Darwin - Letter To William Graham - July 3, 1881

"Supposing there was no intelligence behind the universe, no creative mind. In that case, nobody designed my brain for the purpose of thinking. It is merely that when the atoms inside my skull happen, for physical or chemical reasons, to arrange themselves in a certain way, this gives me, as a by-product, the sensation I call thought. But, if so, how can I trust my own thinking to be true? It's like upsetting a milk jug and hoping that the way it splashes itself will give you a map of London. But if I can't trust my own thinking, of course I can't trust the arguments leading to Atheism, and therefore have no reason to be an Atheist, or anything else. Unless I believe in God, I cannot believe in thought: so I can never use thought to disbelieve in God."
—C.S. Lewis

Self-Refuting Belief Systems - Cornelius Hunter - September 2012
Excerpt: Relativism states that there are no absolute truths, but if true then that statement is an absolute truth. Likewise the statement that evolution is a fact, if true, means that we cannot know evolution to be a fact. Why? Because with evolution our minds are nothing more than molecules in motion—an accidental biochemistry experiment which has yielded a set of chemicals in a certain configuration. This leads to what Darwin called “the horrid doubt”:
"But then with me the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man’s mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey’s mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind." Darwin to Graham, William - 3 July 1881
Today evolutionists agree that while a random collection of chemicals doesn’t know anything, nonetheless over long time periods and under the action of natural selection, phenomena which we refer to as knowledge, will and consciousness will spontaneously emerge. And how do we know this? Because evolution occurred and we know that it occurred. Therefore evolution must have created the phenomena of knowledge. The proof is left to the student.

http://darwins-god.blogspot.com/2012/09/self-refuting-belief-systems.html

“It seems to me immensely unlikely that mind is a mere by-product of matter. For if my mental processes are determined wholly by the motions of atoms in my brain, I have no reason to suppose that my beliefs are true. They may be sound chemically, but that does not make them sound logically. And hence I have no reason for supposing my brain to be composed of atoms. In order to escape from this necessity of sawing away the branch on which I am sitting, so to speak, I am compelled to believe that mind is not wholly conditioned by matter”.
J. B. S. Haldane ["When I am dead," in Possible Worlds: And Other Essays [1927], Chatto and Windus: London, 1932, reprint, p.209.

The Confidence of Jerry Coyne - Ross Douthat - January 6, 2014
Excerpt: then halfway through this peroration, we have as an aside the confession that yes, okay, it’s quite possible given materialist premises that “our sense of self is a neuronal illusion.” At which point the entire edifice suddenly looks terribly wobbly — because who, exactly, is doing all of this forging and shaping and purpose-creating if Jerry Coyne, as I understand him (and I assume he understands himself) quite possibly does not actually exist at all? The theme of his argument is the crucial importance of human agency under eliminative materialism, but if under materialist premises the actual agent is quite possibly a fiction, then who exactly is this I who “reads” and “learns” and “teaches,” and why in the universe’s name should my illusory self believe Coyne’s bold proclamation that his illusory self’s purposes are somehow “real” and worthy of devotion and pursuit? (Let alone that they’re morally significant:,,) Read more here:
http://douthat.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/01/06/the-confidence-of-jerry-coyne/?_r=0

The ultimate irony is that this philosophy implies that Darwinism itself is just another meme, competing in the infectivity sweepstakes by attaching itself to that seductive word “science.” Dawkins ceaselessly urges us to be rational, but he does so in the name of a philosophy that implies that no such thing as rationality exists because our thoughts are at the mercy of our genes and memes. The proper conclusion is that the Dawkins poor brain has been infected by the Darwin meme, a virus of the mind if ever there was one, and we wonder if he will ever be able to find the cure.
~ Phillip Johnson
John Lennox - Science Is Impossible Without God - Quotes - video remix
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/6287271/

Professor John Lennox | The God Debate | Oxford Union - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otrqzITuSqE

Questions and Answers with Professor John Lennox - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tr7dCphnkw
Not the God of the Gaps, But the Whole Show - John Lennox - April 2012
Excerpt: God is not a "God of the gaps", he is God of the whole show.
http://www.christianpost.com/news/the-god-particle-not-the-god-of-the-gaps-but-the-whole-show-80307/
Absolute Truth - Frank Turek - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VaGNRP6Q-6Q

This following video humorously reveals the bankruptcy that atheists have in trying to ground beliefs within a materialistic, genetic reductionism, worldview;

John Cleese – The Scientists – humorous video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-M-vnmejwXo

The following study is not surprising after realizing atheists have no solid basis within their worldview for grounding their claims about absolute truth;
Look Who's Irrational Now
Excerpt: "What Americans Really Believe," a comprehensive new study released by Baylor University yesterday, shows that traditional Christian religion greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of astrology. It also shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to superstition, tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in pseudoscience than evangelical Christians.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html
Not only does knowledge lose any true meaning or basis, but even life itself loses any true meaning and value without God:
The Absurdity of Life Without God by William Lane Craig
Excerpt: First, there is no ultimate meaning without immortality and God. If each individual person passes out of existence when he dies, then what ultimate meaning can be given to his life? Does it really matter whether he ever existed or not? It might be said that his life was important because it influenced others or affected the course of history. But that shows only a relative significance to his life, not an ultimate significance. His life may be important relative to certain other events. But what is the ultimate significance to any of those events? If all of the events are meaningless, then what can be the ultimate significance of influencing any of them? Ultimately it makes no difference.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2149706/posts
video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJqkpI1W75c
Jennifer Fulwiler: Scientific Atheism to Christ - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aw8uUOPoi2M

What caused Jennifer Fulwiler to question her atheism to begin with? It was the birth of her first child. She says that when she looked at her child, the only way her atheist mind could explain the love that she had for him was to assume it was the result of nothing more than chemical reactions in her brain. However, in the video I linked above, she says:
"And I looked down at him, and I realized that’s not true."
"Consequently atheism turns out to be too simple. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning: just as, if there were no light in the universe and therefore no creatures with eyes, we should never know it was dark. Dark would be a word without meaning."
CS Lewis – Mere Christianity
http://puritanbob.blogspot.com/2007/01/cs-lewis-on-meaningless-atheistic.html

'Finding information in life, in ALL life on earth, is very peculiar for information requires 'meaning' to exist before the information can exist. Therefore finding information in life is very close to finding meaning FOR life on earth.'
- paraphrase UprightBiped UD blogger
It is also interesting to point out that this ‘inconsistent identity’, that was pointed out by Alvin Plantinga, which leads to the failure of neo-Darwinists to be able to make absolute truth claims for their beliefs, is what also leads to the failure of neo-Darwinists to be able to account for objective morality, in that neo-Darwinists cannot maintain a consistent identity towards a stable, unchanging, cause for objective morality within their lives;

The Knock-Down Argument Against Atheist Sam Harris' moral landscape argument – William Lane Craig – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xL_vAH2NIPc

Richard Dawkins and the Moral Argument for God by William Lane Craig - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4f3I2QGpucs

Euthyphro's Dilemma answered - William Lane Craig - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iffPFCCx-iY

What is The Euthyphro Dilemma? With William Lane Craig - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgGB4Oxs5VU

I think Peter S Williams’ version of the moral argument, at the 6:40 minute mark, is very impressive as to being very well thought out and nuanced, in the following video,,

Peter S. Williams vs Christopher Norris – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=wWhkJZw4inY#t=398s

R.C. Sproul and Stephen Meyer Explain Ethics – video – 2013
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzQwyq_e9fI

Stephen Meyer - Morality Presupposes Theism (1 of 4) - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSpdh1b0X_M

If Good and Evil Exist, God Exists: Prager University - Peter Kreeft - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApVYpBwXWLk
'Moral realism' may lead to better moral behavior - January 29, 2013
Excerpt: In one experiment, a street canvasser attempted to solicit donations from passersby for a charity that aids impoverished children. Participants in one set were asked a leading question to prime a belief in moral realism: "Do you agree that some things are just morally right or wrong, good or bad, wherever you happen to be from in the world?" Those in a second set were asked a question to prime belief in moral antirealism: "Do you agree that our morals and values are shaped by our culture and upbringing, so there are no absolute right answers to any moral questions?" Participants in a control set were not asked any priming question. In this experiment, participants primed with realism were twice as likely to be donors, compared to those primed with antirealism or not primed at all.
A second experiment, conducted online, yielded similar results. Participants asked to donate money to a charity of their choice who were primed with realism reported being willing to give more than those primed with antirealism or not primed at all.

http://medicalxpress.com/news/2013-01-moral-realism-behavior.html
Compilation of morality statistics that don't bode well for atheists: Section 11.
http://creation.com/atheism

Subjective Moralist, Question, 'Do You Lock Your Door at Night?' ~ Ravi Zacharias - video
http://www.mrctv.org/videos/do-you-lock-your-door-night-ravi-zacharias-during-q-and

The series of studies in the following article, by a humanist, found that, contrary to materialistic expectations, basic 'objective' morality is innate in babies.
The Moral Life of Babies – May 2010
Excerpt: From Sigmund Freud to Jean Piaget to Lawrence Kohlberg, psychologists have long argued that we begin life as amoral animals.,,,
A growing body of evidence, though, suggests that humans do have a rudimentary moral sense from the very start of life. With the help of well-designed experiments, you can see glimmers of moral thought, moral judgment and moral feeling even in the first year of life. Some sense of good and evil seems to be bred in the bone.,,,
Despite their overall preference for good actors over bad, then, babies are drawn to bad actors when those actors are punishing bad behavior.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/09/magazine/09babies-t.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Do Babies have an innate moral sense or are they amoral as would be a-priori expected in the atheistic/materialistic worldview?
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/first-principles-cannot-be-demonstrated/#comment-478148

Although Darwinists have no way of ever explaining the existence of moral good and evil in the world, (in fact if they were consistent in their atheism they would deny the existence of good and evil altogether), they cannot escape the fact that they themselves are constantly evaluating the moral evil and goodness of the world around them.
Moral evaluations of harm are instant and emotional, brain study shows - November 29, 2012
Excerpt: People are able to detect, within a split second, if a hurtful action they are witnessing is intentional or accidental, new research on the brain at the University of Chicago shows.
http://medicalxpress.com/news/2012-11-moral-instant-emotional-brain.html
Although in the preceding study the authors try to credit such ‘instant’ discernment of the morality of any given situation to a ‘evolved’ physiological response, as was illustrated earlier in Dr. Craig's 'Knock-Down Argument Against Atheist Sam Harris' video, atheist simply have no way to account for objective morality from a evolutionary basis. In fact, as with transcendent free will (Zeilinger, delayed choice experiment), objective morality, because of its transcendent nature, must be imbedded in the human psyche at a much deeper level, on the ‘spiritual/consciousness’ level. The following verse reflects a future promise of moral clarity at that 'spiritual/consciousness' level:
Jeremiah 31:33
,,,“I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts.
Objective Morality (1 of 5) - William Lane Craig - video playlist
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sPn_cIh_Cg&feature=bf_prev&list=PL3DBE77BB622A22F7

Albert Einstein and his answer to his Professor ! – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLOZDpE1rkA
Self-refutation and the New Atheists: The Case of Jerry Coyne - Michael Egnor - September 12, 2013
Excerpt: Their (the New Atheists) ideology is a morass of bizarre self-refuting claim. They assert that science is the only way to truth, yet take no note that scientism itself isn't a scientific assertion. They assert a "skeptical" view that thoughts are only constructed artifacts of our neurological processing and have no sure contact with truth, ignoring the obvious inference that their skeptical assertion is thereby reduced to a constructed artifact with no sure contact with truth. They assert that Christianity has brought much immorality to the world, yet they deny the existence of objective morality. They assert that intelligent design is not testable, and (yet claim the counter proposition, that life is not designed, is testable).
And they assert that we are determined entirely by our natural history and physical law and thereby have no free will, yet they assert this freely, claiming truth and personal exemption from determinism. Here is a case in point.,,,

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/09/self-refutation076541.html
Is God Good? (Free will and the problem of evil) - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rfd_1UAjeIA

Hitler and Darwin, pt. 2: Richard Weikart on Evolutionary Ethics - podcast
http://intelligentdesign.podomatic.com/entry/2011-11-30T15_33_04-08_00
"I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: 'I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept His claim to be God.' That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic -- on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg -- or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to."
C. S. Lewis - Mere Christianity, pages 40-41
http://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/cs-lewis-quotes.htm

At Emory University, Consternation over Ben Carson, Evolution, and Morality - Richard Weikart - May 10, 2012
Excerpt: If Emory University (biology) professors want to argue that evolution has no ethical implications, they are free to make that argument (I wonder how many of them actually believe this). However, if they do, they need to recognize that they are not just arguing against "benighted" anti-evolutionists, but against many of their cherished colleagues in evolutionary biology, including Darwin himself.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/05/at_emory_univer_1059491.html
The Moral Impact Of Darwinism On Society - Dr. Phil Fernandes - video
http://www.nwcreation.net/videos/Impact_Of_Darwinism_On_Society.html
“The first principle of value that we need to rediscover is this: that all reality hinges on moral foundations. In other words, that this is a moral universe, and that there are moral laws of the universe just as abiding as the physical laws.”
- Martin Luther King Jr., A Knock at Midnight: Inspiration from the Great Sermons of Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr.
http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/118523-the-first-principle-of-value-that-we-need-to-rediscover
On quantum non-locality and objective morality:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/13shZ_ui7a5MwCLP6CZd3B29gs7LH9XEP1Vb1hNeZ9u8/edit
“My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust?”
- C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity
Michael W Smith - "You Won't Let Go" - video
Lyric: "Not a shadow comes without the light (first) making a way"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNZusL1OHG4

Here is a complete reading of C. S. Lewis's classic book 'Mere Christianity' on youtube. Chapter 3 deals with the reality of the moral law within man.

Mere Christianity - C. S. Lewis - Easy to follow playlist:
http://www.truthaccordingtoscripture.com/documents/apologetics/mere-christianity/cs-lewis-mere-christianity-toc.php

Top Ten Reasons We Know the New Testament is True – Frank Turek – video – November 2011
(41:00 minute mark – Despite what is commonly believed, of someone being 'good enough' to go to heaven, in reality both Mother Teresa and Hitler fall short of the moral perfection required to meet the perfection of God’s objective moral code)
http://saddleback.com/mc/m/5e22f/

G.O.S.P.E.L. – (the grace of propitiation) poetry slam – video
https://vimeo.com/20960385

Falling Plates (the grace of propitiation) - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGlx11BxF24

Nabeel Qureshi, a former devout Muslim, describes his dramatic journey from Islam to Christianity. A question and answer session will follow his talk. - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaYR4G7oRiw

William Lane Craig Q&A: What Is Hell? Is Hell Compatible with a Loving God? – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CjSy9CWEeU

Pascal's Anthropological Argument - (Christianity is the best explanation for the human condition) - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyrPpCrcmnA

Objective Morality – The Objections – Frank Turek – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5MWBsPf5pg
Benjamin Franklin’s Pursuit of the Virtuous Life - 2008
Excerpt: ,,at the age of 20, Ben Franklin set his loftiest goal: the attainment of moral perfection.
"I conceiv’d the bold and arduous project of arriving at moral perfection. I wish’d to live without committing any fault at any time; I would conquer all that either natural inclination, custom, or company might lead me into."
In order to accomplish his goal, Franklin developed and committed himself to a personal improvement program that consisted of living 13 virtues. (He failed to arrive at moral perfection):,,,
"Tho’ I never arrived at the perfection I had been so ambitious of obtaining, but fell far short of it, yet I was, by the endeavour, a better and a happier man than I otherwise should have been if I had not attempted it."

http://www.artofmanliness.com/2008/02/24/lessons-in-manliness-benjamin-franklins-pursuit-of-the-virtuous-life/
Morality: A Tangible part Of Reality
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BhgtPC364n2iAwrO4jhyfW1SOZT6qwoEFrA2J7PNnHk/edit

The following article explains why, when debating a atheist, the moral argument for God is far better to use than a Biblical argument for God.

Can We Prove the Existence of God? - April 16, 2012
http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/tgc/2012/04/16/can-we-prove-the-existence-of-god/

Atheist Professor Larry Moran previously denied the existence of moral absolutes. Yet, here’s Professor Moran’s new moral absolute, in all its resplendent glory:
"It is totally wrong, all the time, to discriminate against someone based on their sexual preferences… There is NEVER a time when an enlightened society should tolerate, let alone legalize, bigotry."
How fitting that Professor Moran picked that particular sin to declare off-limits for criticism! He is a pure Romans 1 poster boy. He suppresses the truth in unrighteousness by denying that God exists, then “gives approval to those who practice” exhibit A in God’s list of sins that suppression of truth leads to.
Romans 1:18–20
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.
Romans 1:26-28
For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.
Thus Professor Moran not only concedes that moral absolutes exist, but also proves, unbeknownst to himself, that these moral absolutes are based in the God of the Bible!
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/professor-larry-moran-squares-the-circle/#comment-491079

Many times atheists, even though they cannot ground objective morality within their worldview, will try to claim that God, as He is portrayed in the Old Testament, is morally evil. In fact Richard Dawkins, in his cowardly refusal to debate William Lane Craig, upon Craig's tour of the UK in the fall of 2011, said he would not debate Craig because Craig supported genocide/infanticide in the Bible. This tactic, to try to cover his cowardice to debate Craig, backfired terribly for Dawkins!

Richard Dawkins Approves Infanticide, not William Lane Craig! (mirror: drcraigvideos)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmodkyJvhFo
“Another example might be suppose you take the argument in favor of abortion up until the baby was one year old, if a baby was one year old and turned out to have some horrible incurable disease that meant it was going to die in agony in later life, what about infanticide? Strictly morally I can see no objection to that at all, I would be in favor of infanticide…..I think I would wish at least to give consideration to the person who says ‘where does it end?’ ”
Richard Dawkins

“When the death of a disabled infant will lead to the birth of another infant with better prospects of a happy life, the total amount of happiness will be greater if the disabled infant is killed. The loss of the happy life for the first infant is outweighed by the gain of a happier life for the second. Therefore, if killing the hemophiliac infant has no adverse effect on others, it would, according to the total view, be right to kill him.”
Peter Singer

“Where do our notions of right and wrong come from? Clearly they have been drummed into us by evolution, the product of these apish urges and social emotions and then they get modulated by culture, you take sexual jealousy for instance, an attitude that has been bred into us over millions of years; our ancestors were highly covetous of one another…this possessiveness now gets enshrined in various cultural institutions and the institution of marriage…for a statement like “its wrong to cheat on one’s spouse” seems a mere summation of these contingencies..its an improvisation on the back of biology…from the point of view of science, it can’t REALLY be wrong to cheat on your spouse, this is just how APES like ourselves learn to worry when we learn to worry with words”
Sam Harris
(Is God a Moral Monster?) Peter J Williams on New Atheists & Old Testament (incl. The Canaanites) – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulCbh_1SlwE

Tim Keller- Hell: Isn't the God of Christianity an angry Judge? - video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmTAotnklKI

This following short video clearly shows, in a rather graphic fashion, the ‘moral dilemma' that atheists face when trying to ground objective morality;

Cruel Logic – video
Description; A brilliant serial killer videotapes his debates with college faculty victims. The topic of his debate with his victim: His moral right to kill them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bq9A-c8bsjc
The Heretic -Who is Thomas Nagel and why are so many of his fellow academics condemning him? Andrew Ferguson – March 25, 2013 Excerpt: A materialist who lived his life according to his professed convictions—understanding himself to have no moral agency at all, seeing his friends and enemies and family as genetically determined robots—wouldn’t just be a materialist: He’d be a psychopath. http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/heretic_707692.html?page=3
There are actually studies that show that people who do not believe in a soul are a little bit more anti-social (psychopathic) than people who do believe in a soul:

Anthony Jack, Why Don't Psychopaths Believe in Dualism? - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?list=UUmmObUi8Fq9g1Zcuzqbt0_g&feature=player_detailpage&v=XRGWe-61zOk#t=862s

To broaden the scope of the studies that Anthony Jack mentioned in the preceding video, which showed a slight tendency towards anti-social behavior for people who do not believe in a soul, the following studies looked at the dramatic long term negative impact on the entire American culture when prayer was removed from the public classroom in 1963:

The following video shows that the SAT (Scholastic Aptitude Test) scores for students showed a steady decline, for seventeen years from the top spot or near the top spot in the world, after the removal of prayer from the public classroom by the Supreme Court, not by public decree, in 1963. Whereas the SAT scores for private Christian schools have consistently remained at the top, or near the top, spot in the world:

The Real Reason American Education Has Slipped – David Barton – video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4318930

United States Crime Rates 1960 - 2010 (Please note the skyrocketing crime rate from 1963, the year prayer was removed from school, thru 1980, the year the steep climb in crime rate finally leveled off.) of note: The slight decline in crime rate from the mid 90s until now is attributed in large part to tougher enforcement on minor crimes. (a nip it in the bud policy)
http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

AMERICA: To Pray Or Not To Pray - David Barton - graphs corrected for population growth
http://www.whatyouknowmightnotbeso.com/graphs.html

What Lies Behind Growing Secularism by William Lane Craig - May 2012 - podcast (steep decline in altruism of young people since early 1960's)
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/what-lies-behind-growing-secularism
"Atheists may do science, but they cannot justify what they do. When they assume the world is rational, approachable, and understandable, they plagiarize Judeo-Christian presuppositions about the nature of reality and the moral need to seek the truth. As an exercise, try generating a philosophy of science from hydrogen coming out of the big bang. It cannot be done. It’s impossible even in principle, because philosophy and science presuppose concepts that are not composed of particles and forces. They refer to ideas that must be true, universal, necessary and certain." Creation-Evolution Headlines
http://creationsafaris.com/crev201102.htm#20110227a
Atheism cannot ground Morality or Science
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Ov3GNroapS12eg3rH0RxvlOdAXiFGaf436IPg5W2ids/edit

As well, as should be blatantly obvious, mathematics cannot be grounded in a materialistic worldview:

Dr. Nash - "God Exists, Follow the Numbers" (by Intelligent Faith 315) - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8MAUqdzqAE
Mathematics is the language with which God has written the universe.
Galileo Galilei

An Interview with David Berlinski - Jonathan Witt
Berlinski: There is no argument against religion that is not also an argument against mathematics. Mathematicians are capable of grasping a world of objects that lies beyond space and time ….
Interviewer:… Come again(?) …
Berlinski: No need to come again: I got to where I was going the first time. The number four, after all, did not come into existence at a particular time, and it is not going to go out of existence at another time. It is neither here nor there. Nonetheless we are in some sense able to grasp the number by a faculty of our minds. Mathematical intuition is utterly mysterious. So for that matter is the fact that mathematical objects such as a Lie Group or a differentiable manifold have the power to interact with elementary particles or accelerating forces. But these are precisely the claims that theologians have always made as well – that human beings are capable by an exercise of their devotional abilities to come to some understanding of the deity; and the deity, although beyond space and time, is capable of interacting with material objects.

http://tofspot.blogspot.com/2013/10/found-upon-web-and-reprinted-here.html

The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences - Eugene Wigner - 1960
Excerpt: ,,certainly it is hard to believe that our reasoning power was brought, by Darwin's process of natural selection, to the perfection which it seems to possess.,,,
It is difficult to avoid the impression that a miracle confronts us here, quite comparable in its striking nature to the miracle that the human mind can string a thousand arguments together without getting itself into contradictions, or to the two miracles of the existence of laws of nature and of the human mind's capacity to divine them.,,,
The miracle of the appropriateness of the language of mathematics for the formulation of the laws of physics is a wonderful gift which we neither understand nor deserve. We should be grateful for it and hope that it will remain valid in future research and that it will extend, for better or for worse, to our pleasure, even though perhaps also to our bafflement, to wide branches of learning.

http://www.dartmouth.edu/~matc/MathDrama/reading/Wigner.html

Mario Livio, or the Poverty of Atheist Philosophy: A Review of “Is God a Mathematician?”
Excerpt: In short, Wigner committed a treason against science. He didn’t, in an Einsteinian fashion, just declare a personal faith in a God that had only marginal relevance to his scientific studies. He went farther than that: he implied that science was impossible and inexplicable without accepting a higher reality, transcending the mind of man and its capabilities for reasoning and experimentation. The short and ostensibly innocent article faced some really violent reactions; some objected to the conclusions in it, others to the premises, and still others refused to even deal with it, pretending it had never been written. But Wigner remained right about one thing: Despite the many attempts, no one could give a rational explanation for what Wigner described as the “uncanny ability of mathematics to describe and predict accurately the physical world.”
http://americanvision.org/4333/mario-livio-or-the-poverty-of-atheist-philosophy-a-review-of-is-god-a-mathematician/
Calvin and Hobbes - cartoon - The Mathematical Atheist
http://s3.hubimg.com/u/270622_f520.jpg

The Underlying Mathematical Foundation Of The Universe - Walter Bradley - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4491491

Quote from preceding video:
“Occasionally I’ll have a bright engineering student who says, “Well you should see the equations we work with in my engineering class. They’re a big mess.”, The problem is not the fundamental laws of nature, the problem is the boundary conditions. If you choose complicated boundary conditions then the solutions to these equations will in fact, in some cases, be quite complicated in form,,, But again the point is still the same, the universe assumes a remarkably simple and elegant mathematical form.”
– Dr. Walter Bradley
Evidence for an Engineered Universe - Walter Bradley - July 2012 - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLd_cPfysrE
How the Recent Discoveries Support a Designed Universe - Dr. Walter L. Bradley - paper
Excerpt: Only in the 20th century have we come to fully understand that the incredibly diverse phenomena that we observe in nature are the outworking of a very small number of physical laws, each of which may be described by a simple mathematical relationship. Indeed, so simple in mathematical form and small in number are these physical laws that they can all be written on one side of one sheet of paper, as seen in Table 1.
http://www.leaderu.com/real/ri9403/evidence.html
The Five Foundational Equations of the Universe and Brief Descriptions of Each:
http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AYmaSrBPNEmGZGM4ejY3d3pfNDdnc3E4bmhkZg&hl=en

Walter Bradley: three scientific evidences that point to a designed universe - article
http://winteryknight.wordpress.com/2013/12/10/walter-bradley-three-scientific-evidences-that-point-to-a-designed-universe/
mp3 - audio lecture
http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1701569/WalterBradley_ScientificEvidence.mp3
"Newton proposed that Gravitational force is inversely proportional to the Square of the distance between two masses (Inverse Square Law). For an orderly, designed universe, this makes sense – why wouldn’t it be something nice and even, like the square of the distance? For someone who believes in a random universe though – why the Square? Why not r ^ 2.148273.. or r ^ 1.932157.. The universe is full of nice, neat relationships like this, at very fundamental levels – moreso than not. I find the ability of the atheist to accept so many coincidences nothing short of astonishing."
drc466 - UD blogger
Inverse Square Law
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/forces/isq.html

Why Mathematics Works, part 1 - James Nickel - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1YssV8qi-w

All the energy and mass (material) of this universe is found to be governed by, and reducible to, transcendent information!
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oBLO8FWKHYki2dhITUV9D75E_QTKUGUkHCdQW1nBAAc/edit

It is interesting to note that Dr. Craig used the example of Peter Higg’s mathematical prediction of the Higg’s boson itself, which Peter Higg’s had made 3 decades ago before it was discovered by the LHC, as a philosophical proof for Theism:
Mathematics and Physics – A Happy Coincidence? – William Lane Craig – video
http://www.metacafe.com/w/9826382

1. If God did not exist the applicability of mathematics would be a happy coincidence.
2. The applicability of mathematics is not a happy coincidence.
3. Therefore, God exists.
William Lane Craig on the unexpected applicability of mathematics to nature - 11/13/13
http://winteryknight.wordpress.com/2013/11/13/william-lane-craig-on-the-unexpected-applicability-of-mathematics-to-nature/
“Geometry is unique and eternal, a reflection from the mind of God. That mankind shares in it is because man is an image of God.”
– Johannes Kepler
https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/79396.Johannes_Kepler
In the following video, at the 22:27 to the 29:50 minute mark, is a pretty neat little presentation of the Schrodinger Equation in answer to the question, 'Why does mathematics describe the universe?'

The Professors: An after-hours conversation on Georgia Tech's hardest questions - veritas video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=vBQ9uFOFLWM&t=1349

The 'Spirituality' of Mathematics - article
https://docs.google.com/document/d/13VBciybSK3D7uJoz6ltldPPSvhL4HJaJAmCmOMkmQxg/edit
"Nothing in evolution can account for the soul of man. The difference between man and the other animals is unbridgeable. Mathematics is alone sufficient to prove in man the possession of a faculty unexistent in other creatures. Then you have music and the artistic faculty. No, the soul was a separate creation."
Alfred Russell Wallace, New Thoughts on Evolution, 1910

How can it be that mathematics, being after all a product of human thought which is independent of experience, is so admirably appropriate to the objects of reality? Is human reason, then, without experience, merely by taking thought, able to fathom the properties of real things?
— Albert Einstein

“It appears that the Creator shares the mathematicians’ sense of beauty.”
- Alexander Vilenkin
http://rfforum.websitetoolbox.com/post?id=3754268

“… if nature is really structured with a mathematical language and mathematics invented by man can manage to understand it, this demonstrates something extraordinary. The objective structure of the universe and the intellectual structure of the human being coincide.” – Pope Benedict XVI
This following site has a brief discussion on the fact that 'transcendent math' is not an invention of man but that transcendent math actually dictates how 'reality' is constructed and operates:
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/human-consciousness/#comment-363381
"The reason that mathematics is so effective in capturing, expressing, and modeling what we call empirical reality is that there is a ontological correspondence between the two - I would go so far as to say that they are the same thing."
Richard Sternberg - Pg. 8 How My Views On Evolution Evolved
The following site lists the unchanging constants of the universe:
Systematic Search for Expressions of Dimensionless Constants using the NIST database of Physical Constants
Excerpt: The National Institute of Standards and Technology lists 325 constants on their website as ‘Fundamental Physical Constants’. Among the 325 physical constants listed, 79 are unitless in nature (usually by defining a ratio). This produces a list of 246 physical constants with some unit dependence. These 246 physical constants can be further grouped into a smaller set when expressed in standard SI base units.,,,
http://www.mit.edu/~mi22295/constants/constants.html
For an example, here is the 'Fine-Structure Constant'
A Brilliant Atheist Bumps Up Against the Alpha (and Omega) - January 8th, 2014
Excerpt: In physics, the Fine-Structure Constant, also known (significantly I think) as ALPHA (α), is a fundamental physical constant characterizing the strength of the electromagnetic interaction. It is also mysteriously related to a number of other fundamentals in physics: e.g. the square of the ratio of the elementary charge to the Planck charge; the ratio of the velocity of the electron in the Bohr model of the atom to the speed of light; in Quantum Electrodynamics as the probability of interaction between Light and Matter.
Shades of the anthropic principle, ALPHA is one of those finely-tuned constants that describe the fundamental structure of our cosmos. And if it was just the slightest bit different, stars, planets and we would not exist. Like Pi (3.14) ALPHA is commonly referred to by the first 3 numbers of its inverse: 137. (More precisely it is 137.03599173(44)). 137 is made up of three prime numbers,,,
Here is what Richard Feynman, Nobel prize-winning physicist, one of the originators and early developers of the theory of quantum electrodynamics (QED) and an atheist had to say about ALPHA (Fine-Structure Constant)
“It has been a mystery ever since it was discovered more than fifty years ago, and all good theoretical physicists put this number up on their wall and worry about it. Immediately you would like to know where this number for a coupling comes from: is it related to pi or perhaps to the base of natural logarithms? Nobody knows. It’s one of the greatest damn mysteries of physics: a magic number that comes to us with no understanding by man. You might say the ‘hand of God’ wrote that number, and ‘we don’t know how He pushed his pencil.’ We know what kind of a dance to do experimentally to measure this number very accurately, but we don’t know what kind of dance to do on the computer to make this number come out, without putting it in secretly!”
(Richard P. Feynman (1985) QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter. Princeton University Press. p. 129) ,,,

http://theapologeticsgroup.com/science/3645/

The Fine-Tuning for Discoverability - Robin Collins - March 22, 2014
Excerpt: Examples of fine - tuning for discoverability.
,,A small increase in α (fine structure constant) would have resulted in all open wood fires going out; yet harnessing fire was essential to the development of civilization, technology, and science - e.g., the forging of metals.,,,
Going in the other direction, if α (fine structure constant) were decreased, light microscopes would have proportionality less resolving power without the size of living cells or other microscopic objects changing.,,, Thus, it is quite amazing that the resolving power of light microscopes goes down to that of the smallest cell (0.2 microns), but no further. If it had less resolving power, some cells could not be observed alive. The fine - structure constant, therefore, is just small enough to allow for open wood fires and just large enough for the light microscope to be able to see all living cells.

http://home.messiah.edu/~rcollins/Fine-tuning/Greer-Heard%20Forum%20paper%20draft%20for%20posting.pdf
graph - fine tuning of strength of electromagnetism balanced to strength of strong nuclear force
http://inspirehep.net/record/758952/files/alphaalphas.png
graph - Time vs Space Dimensions
http://ej.iop.org/images/0264-9381/14/4/002/Full/img5.gif

Reasonable Faith - Topic page - brief synopsis main arguments
http://www.originsdiscussion.info/topics.html
Slides of Interest
Cosmological Argument - slide
http://www.originsdiscussion.info/images/Booth2012/Slide1.JPG
Fine Tuning of Initial Conditions Of The Universe - slide
http://www.originsdiscussion.info/images/Booth2012/Slide2.JPG
Fine Tuning of Laws Of Physics - slide
http://www.originsdiscussion.info/images/Booth2012/Slide3.JPG
Does The Multiverse Help Explain Fine Tuning? - slide
http://www.originsdiscussion.info/images/Booth2012/Slide4.JPG
I Don't Have Enough Faith to Believe In a Naturalistic Origin Of Life - slide
http://www.originsdiscussion.info/images/Booth2012/Slide5.JPG
Resurrection Evidence - "Minimal Facts" - slide
http://www.originsdiscussion.info/images/Booth2012/Slide7.JPG

The numerical values of the transcendent universal constants in physics, which are found for gravity which holds planets, stars and galaxies together; for the weak nuclear force which holds neutrons together; for electromagnetism which allows chemical bonds to form; for the strong nuclear force which holds protons together; for the cosmological constant of space/energy density which accounts for the universe’s expansion; and for many other constants which are universal in their scope, 'just so happen' to be the exact numerical values they need to be in order for life, as we know it, to be possible in this universe. A more than slight variance in the value of any individual universal constant, over the entire age of the universe, would have undermined the ability of the entire universe to have life as we know it. To put it mildly, this is a irreducibly complex condition.

How the Universe Points Toward a Creator - John Bloom (Initial Fine Tuning Of The Universe) - video
http://www.saddleback.com/mc/m/f37e4/

Finely Tuned Gravity (1 in 10^40 tolerance; which is just one inch of tolerance allowed on a imaginary ruler stretching across the diameter of the entire universe) - video
http://www.metacafe.com/w/7659795/

Anthropic Principle - God Created The Universe - Michael Strauss PhD. - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4323661

This preceding video, at the 6:49 mark, has a very interesting quote:
"So what are the theological implications of all this? Well Barrow and Tipler wrote this book, The Anthropic Cosmological Principle, and they saw the design of the universe. But they're atheists basically, there's no God. And they go through some long arguments to describe why humans are the only intelligent life in the universe. That's what they believe. So they got a problem. If the universe is clearly the product of design, but humans are the only intelligent life in the universe, who creates the universe? So you know what Barrow and Tipler's solution is? It makes perfect sense. Humans evolve to a point some day where they reach back in time and create the universe for themselves. (Audience laughs) Hey these guys are respected scientists. So what brings them to that conclusion? It is because the evidence for design is so overwhelming that if you don't have God you have humans creating the universe back in time for themselves." - Michael Strauss PhD. - Particle Physics
Contrary to Barrow and Tipler's beliefs, at the time they wrote their book, of man having a very long time to evolve into some universe creating super-beings, the actual reality of the matter is far more humbling than their grandiose delusions:
Anthropic Principle: A Precise Plan for Humanity By Hugh Ross
Excerpt: Brandon Carter, the British mathematician who coined the term “anthropic principle” (1974), noted the strange inequity of a universe that spends about 15 billion years “preparing” for the existence of a creature that has the potential to survive no more than 10 million years (optimistically).,, Carter and (later) astrophysicists John Barrow and Frank Tipler demonstrated that the inequality exists for virtually any conceivable intelligent species under any conceivable life-support conditions. Roughly 15 billion years represents a minimum preparation time for advanced life: 11 billion toward formation of a stable planetary system, one with the right chemical and physical conditions for primitive life, and four billion more years toward preparation of a planet within that system, one richly layered with the biodeposits necessary for civilized intelligent life. Even this long time and convergence of “just right” conditions reflect miraculous efficiency.
Moreover the physical and biological conditions necessary to support an intelligent civilized species do not last indefinitely. They are subject to continuous change: the Sun continues to brighten, Earth’s rotation period lengthens, Earth’s plate tectonic activity declines, and Earth’s atmospheric composition varies. In just 10 million years or less, Earth will lose its ability to sustain human life. In fact, this estimate of the human habitability time window may be grossly optimistic. In all likelihood, a nearby supernova eruption, a climatic perturbation, a social or environmental upheaval, or the genetic accumulation of negative mutations will doom the species to extinction sometime sooner than twenty thousand years from now.

http://christiangodblog.blogspot.com/2006_12_01_archive.html
Hugh Ross - The Anthropic Principle and Anthropic Inequality - video
http://www.metacafe.com/w/8494065

Can Life Be Merely an Accident? (Dr. Robert Piccioni - Fine Tuning) - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Htfl2rXFezo
“If we modify the value of one of the fundamental constants, something invariably goes wrong, leading to a universe that is inhospitable to life as we know it. When we adjust a second constant in an attempt to fix the problem(s), the result, generally, is to create three new problems for every one that we “solve.” The conditions in our universe really do seem to be uniquely suitable for life forms like ourselves, and perhaps even for any form of organic complexity." Gribbin and Rees, “Cosmic Coincidences”, p. 269
Finely Tuned Universe - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=guHodt-7Q7A
Infrared observatory measures expansion of universe - October 3, 2012
Excerpt: The Hubble constant is named after the astronomer Edwin P. Hubble, who astonished the world in the 1920s by confirming our universe has been expanding since it exploded into being 13.7 billion years ago. In the late 1990s, astronomers discovered the expansion is accelerating, or speeding up over time.,,,
Unlike NASA's Hubble Space Telescope, which views the cosmos in visible light, Spitzer took advantage of long-wavelength infrared light to make its new measurement. It improves by a factor of 3 on a similar, seminal study from the Hubble telescope and brings the uncertainty down to 3 percent, a giant leap in accuracy for cosmological measurements. The newly refined value for the Hubble constant is 74.3 plus or minus 2.1 kilometers per second per megaparsec. A megaparsec is roughly 3 million light-years.

http://phys.org/news/2012-10-infrared-observatory-expansion-universe.html
The Case For The Creator - Lee Strobel - video
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=688111496234161611

This following site has a rigorously argued defense of the fine-tuning(teleological) argument:

The Teleological Argument: An Exploration of the Fine-Tuning of the Universe - ROBIN COLLINS
http://commonsenseatheism.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/Collins-The-Teleological-Argument.pdf

Is It True? Fine-Tuning the Universe - Robin Collins at Pepperdine - 2013 - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gj_fLi_K7jA

Guillermo Gonzalez - Why is the Universe Fine-Tuned for Life? - video
Quote: "Having a precision of one part in 10^30 is like firing a bullet and hitting an amoeba at the edge of the observable universe" - Guillermo Gonzalez
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M39BKwtUAyA

Only God can provide a coherent basis for the finely tuned 'higher dimensional' physical laws;
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1N3rreCPgeJUrQRPt3WNoeYTdHPcVEUOHDBDXrDlWgzU/edit

Here are a few sites that list the finely tuned universal constants:

Fine-Tuning For Life In The Universe
http://www.reasons.org/fine-tuning-life-universe

Evidence for the Fine Tuning of the Universe
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/designun.html

Here is a defense against Victor Stenger's “no fine-tuning” claims:
Many of Victor Stenger’s “no fine-tuning” claims dubbed “highly problematic” (in new peer reviewed paper) - January 2012
Excerpt: We will touch on such issues as the logical necessity of the laws of nature; objectivity, invariance and symmetry; theoretical physics and possible universes; entropy in cosmology; cosmic inflation and initial conditions; galaxy formation; the cosmological constant; stars and their formation; the properties of elementary particles and their effect on chemistry and the macroscopic world; the origin of mass; grand unified theories; and the dimensionality of space and time. I also provide an assessment of the multiverse, noting the significant challenges that it must face.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/fine-tuning/many-of-victor-stengers-no-fine-tuning-claims-dubbed-highly-problematic/
Here is a layman friendly review of the preceding paper:
Is fine-tuning a fallacy? - January 2012
Excerpt: Well, it seems that the great Stenger has finally met his match. Dr. Luke A. Barnes, a post-doctoral researcher at the Institute for Astronomy, ETH Zurich, Switzerland, has written a scathing critique of Stenger’s book. I’ve read refutations in my time, but I have to say, this one is devastating.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/is-fine-tuning-a-fallacy/
Life in a fine-tuned universe - Luke Barnes - lecture videos
http://www.youtube.com/user/LukeABarnes/videos
Psalm 119:89-90
Forever, O LORD, your word is firmly fixed in the heavens. Your faithfulness endures to all generations;,,
On and on through each universal constant scientists analyze, they find such unchanging precision from the universe's creation.

As a side note to this, it seems even the 'exotic' virtual photons, which fleetingly pop into and out of existence, are tied directly to the anthropic principle through the 1 in 10^120 cosmological constant for dark energy:
ELECTROMAGNETIC DARK ENERGY
Abstract: We introduce a new model for dark energy in the Universe in which a small cosmological constant is generated by ordinary electromagnetic vacuum energy. The corresponding virtual photons exist at all frequencies but switch from a gravitationally active phase at low frequencies to a gravitationally inactive phase at higher frequencies via a Ginzburg–Landau type of phase transition. Only virtual photons in the gravitationally active state contribute to the cosmological constant. A small vacuum energy density, consistent with astronomical observations, is naturally generated in this model. We propose possible laboratory tests for such a scenario based on phase synchronization in superconductors.
http://www.worldscinet.com/ijmpd/17/1701/S0218271808011870.html

Shining new light on dark energy with galaxy clusters - December 2010
Excerpt: "Each model for dark energy makes a prediction that you should see this many clusters, with this particular mass, this particular distance away from us," Sehgal said. Sehgal tested these predictions by using data from the most massive galaxy clusters. The results support the standard, vacuum-energy model for dark energy.
http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-12-dark-energy-galaxy-clusters.html
Further note:

Virtual Particles, Anthropic Principle and Special Relativity - Michael Strauss PhD. Particle Physics - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4554674

Here is an interesting experiment accomplished with 'virtual' photons:

Researchers create light from 'almost nothing' - June 2011
http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-06-researchers-create-light-from-almost.html

It is also interesting to point out just how powerful this vacuum energy is:
Vacuum energy - (The 'infinite power of God' literally pervades all of reality):
Excerpt: Vacuum energy is an underlying background energy that exists in space even when the space is devoid of matter (free space). (Vacuum energy has a postulated) value of 10^113 Joules per cubic meter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_energy

and:

(10^113 joules) per (cubic meter) = 10 ^113 pascals (Pa)

and:

10^113 Pa approx = 4.6×10^113 Pa = 6.7×10^109 psi; Of note: The Planck pressure (4.63x10^108 bar), not reached except shortly after the Big Bang or in a black hole.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders_of_magnitude_%28pressure%29
Related notes:
Cosmic coincidence spotted - Philip Ball - 2008
Excerpt: One interpretation of dark energy is that it results from the energy of empty space, called vacuum energy. The laws of quantum physics imply that empty space is not empty at all, but filled with particles popping in and out of existence. This particle ‘fizz’ should push objects apart, just as dark energy seems to require. But the theoretical value of this energy is immense — so huge that it should blow atoms apart, rather than just causing the Universe to accelerate.
Physicists think that some unknown force nearly perfectly cancels out the vacuum energy, leaving only the amount seen as dark energy to push things apart. This cancellation is imperfect to an absurdly fine margin: the unknown 'energy' differs from the vacuum energy by just one part in 10^122. It seems incredible that any physical mechanism could be so finely poised as to reduce the vacuum energy to within a whisker of zero, but it seems to be so.

http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080219/full/news.2008.610.html

How the Power of Intention Alters Matter - Dr. William A. Tiller
Excerpt: "Most people think that the matter is empty, but for internal self consistency of quantum mechanics and relativity theory, there is required to be the equivalent of 10 to 94 grams of mass energy, each gram being E=MC2 kind of energy. Now, that's a huge number, but what does it mean practically? Practically, if I can assume that the universe is flat, and more and more astronomical data is showing that it's pretty darn flat, if I can assume that, then if I take the volume or take the vacuum within a single hydrogen atom, that's about 10 to the minus 23 cubic centimeters. If I take that amount of vacuum and I take the latent energy in that, there is a trillion times more energy there than in all of the mass of all of the stars and all of the planets out to 20 billion light-years. That's big, that's big. And if consciousness allows you to control even a small fraction of that, creating a big bang is no problem."
- Dr. William Tiller - has been a professor at Stanford U. in the Department of materials science and Engineering
http://www.beyondtheordinary.net/williamtiller.shtml
Richard Feynman: Mathematicians versus Physicists - video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obCjODeoLVw

Quote of note at the 6:45 minute mark of preceding video:
"It always bothers me that in spite of all this local business, what goes on in a tiny, no matter how tiny, region of space, and no matter how tiny a region of time, according to laws as we understand them today, it takes a computing machine an infinite number of logical operations to figure out. Now how can all that be going on in that tiny space? Why should it take an infinite amount of logic to figure out what one stinky tiny bit of space-time is going to do?
- Richard Feynman - was one of the founding fathers of QED
Myself, being a Christian Theist, I find it rather comforting to know that it takes an 'infinite amount of logic to figure out what one stinky tiny bit of space-time is going to do':
John1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
of note: 'the Word' in John1:1 is translated from 'Logos' in Greek. Logos is the root word from which we derive our modern word logic
http://etymonline.com/?term=logic

Notes as to how they solved the 'infinite amount of logic' problem:
THE INFINITY PUZZLE: Quantum Field Theory and the Hunt for an Orderly Universe.
Excerpt: In quantum electrodynamics, which applies quantum mechanics to the electromagnetic field and its interactions with matter, the equations led to infinite results for the self-energy or mass of the electron. After nearly two decades of effort, this problem was solved after World War II by a procedure called renormalization, in which the infinities are rolled up into the electron’s observed mass and charge, and are thereafter conveniently ignored. Richard Feynman, who shared the 1965 Nobel Prize with Julian Schwinger and Sin-Itiro Tomonaga for this breakthrough, referred to this sleight of hand as “brushing infinity under the rug.”
http://www.americanscientist.org/bookshelf/pub/tackling-infinity

Particle puzzle: Honey, I shrunk the proton - July 20, 2013
Excerpt: QED showed that to predict orbital energies precisely, you had to consider all the ways an electron could emit photons. For instance, an electron might emit a photon then immediately reabsorb it. Or it might emit two photons at once. Or, en route to the nucleus, a photon might temporarily split into a particle-antiparticle pair. In fact, QED showed that there are infinite possibilities, all of which help to determine the electron orbits by varying amounts. To predict the energy of a particular orbit, you don't need to add up all these possibilities - you would be there forever. Instead, by considering the biggest QED contributions first, then the next biggest and so on, you can progressively make your prediction more accurate. QED is like a box of measuring tools: to get a rough measurement you might start off with a metre stick, but to improve precision you might get out a centimetre rule, and finally a pair of callipers.
http://stirling-westrup-tt.blogspot.com/2013/07/tt-ns-2926-particle-puzzle-honey-i.html
Of interest to the unchanging nature of the transcendent universal 'information' constants which govern this universe, it should be noted that the four primary forces/constants of the universe (gravity, electromagnetism, strong and weak nuclear forces) have been said to be 'mediated at the speed of light' by mass-less 'mediator bosons', yet the speed of light constant is shown to be transcendent of any underlying material basis in the first place.
GRBs Expand Astronomers' Toolbox - Nov. 2009
Excerpt: a detailed analysis of the GRB (Gamma Ray Burst) in question demonstrated that photons of all energies arrived at essentially the same time. Consequently, these results falsify any quantum gravity models requiring the simplest form of a frothy space.
http://www.reasons.org/GRBsExpandAstronomersToolbox

Quantum Foam Paper Suggests Einstein Was Right About Space-Time Being 'Smooth' - January 2013
Excerpt: It appears Albert Einstein may have been right yet again.
A team of researchers came to this conclusion after tracing the long journey three photons took through intergalactic space. The photons were blasted out by an intense explosion known as a gamma-ray burst about 7 billion light-years from Earth. They finally barreled into the detectors of NASA's Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope in May 2009, arriving just a millisecond apart.
Their dead-heat finish strongly supports the Einsteinian view of space-time, researchers said. The wavelengths of gamma-ray burst photons are so small that they should be able to interact with the even tinier "bubbles" in the quantum theorists' proposed space-time foam.
If this foam indeed exists, the three photons should have been knocked around a bit during their epic voyage. In such a scenario, the chances of all three reaching the Fermi telescope at virtually the same time are very low, researchers said.
So the new study is a strike against the foam's existence as currently imagined,,, "If foaminess exists at all, we think it must be at a scale far smaller than the Planck length,"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/10/quantum-foam-einstein-smooth-space-time_n_2449734.html
I would also like to point out that since time, as we understand it, comes to a complete stop at the speed of light this gives these four fundamental universal constants the characteristic of being timeless, and thus unchanging, as far as the temporal mass of this universe is concerned. In other words, we should not a-prori expect that which is shown to be timeless in nature to ever change in value. Yet contrary to what would seem to be so obvious about the a-piori stability of constants that we should expect, when scientists actually measure for variance in the fundamental constants they, at least scientists of the atheistic persuasion, always end up being very 'surprised' by the stability they find in the universal constants even though variance is not to be a-priori expected:
Latest Test of Physical Constants Affirms Biblical Claim - Hugh Ross - September 2010
Excerpt: The team’s measurements on two quasars (Q0458- 020 and Q2337-011, at redshifts = 1.561 and 1.361, respectively) indicated that all three fundamental physical constants have varied by no more than two parts per quadrillion per year over the last ten billion years—a measurement fifteen times more precise, and thus more restrictive, than any previous determination. The team’s findings add to the list of fundamental forces in physics demonstrated to be exceptionally constant over the universe’s history. This confirmation testifies of the Bible’s capacity to predict accurately a future scientific discovery far in advance. Among the holy books that undergird the religions of the world, the Bible stands alone in proclaiming that the laws governing the universe are fixed, or constant.
http://www.reasons.org/files/ezine/ezine-2010-03.pdf

Stronger and More Comprehensive Tests Affirm the Universe’s Unchanging Physics - July 1, 2013 By Dr. Hugh Ross
Excerpt: For thousands of years, the Bible has been on record stating that the physical laws governing the universe do not vary. For example, Jeremiah 33:25, God declares that he “established the fixed laws of heaven and earth” (NIV, 1984).,,,
Laboratory measurements have established that variations any greater than four parts per hundred quadrillion (<4 x 10-17) per year cannot exist in the fine structure constant, which undergirds several of the physical laws.,,,
,,they confirmed with 99 percent certainty that possible variations in the fine structure must be less than two parts per 10 quadrillion per year over the past 10 billion years. This limit is about a thousand times more constraining than the one I described in More Than a Theory.

http://www.reasons.org/articles/stronger-and-more-comprehensive-tests-affirm-the-universe%E2%80%99s-unchanging-physics

This following site discusses the many technical problems they had with the paper that recently (2010) tried to postulate variance within the fine structure constant:
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/why-a-multiverse-proponent-should-be-open-to-young-earth-creationism-and-skeptical-of-man-made-global-warming/#comment-367471

Exploding stars prove Newton's gravity unchanged over cosmic time - March 23, 2014
Excerpt: Australian astronomers have combined all observations of supernovae ever made to determine that the strength of gravity has remained unchanged over the last nine billion years.,,,
,,researchers,, have now analysed the light given off by 580 supernova explosions in the nearby and far Universe and have shown that the strength of gravity has not changed.,,,
a white dwarf reaches a critical mass or after colliding with other stars to 'tip it over the edge'.
"This critical mass depends on Newton's gravitational constant G and allows us to monitor it over billions of years of cosmic time – instead of only decades, as was the case in previous studies." said Professor Mould.
Despite these vastly different time spans, their results agree with findings from the Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment that has been measuring the distance between the Earth and the Moon since NASA's Apollo missions in the 1960s and has been able to monitor possible variations in G at very high precision.,,,
In their current publication, the Swinburne researchers were able to set an upper limit on the change in Newton's gravitational constant of 0.00000001% per year over the past nine billion years.

http://phys.org/news/2014-03-stars-newton-gravity-unchanged-cosmic.html

Psalm 119:89-91
Your eternal word, O Lord, stands firm in heaven. Your faithfulness extends to every generation, as enduring as the earth you created. Your regulations remain true to this day, for everything serves your plans.
According to the materialistic philosophy, there are no apparent reasons why the value of each transcendent universal constant could not have varied dramatically from what they actually are. In fact, the presumption of materialism expects a fairly large amount of flexibility, indeed chaos, in the underlying constants for the universe, since the constants themselves are postulated to randomly 'emerge' from some, as far as I can tell, completely undefined material basis at the Big Bang. In fact if an atheist were ever to be truly consistent in his thinking (which would be a miracle in its own right) he would have to admit that he should a-priori expect variance in the universal laws and constants, like this following astronomer did:
Scientists Question Nature’s Fundamental Laws – Michael Schirber – 2006
Excerpt: “There is absolutely no reason these constants should be constant,” says astronomer Michael Murphy of the University of Cambridge. “These are famous numbers in physics, but we have no real reason for why they are what they are.”
The observed differences are small-roughly a few parts in a million-but the implications are huge (if they hold up): The laws of physics would have to be rewritten, not to mention we might need to make room for six more spatial dimensions than the three that we are used to.”,,,
The speed of light, for instance, might be measured one day with a ruler and a clock. If the next day the same measurement gave a different answer, no one could tell if the speed of light changed, the ruler length changed, or the clock ticking changed.

http://www.space.com/2613-scientists-question-nature-fundamental-laws.html
Indeed, the materialistic worldview is, at its ‘chaotic’ base, very antagonistic to the very ideal that we should find such unchanging laws. This fact alone goes a long way towards explaining why there were no atheists at the founding of the modern scientific revolution. Yet, Christianity, contrary to what atheists would prefer to believe, is very nurturing to such an idea of unchanging universal constants. And indeed it can be, and has been, forcefully argued that that reason is one of the main reasons why we always find that the great men at the base of the modern scientific revolution were devout Christians. As C. S. Lewis, in his clear no nonsense style, put it:
“Men became scientific because they expected Law in Nature, and they expected Law in Nature because they believed in a Legislator. In most modern scientists this belief has died: it will be interesting to see how long their confidence in uniformity survives it.”
Lewis, C.S., Miracles: a preliminary study, Collins, London, p. 110, 1947.
Moreover, most atheists do not seem to realize that if the universal constants were actually found to have even a small variance in them then this would destroy our ability to practice science rationally, for it would undermine our ability to mathematically model the universe in a reliable fashion. For example, if the speed of light constant, or if the invisible glue that holds nuclei together, varied, e=mc2 would be totally useless to us as a reliable description of reality. Please note what chaos ensue if just a very small variance were found to be in the universal constants:
"The observed differences are small-roughly a few parts in a million-but the implications are huge: The laws of physics would have to be rewritten, not to mention we might need to make room for six more spatial dimensions than the three that we are used to."
Scientists Question Nature’s Fundamental Laws – Michael Schirber - 2006
Einstein himself expressed wonder at the ‘epistemological miracle’ that we should, merely by taking thought, reliably model the world with mathematics:
You find it strange that I consider the comprehensibility of the world (to the extent that we are authorized to speak of such a comprehensibility) as a miracle or as an eternal mystery. Well, a priori one should expect a chaotic world, which cannot be grasped by the mind in any way ....
[T]he kind of order created by Newton’s theory of gravitation, for example, is wholly different. Even if man proposes the axioms of the theory, the success of such a project presupposes a high degree of ordering of the objective world, and this could not be expected a priori. That is the “miracle” which is being constantly reinforced as our knowledge expands.

— Albert Einstein
Indeed the correspondence of our mind to be able to mathematically model the universe is far deeper, and even more ‘miraculous’, than even Einstein had realized:
http://www.uncommondescent.com/biology/darwin-doubting-mathematician-david-berlinski-on-why-math-is-really-important/#comment-455440

Many individual constants are of such a high degree of precision as to defy human comprehension, vastly exceeding in precision the most precise man-made machine (1 in 10^22 - gravity wave detector). For example, the cosmological constant (dark energy) is balanced to 1 part in 10^120 and the mass density constant is balanced to 1 part in 10^60.

Fine Tuning Of Dark Energy and Mass of the Universe - Hugh Ross - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4007682

Dark energy is real, say astronomers - September 12, 2012
Excerpt: In the new paper, the product of nearly two years of work, the team have re-examined all the arguments against the Integrated Sachs Wolfe detection as well as improving the maps used in the original work. In their painstaking analysis, they conclude that there is a 99.996 per cent chance that dark energy is responsible for the hotter parts of the cosmic microwave background maps (or the same level of significance as the recent discovery of the Higgs boson).
http://phys.org/news/2012-09-dark-energy-real-astronomers.html

Hugh Ross PhD. - Scientific Evidence For Cosmological Constant (Expansion Of The Universe)
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4347218/

Here are the verses in the Bible Dr. Ross listed, which were written well over 2000 years before the discovery of the finely tuned expansion of the universe by 'Dark Energy', that speak of God 'Stretching out the Heavens'; Job 9:8; Isaiah 40:22; Isaiah 44:24; Isaiah 48:13; Zechariah 12:1; Psalm 104:2; Isaiah 42:5; Isaiah 45:12; Isaiah 51:13; Jeremiah 51:15; Jeremiah 10:12. The following verse is my favorite out of the group of verses:
Job 9:8
He alone stretches out the heavens and treads on the waves of the sea.
The Truman Show – Truman walking on water – screenshot picture
http://gaowsh.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/screen-shot-2011-03-29-at-5-09-50-pm-2.jpg

Here is the paper from the atheistic astrophysicists, that Dr. Ross referenced in the preceding video, that speaks of the ‘disturbing implications’ of the finely tuned expanding universe (1 in 10^120 cosmological constant):
Disturbing Implications of a Cosmological Constant - Dyson, Kleban, Susskind (each are self proclaimed atheists) - 2002
Excerpt: "Arranging the universe as we think it is arranged would have required a miracle.,,,"
"A external agent [external to time and space] intervened in cosmic history for reasons of its own.,,,"
Page 21 "The only reasonable conclusion is that we don't live in a universe with a true cosmological constant".

http://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/0208013.pdf
Here are the 9 lines of evidence that Dr. Ross mentioned which came out shortly after the preceding paper was listed as a preprint on the Los Alamos’s website. Evidences which made Dyson, Kleban and Susskind pull their paper from consideration,,,
Accumulating Evidence for Dark Energy and Supernatural Design - 2011
Excerpt: I (Hugh Ross) often refer to nine different lines of observational evidence that establish dark energy’s reality and dominance in my talks. These nine are:
1.radial velocities of type Ia supernovae;
2.WMAP of the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMBR);
3.ground-based measures of the CMBR;
4.Sloan Digital Sky Survey of galaxies and galaxy clusters;
5.Two-Degree Field Survey of galaxies;
6.gravitational lens measurements of distant galaxies and quasars;
7.distributions of radio galaxies;
8.galaxy velocity distributions; and
9.x-ray emissions from galaxy clusters.


In the last several years, astronomers have added seven additional lines of observational evidence, bringing the total to sixteen. These seven are:
10.Lyman-alpha forest measurements;
11.polarization measures of the cosmic microwave background radiation;
12.stellar ages;
13.cosmic inhomogeneities;
14.gamma-ray bursts;
15.evolution of galaxy clustering; and
16.galaxy cluster angular size measurements.

http://www.reasons.org/articles/rtb-s-dark-energy-articles
Besides the evidence that Dr. Ross listed for the 1 in 10^120 finely tuned expansion of the universe, this following paper clearly indicates that we do live in universe with a ‘true cosmological constant’. A cosmological constant that is not reducible to a materialistic basis. Thus, the atheistic astrophysicists are at a complete loss to explain why the universe expands in such a finely tuned way, whereas Theists are vindicated once again in their beliefs that the universal constants are truly transcendent!

Unchanging universal constant rules out materialistic theories for Dark Energy:
Dark energy alternatives to Einstein are running out of room – January 9, 2013
Excerpt: Last month, a group of European astronomers, using a massive radio telescope in Germany, made the most accurate measurement of the proton-to-electron mass ratio ever accomplished and found that there has been no change in the ratio to one part in 10 million at a time when the universe was about half its current age, around 7 billion years ago. When Thompson put this new measurement into his calculations, he found that it excluded almost all of the dark energy models using the commonly expected values or parameters.
If the parameter space or range of values is equated to a football field, then almost the whole field is out of bounds except for a single 2-inch by 2-inch patch at one corner of the field. In fact, most of the allowed values are not even on the field. “In effect, the dark energy theories have been playing on the wrong field,” Thompson said. “The 2-inch square does contain the area that corresponds to no change in the fundamental constants, (a 'true cosmological constant'), and that is exactly where Einstein stands.”

http://phys.org/news/2013-01-dark-energy-alternatives-einstein-room.html
To clearly illustrate the stunning, incomprehensible, degree of fine-tuning we are dealing with in the universe, Dr. Ross has used the illustration of adding or subtracting a single dime's worth of mass in the observable universe, during the Big Bang, would have been enough of a change in the mass density of the universe to make life impossible in this universe. This word picture he uses, with the dime, helps to demonstrate a number used to quantify that fine-tuning of mass for the universe, namely 1 part in 10^60 for mass density. Compared to the total mass of the observable universe, 1 part in 10^60 works out to about a tenth part of a dime, if not smaller.

Where Is the Cosmic Density Fine-Tuning? - Hugh Ross
http://www.reasons.org/where-cosmic-density-fine-tuning

Actually, 1 in 10 to the 60th for the fine-tuning of the mass density for the universe may be equal to just 1 grain of sand instead of a tenth of a dime!
Sand is made up of Silica this has the formula SiO2
silicon weighs 28 atomic units
Oxygen weighs 16 atomic units
so each SiO2 weighs 60 atomic units

there are 6.023 x 10^23 atomic units in a gram. that is 6 with 23 zeros after it.

so there would be 6.023 x 10^23 / 60 = 1x 10^22 SiO2s in a gram
so
3 x 10^22 atoms in a gram

Say a grain of sand is 1mm across it has a volume of 0.001cm3
1cm3 of sand weighs about 2.6g

so a grain of sand will
weigh 0.0026g

so to find the number of atoms in a grain of sand we multiply the number of atoms per gram by the number of grams:

3 x 10^22 x 0.0026g = 7.8 x 10^19 atoms = 1 grain of sand
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=6447

thus

10^79 – atoms in the universe
minus
10^60 – fine tuning of mass density
equals
10^19 – or equals one grain of sand

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/this-might-make-you-feel-rather-small/#comment-394591
To fully appreciate just how amazing it is the find that the mass density of the universe is balanced to approximately one grain of sand, it is good to ponder just how huge the universe is:

The Biggest Stars in the Universe - video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCmJmTYS7Zw

As well it turns out even the immense size of the universe is necessary for life:

Does the Universe exist for a purpose? The size of the Universe - Overview of the math - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onvUdyvkXvQ
Evidence for Belief in God - Rich Deem
Excerpt: Isn't the immense size of the universe evidence that humans are really insignificant, contradicting the idea that a God concerned with humanity created the universe? It turns out that the universe could not have been much smaller than it is in order for nuclear fusion to have occurred during the first 3 minutes after the Big Bang. Without this brief period of nucleosynthesis, the early universe would have consisted entirely of hydrogen. Likewise, the universe could not have been much larger than it is, or life would not have been possible. If the universe were just one part in 10^59 larger, the universe would have collapsed before life was possible. Since there are only 10^80 baryons in the universe, this means that an addition of just 10^21 baryons (about the mass of a grain of sand) would have made life impossible. The universe is exactly the size it must be for life to exist at all.
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/atheismintro2.html

God created the entire universe for us - February 2012
Excerpt: If the sun were represented by the period at the end of this sentence, our galaxy would be the size of the continental United States.,,, Why didn't God create our modest solar system and a few stars and let it go at that? Because size matters.
If the universe weren't as large as it is fusion would be inefficient. As a result, the universe would produce hydrogen, or hydrogen plus a small amount of helium. That means carbon and oxygen — both essential for life — would be missing.

http://www.dailypilot.com/news/opinion/tn-dpt-0228-carnett-20120227,0,2022339.story
Here is a video of Astrophysicist Hugh Ross explaining the anthropic cosmological principle behind the immense size of the universe as well as behind the ancient age of the universe:

We Live At The Right Time In Cosmic History - Hugh Ross - video
http://vimeo.com/31940671

Of related interest, to how big the universe is, is this fairly old website which points out this mysterious fact;
The View from the Centre of the Universe by Nancy Ellen Abrams and Joel R. Primack
Excerpt: The size of a human being is near the centre of all possible sizes.
http://www.popularscience.co.uk/features/feat24.htm
Whereas this recently updated website is interesting;

The Scale of The Universe - Part 2 - interactive graph (recently updated in 2012 with cool features)
http://htwins.net/scale2/scale2.swf?bordercolor=white

The preceding interactive graph points out that the smallest scale visible to the human eye (as well as a human egg) is at 10^-4 meters, which 'just so happens' to be directly in the exponential center of all possible sizes of our physical reality (not just ‘nearly’ in the exponential center!). i.e. 10^-4 is, exponentially, right in the middle of 10^-35 meters, which is the smallest possible unit of length, which is Planck length, and 10^27 meters, which is the largest possible unit of 'observable' length since space-time was created in the Big Bang, which is the diameter of the universe. This is very interesting for, as far as I can tell, the limits to human vision (as well as the size of the human egg) could have, theoretically, been at very different positions than directly in the exponential middle of all possible sizes;

I think this following music video and Bible verse sum up nicely what these transcendent universal constants are telling us about reality:

My Beloved One - Inspirational Christian Song - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4200171
Hebrews 11:3
"By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible."
Although 1 part in 10^120 and 1 part in 10^60 far exceeds, by many orders of magnitude, the highest tolerance ever achieved in any man-made machine, which is 1 part in 10^22 for a gravity wave detector, according to esteemed British mathematical physicist Roger Penrose (1931-present), the odds of one particular individual constant, the 'original phase-space volume' of the universe, required such precision that the "Creator’s aim must have been to an accuracy of 1 part in 10^10^123”. This number is gargantuan. If this number were written out in its entirety, 1 with 10^123 zeros to the right, it could not be written on a piece of paper the size of the entire visible universe, even if a number were written down on each sub-atomic particle in the entire universe, since the universe only has 10^80 sub-atomic particles in it.

Roger Penrose discusses initial entropy of the universe. - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhGdVMBk6Zo
The Physics of the Small and Large: What is the Bridge Between Them? Roger Penrose
Excerpt: "The time-asymmetry is fundamentally connected to with the Second Law of Thermodynamics: indeed, the extraordinarily special nature (to a greater precision than about 1 in 10^10^123, in terms of phase-space volume) can be identified as the "source" of the Second Law (Entropy)."
http://www.pul.it/irafs/CD%20IRAFS%2702/texts/Penrose.pdf

How special was the big bang? - Roger Penrose
Excerpt: This now tells us how precise the Creator's aim must have been: namely to an accuracy of one part in 10^10^123.
(from the Emperor’s New Mind, Penrose, pp 339-345 - 1989)
http://www.ws5.com/Penrose/

"The 'accuracy of the Creator's aim' would have had to be in 10^10^123"
Hawking, S. and Penrose, R., The Nature of Space and Time, Princeton, Princeton University Press (1996), 34, 35.
As well, contrary to speculation of 'budding universes' arising from Black Holes, Black Hole singularities are completely opposite the singularity of the Big Bang in terms of the ordered physics of entropic thermodynamics. In other words, Black Holes are singularities of destruction, and disorder, rather than singularities of creation and order.
Roger Penrose - How Special Was The Big Bang?
“But why was the big bang so precisely organized, whereas the big crunch (or the singularities in black holes) would be expected to be totally chaotic? It would appear that this question can be phrased in terms of the behaviour of the WEYL part of the space-time curvature at space-time singularities. What we appear to find is that there is a constraint WEYL = 0 (or something very like this) at initial space-time singularities-but not at final singularities-and this seems to be what confines the Creator’s choice to this very tiny region of phase space.”

Entropy of the Universe - Hugh Ross - May 2010
Excerpt: Egan and Lineweaver found that supermassive black holes are the largest contributor to the observable universe’s entropy. They showed that these supermassive black holes contribute about 30 times more entropy than what the previous research teams estimated.
http://www.reasons.org/entropy-universe

Evolution is a Fact, Just Like Gravity is a Fact! UhOh!
Excerpt: The results of this paper suggest gravity arises as an entropic force, once space and time themselves have emerged.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/evolution-is-a-fact-just-like-gravity-is-a-fact-uhoh/

Shining Light on Dark Energy - October 21, 2012
Excerpt: It (Entropy) explains time; it explains every possible action in the universe;,,
Even gravity, Vedral argued, can be expressed as a consequence of the law of entropy.,,,
The principles of thermodynamics are at their roots all to do with information theory. Information theory is simply an embodiment of how we interact with the universe —,,,

http://crev.info/2012/10/shining-light-on-dark-energy/
This 1 in 10^10^123 number, for the time-asymmetry of the initial state of the 'ordered entropy' for the universe, also lends strong support for 'highly specified infinite information' creating the universe since;
"Gain in entropy always means loss of information, and nothing more."
Gilbert Newton Lewis - Eminent Chemist

"Is there a real connection between entropy in physics and the entropy of information? ....The equations of information theory and the second law are the same, suggesting that the idea of entropy is something fundamental..."
Tom Siegfried, Dallas Morning News, 5/14/90 - Quotes attributed to Robert W. Lucky, Ex. Director of Research, AT&T, Bell Laboratories & John A. Wheeler, of Princeton & Univ. of TX, Austin in the article
http://www.bible.ca/tracks/dp-lawsScience.htm
This staggering level of precision, for each individual universal constant scientists can measure, is exactly why many theoretical physicists have suggested the existence of a 'super-calculating intellect' to account for this fine-tuning. This is precisely why the anthropic hypothesis has gained such a strong foothold in many scientific circles. American geneticist Robert Griffiths jokingly remarked about these recent developments;
"If we need an atheist for a debate, I go to the philosophy department. The physics department isn't much use anymore."
Further comments by leading scientists in astrophysics:
"Intelligent design, as one sees it from a scientific point of view, seems to be quite real. This is a very special universe: it's remarkable that it came out just this way. If the laws of physics weren't just the way they are, we couldn't be here at all. The sun couldn't be there, the laws of gravity and nuclear laws and magnetic theory, quantum mechanics, and so on have to be just the way they are for us to be here. Some scientists argue that "well, there's an enormous number of universes and each one is a little different. This one just happened to turn out right." Well, that's a postulate, and it's a pretty fantastic postulate — it assumes there really are an enormous number of universes and that the laws could be different for each of them. The other possibility is that ours was planned, and that's why it has come out so specially."
Nobel Prize winning Physicist Charles Townes

"Astronomy leads us to a unique event, a universe that was created out of nothing and delicately balanced to provide exactly the conditions required to support life. In the absence of an absurdly improbable accident, the observations of modern science seem to suggest an underlying, one might say, supernatural plan."
Physicist and Nobel laureate Arno Penzias

"The precision is as if one could throw a dart across the entire universe and hit a bulls eye one millimeter in diameter on the other side."
Michael Turner - (Astrophysicist at Fermilab)

"If the Universe had not been made with the most exacting precision we could never have come into existence. It is my view that these circumstances indicate the universe was created for man to live in."
John O'Keefe (astronomer at NASA)

"I find it quite improbable that such order came out of chaos. There has to be some organizing principle. God to me is a mystery but is the explanation for the miracle of existence, why there is something instead of nothing."
Alan Sandage (preeminent Astronomer)

"For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries."
(NASA Astronomer Robert Jastrow, God and the Astronomers, p. 116.)

"Some people ... still maintain that since science has provided us with so many answers the day will soon arrive when we will be able to understand even the creation of the fundamental laws of nature without a Divine intent. They challenge science to prove the existence of God. But must we really light a candle to see the sun?"
— Wernher von Braun, rocket pioneer, 1972 - genius behind Apollo program
Wernher von Braun: Rocket Man for War and Peace - entire video playlist
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqmlDqiHYWU&feature=bf_prev&list=PL903EE7447AF47845

"Although I know of no reference to Christ ever commenting on scientific work, I do know that He said, “Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” Thus I am certain that, were He among us today, Christ would encourage scientific research as modern man’s most noble striving to comprehend and admire His Father’s handiwork. The universe as revealed through scientific inquiry is the living witness that God has indeed been at work."
Wernher von Braun, rocket pioneer, 1976.

"Is he worthy to be called a man who attributes to chance, not to an intelligent cause, the constant motion of the heavens, the regular courses of the stars, the agreeable proportion and connection of all things, conducted with so much reason that our intellect itself is unable to estimate it rightly? When we see machines move artificially, as a sphere, a clock, or the like, do we doubt whether they are the productions of reason? -
Cicero (45 BC)

Proverbs 8:29-30
"When He marked out the foundations of the earth, then I was beside Him as a master craftsman;"
The only other theory possible for the universe’s creation, other than a God-centered hypothesis, is some purposeless materialistic theory based on blind chance. Materialistic blind chance tries to escape being completely crushed, by the overwhelming weight of evidence for design in the fine-tuning of the universe, by appealing to an infinity of other un-testable universes in which all other possibilities have been played out. Yet there is absolutely no hard physical evidence to support this blind chance conjecture.
But Who Needs Reality-Based Thinking Anyway? Not the New Cosmologists - Denyse O'Leary - January 2, 2014
Excerpt: "Multiverse theory is designed for one purpose, and one purpose only, and that is to defend atheism. It makes no predictions, it gives no insight, it provides no control, it produces no technology, it advances no mathematics, it is a science in name only, because it is really metaphysics."
Dr. Robert B. Sheldon - PhD Physics

"These multiverse theories all share the same fundamental defect: They can be neither confirmed nor falsified. Hence, they don't deserve to be called scientific, according to the well-known criterion proposed by the philosopher Karl Popper. Some defenders of multiverses and strings mock skeptics who raise the issue of falsification as "Popperazi" -- which is cute but not a counterargument. Multiverse theories aren't theories -- they're science fictions, theologies, works of the imagination unconstrained by evidence."

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2014/01/but_who_needs_r080281.html

Mathematician (Woit) wonders about the respectful reception new multiverse book is getting - January 25, 2014
Excerpt: As recently as the 1990s, most scientists regarded the idea of multiple universes as wild speculation too far out on the fringe to be worth serious discussion. Indeed, in 1998, Max Tegmark, then an up-and-coming young cosmologist at Princeton, received an email from a senior colleague warning him off multiverse research: “Your crackpot papers are not helping you,” it said.
Needless to say, Tegmark persisted in exploring the multiverse as a window on “the ultimate nature of reality”, while making sure also to work on subjects in mainstream cosmology as camouflage for his real enthusiasm. Today multiple universes are scientifically respectable, thanks to the work of Tegmark as much as anyone. Now a physics professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, he presents his multiverse work to the public in Our Mathematical Universe.

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/mathematician-wonders-about-the-respectful-reception-new-multiverse-book-is-getting/
In fact, the 'infinite multiverse' conjecture suffers from some very serious, and deep, flaws of logic.

The Absurdity of Inflation, String Theory and The Multiverse - Dr. Bruce Gordon - video
http://vimeo.com/34468027
The End Of Materialism? - Dr. Bruce Gordon
* In the multiverse, anything can happen for no reason at all.
* In other words, the materialist is forced to believe in random miracles as a explanatory principle.
* In a Theistic universe, nothing happens without a reason. Miracles are therefore intelligently directed deviations from divinely maintained regularities, and are thus expressions of rational purpose.
* Scientific materialism is (therefore) epistemically self defeating: it makes scientific rationality impossible.
As well, this hypothetical infinite multiverse obviously begs the question of exactly which laws of physics, arising from which material basis, are telling all the other natural laws in physics what, how and when, to do the many precise unchanging things they do in these other universes? Since Cosmologist Alexander Vilenkin has shown that even the hypothetical multiverse must face an absolute, transcendent, beginning, exactly where is this universe creating machine to be located? The atheist does not make the problem of ex nihilo creation of this universe go away simply by postulating an infinity of untestable universes which also must have arisen ex nihilo! Moreover, if an infinite number of other possible universes must exist in order to explain the fine tuning of this one, then why is it not also infinitely possible for a infinitely powerful and transcendent Creator to exist? Using the materialist same line of reasoning for an infinity of multiverses to 'explain away' the extreme fine-tuning of this one we can thusly surmise; If it is infinitely possible for God to exist then He, of 100% certainty, must exist no matter how small the probability is of His existence in one of these other infinity of universes, and since He certainly must exist in some possible world then he must exist in all possible worlds since all possibilities in all universes automatically become subject to Him since He is, by definition, transcendent and infinitely Powerful.,,, To clearly illustrate the level of absurdity of what materialists now consider their cutting edge science: The materialistic conjecture of an infinity of universes to 'explain away' the fine tuning of this one also insures the 100% probability of the existence of Pink Unicorns no matter how small the probability is of them existing (Though since a pink unicorn is a 'contingent being', instead of a 'necessary being' like God, this means that pink unicorns will only exist in 'some' possible worlds in the multiverse scenario). Thus it is self-evident that the atheistic materialists have painted themselves into a inescapable corner of logical absurdities in trying to find an escape from the Theistic implications we are finding for the fine-tuning of this universe.

The preceding argument has actually been made into a formal philosophical proof:

Ontological Argument For God From The Many Worlds Hypothesis - William Lane Craig - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4784641

The materialistic conjecture of an infinity of universes to ‘explain away’ the fine tuning of this universe also insures, through the ontological argument, the 100% probability of the existence of God:
God Is Not Dead Yet – William Lane Craig – Page 4
The ontological argument. Anselm’s famous argument has been reformulated and defended by Alvin Plantinga, Robert Maydole, Brian Leftow, and others. God, Anselm observes, is by definition the greatest being conceivable. If you could conceive of anything greater than God, then that would be God. Thus, God is the greatest conceivable being, a maximally great being. So what would such a being be like? He would be all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-good, and he would exist in every logically possible world. But then we can argue:

1. It is possible that a maximally great being (God) exists.
2. If it is possible that a maximally great being exists, then a maximally great being exists in some possible world.
3. If a maximally great being exists in some possible world, then it exists in every possible world.
4. If a maximally great being exists in every possible world, then it exists in the actual world.
5. Therefore, a maximally great being exists in the actual world.
6. Therefore, a maximally great being exists.
7. Therefore, God exists.

Now it might be a surprise to learn that steps 2–7 of this argument are relatively uncontroversial. Most philosophers would agree that if God’s existence is even possible, then he must exist. So the whole question is: Is God’s existence possible? The atheist has to maintain that it’s impossible that God exists. He has to say that the concept of God is incoherent, like the concept of a married bachelor or a round square. But the problem is that the concept of God just doesn’t appear to be incoherent in that way. The idea of a being which is all-powerful, all knowing, and all-good in every possible world seems perfectly coherent. And so long as God’s existence is even possible, it follows that God must exist.

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2008/july/13.22.html?start=4
Where this argument has gained purchase is in the materialist/atheist appeal to the multiverse (an infinity of possible worlds) to try to ‘explain away’ the extreme fine tuning we find for this universe. The materialist/atheist, without realizing it, ends up conceding the necessary premise to the ontological argument and thus guarantees the success of the argument and thus insures the 100% probability of God’s existence!

I like the concluding comment from the narrator about the ontological argument:
"God then is the Being that couldn't possibly not exit."
Ontological Argument – Dr. Plantinga (3:50 minute mark)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCXvVcWFrGQ

I think that Plantinga formulates the argument best in this following paper (reference to Kant's objection):

The Ontological Argument - ALVIN PLANTINGA
http://mind.ucsd.edu/syllabi/02-03/01w/readings/plantinga.html

Is God a Necessary Being? (Alvin Plantinga) - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndmnIs2gMzI

Of note The ontological argument only works for maximally great being. Other deities like Zeus or Thor aren’t described as maximally great so the argument doesn’t work for them. Same for unicorns which atheists usually try to substitute for God in the argument to ridicule it, but that logically fails.

Zeus's failings in the 'perfect being' argument are gone over here:

God and Necessity - pg. 187
http://books.google.com/books?id=rnXdrTimPO0C&pg=PA187&lpg=PA187#v=onepage&q&f=false

This following video deals with many of the technical objections that atheists/materialists have tried to raise to the ontological argument:

The Ontological Argument (The Introduction) – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQPRqHZRP68

And as weird as it may sound, this following video refines the Ontological argument into a proof that, because of the characteristic of ‘maximally great love’, God must exist in more than one person:

The Ontological Argument for the Triune God - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGVYXog8NUg

i.e. without this distinction we are stuck with the logical contradiction of maximally great love being grounded in ones own self which is the very antithesis of maximally great love.
"The light is the sum of all love… give love and your reward will be the love you gave and the love you received… If you do not give love then all you will have is the love you were given,,, and that is still wonderful but why not add to the sum of all love,, It is like ruby’s and sapphires in heaven when we give love… Love is the currency of the next life… so give love…"
Rudi – Near Death Experiencer
Of related note: Computer scientists proven Godel's ontological proof for the existence of God:
Computer Scientists 'Prove' God Exists - Oct. 23, 2013
Excerpt: Two scientists have formalized a theorem regarding the existence of God penned by mathematician Kurt Gödel.,,,
researchers,, say they have actually proven is a theorem put forward by renowned Austrian mathematician Kurt Gödel,,,
Using an ordinary MacBook computer, they have shown that Gödel's proof was correct,,,

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/scientists-use-computer-to-mathematically-prove-goedel-god-theorem-a-928668.html
Of note, although most people, as well as theologians, philosophers and logicians, would certainly think that proving Godel's ontological argument for the existence of God logically true, and consistent, was a pretty big deal, it seems the author of the article (and researchers?) were more impressed with the advance in computer programming that it represented than they were impressed with the fact that they proved Godel's proof was actually true. This is how the author of the article put it:
"and the real news isn't about a Supreme Being, but rather what can now be achieved in scientific fields using superior technology."
I think someone may have their priorities a bit confused in that article.

Here is the entire paper:

Formalization, Mechanization and Automation of Godel’s Proof of God’s Existence - 10 Sep 2013
Christoph Benzmullerand Bruno Woltzenlogel Paleo
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1308.4526.pdf

Here are some more resources outlining the absurdity of the multiverse conjecture:
The Multiverse Gods, final part - Robert Sheldon - June 2011
Excerpt: And so in our long journey through the purgatory of multiverse-theory, we discover as we previously discovered for materialism, there are two solutions, and only two. Either William Lane Craig is correct and multiverse-theory is just another ontological proof a personal Creator, or we follow Nietzsche into the dark nihilism of the loss of reason. Heaven or hell, there are no other solutions.
“How can this be? Did we not begin with an infinity of solutions, how then did we end up with only two?” Because of feedback. When our solutions include us, then we have introduced unavoidable feedback. For positive feedback takes any number or even infinite inputs and returns just two outputs. It is the inevitable consequence of wanting to explain ourselves. If, as in most of our science endeavors, we leave out ourselves, our feelings, our metaphysics, our guilt, our pleasures and focus merely on the task at hand–say, building a better telescope–then we don’t suffer this indignity. But as soon as we try to avoid something that is rightfully ours–our conscience, our responsibility, our will–then we are up to our neck in a mess.
What can deliver us from this metaphysical pit? Only another person, who isn’t us. Only by having an outside force can we avoid the metaphysical feedback that unleashes the Titans. And only by making that force personal, is the cure any better than the disease. We need a pure light, a simple truth, a thing of beauty, something outside our self to guide us through the minefield.
Pandora slammed the box shut, but it was too late, the only thing left in it was Hope.

http://rbsp.info/PROCRUSTES/the-multiverse-gods-final-part/
Atheism In Crisis - The Absurdity Of The Multiverse - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4227733
Multiverse and the Design Argument - William Lane Craig
Excerpt: Roger Penrose of Oxford University has calculated that the odds of our universe’s low entropy condition obtaining by chance alone are on the order of 1 in 10^10(123), an inconceivable number. If our universe were but one member of a multiverse of randomly ordered worlds, then it is vastly more probable that we should be observing a much smaller universe. For example, the odds of our solar system’s being formed instantly by the random collision of particles is about 1 in 10^10(60), a vast number, but inconceivably smaller than 1 in 10^10(123). (Penrose calls it “utter chicken feed” by comparison [The Road to Reality (Knopf, 2005), pp. 762-5]). Or again, if our universe is but one member of a multiverse, then we ought to be observing highly extraordinary events, like horses’ popping into and out of existence by random collisions, or perpetual motion machines, since these are vastly more probable than all of nature’s constants and quantities’ falling by chance into the virtually infinitesimal life-permitting range. Observable universes like those strange worlds are simply much more plenteous in the ensemble of universes than worlds like ours and, therefore, ought to be observed by us if the universe were but a random member of a multiverse of worlds. Since we do not have such observations, that fact strongly disconfirms the multiverse hypothesis. On naturalism, at least, it is therefore highly probable that there is no multiverse. — Penrose puts it bluntly “these world ensemble hypothesis are worse than useless in explaining the anthropic fine-tuning of the universe”.
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/multiverse-and-the-design-argument

On Signature in the Cell, Robert Saunders Still Doesn't Get It - Jonathan M. - December 2011
Excerpt: On the issue of fine tuning, Saunders appeals to the famous anthropic argument, noting, 'The fine-tuning argument has always seemed to me to be somewhat tautologous. Had the constants been different, we would not be here to look at the Universe and its physical constants. We have a sample size of 1. Exactly 1.'
William Lane Craig has effectively countered this argument:
'[S]uppose you are dragged before a firing squad of 100 trained marksmen, all of them with rifles aimed at your heart, to be executed. The command is given; you hear the deafening sound of the guns. And you observe that you are still alive, that all of the 100 marksmen missed! Now while it is true that, "You should not be surprised that you do not observe that you are dead," nonetheless it is equally true that, "You should be surprised that you do observe that you are alive."
Since the firing squad's missing you altogether is extremely improbable, the surprise expressed is wholly appropriate, though you are not surprised that you do not observe that you are dead, since if you were dead you could not observe it.

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/12/robert_saunders053711.html

Can We Scientifically Determine if a Complex Event is Specified? - Casey Luskin - July, 2012
Excerpt: If you shoot an arrow at a target, it will hit a certain point. Your hitting that precise point is in itself an unlikely event. Is that enough to infer design? It depends. If you draw the bull's eye around the target after you hit the event, then probably not. But Dembski points out that if you drew the target before shooting the arrow, and then hit the target, then there's a specification worthy of a design inference. So not all specifications will do.
For example, in cosmology the required specification is an objectively understandable configuration of the physical laws and constants of the universe. Not just any improbable configuration will do. You need one that allows life to exist. The vast vast majority of configurations don't yield any or all of the following: matter, heavy elements, molecules, galaxies, stars, solar systems, habitable planets, or even elements like carbon. So it's not hard to understand the specification required for cosmic design: you need a configuration that produces a life-friendly universe. Thus, the laws of the universe exhibit high CSI.
In biology, specification is also easy to understand. The relevant specification in biology is functionality.,,,

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/07/can_we_scientif062221.html

Michael Behe has a profound answer to the infinite multiverse argument in “Edge of Evolution”. If there are infinite universes, then we couldn’t trust our senses, because it would be just as likely that our universe might only consist of a human brain that pops into existence which has the neurons configured just right to only give the appearance of past memories. It would also be just as likely that we are floating brains in a lab, with some scientist feeding us fake experiences. Those scenarios would be just as likely as the one we appear to be in now (one universe with all of our experiences being “real”). Bottom line is, if there really are an infinite number of universes out there, then we can’t trust anything we perceive to be true, which means there is no point in seeking any truth whatsoever.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/on-the-vastness-of-the-universe/#comment-362912

But Who Needs Reality-Based Thinking Anyway? Not the New Cosmologists - Denyse O'Leary January 2, 2014
Excerpt: Logic and reason are likewise irrelevant. Consider the multiverse claim that there are "infinite copies of you and your loved ones leading lives, up until this moment, that are absolutely identical to yours." Mathematician George F. R. Ellis notes that, if so, the deep mysteries of nature are too absurd to be explicable and that the proposed nine types of multiverse in one scheme are "mutually exclusive." True, but in a multiverse, "inexplicable" is okay. "Absurd" and "mutually exclusive" are meaningless concepts. It is equally meaningless to assert that one event is more probable than another. As David Berlinski puts it, "Why is Newton's universal law of gravitation true? No need to ask. In another universe, it is not"(Devil's Delusion, p. 124).,,,
Science writer John Horgan pointedly asks, "Is theorizing about parallel universes immoral?"
"These multiverse theories all share the same fundamental defect: They can be neither confirmed nor falsified. Hence, they don't deserve to be called scientific, according to the well-known criterion proposed by the philosopher Karl Popper. Some defenders of multiverses and strings mock skeptics who raise the issue of falsification as "Popperazi" -- which is cute but not a counterargument. Multiverse theories aren't theories -- they're science fictions, theologies, works of the imagination unconstrained by evidence."

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2014/01/but_who_needs_r080281.html
Brief Refutation of all of Max Tegmark's 4 levels of multiverses - February 2014
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/multiverse-advocate-defends-in-sciam-against-charges-that-his-claims-are-unscientific-nonsense/#comment-490175

Peter Woit's refutation of Max Tegmark's Multiverses:

Book Review: 'Our Mathematical Universe' by Max Tegmark
Is our universe only one of many? If so, how real are the others? - Peter Woit - January 17, 2014
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303393804579310720208417980
“The multiverse idea rests on assumptions that would be laughed out of town if they came from a religious text.”
Gregg Easterbrook

"The multiverse comes with a lot of baggage, such as an overarching space and time to host all those bangs, a universe-generating mechanism to trigger them, physical fields to populate the universes with material stuff, and a selection of forces to make things happen. Cosmologists embrace these features by envisaging sweeping "meta-laws" that pervade the multiverse and spawn specific bylaws on a universe-by-universe basis. The meta-laws themselves remain unexplained - eternal, immutable transcendent entities that just happen to exist and must simply be accepted as given."
Paul Davies, physicist, SETI director

Believe Science Has All the Answers? Evolutionary Biologist Austin Hughes Says, Open Your Eyes - Fall 2013
Excerpt: How does scientism justify moving into areas traditionally explained by philosophy?
"What they say is, "Philosophy has never solved anything. It's just nonsense or religion." They don't realize that they themselves are incapable of answering the really big questions. Take these multiverse theories. Basically, they're just a way to deny that the universe has the appearance of design. "The universe was not designed," these scientists say. "It's just that there are lots and lots of other universes, and we just happen to be in one that's favorable to life." But that doesn't solve the metaphysical problem, does it? Where did all of these universes come from? Who established the rules within each universe? Who established the rules by which new universes are generated?"

http://salvomag.com/new/articles/salvo26-science-faith/blinded-by-science.php

Do Multiverse Scenarios Solve the Problem of Fine-Tuning? by Max Andrews - January 19, 2013 (Good Graphs are included)
Excerpt: Physicists, cosmologists, and philosophers must either accept the laws of nature and basic premises of inflationary cosmology and string theory as metaphysical brute facts or seriously entertain the possibility of the fine-tuning hypothesis; that is, the possible existence of a fine-tuner.
http://sententias.org/2013/01/19/do-multiverse-scenarios-solve-the-problem-of-fine-tuning/#more-4234

Job Opening: Creator of the Universe—A Reply to Keith Parsons - Professor Paul Herrick
Excerpt: In short, says Parsons, we have no rational need to suppose that God exists. But Parsons' argument contains undefended gaps at a number of crucial points, as I have argued in this paper. On the other hand, Varghese's argument, when supplemented by the additional considerations suggested in this paper, makes a good case that the choice between theism and atheism does not simply boil down to a choice between one ultimate brute fact or another. Rather, it comes down to a choice between one view that makes rational sense of the existence of the material universe, and an opposing view that, bottom line, does not. This is a choice between theism on the one hand, and Parsons' atheism and scientific naturalism on the other, respectively.
This all adds up to a perfectly good explanatory reason to embrace theism. After all, what better reason is there to hold a belief, than that it is the best explanation for something we are trying to make sense of (in this case, the existence of the whole of what there is)?

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/paul_herrick/parsons.html
Cosmology and Fine Tuning: Three Approaches - Robin Collins, PhD - (2013) - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmExDsWL3W8

Here are more formal refutation of the multiverse conjecture;
Bayesian considerations on the multiverse explanation of cosmic fine-tuning - V. Palonen
Conclusions: ,,, The self-sampling assumption approach by Bostrom was shown to be inconsistent with probability theory. Several reasons were then given for favoring the ‘this universe’ (TU) approach and main criticisms against TU were answered. A formal argument for TU was given based on our present knowledge. The main result is that even under a multiverse we should use the proposition “this universe is fine-tuned” as data, even if we do not know the ‘true index’ 14 of our universe. It follows that because multiverse hypotheses do not predict fine-tuning for this particular universe any better than a single universe hypothesis, multiverse hypotheses are not adequate explanations for fine-tuning. Conversely, our data on cosmic fine-tuning does not lend support to the multiverse hypotheses. For physics in general, irrespective of whether there really is a multiverse or not, the common-sense result of the above discussion is that we should prefer those theories which best predict (for this or any universe) the phenomena we observe in our universe.
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0802/0802.4013.pdf
Here is a devastating critique of atheist Victor Stenger's no fine tuning argument:

The Fine-Tuning of the Universe for Intelligent Life - Dr. Luke A. Barnes, a post-doctoral researcher at the Institute for Astronomy, ETH Zurich, Switzerland
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1112/1112.4647v1.pdf
non technical overview:
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/is-fine-tuning-a-fallacy

As to the 'string-theoretic' multiverse. The following expert shows why the materialistic postulation of 'string theory' is, for all intents and purposes of empirical science, a complete waste of time and energy:
Not Even Wrong: The Failure of String Theory and the Search for Unity in Physical Law:
Peter Woit, a PhD. in theoretical physics and a lecturer in mathematics at Columbia, points out—again and again—that string theory, despite its two decades of dominance, is just a hunch aspiring to be a theory. It hasn't predicted anything, as theories are required to do, and its practitioners have become so desperate, says Woit, that they're willing to redefine what doing science means in order to justify their labors.
http://www.amazon.com/Not-Even-Wrong-Failure-Physical/dp/0465092756

This Week’s Hype - August 2011
Excerpt: ‘It’s well-known that one can find Stephen Hawking’s initials, and just about any other pattern one can think of somewhere in the CMB data.,, So, the bottom line is that they see nothing, but a press release has been issued about how wonderful it is that they have looked for evidence of a Multiverse, without mentioning that they found nothing.’ – Peter Woit PhD.
http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=3879
Here is another entry from Professor Peter Woit's blog where he has been fairly busy showing the failure of string theory to pass any of the experimental tests that have been proposed and put to any of its predictions:
String Theory Fails Another Test, the “Supertest” - December 2010
Excerpt: It looks like string theory has failed the “supertest”. If you believe that string theory “predicts” low-energy supersymmetry, this is a serious failure.
http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=3338

This Week’s Hype – November 3, 2011 by Peter Woit (Ph.D. in theoretical physics and a lecturer in mathematics at Columbia)
Excerpt: the LHC has turned out to be dud, producing no black holes or extra dimensions,
http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=4118

SUSY Still in Hiding - Prof. Peter Woit - Columbia University - February 2012
Excerpt: The LHC (Large Haldron Collider) has done an impressive job of investigating and leaving in tatters the SUSY/extra-dimensional speculative universe that has dominated particle theory for much of the last thirty years, and this is likely to be one of its main legacies. These fields will undoubtedly continue to play a large role in particle theory, no matter how bad the experimental situation gets, as their advocates argue “Never, never, never give up!”, but fewer and fewer people will take them seriously.
http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=4437

Popular physics theory running out of hiding places - Nov. 12, 2012
Excerpt: Researchers at the Large Hadron Collider have detected one of the rarest particle decays seen in Nature.
The finding deals a significant blow to the theory of physics known as supersymmetry.
Many researchers had hoped the LHC would have confirmed this by now. Supersymmetry, or SUSY, has gained popularity as a way to explain some of the inconsistencies in the traditional theory of subatomic physics known as the Standard Model.
The new observation, reported at the Hadron Collider Physics conference in Kyoto, is not consistent with many of the most likely models of SUSY.,,,

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-20300100

The Ultimate Guide to the Multiverse - Peter Woit - November 2011
Excerpt: The multiverse propaganda machine has now been going full-blast for more than eight years, since at least 2003 or so, and I’m beginning to wonder “what’s next?”. Once your ideas about theoretical physics reach the point of having a theory that says nothing at all, there’s no way to take this any farther. You can debate the “measure problem” endlessly in academic journals, but the cover stories about how you have revolutionized physics can only go on so long before they reach their natural end of shelf-life. This has gone on longer than I’d ever have guessed, but surely it has to end sooner or later, - Peter Woit - Senior Lecturer at Columbia University
http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=4194

Multiverse Mania at Wikipedia - Woit - March 9, 2014
Excerpt: It’s hard to know where to start with a document like this, and I’ve neither the time nor the Wikipedia expertise to start trying to edit it to something sensible (at this point I’d suggest that the most sensible edit would be to remove the whole thing).
I include just a couple of random examples of problems with the entry. The “criticism” section has little actual criticism, just some mild comments from Ellis and Davies, together with positive quotes from them about the multiverse as a research program. Nothing from Gross or Steinhardt, for instance. Much of the “criticism” section is actually defense of the multiverse through claims about experimental evidence from Mersini-Houghton that I don’t think anyone except her takes seriously. Other claims of experimental evidence are completely outrageous, for instance we read that “Recent research has indicated the possibility of the gravitational pull of other universes on ours.[22]” where reference [22] is to a Planck collaboration paper which states the exact opposite (“There is no detection of bulk flow”).

http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=6758

Integral challenges physics beyond Einstein - June 30, 2011
Excerpt: However, Integral’s observations are about 10,000 times more accurate than any previous and show that any quantum graininess must be at a level of 10-48 m or smaller.,,, “This is a very important result in fundamental physics and will rule out some string theories and quantum loop gravity theories,” says Dr Laurent.
http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-06-physics-einstein.html

“string theory, while dazzling, has outrun any conceivable experiment that could verify it”
Excerpt: string theory, while dazzling, has outrun any conceivable experiment that could verify it—there’s zero proof that it describes how nature works.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/physics/string-theory-while-dazzling-has-outrun-any-conceivable-experiment-that-could-verify-it/

The part of the book ('The Trouble With Physics') I found most interesting was the part which tells how the string theorists were scammed by Nature (or Mathematics). Of course, Smolin doesn't put it exactly like this, but imagine the following conversation.---------
String theorists: We've got the Standard Model, and it works great, but it doesn't include gravity, and it doesn't explain lots of other stuff, like why all the elementary particles have the masses they do. We need a new, broader theory.
Nature: Here's a great new theory I can sell you. It combines quantum field theory and gravity, and there's only one adjustable parameter in it, so all you have to do is find the right value of that parameter, and the Standard Model will pop right out.
String theorists: We'll take it.
String theorists (some time later): Wait a minute, Nature, our new theory won't fit into our driveway. String theory has ten dimensions, and our driveway only has four.
Nature: I can sell you a Calabi-Yau manifold. These are really neat gadgets, and they'll fold up string theory into four dimensions, no problem.
String theorists: We'll take one of those as well, please.
Nature: Happy to help.
String theorists (some time later): Wait a minute, Nature, there's too many different ways to fold our Calabi-Yao manifold up. And it keeps trying to come unfolded. And string theory is only compatible with a negative cosmological constant, and we own a positive one.
Nature: No problem. Just let me tie this Calabi-Yao manifold up with some strings and branes, and maybe a little duct tape, and you'll be all set.
String theorists: But our beautiful new theory is so ugly now!
Nature: Ah! But the Anthropic Principle says that all the best theories are ugly.
String theorists: It does?
Nature: It does. And once you make it the fashion to be ugly, you'll ensure that other theories will never beat you in beauty contests.
String theorists: Hooray! Hooray! Look at our beautiful new theory.

---------- Okay, I've taken a few liberties here. But according to Smolin's book, string theory did start out looking like a very promising theory. And, like a scam, as it looks less and less promising, it's hard to resist the temptation to throw good money (or research) after bad in the hope of getting something back for your effort.
http://www.amazon.com/review/R2H7GVX4BUQQ68/

The Multiverse, Evidence and Theology - February 11, 2014
Excerpt: This is being sold as “testing the multiverse”, and string theory is brought in to justify lots of possible different physics in different universes, but this is not a testable part of these scenarios. What’s being advertised is a grandiose picture of the string landscape, laws of physics determined environmentally, etc., etc., but if you actually look at the product that you’re actually buying as “testable”, you don’t get any of the cool stuff.
http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=6681
A Capella Science - Bohemian Gravity! - video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rjbtsX7twc
Bohemian Gravity - Rob Sheldon - September 19, 2013
Excerpt: there's a large contingent of physicists who believe that string theory is the heroin of theoretical physics. It has absorbed not just millions of dollars, but hundreds if not thousands of grad student lifetimes without delivering what it promised--a unified theory of the universe and life. It is hard, in fact, to find a single contribution from string theory despite 25 years of intense effort by thousands of the very brightest and best minds our society can find.,,
This negative result is remarkable, and says something that no one wants to hear--that materialism as a philosophy of science, is spent, is toast, is worthless.

http://procrustes.blogtownhall.com/2013/09/19/bohemian_gravity.thtml

Theory Bubbles - Peter Woit - April 2012
Excerpt: With no reality check, a less than rigorous hypothesis such as string theory may linger on,,,, By contrast, a hypothesis such as string theory, which attempts to unify quantum mechanics with Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity, has so far not been tested critically by experimental data, even over a time span equivalent to a physicist’s career.
http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=4558

F-theory Phenomenology - Peter Woit - March 2012
Excerpt: So, the long-standing ideology that supersymmetry stabilizes the weak scale, and seeing its effects will finally give evidence for string theory unification looks like it is crumbling. With this hope gone, string theory unification becomes a completely unpredictive subject, with no hope of connection to experiment. One has an infinite array of mathematically highly complex models one can spend time studying, but it’s hard to characterize doing so as any recognizable form of physical science.
http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=4506

String theory now “thoroughly irrelevant” to Large Hadron Collider work? - May 8, 2012
Excerpt: The extent to which string theory is now agreed to be thoroughly irrelevant to LHC physics is kind of striking. The few people like Kane claiming otherwise are being ignored as an embarrassment. If evidence for SUSY or extra dimensions had shown up, this would be very, very different.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/cosmology/string-theory-now-thoroughly-irrelevant-to-large-hadron-collider-work/
Though to be fair, a subset of the math of the string hypothesis did get lucky with a interesting 'after the fact' prediction (post-diction) of a already known phenomena. (But this is very similar to finding an arrow on a wall, drawing a circle around it, and then declaring that you hit a bulls-eye!):
A first: String theory predicts an experimental result:
Excerpt: Not to say that string theory has been proved. Clifford Johnson of the University of Southern California, the string theorist on the panel, was very clear about that.
http://www.symmetrymagazine.org/breaking/2009/02/16/a-first-string-theory-predicts-an-experimental-result/
Despite this contrived 'after the fact' postdiction of a physical phenomena, string theory is constantly suffering severe setbacks in other areas, thus string theory has yet to even establish itself as a legitimate line of inquiry within science.
Testing Creation Using the Proton to Electron Mass Ratio
Excerpt: The bottom line is that the electron to proton mass ratio unquestionably joins the growing list of fundamental constants in physics demonstrated to be constant over the history of the universe.,,, For the first time, limits on the possible variability of the electron to proton mass ratio are low enough to constrain dark energy models that “invoke rolling scalar fields,” that is, some kind of cosmic quintessence. They also are low enough to eliminate a set of string theory models in physics. That is these limits are already helping astronomers to develop a more detailed picture of both the cosmic creation event and of the history of the universe. Such achievements have yielded, and will continue to yield, more evidence for the biblical model for the universe’s origin and development.
http://www.reasons.org/TestingCreationUsingtheProtontoElectronMassRatio
As well, even if the whole of string theory were to have been found to be true, it would have done nothing to help the materialist, and in reality, would have only added another level of 'finely tuned complexity' for us to deal with without ever truly explaining the origination of that logically coherent complexity (Logos) of the string theory in the first place.,,, Bruce Gordon, after a thorough analysis of the entire string theory framework, states the following conclusion on page 72 of Robert J. Spitzer's book 'New Proofs For The Existence Of God':
'it is clear that the string landscape hypothesis is a highly speculative construction built on shaky assumptions and,,, requires meta-level fine-tuning itself."
- Bruce Gordon

Sean Carroll channels Giordano Bruno - Robert Sheldon - November 2011
Excerpt: 'In fact, on Lakatos' analysis, both String Theory and Inflation are clearly "degenerate science programs".',,,
The sad part about Carroll’s piece, is that it confirms one of Jaki’s hypotheses–that what stopped the science of the golden age of Greece, what stopped the science of the Chinese or the Babylonians or the Caliphate was not politics, not anti-science reactionaries, not an epidemic of stupidity, but bad metaphysics. Bad metaphysics can turn any “progressive science program” into a “degenerate” one, and this infatuation with multiverses is sucking the life of hundreds of grad students, the resources of a hundred tenure-track cosmologists into the impossible task of predicting the unobservable.
They’d be better off studying theology.

http://rbsp.info/PROCRUSTES/sean-carroll-channels-giordano-bruno/
Of related note: Inflation is thought to be confirmed recently by gravitational waves from the big bang:

Signal detected for cosmic microwave background’s polarization - March 17, 2014
http://www.uncommondescent.com/cosmology/announcement-signal-detected-for-cosmic-microwave-backgrounds-polarization/
New Big Bang evidence supports Biblical creation, says Orthodox physicist By David Shamah - March 19, 2014, The Times of Israel
Excerpt: “One thing the announcement does do is make it clear that the universe had a definite starting point – a creation – as described in the book of Genesis,” Bar Ilan University physics Professor Nathan Aviezer told the Times of Israel.
“To deny this now is to deny scientific fact.”
Professor Aviezer goes on to say:
“Without addressing who or what caused it, the mechanics of the creation process in the Big Bang match the Genesis story perfectly,” he said. “If I had to make up a theory to match the first passages in Genesis, the Big Bang theory would be it.”

http://www.timesofisrael.com/with-new-big-bang-evidence-creation-is-a-fact/
Yet inflation, even though it lends strong support for a creation event for this universe, some materialists took this as evidence for a multiverse.
“In most models, if you have inflation, then you have a multiverse,” said Stanford physicist Andrei Linde. Linde, one of cosmological inflation’s inventors, spoke on Monday at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics event where the BICEP2 astrophysics team unveiled the gravitational wave results.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/national-geographic-claims-gravitational-waves-show-we-live-in-multiverse/
Yet a materialistic multiverse has many insurmountable 'metaphysical' problems for materialists:
One of cosmic inflation theory’s creators (Steinhardt) now questions own theory - April 2011
Excerpt: Cosmic inflation is so widely accepted that it is often taken as established fact. The idea is that the geometry and uniformity of the cosmos were established during an intense early growth spurt.
But some of the theory’s creators, including the author, are having second thoughts. As the original theory has developed, cracks have appeared in its logical foundations.
Highly improbable conditions are required to start inflation. Worse, inflation goes on eternally, producing infinitely many outcomes, so the theory makes no firm observational predictions.
Scientists debate among (and within) themselves whether these troubles are teething pains or signs of a deeper rot. Various proposals are circulating for ways to fix inflation or replace it.
- Scientific American (April 2011),
Paul J. Steinhardt,,,
Inflation adds a whole bunch of really unlikely metaphysical assumptions — a new force field that has a never-before-observed particle called the “inflaton”, an expansion faster than the speed of light, an interaction with gravity waves which are themselves only inferred– just so that it can explain the unlikely contingency of a finely-tuned big bang.
But instead of these extra assumptions becoming more-and-more supported, the trend went the opposite direction, with more-and-more fine-tuning of the inflation assumptions until they look as fine-tuned as Big Bang theories. At some point, we have “begged the question”. Frankly, the moment we add an additional free variable, I think we have already begged the question. In a Bayesean comparison of theories, extra variables reduce the information content of the theory, (by the so-called Ockham factor), so these inflation theories are less, not more, explanatory than the theory they are supposed to replace.,,, after 20 years of work, if we haven’t made progress, but have instead retreated, it is time to cut bait.

http://www.uncommondescent.com/cosmology/cosmology-one-of-cosmic-inflation-theory%E2%80%99s-creators-now-questions-own-theory/
A criticism about the fine-tuning problem for inflation by Roger Penrose is here:
Inflation
Excerpt: In order to work, and as pointed out by Roger Penrose from 1986 on, inflation requires extremely specific initial conditions of its own, so that the problem of initial conditions is not solved: “There is something fundamentally misconceived about trying to explain the uniformity of the early universe as resulting from a thermalization process. […] For, if the thermalization is actually doing anything […] then it represents a definite increasing of the entropy. Thus, the universe would have been even more special before the thermalization than after.”[104]
Penrose, Roger (1989). “Difficulties with Inflationary Cosmology”. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 271: 249–264.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_%28cosmology%29#Criticisms
As far as I know (and I very well may be wrong), the fine tuning problem has only gotten worse since Penrose made his criticism of inflation and is not dealt with by this new finding for gravity waves. Steinhardt, one of inflation theory’s creators, commented in 2013 on the trend in evidence:
Inflationary paradigm in trouble after Planck2013
Anna Ijjas, Paul J. Steinhardt, Abraham Loeb
Excerpt of abstract: More important, though, is that all the simplest inflaton models are disfavored statistically relative to those with plateau-like potentials. We discuss how a restriction to plateau-like models has three independent serious drawbacks: it exacerbates both the initial conditions problem and the multiverse-unpredictability problem and it creates a new difficulty that we call the inflationary “unlikeliness problem.”,,
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1304.2785v2.pdf

A new study,, challenges the inflation model - April 12, 2013
Excerpt: CfA astronomers Anna Ijjas, Paul Steinhardt, and Avi Loeb have just published a paper arguing that the new Planck results, far from lending credibility to ideas of inflation, actually undermine them. Indeed, they argue that they pose a challenge to cosmology overall. In an ironic and subtle twist, the scientists point out that the results of Planck are actually too good, because they confirm with high precision only the very simplest version of inflation. Yet, they argue, if one believes in the principles of inflation the simplest version is actually by far the most unlikely version. Hence the whole edifice of inflation becomes untenable.
http://scitechdaily.com/new-study-challenges-planck-results/

Inflation Model Severely Questioned In New Paper - October 29. 2013
Excerpt: There has been much talk in scientific circles recently about a 2013 paper by Anna Ijjas, Paul J. Steinhardt and Abraham Loeb, titled, Inflationary paradigm in trouble after Planck2013. The authors of the paper (severely) question the cosmological theory of inflation, which postulates that the universe underwent a period of extremely rapid expansion shortly after the big bang, and that it has been expanding at a slower rate ever since.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/new-cosmology-paper-by-skeptical-scientists-lends-support-to-the-fine-tuning-argument/
Various inflation models are discussed here:

Inflation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_%28cosmology%29#Eternal_inflation

So which model did they strengthen and which one did they weaken with the finding of polarization? (gravitational waves?).
Why I Still Doubt Inflation, in Spite of Gravitational Wave Findings By John Horgan - March 17, 2014
Excerpt: Indeed, inflation, like string theory, has always suffered from what is sometimes called the “Alice’s Restaurant Problem.” Like the diner eulogized in the iconic Arlo Guthrie song, inflation comes in so many different versions that it can give you “anything you want.” In other words, it cannot be falsified, and so–like psychoanalysis, Marxism and other overly flexible hypotheses (mmm Darwinism?)–it is not really a scientific theory.
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/2014/03/17/why-i-still-doubt-inflation-in-spite-of-gravity-wave-findings/

Bang for the Buck: What the BICEP2 Consortium's Discovery Means - Rob Sheldon - March 19, 2014
Excerpt: Turning to theorists, the team looked at whether this effect was predicted by the models. Reconstructing the probable scenario, somebody dragged up a gravity wave model of the early universe and said that if the matter was compressed in one direction, say by a gravity wave, then the CMB light would get preferentially polarized. But the effect was way too small to explain the data. Then somebody else had a brainstorm and suggested that inflation would flatten the background but not the foreground, effectively making the signal stand out or become amplified. Since all these models have three or four dials, the theorists feverishly got to work and found a setting of the dials that matched the data. (One of common pitfalls of all modelers is to confuse curve fitting with prediction -- to confuse the assumptions of the model with the conclusions of the fit.)
Now the BICEP2 consortium had the opposite problem. They had first struggled with too big a signal for the theory, and now they had too important a theory for the signal. They spent another year double-checking, trying out alternative explanations, waiting for confirmation. The replacement for BICEP2, the Keck, went into operation and when it saw the same signal, they felt confident enough to release their paper.
Isn't this the very model of propriety in science -- careful measurement, skeptical modeling, confirmatory measurements, cautious publication? Why then do I give this paper a 1 in 10^60 chance of being correct?
Two independent models that have never been confirmed are both needed to process the data and arrive at an explanation. Two extremely unlikely chance coincidences -- since the two models are not related to each other -- are needed to produce the effect. Multiple dials in each unconfirmed theory having unconstrained parameters have to be adjusted to get the model to agree. There are just too many ways in which the assumptions of the modelers are unconsciously affecting the results for this to be believed. As Richard Feynman said about physics, "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool."

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2014/03/bang_for_the_bu083451.html
I’m certainly not qualified to know which models were supported and which models were weakened, but what I do know for certain is that a purely unguided (atheistic/materialistic) inflationary model would lead to the epistemological failure of science itself, as one of the chief proponents of multiverses himself admits:
WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? Infinity - Max Tegmark - January 2014
Excerpt: Physics is all about predicting the future from the past, but inflation seems to sabotage this: when we try to predict the probability that something particular will happen, inflation always gives the same useless answer: infinity divided by infinity. The problem is that whatever experiment you make, inflation predicts that there will be infinitely many copies of you far away in our infinite space, obtaining each physically possible outcome, and despite years of tooth-grinding in the cosmology community, no consensus has emerged on how to extract sensible answers from these infinities. So strictly speaking, we physicists are no longer able to predict anything at all!
This means that today’s best theories similarly need a major shakeup, by retiring an incorrect assumption. Which one?
Here’s my prime suspect: infinity. (actually the ‘theory’ that needs to be retired is the philosophy of materialism in general)

MAX TEGMARK – Physicist
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/jan/12/what-scientific-idea-is-ready-for-retirement-edge-org
Thus, while gravitational waves may be an important discovery, I hardly think it resolves any of the serious shortcomings that a purely materialistic/atheistic inflation model would possess! But that is just my initial unqualified hunch. I’m sure much more qualified people than I will be taking this finding apart with a fine tooth comb in the future.

Also of note: A physicist(?), named Robert L. Oldershaw, in the comment section under this article announcing the finding for polarization (gravitational waves?), commented,,
Key Signature of the Big Bang’s Origin Discovered - UPDATE MARCH 17
Excerpt: The discovery of B-mode polarization in the CMB would be important observation, but let’s not get carried away. Inflation predicted a homogeneous cosmos, but the latest Planck results indicate an intrinsic dipole anisotropy (that is not a Doppler effect). Inflation predicted the existence of magnetic monopoles, but not a single one of these mythical particles has ever been found. Inflation theory cannot say why inflation occurred, but rather has to invent some ad hoc unknown “inflaton” field that was the culprit. So celebrate the discovery of B-mode polarization, but keep in mind that the interpretation of that finding in terms of what was going on 10^-35 seconds after the Big Bang bears some resemblance to reading tea leaves.
http://www.skyandtelescope.com/news/Proof-of-Inflationary-Universe-To-Be-Announced-Monday-250522521.html
As to the ‘intrinsic dipole anisotropy’, the following paper was recently (2014) brought to my attention:
Why is the solar system cosmically aligned? BY Dragan Huterer – 2007
The solar system seems to line up with the largest cosmic features. Is this mere coincidence or a signpost to deeper insights?
Caption under figure on page 43:
ODD ALIGNMENTS hide within the multipoles of the cosmic microwave background. In this combination of the quadrupole and octopole, a plane bisects the sphere between the largest warm and cool lobes. The ecliptic — the plane of Earth’s orbit projected onto the celestial sphere — is aligned parallel to the plane between the lobes.
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~huterer/PRESS/CMB_Huterer.pdf
Of note: The preceding article was written before the Planck data (with WMPA & COBE data), but the multipoles were actually verified by Planck.

A Large Scale Pattern from Optical Quasar Polarization Vectors – 2013
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1311.6118.pdf

Testing the Dipole Modulation Model in CMBR – 2013
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1308.0924.pdf

of related interest:
Is there a violation of the Copernican principle in radio sky? – Ashok K. Singal – May 17, 2013
Abstract Excerpt: Two pertinent questions then arise. First, why should there be such large anisotropies present in the sky distribution of some of the most distant discrete sources implying inhomogeneities in the universe at very large scales (covering a fraction of the universe)? What is intriguing even further is why such anisotropies should lie about a great circle decided purely by the orientation of earth’s rotation axis and/or the axis of its revolution around the sun? It looks as if these axes have a preferential placement in the larger scheme of things, implying an apparent breakdown of the Copernican principle or its more generalization, cosmological principle, upon which all modern cosmological theories are based upon.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1305.4134

Psalm 89:11-12
The heavens are Yours, the earth also is Yours;
The world and all its fullness, You have founded them.
The north and the south, You have created them;
Tabor and Hermon rejoice in Your name.

(commentary on Tabor and Hermon: ,,,that is to say, east and west are equally formed by thee, and therefore give thee praise.,,,)
This following article illustrates just how far string theory, and inflation, would miss the mark of explaining the fine-tuning we see even if they were found to be true:
Baron Münchhausen and the Self-Creating Universe:
Roger Penrose has calculated that the entropy of the big bang itself, in order to give rise to the life-permitting universe we observe, must be fine-tuned to one part in e10exp(123)≈10^10exp(123). Such complex specified conditions do not arise by chance, even in a string-theoretic multiverse with 10^500 different configurations of laws and constants, so an intelligent cause may be inferred. What is more, since it is the big bang itself that is fine-tuned to this degree, the intelligence that explains it as an effect must be logically prior to it and independent of it – in short, an immaterial intelligence that transcends matter, energy and space-time. (of note: 10^10^123 minus 10^500 is still, for all practical purposes, 10^10^123)
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2007/06/baron_munchausen_and_the_selfc.html

Infinitely wrong - Dr. Sheldon - November 2010
Excerpt: So you see, they gleefully cry, even [1 / 10^(10^123)] x infinity = 1! Even the most improbable events can be certain if you have an infinite number of tries.,,,Ahh, but does it? I mean, zero divided by zero is not one, nor is 1/infinity x infinity = 1. Why? Well for starters, it assumes that the two infinities have the same cardinality.
http://rbsp.info/PROCRUSTES/infinitely-wrong/
Stephen Hawking created quite a stir with his book 'The Grand Design', in Sept. 2010, by claiming that M-theory, the dubious, and completely unsubstantiated, step child of string theory, eliminated the need for God to explain the origin of the universe. Many physicists objected to Hawking's claim, but perhaps the best argument against Hawking's claim is Hawking's very own words:

Hawking gave the game away for his 'omnipotent' claims for M-theory with this quote that he gave in response to a question from Larry King at the beginning of a interview King had with Hawking about his book:
Larry King: “If you could time travel would you go forward or backward?”

Stephen Hawking: “I would go forward and find if M-theory is indeed the theory of everything.”

Larry King and others; “Quietly laugh”
So here we have Hawking making sweeping claims with a theory that, by his own admission, is not even shown to be a complete 'theory of everything' in the first place. Further critiques of Hawking's 'omnipotent' M-theory, by leading experts in the field, can be found on the following site, as well the video of the interview between King and Hawking:

Barr on Hawking - Barry Arrington - September 2010
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/barr-on-hawking/#comment-363544

of related note:
Cosmologists Forced to “In the Beginning” - January 2011
Excerpt: In New Scientist today, Lisa Grossman reported on ideas presented at a conference entitled “State of the Universe” convened last week in honor of Stephen Hawking’s 70th birthday. Some birthday; he got “the worst presents ever,” she said: “two bold proposals posed serious threats to our existing understanding of the cosmos.” Of the two, the latter is most serious: a presentation showing reasons why “the universe is not eternal, resurrecting the thorny question of how to kick-start the cosmos without the hand of a supernatural creator.” It is well-known that Hawking has preferred a self-existing universe. Grossman quotes him saying, “‘A point of creation would be a place where science broke down. One would have to appeal to religion and the hand of God,’ Hawking told the meeting, at the University of Cambridge, in a pre-recorded speech.”
http://crev.info/2012/01/cosmologists-forced-to-in-the-beginning/
William Lane Craig: The Origins of the Universe - Has Hawking Eliminated God? Cambridge October 2011 - video lecture
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Tup-dA88aw

Hawking stated in his book, 'The Grand Design':
“Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist.The universe didn't need a God to begin; it was quite capable of launching its existence on its own,"
Stephen Hawking
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2010/09/the-universe-exists-because-of-spontaneous-creation-stephen-hawking.html
John Lennox took issue with Hawking's claim:
Stephen Hawking is wrong - 2010
“But contrary to what Hawking claims, physical laws can never provide a complete explanation of the universe. Laws themselves do not create anything, they are merely a description of what happens under certain conditions.
What Hawking appears to have done is to confuse law with agency.

– John Lennox
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1308599/Stephen-Hawking-wrong-You-explain-universe-God.html
Confusing law with agency is a profoundly deep logical error on Hawking's part:
Do Physical Laws Make Things Happen? - Stephen L. Talbott
Excerpt: In "The Limits of Predictability" I tried to show the great distance between understanding a certain lawfulness inherent in events and predicting or explaining the events themselves. Contrary to all current thinking within science, the more uncompromisingly we formulate the precise and determining action of a physical law, the less it tells us about the events it governs. We gain more and more exactness about less and less of the world's concrete expression.
I illustrated this by describing what happens when we release a leaf in a vacuum chamber. The leaf now "drops like a rock". That is, we get a trajectory that seems to be little more than the graphic display of a mathematical expression we call the "law of gravity". To see an event in this way as a mathematical necessity made visible gives us a powerful sense of explanation.
But — and this was the decisive point — if we restrict ourselves to the sphere of our mathematical explanation and do not smuggle in qualitative aspects of the phenomenon lying outside the explanation, then we no longer even know whether we're dealing with a leaf or rock! The explanation, in its own terms and despite all its precision, gives us no means to distinguish between the two. We highlight a law equally implicit in both leafy and rocky phenomena by sacrificing everything distinctive in those phenomena to the single, implicit aspect we are looking for.

http://www.natureinstitute.org/txt/st/mqual/ch03.htm

"Universes do not “spontaneously create” on the basis of abstract mathematical descriptions, nor does the fantasy of a limitless multiverse trump the explanatory power of transcendent intelligent design. What Mr. Hawking’s contrary assertions show is that mathematical savants can sometimes be metaphysical simpletons. Caveat emptor."
Bruce Gordon - Hawking's irrational arguments - October 2010
This following quote, in critique of Hawking's book, is from Roger Penrose who worked closely with Stephen Hawking in the 1970's and 80's:
'What is referred to as M-theory isn’t even a theory. It’s a collection of ideas, hopes, aspirations. It’s not even a theory and I think the book is a bit misleading in that respect. It gives you the impression that here is this new theory which is going to explain everything. It is nothing of the sort. It is not even a theory and certainly has no observational (evidence),,, I think the book suffers rather more strongly than many (other books). It’s not a uncommon thing in popular descriptions of science to latch onto some idea, particularly things to do with string theory, which have absolutely no support from observations.,,, They are very far from any kind of observational (testability). Yes, they (the ideas of M-theory) are hardly science."
– Roger Penrose – former close colleague of Stephen Hawking – in critique of Hawking’s new book ‘The Grand Design’ the exact quote in the following video clip:
Roger Penrose Debunks Stephen Hawking's New Book 'The Grand Design' - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5278793/

The following gives a glimpse as to how far away physicists are from ever experimentally confirming a 'unified' theory:
Pouring Some Cold Water on Higgs Hype - July 2012
Excerpt: "Our best theory of gravity is still general relativity, which does not mesh mathematically with the quantum field theories that comprise the Standard Model. Over the past few decades, theorists have become increasingly obsessed with finding a unified theory, a "theory of everything" that wraps all of nature's forces into one tidy package. Hearing all the hoopla about the Higgs, the public might understandably assume that it represents a crucial step toward a unified theory -- and perhaps at least tentative confirmation of the existence of strings, branes, hyperspaces, multiverses and all the other fantastical eidolons that Kaku, Stephen Hawking, Brian Greene and other unification enthusiasts tout in their bestsellers.
But the Higgs doesn't take us any closer to a unified theory than climbing a tree would take me to the Moon. As I've pointed out previously, string theory, loop-space theory and other popular candidates for a unified theory postulate phenomena far too minuscule to be detected by any existing or even conceivable (except in a sci-fi way) experiment. Obtaining the kind of evidence of a string or loop that we have for, say, the top quark would require building an accelerator as big as the Milky Way."

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/07/some_cold_water061721.html

“Higgs boson (The 'God Particle') continues to be maddeningly well-behaved” - New Scientist, November 14, 2012
Excerpt: The world's favourite particle is proving far too well-behaved for physicists' liking. The first major update from the Large Hadron Collider since a particle resembling the Higgs boson was discovered in July rules out one way in which the boson might open the door to new physics, and weakens another.
What's more, direct searches for particles not accounted for in the standard model of particle physics, our leading theory of the fundamental particles and forces, are also coming up empty. "I would, as a hunter of new physics, have liked to see it different than what we have now," says Albert De Roeck of CMS, one of the two major detectors at the LHC, which is based at CERN near Geneva, Switzerland. "But the data is the data."
Since the Higgs is credited with giving mass to other elementary particles, a well-behaved one might seem like a good thing. The trouble is that the particle is predicted by the standard model, which must be incomplete as it doesn't contain any mention of dark matter and gravity.,,,
"The results really tell us that we're either not looking in the right place, or we're not looking in the right way, or maybe both," says Paul Jackson, ,,,

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn22503-higgs-boson-continues-to-be-maddeningly-wellbehaved.html?full=true

Dark matter tops physicists’ wish list, post-Higgs (The 'God' particle) – October 2, 2013
Excerpt: However, the standard model is still incomplete – it does not account for gravity, for example – so physicists hoped the Higgs would turn out to be weird enough to point the way to new theories.
But further results from the LHC suggest the Higgs looks exactly as expected. “The LHC has not found any trace of new physics,” says Luis Ibanez of the Autonomous University of Madrid in Spain.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn24314-dark-matter-tops-physicists-wish-list-posthiggs.html#.UlFfsxA0Eis
Is the Higgs Boson (aka the God Particle) also finely tuned for life? So researchers think so!
Rethinking the universe: - June 17, 2013
Excerpt: "It all has to do with one of the main theoretical puzzles in fundamental physics," explains Barr. "Why is the mass of the Higgs particle 17 orders of magnitude smaller than its 'natural' value?"
Two explanations have been proposed, and both of them predict new phenomena that should be seen by the LHC. But so far, there is no hint of them. "That is why our radical proposal nearly 15 years ago is attracting increasing attention," he adds.
Their idea is that the Higgs boson mass has to have an "unnaturally" small value for life to be possible. In other words, if it didn't, we wouldn't be here.,,,

http://phys.org/news/2013-06-rethinking-universe-groundbreaking-theory-multiverse.html
I liked John Lennox's response to the "Higg's Hype':
Not the God of the Gaps, But the Whole Show - John Lennox - 2012
Excerpt: Krauss does not seem to realize that his concept of God is one that no intelligent monotheist would accept. His "God" is the soft-target "God of the gaps" of the "I can't understand it, therefore God did it" variety. As a result, Krauss, like Dawkins and Hawking, regards God as an explanation in competition with scientific explanation. That is as wrong-headed as thinking that an explanation of a Ford car in terms of Henry Ford as inventor and designer competes with an explanation in terms of mechanism and law. God is not a "God of the gaps", he is God of the whole show.,,,
So what can we say about the Higgs boson? Simply this: God created it, Higgs predicted it and Cern found it. We rightly celebrate the last two - what about the first?

http://www.christianpost.com/news/the-god-particle-not-the-god-of-the-gaps-but-the-whole-show-80307/
It is interesting to note that Dr. Craig used the example of Peter Higg’s mathematical prediction of the Higg’s boson itself, which Peter Higg’s had made 3 decades ago before it was discovered by the LHC, as a philosophical proof for Theism:
Mathematics and Physics – A Happy Coincidence? – Dr. Craig – video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/9826382/

1. If God did not exist the applicability of mathematics would be a happy coincidence.
2. The applicability of mathematics is not a happy coincidence.
3. Therefore, God exists.
Of related note for anyone who may still believe that super-string theory may have purchase as to accurately describing reality (I have many reservations myself), the following video may be very interesting for you to watch (actually it was very interesting for me to watch, and as I said earlier, I have my many reservations about super-string theory):

Dr. Sylvester James Gates, Jr. Presents Evidence For Intelligent Design - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BMYtnv_OnI

Excerpt from video description: "Doubly-even self-dual linear binary error-correcting block code," first invented by Claude Shannon in the 1940's, has been discovered embedded WITHIN the equations of superstring theory!

Why does nature have this? What errors does it need to correct? What is an 'error' for nature? More importantly what is the explanation for this freakish discovery?

The most obvious conclusion for this discovery is Intelligent Design.


Recent NPR interview with Professor Gates: Uncovering the codes for reality:
http://being.publicradio.org/programs/2012/codes-for-reality/gates-symbolsofp...

Gates original paper:

Relating Doubly-Even Error-Correcting Codes, Graphs, and Irreducible Representations of N-Extended Supersymmetry - May 2008
http://arxiv.org/abs/0806.0051

Here is one objection I have to reality being 'merely' a computer simulation as depicted by Professor Gates, and others working in super-string theory, (as if reality being a computer simulation wasn't bad enough for materialists to explain), It should be noted that the popular science fiction conception of the universe being 'merely' a computer simulation (as in the 'Matrix' movies), a conception drawn from the fact that 'material' reality is now shown to be reducible to information, is far too simplistic in its conception:

Is God No Better Than A Special Computer? - William Lane Craig - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xinwkb_b4k4
Quantum Computing Promises New Insights, Not Just Supermachines - Scott Aaronson - December 2011
Excerpt: And yet, even though useful quantum computers might still be decades away, many of their payoffs are already arriving. For example, the mere possibility of quantum computers has all but overthrown a conception of the universe that scientists like Stephen Wolfram have championed. That conception holds that, as in the “Matrix” movies, the universe itself is basically a giant computer, twiddling an array of 1’s and 0’s in essentially the same way any desktop PC does.
Quantum computing has challenged that vision by showing that if “the universe is a computer,” then even at a hard-nosed theoretical level, it’s a vastly more powerful kind of computer than any yet constructed by humankind. Indeed, the only ways to evade that conclusion seem even crazier than quantum computing itself: One would have to overturn quantum mechanics, or else find a fast way to simulate quantum mechanics using today’s computers.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/06/science/scott-aaronson-quantum-computing-promises-new-insights.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&ref=science
Here is a much better argument refuting the computer simulation argument:

Digital Physics Argument for God's Existence - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2Xsp4FRgas
Digital Physics Argument
Premise 1: Simulations can only exist is a computer or a mind.
Premise 2: The universe is a simulation.
Premise 3: A simulation on a computer still must be simulated in a mind.
Premise 4: Therefore, the universe is a simulation in a mind (2,3).
Premise 5: This mind is what we call God.
Conclusion: Therefore, God exists.
As a interesting sidelight to Penrose debunking Hawking's theory for how the universe began, it seems that Roger Penrose's own pet 'non-theistic' theory, for how the universe began without the need for God, also fails when scrutinized:
Mr Hoyle, call your office - Robert Sheldon - November 2010
Excerpt: I think I understand what Penrose is saying, and the truly weird thing about it is that I was introduced to this theory from a DC comic book circa 1967, whereas Sir Roger only just discovered it in 2007.
http://procrustes.blogtownhall.com/page1

BRUCE GORDON: Hawking's irrational arguments - October 2010
Excerpt: The physical universe is causally incomplete and therefore neither self-originating nor self-sustaining. The world of space, time, matter and energy is dependent on a reality that transcends space, time, matter and energy. This transcendent reality cannot merely be a Platonic realm of mathematical descriptions, for such things are causally inert abstract entities that do not affect the material world. Neither is it the case that "nothing" is unstable, as Mr. Hawking and others maintain. Absolute nothing cannot have mathematical relationships predicated on it, not even quantum gravitational ones. Rather, the transcendent reality on which our universe depends must be something that can exhibit agency - a mind that can choose among the infinite variety of mathematical descriptions and bring into existence a reality that corresponds to a consistent subset of them. This is what "breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to describe.,,, the evidence for string theory and its extension, M-theory, is nonexistent; and the idea that conjoining them demonstrates that we live in a multiverse of bubble universes with different laws and constants is a mathematical fantasy. What is worse, multiplying without limit the opportunities for any event to happen in the context of a multiverse - where it is alleged that anything can spontaneously jump into existence without cause - produces a situation in which no absurdity is beyond the pale.
For instance, we find multiverse cosmologists debating the "Boltzmann Brain" problem: In the most "reasonable" models for a multiverse, it is immeasurably more likely that our consciousness is associated with a brain that has spontaneously fluctuated into existence in the quantum vacuum than it is that we have parents and exist in an orderly universe with a 13.7 billion-year history. This is absurd. The multiverse hypothesis is therefore falsified because it renders false what we know to be true about ourselves. Clearly, embracing the multiverse idea entails a nihilistic irrationality that destroys the very possibility of science.
Universes do not “spontaneously create” on the basis of abstract mathematical descriptions, nor does the fantasy of a limitless multiverse trump the explanatory power of transcendent intelligent design. What Mr. Hawking’s contrary assertions show is that mathematical savants can sometimes be metaphysical simpletons. Caveat emptor.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/oct/1/hawking-irrational-arguments/
The Absurdity of Inflation, String Theory and The Multiverse - Dr. Bruce Gordon - video
http://vimeo.com/34468027

Here is the last power-point slide of the preceding video:
The End Of Materialism?
* In the multiverse, anything can happen for no reason at all.
* In other words, the materialist is forced to believe in random miracles as a explanatory principle.
* In a Theistic universe, nothing happens without a reason. Miracles are therefore intelligently directed deviations from divinely maintained regularities, and are thus expressions of rational purpose.
* Scientific materialism is (therefore) epistemically self defeating: it makes scientific rationality impossible.
God Is the Best Explanation of the Fine-Tuning of the Universe for Intelligent Life - William Lane Craig - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMBcc2aTqcE

It is interesting to note that the very belief that there is some type of unity, some overriding connection, of the laws of physics, i.e. a theory of everything, is itself a belief that arises from the presupposition of Design in the universe. A Theistic presupposition.
In Cambridge, Professor Steve Fuller discusses intelligent design - Video
http://www.uncommondescent.com/news/in-cambridge-professor-steve-fuller-discusses-why-the-hypothesis-of-intelligent-design-is-not-more-popular-among-scientists-and-others/
At 17:34 minute mark of the video, Dr. Steve Fuller states:
"So you think of physics in search of a "Grand Unified Theory of Everything", Why should we even think there is such a thing? Why should we think there is some ultimate level of resolution? Right? It is part, it is a consequence of believing in some kind of design. Right? And there is some sense in which that however mulrifarious and diverse the phenomena of nature are, they are ultimately unified by the minimal set of laws and principles possible. In so far as science continues to operate with that assumption, there is a presupposition of design that is motivating the scientific process. Because it would be perfectly easy,, to stop the pursuit of science at much lower levels. You know understand a certain range of phenomena in a way that is appropiate to deal with that phenomena and just stop there and not go any deeper or any farther.",,, You see, there is sense in which there is design at the ultimate level, the ultimate teleology you might say, which provides the ultimate closure,,"
But as Godel showed, if numbers are included, there cannot be a 'complete' mathematical theory of everything,,
The nature and significance of Gödel’s incompleteness theorems - Princeton - 2006
Excerpt: ,,Stephen Hawking and Freeman Dyson, among others, have come to the conclusion that Gödel’s theorem implies that there can’t be a Theory of Everything.,,
http://math.stanford.edu/~feferman/papers/Godel-IAS.pdf
Many times an atheist will object to Theism by saying something along the lines of this following quote by a prominent atheist:
The eminent Kant scholar Lewis Beck used to say that anyone who could believe in God could believe in anything. To appeal to an omnipotent deity is to allow that at any moment the regularities of nature may be ruptured, that miracles may happen. - Richard Lewontin
http://www.drjbloom.com/Public%20files/Lewontin_Review.htm
Yet for a atheist/materialist to say that science can ONLY study law-like events that can faithfully be predicted, time after time, is sheer hypocrisy on the part of the atheist, for indeed the atheist himself holds that strictly random, non-regular, non-law-like, indeed 'CHAOTIC' events are responsible for why the universe, and all life in it, originated, and ‘evolves’, in the first place. The atheist’s own worldview, far from demanding regularity in nature, demands that random, and thus by definition ‘non-predictable’, events be at the base of all reality and of all life. Needless to say, being ‘non-predictably random’ is the exact polar opposite of the predictability of science that atheists accuse Theists of violating when Theists posit the rational Mind of God for the origin of the universe and/or all life in it. In truth, the atheist is just extremely prejudiced as to exactly what, or more precisely WHOM, he, or she, will allow to be the source for the random, irregular, non-predicatable, non-law-like, events that they themselves require to be at the very basis of the creation events of the universe and all life in it.,,, Moreover, unlike atheistic neo-Darwinian evolution, which continually requires these non-predictable, non-law like, random events, to continually be present within the base of reality (which is the antithesis of ‘science’ according to the atheist's own criteria for excluding any Theistic answer to ever be plausible), Intelligent Design finds itself only requiring that this seemingly ‘random’, top down, implementation of novel genetic, and body plan, information at the inception of each new parent species, with all sub-speciation events thereafter, from the parent species, following a law-like adherence to the principle of genetic entropy. A principle that happens to be in accordance with perhaps the most rigorously established law in science, the second law of thermodynamics, as well as in accordance with the law of Conservation of Information as laid out by Dr. Dembski and Marks.

The following is a humorous account of the preceding:

Blackholes- The neo-Darwinists ultimate ‘god of randomness’ which can create all life in the universe (according to them)
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fxhJEGNeEQ_sn4ngQWmeBt1YuyOs8AQcUrzBRo7wISw/edit?hl=en_US

Further notes:
The Effect of Infinite Probabilistic Resources on ID and Science (Part 2) - Eric Holloway - July 2011
Excerpt:,, since orderly configurations drop off so quickly as our space of configurations approach infinity, then this shows that infinite resources actually make it extremely easy to discriminate in favor of ID (Intelligent Design) when faced with an orderly configuration. Thus, intelligent design detection becomes more effective as the probabilistic resources increase.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/philosophy/the-effect-of-infinite-probabilistic-resources-on-id-and-science-part-2/
What Would The World Look Like If Atheism Were Actually True? – video
http://www.metacafe.com/w/5486757/

When Nothing Created Everything? A humorous account of the atheist's creation myth
http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2010/12/when-nothing-created-everything

And yes an atheists cosmologist has actually tried to give causal power to 'nothing':
"Pale, Small, Silly, Nerdy": NY Times Gives a Devastating Smack to New Atheists' Favorite Cosmologist - March 2012
Excerpt: Krauss, author of the The Physics of Star Trek and other works, has been something of a hero to the New Atheists. It will be interesting to see how they regard him now. Albert has slain the dragon, burned its body, buried the ashes, and salted the earth over the grave. He hasn't given some superficial criticism of Krauss's argument that is politically correct and leaves Krauss with a platform. He has not only shown why Krauss's argument is wrong, but why it can't be right -- because it incoherently gives physical causal properties to "nothing."
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/03/pale_small_sill057841.html
Materialists also 'use to' try to find a place for random blind chance to hide by proposing a universe which expands and contracts (recycles) infinitely. Even at first glance, the 'recycling universe' conjecture suffers so many questions from the second law of thermodynamics (entropy) as to render it effectively implausible as a serious theory, but now the recycling universe conjecture has been totally crushed by the hard evidence for a 'flat' universe found by the 'BOOMERANG' experiment.

Refutation Of Oscillating Universe - Michael Strauss PhD. - video:
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4323673

Evidence For Flat Universe - Boomerang Project
http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/boomerang-flat.html
http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/images1/omegamomegal3.gif
Did the Universe Hyperinflate? - Hugh Ross - April 2010
Excerpt: Perfect geometric flatness is where the space-time surface of the universe exhibits zero curvature (see figure 3). Two meaningful measurements of the universe's curvature parameter, ½k, exist. Analysis of the 5-year database from WMAP establishes that -0.0170 < ½k < 0.0068.4 Weak gravitational lensing of distant quasars by intervening galaxies places -0.031 < ½k < 0.009.5 Both measurements confirm the universe indeed manifests zero or very close to zero geometric curvature,,,
http://www.reasons.org/did-universe-hyperinflate

Einstein's 'Biggest Blunder' Turns Out to Be Right - November 2010
Excerpt: By providing more evidence that the universe is flat, the findings bolster the cosmological constant model for dark energy over competing theories such as the idea that the general relativity equations for gravity are flawed. "We have at this moment the most precise measurements of lambda that a single technique can give," Marinoni said.
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/dark-energy-cosmological-constant-101124.html
A 'flat universe', which is actually another very surprising finely-tuned 'coincidence' of the universe, means this universe, left to its own present course of accelerating expansion due to Dark Energy, will continue to expand forever, thus fulfilling the thermodynamic equilibrium of the second law to its fullest extent (entropic 'Heat Death' of the universe).
The Future of the Universe
Excerpt: After all the black holes have evaporated, (and after all the ordinary matter made of protons has disintegrated, if protons are unstable), the universe will be nearly empty. Photons, neutrinos, electrons and positrons will fly from place to place, hardly ever encountering each other. It will be cold, and dark, and there is no known process which will ever change things. --- Not a happy ending.
http://spiff.rit.edu/classes/phys240/lectures/future/future.html

The End Of Cosmology? - Lawrence M. Krauss and Robert J. Scherrer
Excerpt: We are led inexorably to a very strange conclusion. The window during which intelligent observers can deduce the true nature of our expanding universe might be very short indeed.
http://genesis1.asu.edu/0308046.pdf

Psalm 102:25-27
Of old You laid the foundation of the earth, And the heavens are the work of Your hands. They will perish, but You will endure; Yes, they will all grow old like a garment; Like a cloak You will change them, And they will be changed. But You are the same, And Your years will have no end.

"We have the sober scientific certainty that the heavens and earth shall ‘wax old as doth a garment’....
Dark indeed would be the prospects of the human race if unilluminated by that light which reveals ‘new heavens and a new earth.’"

Lord Kelvin

Big Rip
Excerpt: The Big Rip is a cosmological hypothesis first published in 2003, about the ultimate fate of the universe, in which the matter of universe, from stars and galaxies to atoms and subatomic particles, are progressively torn apart by the expansion of the universe at a certain time in the future. Theoretically, the scale factor of the universe becomes infinite at a finite time in the future.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Rip
Thermodynamic Argument Against Evolution - Thomas Kindell - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4168488
entire video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MV3WWDfGsX4

Does God Exist? The End Of Christianity - Finding a Good God in an Evil World - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4007708

Of related interest to entropy, another line of evidence from quantum mechanics that strongly indicates consciousness precedes material reality is the Quantum Zeno Effect:
Quantum Zeno effect
Excerpt: The quantum Zeno effect is,,, an unstable particle, if observed continuously, will never decay.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Zeno_effect
The reason why I am fascinated with this effect is, for one thing, that Entropy is, by a wide margin, the most finely tuned of initial conditions of the Big Bang:

Roger Penrose discusses initial entropy of the universe. – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhGdVMBk6Zo
The Physics of the Small and Large: What is the Bridge Between Them? Roger Penrose
Excerpt: “The time-asymmetry is fundamentally connected to with the Second Law of Thermodynamics: indeed, the extraordinarily special nature (to a greater precision than about 1 in 10^10^123, in terms of phase-space volume) can be identified as the “source” of the Second Law (Entropy).”

How special was the big bang? – Roger Penrose
Excerpt: This now tells us how precise the Creator’s aim must have been: namely to an accuracy of one part in 10^10^123.
(from the Emperor’s New Mind, Penrose, pp 339-345 – 1989)
For another thing, it is interesting to note just how foundational entropy is in its explanatory power:
Shining Light on Dark Energy - October 21, 2012
Excerpt: It (Entropy) explains time; it explains every possible action in the universe;,,
Even gravity, Vedral argued, can be expressed as a consequence of the law of entropy. ,,,
The principles of thermodynamics are at their roots all to do with information theory. Information theory is simply an embodiment of how we interact with the universe —,,,

http://crev.info/2012/10/shining-light-on-dark-energy/

Evolution is a Fact, Just Like Gravity is a Fact! UhOh! - January 2010
Excerpt: The results of this paper suggest gravity arises as an entropic force, once space and time themselves have emerged.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/evolution-is-a-fact-just-like-gravity-is-a-fact-uhoh/
In fact, entropy is also the primary reason why our physical bodies grow old and die,,,
And yet, to repeat the Zeno Effect,,,
Quantum Zeno effect
Excerpt: The quantum Zeno effect is,,, an unstable particle, if observed continuously, will never decay.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Zeno_effect
This is just fascinating! Why in blue blazes should conscious observation put a freeze on entropic decay, unless consciousness was/is more foundational to reality than entropy is? And seeing as to how entropy is VERY foundational to reality, I think the implications of all this are fairly obvious:

Verse and Music:
Romans 8:18-21
I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us. The creation waits in eager expectation for the sons of God to be revealed. For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God.
Evanescence – The Other Side (Lyric Video)
http://www.vevo.com/watch/evanescence/the-other-side-lyric-video/USWV41200024?source=instantsearch

The only hard evidence there is, the stunning precision found in the transcendent universal constants, points overwhelmingly to intelligent design by a transcendent Creator who originally established what the transcendent universal constants of physics could and would do during the creation of the universe. The hard evidence left no room for the blind chance of natural laws in this universe. Thus, materialism was forced into appealing to an infinity of un-testable universes for it was left with no footing in this universe. These developments in science make it seem like materialism was cast into the abyss of nothingness in so far as rationally explaining the fine-tuning of the universe.

As well as the universe having a transcendent beginning, thus confirming the Theistic postulation in Genesis 1:1, the following recent discovery of a 'Dark Age' for the early universe uncannily matches up with the Bible passage in Job 38:4-11.

For the first 400,000 years of our universe’s expansion, the universe was a seething maelstrom of energy and sub-atomic particles. This maelstrom was so hot, that sub-atomic particles trying to form into atoms would have been blasted apart instantly, and so dense, light could not travel more than a short distance before being absorbed. If you could somehow live long enough to look around in such conditions, you would see nothing but brilliant white light in all directions. When the cosmos was about 400,000 years old, it had cooled to about the temperature of the surface of the sun. The last light from the "Big Bang" shone forth at that time. This "light" is still detectable today as the Cosmic Background Radiation.
This 400,000 year old “baby” universe entered into a period of darkness. When the dark age of the universe began, the cosmos was a formless sea of particles. By the time the dark age ended, a couple of hundred million years later, the universe lit up again by the light of some of the galaxies and stars that had been formed during this dark era. It was during the dark age of the universe that the heavier chemical elements necessary for life, carbon, oxygen, nitrogen and most of the rest, were first forged, by nuclear fusion inside the stars, out of the universe’s primordial hydrogen and helium.
It was also during this dark period of the universe the great structures of the modern universe were first forged. Super-clusters, of thousands of galaxies stretching across millions of light years, had their foundations laid in the dark age of the universe. During this time the infamous “missing dark matter”, was exerting more gravity in some areas than in other areas; drawing in hydrogen and helium gas, causing the formation of mega-stars. These mega-stars were massive, weighing in at 20 to more than 100 times the mass of the sun. The crushing pressure at their cores made them burn through their fuel in only a million years. It was here, in these short lived mega-stars under these crushing pressures, the chemical elements necessary for life were first forged out of the hydrogen and helium. The reason astronomers can’t see the light from these first mega-stars, during this dark era of the universe’s early history, is because the mega-stars were shrouded in thick clouds of hydrogen and helium gas. These thick clouds prevented the mega-stars from spreading their light through the cosmos as they forged the elements necessary for future life to exist on earth. After about 200 million years, the end of the dark age came to the cosmos. The universe was finally expansive enough to allow the dispersion of the thick hydrogen and helium “clouds”. With the continued expansion of the universe, the light, of normal stars and dwarf galaxies, was finally able to shine through the thick clouds of hydrogen and helium gas, bringing the dark age to a close. (How The Stars Were Born - Michael D. Lemonick)
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1376229-2,00.html
Job 26:10
He marks out the horizon on the face of the waters for a boundary between light and darkness.

Job 38:4-11
“Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell me if you have understanding. Who determined its measurements? Surely you know! Or who stretched a line upon it? To what were its foundations fastened? Or who laid its cornerstone, When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy? Or who shut in the sea with doors, when it burst forth and issued from the womb; When I made the clouds its garment, and thick darkness its swaddling band; When I fixed my limit for it, and set bars and doors; When I said, ‘This far you may come but no farther, and here your proud waves must stop!"
Hidden Treasures in the Book of Job - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sl0Ln3Ptb8

History of The Universe Timeline- Graph Image
http://www.astronomynotes.com/cosmolgy/CMB_Timeline.jpg
Cosmic GDP crashes 97% as star formation slumps - November 6, 2012
Excerpt: If the measured decline continues, then no more than 5% more stars will form over the remaining history of the cosmos, even if we wait forever.
http://phys.org/news/2012-11-cosmic-gdp-star-formation-slumps.html
As a sidelight to this, every class of elements that exists on the periodic table of elements is necessary for complex carbon-based life to exist on earth. The three most abundant elements in the human body, Oxygen, Carbon, Hydrogen, 'just so happen' to be the most abundant elements in the universe, save for helium which is inert. A truly amazing coincidence that strongly implies 'the universe had us in mind all along'. Even uranium the last naturally occurring 'stable' element on the period table of elements is necessary for life. The heat generated by the decay of uranium is necessary to keep a molten core in the earth for an extended period of time, which is necessary for the magnetic field surrounding the earth, which in turn protects organic life from the harmful charged particles of the sun. As well, uranium decay provides the heat for tectonic activity and the turnover of the earth's crustal rocks, which is necessary to keep a proper mixture of minerals and nutrients available on the surface of the earth, which is necessary for long term life on earth. (Denton; Nature's Destiny). These following articles and videos give a bit deeper insight into the crucial role that individual elements play in allowing life:

The Elements: Forged in Stars - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4003861

Michael Denton - We Are Stardust - Uncanny Balance Of The Elements - Fred Hoyle Atheist to Deist/Theist - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4003877

“Dr. Michael Denton on Evidence of Fine-Tuning in the Universe” (Remarkable balance of various key elements for life) – podcast
http://intelligentdesign.podomatic.com/entry/2012-08-21T14_43_59-07_00
The Place of Life and Man in Nature: Defending the Anthropocentric Thesis - Michael J. Denton - February 25, 2013
Summary (page 11)
Many of the properties of the key members of Henderson’s vital ensemble —water, oxygen, CO2, HCO3 —are in several instances fit specifically for warm-blooded, air-breathing organisms such as ourselves. These include the thermal properties of water, its low viscosity, the gaseous nature of oxygen and CO2 at ambient temperatures, the inertness of oxygen at ambient temperatures, and the bicarbonate buffer, with its anomalous pKa value and the elegant means of acid-base regulation it provides for air-breathing organisms. Some of their properties are irrelevant to other classes of organisms or even maladaptive.
It is very hard to believe there could be a similar suite of fitness for advanced carbon-based life forms. If carbon-based life is all there is, as seems likely, then the design of any active complex terrestrial being would have to closely resemble our own. Indeed the suite of properties of water, oxygen, and CO2 together impose such severe constraints on the design and functioning of the respiratory and cardiovascular systems that their design, even down to the details of capillary and alveolar structure can be inferred from first principles. For complex beings of high metabolic rate, the designs actualized in complex Terran forms are all that can be. There are no alternative physiological designs in the domain of carbon-based life that can achieve the high metabolic activity manifest in man and other higher organisms.

http://bio-complexity.org/ojs/index.php/main/article/view/BIO-C.2013.1/BIO-C.2013.1

Dr. Michael Denton Interview
Excerpt Question 14: 14. Q: ,,,you also detail that nature isn’t fine-tuned for just any kind of life, but life specifically like human life. Would you expound on this for our readers?
A: there are certain elements of the fine-tuning which are clearly for advanced being like ourselves.
We are warm-blooded, terrestrial aerobes; we use oxidation to get energy, we’re warm-blooded and we breathe air. We get our oxygen from the air. First of all, a warm-blooded organism needs to maintain a constant temperature. To do that we are massively assisted by the high specific heat of water, which buffers our body against rapid changes in temperature. In getting rid of excess heat, we utilize the evaporative cooling of water. That’s why dog’s pant, we sweat, etc. Warm-blooded organisms have to get rid of excess heat, and the evaporative cooling of water is the only way you’ve really got to get rid of heat when the temperature reaches close to body temperature. When it’s hot you can’t radiate off body heat to the environment.
These critical thermal properties are obviously of great utility to air breathing, warm-blooded organisms like our self. But what relevance do they have to an extremophile living in the deep ocean, or a cold-blooded fish living in the sea? It’s obvious that these are elements of fitness in nature which seem to be of great and specific utility to beings like us, and very little utility to a lot of other organisms. Of course it is the case that they are playing a role in maintaining the constancy of global climate, the physical and chemical constancy of the hydrosphere and so forth. No doubt the evaporative cooling of water plays a big role in climatic amelioration; it transfers heat from the tropics to the higher latitudes and this is of utility for all life on earth. But definitely water’s thermal properties seem particularly fit for advanced organisms of biology close to our own.
And even the freezing of water from the top down rather than the bottom up, which conserves large bodies of fresh water on the earth, is again relevant to large organisms. Bacterial cells can withstand quite well periodically freezing. And for unicellular organisms living in the hot sub surface rocks its pretty well irrelevant. In other words the top down freezing and the consequent preservation of liquid water is of much more utility for a large organism, but of far less relevance for microbial life.
Or consider the generation and utilization of oxygen. We use oxygen, but many organisms don’t use oxygen; for a lot of organisms it’s a poison. So how do we get our oxygen? When we look at the conditions in the universe for photosynthesis, we find a magical collusion between of all sorts of different elements of fitness. First of all the atmospheric gases let through visual light which has got the right energy for biochemistry, for photosynthesis. And what are the gases in the atmosphere that let through the light? Well, carbon dioxide, water vapor, oxygen, and nitrogen. And what are the basic reactants which are involved in photosynthesis? Well, oxygen, water, and CO2. The same compounds that let through the light are also the main ‘players’ in photosynthesis.
And then you might wonder what about the harmful radiations? UV, Gamma rays, microwaves? Well to begin with the sun only puts out most of its electromagnetic radian energy in the visual region (light) and near infrared (heat) and puts out very little in the dangerous regions (UV’s, gamma rays, X-rays etc.). And wonder on wonder, the atmospheric gases absorb all these harmful radiations. And so on and on and on, one anthropocentric biofriendly coincidence after another. And what provides the necessary warmth for photosynthesis, indeed for all life on earth. What keeps the average temperature of the earth above freezing? Well water vapor and carbon dioxide. If it wasn’t for water vapor and CO2 in the atmosphere the temperature of the earth would be -33 centigrade.
Now when you consider all these factors necessary for the generation of oxygen via photosynthesis knowing that not all organisms use oxygen implying that all these coincidences are irrelevant to the vast majority of all species (most of the biomass on the planet may well be anaerobic unicellular life occupying the hot deep biosphere in the sub surface rocks) never use oxygen, its clear that the special fitness of nature for oxygen utilization is for us.

http://successfulstudent.org/dr-michael-denton-interview/
The Role of Elements in Life Processes
http://www.mii.org/periodic/LifeElement.php
The vastness, beauty, orderliness, of the heavenly bodies, the excellent structure of animals and plants; and the other phenomena of nature justly induce an intelligent and unprejudiced observer to conclude a supremely powerful, just, and good author.
— Robert Boyle (1627 - 1691), father of experimental chemistry
Periodic Table - Interactive web page for each element
http://www.mii.org/periodic/MiiPeriodicChart.htm

Periodic Table - with stability, and native state, of elements listed
http://www.cbc.ca/news/pdf//Periodic_Table_Armtuk3-703.jpg

Just How Small is an Atom? - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQP4UJhNn0I

To answer our second question (What evidence is found for the earth's ability to support life?) we will consider many 'life-enabling characteristics', for the galaxy, sun, moon and earth, which establish that the earth is extremely unique in its ability to host advanced life in this universe. Again, the presumption of materialistic blind chance being the only reasonable cause must be dealt with. As opposed to the anthropic hypothesis which starts off by presuming the earth is extremely unique in this universe, materialism begins by presuming planets that are able to support life are fairly common in this universe. In fact astronomer Frank Drake (1930-present) proposed, in 1961, advanced life should be fairly common in the universe. He developed a rather crude equation called the 'Drake equation'. He plugged in some rather optimistic numbers and reasoned that ten worlds with advanced life should be in our Milky Way galaxy alone. One estimate of his worked out to roughly one trillion worlds with advanced life throughout the entire universe. Much to the disappointment of Star Trek fans, the avalanche of recent scientific evidence has found the probability of finding another planet with the ability to host advanced life in this universe is not nearly as likely as astronomer Frank Drake had originally predicted.

First, our solar system is not nearly as haphazard as some materialists would have us believe:

Weird Orbits of Neighbors Can Make 'Habitable' Planets Not So Habitable - May 2010
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/05/100524143419.htm
Thank God for Jupiter - July 2010
Excerpt: The July 16, 1994 and July 19, 2009 collision events on Jupiter demonstrate just how crucial a role the planet plays in protecting life on Earth. Without Jupiter’s gravitational shield our planet would be pummeled by frequent life-exterminating events. Yet Jupiter by itself is not an adequate shield. The best protection is achieved via a specific arrangement of several gas giant planets. The most massive gas giant must be nearest to the life support planet and the second most massive gas giant the next nearest, followed by smaller, more distant gas giants. Together Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune provide Earth with this ideal shield.
http://www.reasons.org/thank-god-jupiter

Of Gaps, Fine-Tuning and Newton’s Solar System - Cornelius Hunter - July 2011
Excerpt: The new results indicate that the solar system could become unstable if diminutive Mercury, the inner most planet, enters into a dance with Jupiter, the fifth planet from the Sun and the largest of all. The resulting upheaval could leave several planets in rubble, including our own. Using Newton’s model of gravity, the chances of such a catastrophe were estimated to be greater than 50/50 over the next 5 billion years. But interestingly, accounting for Albert Einstein’s minor adjustments (according to his theory of relativity), reduces the chances to just 1%.
http://darwins-god.blogspot.com/2011/07/of-gaps-fine-tuning-and-newtons-solar.html

Milankovitch Cycle Design - Hugh Ross - August 2011
Excerpt: In all three cases, Waltham proved that the actual Earth/Moon/solar system manifests unusually low Milankovitch levels and frequencies compared to similar alternative systems. ,,, Waltham concluded, “It therefore appears that there has been anthropic selection for slow Milankovitch cycles.” That is, it appears Earth was purposely designed with slow, low-level Milankovitch cycles so as to allow humans to exist and thrive.
http://www.reasons.org/milankovitch-cycle-design

Evidence from self-consistent solar system n-body simulations is presented to argue that the Earth- Moon system (EM) plays an important dynamical role in the inner solar system, stabilizing the orbits of Venus and Mercury by suppressing a strong secular resonance of period 8.1 Myr near Venus’s heliocentric distance. The EM thus appears to play a kind of “gravitational keystone” role in the terrestrial precinct, for without it, the orbits of Venus and Mercury become immediately destabilized. … First, we find that EM is performing an essential dynamical role by suppressing or “damping out” a secular resonance driven by the giant planets near the Venusian heliocentric distance. The source of the resonance is a libration of the Jovian longitude of perihelion with the Venusian perihelion longitude.
http://iopscience.iop.org/1538-3881/116/4/2055/pdf/1538-3881_116_4_2055.pdf

Astrobiology research is revealing the high specificity and interdependence of the local parameters required for a habitable environment. These two features of the universe make it unlikely that environments significantly different from ours will be as habitable. At the same time, physicists and cosmologists have discovered that a change in a global parameter can have multiple local effects. Therefore, the high specificity and interdependence of local tuning and the multiple effects of global tuning together make it unlikely that our tiny island of habitability is part of an archipelago. Our universe is a small target indeed.
Astronomer Guillermo Gonzalez - P. 625, The Nature of Nature

Among Darwin Advocates, Premature Celebration over Abundance of Habitable Planets - September 2011
Excerpt: Today, such processes as planet formation details, tidal forces, plate tectonics, magnetic field evolution, and planet-planet, planet-comet, and planet-asteroid gravitational interactions are found to be relevant to habitability.,,, What's more, not only are more requirements for habitability being discovered, but they are often found to be interdependent, forming a (irreducibly) complex "web." This means that if a planetary system is found not to satisfy one of the habitability requirements, it may not be possible to compensate for this deficit by adjusting a different parameter in the system. - Guillermo Gonzalez
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/09/among_darwin_advocates_prematu050871.html
In fact when trying to take into consideration all the different factors necessary to make life possible on any earth-like planet, we learn some very surprising things:

Privileged Planet Principle - Michael Strauss - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4318884/

Privileged Planet Principle - Scot Pollock (Notes In Description) - video
http://vimeo.com/31904755

There are many independent characteristics required to be fulfilled for any planet to host advanced carbon-based life. Two popular books have recently been written, 'The Privileged Planet' by Guillermo Gonzalez and 'Rare Earth' by Donald Brownlee, indicating the earth is extremely unique in its ability to host advanced life in this universe. Privileged Planet, which holds that any life supporting planet in the universe will also be 'privileged' for observation of the universe, has now been made into a excellent video.

The Privileged Planet - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnWyPIzTOTw

The Privileged Planet: How Our Place in the Cosmos Is Designed for Discovery - book By Guillermo Gonzalez, Jay Wesley Richards
http://books.google.com/books?id=KFdu4CyQ1k0C&pg=PA1&lpg=PA1&dq=#v=onepage&q&f=false

Privileged Planet - Observability Correlation - Gonzalez and Richards - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5424431
The very conditions that make Earth hospitable to intelligent life also make it well suited to viewing and analyzing the universe as a whole.
- Jay Richards

The Privileged Planet - The Correlation Of Habitability and Observability
“The same narrow circumstances that allow us to exist also provide us with the best over all conditions for making scientific discoveries.”
“The one place that has observers is the one place that also has perfect solar eclipses.”
“There is a final, even more bizarre twist. Because of Moon-induced tides, the Moon is gradually receding from Earth at 3.82 centimeters per year. In ten million years will seem noticeably smaller. At the same time, the Sun’s apparent girth has been swelling by six centimeters per year for ages, as is normal in stellar evolution. These two processes, working together, should end total solar eclipses in about 250 million years, a mere 5 percent of the age of the Earth. This relatively small window of opportunity also happens to coincide with the existence of intelligent life. Put another way, the most habitable place in the Solar System yields the best view of solar eclipses just when observers can best appreciate them.”

- Guillermo Gonzalez - Astronomer
http://books.google.com/books?id=lMdwFWZ00GQC&pg=PT28#v=onepage&q&f=false

Nature makes an ID-friendly report on the Solar System (officially it’s not YEC friendly) - scordova - February 7, 2014
Excerpt: The most active bodies out there — Jupiter’s moon Io and Saturn’s moons Enceladus and Titan — may be putting on limited-run shows that humans are lucky to witness. Saturn’s brilliant rings, too, might have appeared relatively recently, and could grow dingy over time. Some such proposals make planetary researchers uncomfortable, because it is statistically unlikely that humans would catch any one object engaged in unusual activity — let alone several.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/privileged-planet/nature-makes-an-id-friendly-report-on-the-solar-system-officially-its-not-yec-friendly/
A video of related 'observability correlation' interest;

We Live At The Right Time In Cosmic History (To see the Cosmic Background Radiation) - Hugh Ross - video
http://vimeo.com/31940671

Epistemology – Why Should The Human Mind Even Be Able To Comprehend Reality? – Stephen Meyer - video – (Notes in description)
http://vimeo.com/32145998
The Fine-Tuning for Discoverability - Robin Collins - March 22, 2014
Excerpt: Examples of fine - tuning for discoverability.
,,A small increase in α (fine structure constant) would have resulted in all open wood fires going out; yet harnessing fire was essential to the development of civilization, technology, and science - e.g., the forging of metals.,,,
Going in the other direction, if α (fine structure constant) were decreased, light microscopes would have proportionality less resolving power without the size of living cells or other microscopic objects changing.,,,
Thus, it is quite amazing that the resolving power of light microscopes goes down to that of the smallest cell (0.2 microns), but no further. If it had less resolving power, some cells could not be observed alive. The fine - structure constant, therefore, is just small enough to allow for open wood fires and just large enough for the light microscope to be able to see all living cells.
Predictive and Explanatory Power of Discoverability - Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation
Prediction: DLO: Within the range of values of a given parameter p that yield near - optimal livability, p will fall into that subrange of values that maximize discoverability (given constraints of elegance are not violated).
In every case that I was able to make calculations regarding whether the fundamental parameters of physics are optimized in this way, they appear to pass the test.[iv] This alone is significant since this hypothesis is falsifiable in the sense that one could find data that potentially disconfirms it – namely, cases in which as best as we can determining, such as a case in which changing the value of a fundamental parameter – such as the fine - structure constant – increases discoverability while not negatively affecting livability.[v] Below, I will look at a case from cosmology where this thesis could have been disconfirmed but was not.,,,
The most dramatic confirmation of the discoverability/livability optimality thesis (DLO) is the dependence of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMB) on the baryon to photon ratio.,,,
...the intensity of CMB depends on the photon to baryon ratio, (ηγb), which is the ratio of the average number of photons per unit volume of space to the average number of baryons (protons plus neutrons) per unit volume. At present this ratio is approximately a billion to one (10^9) , but it could beanywhere from one to infinity; it traces back to the degree of asymmetry in matter and anti - matter right after the beginning of the universe – for approximately every billion particles of antimatter, there was a billion and one particles of matter.,,,
The only livability effect this ratio has is on whether or not galaxies can form that have near - optimally livability zones. As long as this condition is met, the value of this ratio has no further effects on livability. Hence, the DLO predicts that within this range, the value of this ratio will be such as to maximize the intensity of the CMB as observed by typical observers.
According to my calculations – which have been verified by three other physicists -- to within the margin of error of the experimentally determined parameters (~20%), the value of the photon to baryon ratio is such that it maximizes the CMB. This is shown in Figure 1 below. (pg. 13)
It is easy to see that this prediction could have been disconfirmed. In fact, when I first made the calculations in the fall of 2011, I made a mistake and thought I had refuted this thesis since those calculations showed the intensity of the CMB maximizes at a value different than the photon - baryon ratio in our universe. So, not only does the DLO lead us to expect this ratio, but it provides an ultimate explanation for why it has this value,,, This is a case of a teleological thesis serving both a predictive and an ultimate explanatory role.,,,

http://home.messiah.edu/~rcollins/Fine-tuning/Greer-Heard%20Forum%20paper%20draft%20for%20posting.pdf
At the 38:10 minute mark of the following video, Dr. Huterer speaks of the 'why right now? coincidence problem' for dark matter and visible matter:

Dragan Huterer - 'coincidence problem' - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qTJc1Y7duM#t=2290

Radio Astronomy reveals privileged position for Earth in relation to the quasar and radio galaxy distributions in the universe:
Is there a violation of the Copernican principle in radio sky? - Ashok K. Singal - May 17, 2013
Abstract: Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR) observations from the WMAP satellite have shown some unexpected anisotropies (directionally dependent observations), which surprisingly seem to be aligned with the ecliptic\cite {20,16,15}. The latest data from the Planck satellite have confirmed the presence of these anisotropies\cite {17}. Here we report even larger anisotropies in the sky distributions of powerful extended quasars and some other sub-classes of radio galaxies in the 3CRR catalogue, one of the oldest and most intensively studies sample of strong radio sources\cite{21,22,3}. The anisotropies lie about a plane passing through the two equinoxes and the north celestial pole (NCP). We can rule out at a 99.995% confidence level the hypothesis that these asymmetries are merely due to statistical fluctuations. Further, even the distribution of observed radio sizes of quasars and radio galaxies show large systematic differences between these two sky regions. The redshift distribution appear to be very similar in both regions of sky for all sources, which rules out any local effects to be the cause of these anomalies. Two pertinent questions then arise. First, why should there be such large anisotropies present in the sky distribution of some of the most distant discrete sources implying inhomogeneities in the universe at very large scales (covering a fraction of the universe)? What is intriguing even further is why such anisotropies should lie about a great circle decided purely by the orientation of earth's rotation axis and/or the axis of its revolution around the sun? It looks as if these axes have a preferential placement in the larger scheme of things, implying an apparent breakdown of the Copernican principle or its more generalization, cosmological principle, upon which all modern cosmological theories are based upon.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1305.4134
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1305.4134.pdf

Why is the solar system cosmically aligned? BY Dragan Huterer - 2007
The solar system seems to line up with the largest cosmic features. Is this mere coincidence or a signpost to deeper insights?
Caption under figure on page 43:
ODD ALIGNMENTS hide within the multipoles of the cosmic microwave background. In this combination of the quadrupole and octopole, a plane bisects the sphere between the largest warm and cool lobes. The ecliptic — the plane of Earth’s orbit projected onto the celestial sphere — is aligned parallel to the plane between the lobes.

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~huterer/PRESS/CMB_Huterer.pdf
Of note: The preceding article was written before the Planck data (with WMPA & COBE data), but the multipoles were actually verified by Planck.

A Large Scale Pattern from Optical Quasar Polarization Vectors - 2013
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1311.6118.pdf

Testing the Dipole Modulation Model in CMBR - 2013
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1308.0924.pdf

Continued notes:

Our Privileged Planet (1 of 5) - Guillermo Gonzalez - video lecture
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inUlX0oWHbw&list=PLDE3C7537204166EF&feature=plpp

Guillermo Gonzalez and Stephen Meyer on Coral Ridge - video (Part 1)
http://www.truthinaction.org/index.php/truth-that-transforms?p=CRH1118_F

Guillermo Gonzalez and Stephen Meyer on Coral Ridge - video (Part 2)
http://www.truthinaction.org/index.php/truth-that-transforms?p=CRH1119_F

Fine Tuning Of The Universe - Privileged Planet (Notes In Description) - video
http://vimeo.com/31664112

There is also a well researched statistical analysis of the many independent 'life-enabling characteristics' that gives strong mathematical indication that the earth is extremely unique in its ability to support complex life in this universe and shows, from a naturalistic perspective, that a life permitting planet is extremely unlikely to 'accidentally emerge' in the universe. The statistical analysis, which is actually a extreme refinement of the Drake's probability equation, is dealt with by astro-physicist Dr. Hugh Ross (1945-present) in his paper 'Probability for Life on Earth'.

Probability For Life On Earth - List of Parameters, References, and Math - Hugh Ross
http://www.reasons.org/probability-life-earth-apr-2004
http://www.meaningfulscience.com/FineTuningForLifeOnEarthHughRoss.pdf

A few of the items in Dr. Ross's "life-enabling characteristics" list are; Planet location in a proper galaxy's 'habitable zone'; Parent star size; Surface gravity of planet; Rotation period of planet; Correct chemical composition of planet; Correct size for moon; Thickness of planets’ crust; Presence of magnetic field; Correct and stable axis tilt; Oxygen to nitrogen ratio in atmosphere; Proper water content of planet; Atmospheric electric discharge rate; Proper seismic activity of planet; Many complex cycles necessary for a stable temperature history of planet; Translucent atmosphere; Various complex, and inter-related, cycles for various elements etc.. etc..

10 Years of Weather History in 3 Minutes - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ieILUnkdD90

I could go a lot further in details for there are a total of 322 known parameters on his list, (816 in his updated list), which have to be met for complex life to be possible on Earth, or on a planet like Earth. Individually, these limits are not that impressive but when we realize ALL these limits have to be met at the same time and not one of them can be out of limits for any extended period of time, then the condition becomes 'irreducibly complex' and the probability for a world which can host advanced life in this universe becomes very extraordinary. Here is the final summary of Dr. Hugh Ross's 'conservative' estimate for the probability of another life-hosting world in this universe.
Probability for occurrence of all 322 parameters =10^-388
Dependency factors estimate =10^96
Longevity requirements estimate =10^14
Probability for occurrence of all 322 parameters = 10^-304
Maximum possible number of life support bodies in universe =10^22

Thus, less than 1 chance in 10^282 (million trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion) exists that even one such life-support body would occur anywhere in the universe without invoking divine miracles.
Dr. Hugh Ross, and his team, have now drastically refined this probability of 1 in 10^304 to a staggering probability of 1 in 10^1054:
Does the Probability for ETI = 1?
Excerpt; On the Reasons To Believe website we document that the probability a randomly selected planet would possess all the characteristics intelligent life requires is less than 10^-304. A recent update that will be published with my next book, Hidden Purposes: Why the Universe Is the Way It Is, puts that probability at 10^-1054.
http://www.reasons.org/does-probability-eti-1

Linked from Appendix C from Dr. Ross's book, 'Why the Universe Is the Way It Is';
Probability for occurrence of all 816 parameters ≈ 10^-1333
dependency factors estimate ≈ 10^324
longevity requirements estimate ≈ 10^45
Probability for occurrence of all 816 parameters ≈ 10^-1054
Maximum possible number of life support bodies in observable universe ≈ 10^22

Thus, less than 1 chance in 10^1032 exists that even one such life-support body would occur anywhere in the universe without invoking divine miracles.

http://www.reasons.org/files/compendium/compendium_part3.pdf
Hugh Ross - Evidence For Intelligent Design Is Everywhere (10^-1054) - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4347236
Isaiah 40:28
Do you not know? Have you not heard? The LORD is the everlasting God, the Creator of the ends of the earth. He will not grow tired or weary, and his understanding no one can fathom.
Hugh Ross - Four Main Research Papers
https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1Sl5SCBtcO6xMjwgrkKysBYIOJzjZEcXX68qZ9rwh85s
"If some god-like being could be given the opportunity to plan a sequence of events with the expressed goal of duplicating our 'Garden of Eden', that power would face a formidable task. With the best of intentions but limited by natural laws and materials it is unlikely that Earth could ever be truly replicated. Too many processes in its formation involve sheer luck. Earth-like planets could certainly be made, but each would differ in critical ways. This is well illustrated by the fantastic variety of planets and satellites (moons) that formed in our solar system. They all started with similar building materials, but the final products are vastly different from each other . . . . The physical events that led to the formation and evolution of the physical Earth required an intricate set of nearly irreproducible circumstances."
Peter B. Ward and Donald Brownlee, Rare Earth: Why Complex Life is Uncommon in the Universe (New York: Copernicus, 2000)
Is There Scientific Evidence for the Existence of God? How the Recent Discoveries Support a Designed Universe - Dr. Walter L. Bradley
http://www.leaderu.com/real/ri9403/evidence.html
Sir Isaac Newton's book 'Principia' is considered by many the most important scientific work of all time that had the greatest impact on transforming Western culture. The book contains a General Scholium (General Interpretation) that reads in part,,,
This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being. And if the fixed stars are the centres of other like systems, these, being formed by the like wise counsel, must be all subject to the dominion of One; especially since the light of the fixed stars is of the same nature with the light of the sun, and from every system light passes into all the other systems: and lest the systems of the fixed stars should, by their gravity, fall on each other mutually, he hath placed those systems at immense distances one from another. This Being governs all things, not as the soul of the world, but as Lord over all; and on account of his dominion he is wont to be called Lord God pantokrator, or Universal Ruler;,,, The Supreme God is a Being eternal, infinite, absolutely perfect;,,, from his true dominion it follows that the true God is a living, intelligent, and powerful Being; and, from his other perfections, that he is supreme, or most perfect. He is eternal and infinite, omnipotent and omniscient; that is, his duration reaches from eternity to eternity; his presence from infinity to infinity; he governs all things, and knows all things that are or can be done. He is not eternity or infinity, but eternal and infinite; he is not duration or space, but he endures and is present. He endures for ever, and is every where present:
Sir Isaac Newton - Quoted from what many consider the greatest science masterpiece of all time, his book "Principia"
http://gravitee.tripod.com/genschol.htm
Related notes on the Privileged Planet principle:
The Loneliest Planet - ALAN HIRSHFELD - December 2011
Excerpt: While he cannot prove a galaxy-wide absence of other civilizations, he presents an array of modern, research-based evidence that renders that conclusion eminently reasonable.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204552304577116570107579152.html
The following is another surprising Privileged Planet parameter which fairly recently came to light:
Cosmic Rays Hit Space Age High
Excerpt: "The entire solar system from Mercury to Pluto and beyond is surrounded by a bubble of solar magnetism called "the heliosphere."
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/09/090929133244.htm
The Protective Boundaries of our Solar System - NASA IBEX - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2O0qcQZXpII

Voyager 1 Goes Interstellar: Solar System Boundary Passed - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEKw-TITTU8

NASA Voyager 1 Encounters New Region (Heliosheath) in Deep Space - (Dec. 3, 2012)
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/12/121203154500.htm
Picture of Heliosheath:
http://i.livescience.com/images/i/000/034/024/original/sun-southern-wind-flow-north.jpg?1354584996
Voyager 1 Has Entered a New Region of Space, Sudden Changes in Cosmic Rays Indicate - Mar. 20, 2013
Excerpt: Thirty-five years after its launch, Voyager 1 appears to have travelled beyond the influence of the Sun and exited the heliosphere,,,
The heliosphere is a region of space dominated by the Sun and its wind of energetic particles, and which is thought to be enclosed, bubble-like, in the surrounding interstellar medium of gas and dust that pervades the Milky Way galaxy.
On August 25, 2012, NASA's Voyager 1 spacecraft measured drastic changes in radiation levels, more than 11 billion miles from the Sun. Anomalous cosmic rays, which are cosmic rays trapped in the outer heliosphere, all but vanished, dropping to less than 1 percent of previous amounts. At the same time, galactic cosmic rays -- cosmic radiation from outside of the solar system -- spiked to levels not seen since Voyager's launch, with intensities as much as twice previous levels.,,,
"Within just a few days, the heliospheric intensity of trapped radiation decreased, and the cosmic ray intensity went up as you would expect if it exited the heliosphere," said Bill Webber, professor emeritus of astronomy at New Mexico State University in Las Cruces. He calls this transition boundary the "heliocliff."

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/03/130320134256.htm
Here is a glimpse at how the aurora borealis is actually formed by solar flares interacting with the magnetic field:

NASA Magnetic Reconnection - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_Gny2JVqQ8
Cluster Spacecraft Detects Elusive Space Wind - July 2, 2013
Excerpt: A new study provides the first conclusive proof of the existence of a space wind first proposed theoretically over 20 years ago. ,,plasmasphere, a donut-shaped region extending above Earth's atmosphere.,,
"After long scrutiny of the data, there it was, a slow but steady wind, releasing about 1 kg of plasma every second into the outer magnetosphere: this corresponds to almost 90 tonnes every day.,,,
"The plasmaspheric wind is an important element in the mass budget of the plasmasphere,,,
The plasmasphere, the most important plasma reservoir inside the magnetosphere, plays a crucial role in governing the dynamics of Earth's radiation belts.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/07/130702100106.htm
Image of Belts
http://www.eos.unh.edu/Spheres_0812/graphics/summer12_pics/magneto_lg.jpg

The Earth as You've Never Seen it Before: Atmosphere, Airglow and Aurora - video
https://vimeo.com/42909676
The science behind northern lights - October 2, 2012
Excerpt: ,,,(solar) flares release a burst of charged particles, or plasma, into the solar system. When they come our way, they whack into the Earth's magnetosphere, which is made up of its own stream of charged particles. That collision causes particles to break free of the magnetosphere and cascade toward the Earth's magnetic field lines, usually traveling toward the poles. "The aurorae happen when these high-energy particles bap into atoms and molecules in the Earth's atmosphere, typically oxygen," Nemiroff said. Light is emitted as part of the reaction. Those particles can also wreak havoc. "The plasma cloud can cause the Earth's magnetic field to fluctuate," Nemiroff said. "At worst, that can knock out satellites and even power grids.",,,
http://phys.org/news/2012-10-science-northern.html

Houston We Have a Problem: Microgravity Accelerates Biological Aging - Oct. 31, 2013
Excerpt: experiments conducted on the International Space Station involving cells that line the inner surfaces of blood vessels (endothelial cells) show that microgravity accelerates cardiovascular disease and the biological aging of these cells.,,,
They compared space-flown endothelial cells to endothelial cells cultured under normal gravity, looking for differences in gene expression and/or in the profile of secreted proteins. Space-flown cells differentially expressed more than 1,000 genes and secreted high amounts of pro-inflammatory cytokines. Ultimately, this induced significant oxidative stress, causing inflammation among endothelial cells, which in turn, led to atherosclerosis and cell senescence (biological aging).

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131031125317.htm
Many people simply presume that solar system formation is fairly well understood by science but that simply is not the case:
New study sheds new light on planet formation - July 4, 2012
Excerpt: The study,, began with a curious and unexpected finding: Within three years, the cloud of dust circling a young star in the Scorpius-Centaurus stellar nursery simply disappeared."The most commonly accepted time scale for the removal of this much dust is in the hundreds of thousands of years, sometimes millions," said study co-author Inseok Song,,, "What we saw was far more rapid and has never been observed or even predicted. It tells us that we have a lot more to learn about planet formation.",,, "Many astronomers may feel uncomfortable with the suggested explanations for the disappearance of the dust because each of them has non-traditional implications," Song said, "but my hope that this line of research can bring us closer to a true understanding of how planets form."
http://phys.org/news/2012-07-planet-formation.html

Are Saturn’s Rings Evolving? July - 2010
Excerpt: Not all is well in theories of planet formation, though. Astrobiology Magazine complained this week that many of the exoplanets discovered around other stars do not fit theories of the origin of the solar system.
http://www.creationsafaris.com/crev201007.htm#20100710a

Lava World Baffles Astronomers: Planet Kepler-78b 'Shouldn't Exist' - Oct. 30, 2013
Excerpt: Kepler-78b is a planet that shouldn't exist. This scorching lava world circles its star every eight and a half hours at a distance of less than one million miles -- one of the tightest known orbits. According to current theories of planet formation, it couldn't have formed so close to its star, nor could it have moved there.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131030142915.htm

Planet-Making Theories Don’t Fit Extrasolar Planets;
Excerpt: “The more new planets we find, the less we seem to know about how planetary systems are born, according to a leading planet hunter.” We cannot apply theories that fit our solar system to other systems:
http://www.creationsafaris.com/crev201102.htm#20110223b

Astronomers Discover Planet That Shouldn't Be There - Dec. 5, 2013
Excerpt: Weighing in at 11 times Jupiter's mass and orbiting its star at 650 times the average Earth-Sun distance, planet HD 106906 b is unlike anything in our own Solar System and throws a wrench in planet formation theories.
"This system is especially fascinating because no model of either planet or star formation fully explains what we see," said Vanessa Bailey, who led the research.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/12/131205141629.htm

Our Very Normal Solar System Isn't Normal Anymore by Robert Krulwich - May 07, 2013
Excerpt: As of this month, we've discovered 884 planets, 692 planetary systems, 132 of them with more than one planet and, strange to tell, almost none of them look like us.,,,
"Before we ever discovered any [planets outside the solar system] we thought we understood the formation of planetary systems pretty deeply." We had our frost line. We knew how solar systems formed. "It was a really beautiful theory," he says. "And, clearly, thoroughly wrong.",,,
"It really is something that I find deeply weird," he (an astronomer) writes. "What does it all mean? I don't know. I am certain that this single-minded emphasis on planets-in-habitable-zones is making people forget that there is still a lot of weird stuff happening out there and that we still don't even understand the basics of how we ourselves got here."

http://www.npr.org/blogs/krulwich/2013/05/06/181613582/our-very-normal-solar-system-isn-t-normal-anymore

Ancient alien planets shake up view of our early universe - March 2012
Excerpt: Astronomers have discovered a planetary system that formed nearly 13 billion years ago, suggesting the early universe harbored more planets than has been thought. The system consists of a star called HIP 11952 and two Jupiter-like alien planets. It is just 375 light-years from Earth, in the constellation Cetus (the Whale). The planets are likely the oldest yet found; at 12.8 billion years old, they're just 900 million years younger than the universe itself, according to the commonly accepted Big Bang theory.,,, It is widely accepted that planets coalesce from the swirling disks of dust and gas that surround young stars. Classical models of planet formation hold that metal-poor stars are unlikely to harbor planets, while worlds should form far more easily around metal-rich suns. But recent discoveries, including the HIP 11952 system, have astronomers rethinking these models.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46910290/ns/technology_and_science-space/#.T3dzpdX5a6N

Medium size worlds upset “Earth is not unique” planet modelling - January 2012
Excerpt: But what has puzzled observers and theorists so far is the high proportion of planets — roughly one-third to one-half — that are bigger than Earth but smaller than Neptune. These ‘super-Earths’ are emerging as a new category of planet — and they could be the most numerous of all (see ‘Super-Earths rising’). Their very existence upsets conventional models of planetary formation and, furthermore, most of them are in tight orbits around their host star, precisely where the modellers say they shouldn’t be.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/cosmology/medium-size-worlds-upset-earth-is-not-unique-planet-modelling/
Rocky Exoplanets - Reasons To Believe - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7DDPqyZED8

The solar systems that scientists are currently finding, in our corner of the universe, simply do not match the 'predictions':
Exoplanet Hunters Fail Predictions – August 2010
Excerpt: There are so many surprises in this field—almost nothing is turning out as we expected. There are Jupiter-mass planets in three-day orbits. There are planets with masses that are between those of the terrestrial planets in our solar system and the gas giants in the outer part of our solar system. There are Jupiter-mass planets with hugely inflated radii—at densities far lower than what we thought were possible for a gas-giant planet. There are giant planets with gigantic solid cores that defy models of planet formation, which say there shouldn’t be enough solids available in a protoplanetary disk to form a planet that dense. There are planets with tilted orbits. There are planets that orbit the poles of their stars, in so-called circumpolar orbits. There are planets that orbit retrograde—that is, they orbit in the opposite direction of their star’s rotation. There are systems of planets that are in configurations that are hard to describe given our understanding of planet formation. For instance, some planets are much too close to one another.
But a lot of those surprises have to do with the fact that we have only one example of a planetary system—our solar system—to base everything on, right?
What’s interesting is that we’ve found very little that resembles our example.

http://www.creationsafaris.com/crev201008.htm#20100831a

More Evidence Our Solar System Is Uniquely Suited for Life - October 16, 2012
Excerpt: Most planetary systems found by astronomers so far are quite different than our own. Many have giant planets whizzing around in a compact configuration, very close to their star. An extreme case in point is a newly found solar system that was announced on October 15, 2012 which packs five—count ‘em—five planets into a region less than one-twelve the size of Earth’s orbit!,,,
The fact that almost all solar systems found so far are so different than our own has astronomers wondering if we are, in fact, the oddballs.,,,
Fact is, “We don’t know why this didn’t happen in our solar system,” the spokesperson said. It’s going to require “a new generation of theories to explain why our solar system turned out so differently.”

http://crev.info/2012/10/solar-system-suited-for-life/

Capturing planets - May 2012
Excerpt: The discovery of planets around other stars has led to the realization that alien solar systems often have bizarre features - at least they seem bizarre to us because they were so unexpected. For example, many systems have giant planets closer to their star than Mercury is to the Sun, while other have the opposite - giant planets more than ten times farther way from their star than Jupiter is from our Sun.
http://phys.org/news/2012-05-capturing-planets.html

Did cosmic collisions make habitable planets rare? - August 2011
Excerpt: Most of the planets in our own solar system, including Earth, have relatively circular orbits and are lined up along a plane that isn't tilted much from the sun's equator. They also orbit in the same direction around the sun as our star spins. But many other solar systems are not so neatly ordered, harboring planets that move in the opposite direction of their stars' spin on highly tilted orbits.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44230474/ns/technology_and_science-space/#.TlLOD6hEOkM

Man in the moon looking younger - August 17, 2011
Excerpt: "The extraordinarily young age of this lunar sample either means that the Moon solidified significantly later than previous estimates, or that we need to change our entire understanding of the Moon's geochemical history," Carlson said.
http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-08-moon-younger.html

How the Moon Supports the Privileged Planet Hypothesis - December 5, 2013
Excerpt: Planetary scientists were optimistic that the Apollo missions would help decide among three leading hypotheses: capture, fission, and accretion. After Apollo, all three were rejected, leaving theorists without a theory until the "giant impact" hypothesis came along in the 1980s. Till recently, the scenario of a Mars-sized object striking the Earth at a glancing blow was hailed as accepted truth. TV documentaries animated the event handsomely, in vivid color. However, new observations have cast doubt on the (impact) idea.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/12/our_moon_still079861.html
"A visualization of an asteroid's path of orbit which nearly collided with the Earth and Moon in 2003" (Note how the moon eventually 'slingshots' the asteroid out of orbit from around the earth thus preventing eventual disaster)
http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/j002e3/j002e3d.gif
What if the moon disappeared? - February 26, 2014
Excerpt: Without the Moon, without significant tidal effects, there would be no braking effect on the torque of the earth: Our own rotation speed would increase gradually becoming so strong that a day would go by three times as fast: eight instead of 24 hours,,,
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/what-if-the-moon-disappeared/

Habitable Zones Constrained by Tides
Excerpt: “I think that the chances for life existing on exoplanets in the traditional habitable zone around low-mass stars are pretty bleak, when considering tidal effects,” lead researcher Rene Heller remarked. “If you want to find a second Earth, it seems that you need to look for a second Sun.”
http://www.creationsafaris.com/crev201102.htm#20110226a

New Definition Could Further Limit Habitable Zones Around Distant Suns: - June 2009
... liquid water is essential for life, but a planet also must have plate tectonics to pull excess carbon from its atmosphere and confine it in rocks to prevent runaway greenhouse warming. Tectonics, or the movement of the plates that make up a planet's surface, typically is driven by radioactive decay in the planet's core, but a star's gravity can cause tides in the planet, which creates more energy to drive plate tectonics.... Barnes added, "The bottom line is that tidal forcing is an important factor that we are going to have to consider when looking for habitable planets."
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090610124831.htm

Tidal forces could squeeze out planetary water - February 2012
Excerpt: Alien planets might experience tidal forces powerful enough to remove all their water, leaving behind hot, dry worlds like Venus, researchers said. These findings might significantly affect searches for habitable exoplanets, scientists explained. Although some planets might dwell in regions around their star friendly enough for life as we know it, they could actually be lifelessly dry worlds. ,,, After a tidal Venus loses all its water and becomes uninhabitable, the tides could alter its orbit so that it no longer experiences tidal heating. As such, it might no longer appear like a tidal Venus, but look just like any other world in its star's habitable zone, fooling researchers into thinking it is potentially friendly for life, even though it has essentially been sterilized.
http://www.physorg.com/news/2012-02-tidal-planetary.html

Earth is only just within the Sun's habitable zone - Climate model suggests exoplanets that can host life are less prevalent than thought. - 11 December 2013
Excerpt: If our planet were just a little closer to the Sun, a runaway greenhouse effect would render it unliveable, a climate model suggests. The simulation, which helps to define the inner edge of a star system’s ‘habitable zone’, drastically reduces the fraction of Sun-like stars that might harbour a rocky planet suitable for life,
http://www.nature.com/news/earth-is-only-just-within-the-sun-s-habitable-zone-1.14353
The latest claim from 'popular science' is that there are 'potentially' tens of billions of planets, around Red Dwarf stars, that could possibly support life.
What, More Earth-Like Exoplanets? - March 2012
Excerpt: Red dwarfs -- which are smaller and cooler than our sun -- are extremely common, making up 80 percent of stars in the galaxy. Their ubiquity suggests that there are tens of billions of possible places to look for life beyond Earth, with at least 100 such planets located nearby.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/03/what_more_earth057971.html
Yet, what they fail to mention is that any planet orbiting close enough to a Red Dwarf, to be in its 'habitable zone' where the temperature from the Red Dwarf star would be sufficient to maintain liquid water, would be locked into a synchronized orbit with the Red Dwarf, where one face of the planet would continuously face the Red Dwarf, thus overheating, and the other face of the planet would be in a perpetual deep freeze;
New Conditions for Life On Other Planets: Tidal Effects Change 'Habitable Zone' Concept - February 2011
Excerpt: Tides can render the so-called "habitable zone" around low-mass stars uninhabitable. This is the main result of a recently published study by a team of astronomers led by René Heller of the Astrophysical Institute Potsdam (AIP).,,, Finally, tides can cause the rotational period of the planet (the planet's "day") to synchronize with the orbital period (the planet's "year"). This situation is identical to the Earth-moon setup: the moon only shows Earth one face, the other side being known as "the dark side of the moon." As a result one half of the exoplanet receives extreme radiation from the star while the other half freezes in eternal darkness.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/02/110224091735.htm

Overlooked factor suggests fewer habitable planets than thought - Richard A. Lovett - 08 May 2012
Excerpt: There's just one problem with finding habitable planets around such stars (red dwarfs), says Barnes. Because tidal forces vary dramatically with the distance between a planet and its star, closer orbits also result in massively larger tidal forces.,,, A similar tidal process makes Jupiter's moon Io the most volcanic body in the Solar System. "I’m just scaling that Io–Jupiter system up by a factor of 1,000 in mass," Barnes said at the meeting. "It's the same process, on steroids."
http://www.nature.com/news/tidal-heating-shrinks-the-goldilocks-zone-1.10601
Notes:
Red dwarf
Excerpt: A red dwarf is a small and relatively cool star on the main sequence, either late K or M spectral type. They have a mass of less than half that of the Sun (down to about 0.075 solar masses, below which stellar objects are brown dwarfs) and a surface temperature of less than 4,000 K. Red dwarfs are by far the most common type of star in the Galaxy, at least in the neighborhood of the Sun,,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_dwarf

A Renewed Concern: Flares and Astrobiology - January 2011
Excerpt: “Such powerful flares bode ill for any possible biology, life, on any planet that happens to be close to that flaring star. It’s extraordinary to think that the most numerous stars, the smallest ones in our galaxy, pose this threat to life.”
http://www.centauri-dreams.org/?p=16327

Star Chemistry Constrains Habitable Zone (additional constraint to the Privileged Planet Principle) Sept. 2012
Excerpt: If there had been less oxygen in the Sun’s chemical makeup, for example, Earth likely would have been pushed out of the Sun’s habitable zone about a billion years ago, well before complex organisms,,,
http://crev.info/2012/09/star-chemistry-constrains-habitable-zone/

Many Stars Are Planet Destroyers - September 2010
Excerpt: A NASA study is being called “Bad news for planet hunters.” A survey of stars in globular clusters has not turned up the number of planets expected. Astronomers conclude that stars in these presumably ancient clusters have long since devoured their planets or sent them careening out into oblivion.
http://www.creationsafaris.com/crev201009.htm#20100916a
As well, tectonic activity, which is itself finely tuned for life on earth, is not nearly as well understood by science as many people think:
Dominant paradigms in science and their attendant anomalies - David Tyler - July 2010
Excerpt: The relative contributions made by these different forces have been much discussed by scientists developing plate tectonic theory. However, firm conclusions have not been reached. If there is any consensus, it is that boundary forces are more significant than drag forces, and that slab pull is more significant than ridge push.
http://www.arn.org/blogs/index.php/literature/2010/07/18/dominant_paradigms_in_science_and_their
As well, the prevailing 'impact theory', for how our life-enabling moon is hypothesized to have been formed, is not nearly as well established as some people think:
Researchers discover water on the moon is widespread, similar to Earth's - July 2010
Excerpt: The finding of volatiles on the moon has deep implications for how it, and the Earth, formed. It is generally believed that the moon was created when the early Earth was hit by a Mars-sized proto-planet called Theia, melting and vaporizing itself and a large chunk of the Earth. The cloud of particles created by the impact later congealed to form the moon, which supposedly was devoid of highly volatile elements such as hydrogen and chlorine. However, the researchers' discovery of these volatiles challenges this theory. "If water in the Moon was residue water kept during the giant impact, it is surprising that water survived the impact at all because less volatile elements, such as sodium and potassium, are strongly depleted. The details of the impact theory need to be re-examined," Liu said.
http://www.physorg.com/news198934028.html
Enter Two More Ideas For Earth-Moon Evolution - Cornelius Hunter - Nov. 26, 2012
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/enter-two-more-ideas-for-earth-moon-evolution/

In further evidence for the 'Privileged Planet'; relative element abundances, complex symbiotic chemistry, water, and the fine tuning of light for carbon based life on earth, all display extraordinary characteristics of design which also lend strong support to the Privileged Planet principle:

It is found that not only must the right chemicals be present on earth to have life, the chemicals must also be present on the earth in 'specific abundances'.
Elemental Evidence of Earth’s Divine Design - Hugh Ross PhD. - April 2010
Table: Earth’s Anomalous Abundances - Page 8
The twenty-five elements listed below must exist on Earth in specific abundances for advanced life and/or support of civilization to be possible. For each listed element the number indicates how much more or less abundant it is, by mass, in Earth’s crust, relative to magnesium’s abundance, as compared to its average abundance in the rest of the Milky Way Galaxy, also relative to the element magnesium. Asterisks denote “vital poisons,” essential elements that if too abundant would be toxic to advanced life, but if too scarce would fail to provide the quantities of nutrients essential for advanced life. The water measure compares the amount of water in and on Earth relative to the minimum amount the best planet formation models would predict for a planet the mass of Earth orbiting a star identical to the Sun at the same distance from the Sun.

carbon* 1,200 times less
nitrogen* 2,400 times less
fluorine* 50 times more
sodium* 20 times more
aluminum 40 times more
phosphorus* 4 times more
sulfur* 60 times less
potassium* 90 times more
calcium 20 times more
titanium 65 times more
vanadium* 9 times more
chromium* 5 times less
nickel* 20 times less
cobalt* 5 times less
selenium* 30 times less
yttrium 50 times more
zirconium 130 times more
niobium 170 times more
molybdenum* 5 times more
tin* 3 times more
iodine* 3 times more
gold 5 times less
lead 170 times more
uranium 16,000 times more
thorium 23,000 times more
water 250 times less

http://www.reasons.org/files/ezine/ezine-2010-02.pdf

Compositions of Extrasolar Planets - July 2010
Excerpt: ,,,the presumption that extrasolar terrestrial planets will consistently manifest Earth-like chemical compositions is incorrect. Instead, the simulations revealed “a wide variety of resulting planetary compositions.
http://www.reasons.org/compositions-extrasolar-planets

Early Mars Water Was Salty, Toxic Stew – 2008
Excerpt: But data from the rover Opportunity is already suggesting that water on early Mars billions of years ago may have been fit for pickling—not supporting—life. That’s because the water was thick with salt and other minerals, making it far too briny for life as we know it, according to a new study.
Nicholas Tosca of Harvard University and colleagues studied mineral clues from the surface of Mars sent back by the rover and used computers to turn back the clock.
“Our sense has been that while Mars is a lousy environment for supporting life today, long ago it might have more closely resembled Earth,” said Andrew Knoll, a study co-author also from Harvard. But instead the team found that the soil’s mineral content would have made that liquid a salty, toxic stew. “No matter how far back we peer into Mars’s history, we may never see a point at which the planet really looked like Earth,” Knoll said.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/05/080529-mars-salty.html

Toxic Mars: Astronauts Must Deal with Perchlorate on the Red Planet - June 13, 2013
Excerpt: The high levels of perchlorate found on Mars would be toxic to humans, Smith said.
Smith said microbes on Earth use perchlorate for an energy source. They actually live off highly oxidized chlorine, and in reducing the chlorine down to chloride, they use the energy in that transaction to power themselves. In fact, when there's too much perchlorate in drinking water, microbes are used to clean it up, he said.
"Anybody who is saying they want to go live on the surface of Mars better think about the interaction of perchlorate with the human body," he warned. "At one-half percent, that's a huge amount. Very small amounts are considered toxic. So you'd better have a plan to deal with the poisons on the surface."

http://www.space.com/21554-mars-toxic-perchlorate-chemicals.html

Our Poisonous Moon: Better from a Distance - July, 2012
Excerpt: Even if the dust problems could be overcome, the moon remains unprotected from solar UV radiation, the solar wind, solar flares, micrometeorites and high-energy cosmic rays.
The authors listed 34 remaining “knowledge gaps” about lunar toxicity. If any of these (many suspected to be high to very high risk) were to prove serious, it might cause a reconsideration of the wisdom of sending humans to the moon for extended stays. Since some of the risks apply to Mars as well (and since the moon would probably be a training base), these findings could put a damper on hopes for manned missions to Mars.

http://crev.info/2012/07/our-poisonous-moon/
In related note about water on Mars:
Surface of Mars an unlikely place for life after 600-million-year drought, say scientists - February 2012
Excerpt: The results of the soil analysis at the Phoenix site suggest the surface of Mars has been arid for hundreds of millions of years, despite the presence of ice and the fact that previous research has shown that Mars may have had a warmer and wetter period in its earlier history more than three billion years ago. The team also estimated that the soil on Mars had been exposed to liquid water for at most 5,000 years since its formation billions of years ago. They also found that Martian and Moon soil is being formed under the same extremely dry conditions.
Satellite images and previous studies have proven that the soil on Mars is uniform across the planet, which suggests that the results from the team's analysis could be applied to all of Mars. This implies that liquid water has been on the surface of Mars for far too short a time for life to maintain a foothold on the surface.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/02/120203092006.htm

Organic Carbon from Mars, but Not Biological - May 2012
Excerpt: Molecules containing large chains of carbon and hydrogen--the building blocks of all life on Earth--have been the targets of missions to Mars from Viking to the present day. While these molecules have previously been found in meteorites from Mars, scientists have disagreed about how this organic carbon was formed and whether or not it came from Mars. A new paper led by Carnegie's Andrew Steele provides strong evidence that this carbon did originate on Mars,,,
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/05/120524143450.htm

Curiosity finds no methane on Mars — not yet, anyway - Nov. 2, 2012
Excerpt: NASA's Mars rover Curiosity has detected no methane in its first analyses of the Martian atmosphere — news that will doubtless disappoint those who hope to find life on the Red Planet.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/49664054/ns/technology_and_science-space/#.UJVJcoYsE30

Don't Let Mars Fool You. Those Exoplanets Teem with Life! - Denyse O'Leary - November 11, 2013
Caution: Biology is an awkward science to play dice with. One may as well argue that there must be several species of reasoning animals like humans on Earth because there are just so many species. But there aren't several, just one.,,,
In the Washington Post, Joel Achenbach explains that life on Mars is awfully cryptic: "Time and again, scientists have detected signatures of Martian life, only to discover that they were written in vanishing ink."

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/11/dont_let_mars_f078731.html

Martian Lowlands are Old - Dr. Hugh Ross - June 2006
Excerpt: The scientists concluded that the northern lowlands formed within 500 million years of Mars’ formation. This puts the lowlands’ formation before the end of the late heavy bombardment (a time when the inner solar system was bombarded with numerous cometary and asteroidal impacts), essentially precluding significant resurfacing by liquid water. Without abundant liquid water, the possibility of Mars’ suitability for life dramatically diminishes and Earth looks even rarer as a suitable habitat for advanced life.
http://www.reasons.org/articles/martian-lowlands-are-old
Further note on widely varying chemical composition:
Chemical Clues On Formation of Planetary Systems: Earth 'Siblings' Can Be Different - ScienceDaily (Feb. 23, 2012)
Excerpt: An international team of researchers, with the participation of IAC astronomers, has discovered that the chemical structure of Earth-like planets can be very different from the bulk composition of Earth. This may have a dramatic effect on the existence and formation of the biospheres and life on Earth-like planets.,,,'There could be billions of Earth-like planets in the Universe but a great majority of them may have a totally different internal and atmospheric structure.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/02/120223132902.htm

Chances of Exoplanet Life ‘Impossible’? Or ’100 percent’? - February 2011
Excerpt: Howard Smith, an astrophysicist at Harvard University, made the headlines earlier this year when he announced, rather pessimistically, that aliens will unlikely exist on the extrasolar planets we are currently detecting. “We have found that most other planets and solar systems are wildly different from our own. They are very hostile to life as we know it,” “Extrasolar systems are far more diverse than we expected, and that means very few are likely to support life,” he said.
http://news.discovery.com/space/exoplanet-life-impossible-or-100-percent-what.html

Expectation of extraterrestrial life built more on optimism than evidence, study finds - April 26, 2012
Excerpt: "Information about that probability comes largely from the assumptions scientists have going in, and some of the most optimistic conclusions have been based almost entirely on those assumptions," he said.
http://phys.org/news/2012-04-extraterrestrial-life-built-optimism-evidence.html

Elements of ExoPlanets - February 2012
Excerpt: "I was expecting some subtle changes in our stellar evolution models in terms of the surface temperature and brightness — I was not looking for such a dramatic change in the lifetimes of the stars," said study lead author Patrick Young,
http://www.physorg.com/news/2012-02-elements-exoplanets.html
The stunning long term balance of the necessary chemicals for life, on the face of the earth, is a wonder in and of itself:
Chemical Cycles:
Long term chemical balance is essential for life on earth. Complex symbiotic chemical cycles keep the amount of elements on the earth surface in relatively perfect balance and thus in steady supply to the higher life forms that depend on them to remain stable. This is absolutely essential for the higher life forms to exist on Earth for any extended period of time.
http://www.uen.org/themepark/cycles/chemical.shtml
Carbon and Nitrogen Cycles - music video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8-E6cDCr5U

Carbon Cycle - Illustration
http://www.swiftenterprises.net/images/Charts/Large/Carbon_Cycle.png

When we look at water, the most common substance on earth and in our bodies, we find many odd characteristics which clearly appear to be designed. These oddities are absolutely essential for life on earth. Some simple life can exist without the direct energy of sunlight, some simple life can exist without oxygen; but no life can exist without water. Water is called a universal solvent because it has the unique ability to dissolve a far wider range of substances than any other solvent. This 'universal solvent' ability of water is essential for the cells of living organisms to process the wide range of substances necessary for life. Another oddity is water expands as it becomes ice, by an increase of about 9% in volume. Thus, water floats when it becomes a solid instead of sinking. This is an exceedingly rare ability. Yet if it were not for this fact, lakes and oceans would freeze from the bottom up. The earth would be a frozen wasteland, and human life would not be possible. Water also has the unusual ability to pull itself into very fine tubes and small spaces, defying gravity. This is called capillary action. This action is essential for the breakup of mineral bearing rocks into soil. Water pulls itself into tiny spaces on the surface of a rock and freezes; it expands and breaks the rock into tinier pieces, thus producing soil. Capillary action is also essential for the movement of water through soil to the roots of plants. It is also essential for the movement of water from the roots to the tops of the plants, even to the tops of the mighty redwood trees,,,

Towering Giants Of Teleological Beauty - October 2010
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/towering-giants-of-teleological-beauty/

,,,Capillary action is also essential for the circulation of the blood in our very own capillary blood vessels. Water's melting and boiling point are not where common sense would indicate they should be when we look at its molecular weight. The three sister compounds of water all behave as would be predicted by their molecular weight. Oddly, water just happens to have melting and boiling points that are of optimal biological utility. The other properties of water we measure, like its specific slipperiness (viscosity) and its ability to absorb and release more heat than any other natural substance, have to be as they are in order for life to be possible on earth. Even the oceans have to be the size they are in order to stabilize the temperature of the earth so human life may be possible. On and on through each characteristic we can possibly measure water with, it turns out to be required to be almost exactly as it is or complex life on this earth could not exist. No other liquid in the universe comes anywhere near matching water in its fitness for life (Denton: Nature's Destiny).

Here is a more complete list of the anomalous life enabling properties of water:

Anomalous life enabling properties of water
http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/anmlies.html
Water's remarkable capabilities - December 2010 - Peer Reviewed
Excerpt: All these traits are contained in a simple molecule of only three atoms. One of the most difficult tasks for an engineer is to design for multiple criteria at once. ... Satisfying all these criteria in one simple design is an engineering marvel. Also, the design process goes very deep since many characteristics would necessarily be changed if one were to alter fundamental physical properties such as the strong nuclear force or the size of the electron.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/12/pro-intelligent_design_peer_re042211.html

Water's quantum weirdness makes life possible - October 2011
Excerpt: WATER'S life-giving properties exist on a knife-edge. It turns out that life as we know it relies on a fortuitous, but incredibly delicate, balance of quantum forces.,,, They found that the hydrogen-oxygen bonds were slightly longer than the deuterium-oxygen ones, which is what you would expect if quantum uncertainty was affecting water’s structure. “No one has ever really measured that before,” says Benmore.
We are used to the idea that the cosmos’s physical constants are fine-tuned for life. Now it seems water’s quantum forces can be added to this “just right” list.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21228354.900-waters-quantum-weirdness-makes-life-possible.html

How much water is there on, in, and above the Earth?
Excerpt: Do you notice that "tiny" bubble over Atlanta, Georgia? That one represents fresh water in all the lakes and rivers on the planet, and most of the water people and life of earth need every day comes from these surface-water sources. The volume of this sphere is about 22,339 mi3 (93,113 km3). The diameter of this sphere is about 34.9 miles (56.2 kilometers).
http://ga.water.usgs.gov/edu/earthhowmuch.html
Water cycle song - music video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okZBiy_IdBA

Of interest:
Nanosilicon rapidly splits water without light, heat, or electricity - January 24, 2013 - by Lisa Zyga
Excerpt: But the improvements the scientists discovered with silicon nanoparticles far exceeded their expectations. The reaction of 10-nm silicon particles with water produced a total of 2.58 mol of hydrogen per mol of silicon (even exceeding theoretical expectations), taking 5 seconds to produce 1 mmol of hydrogen,,,
"I believe the greatest significance of this work is the demonstration that silicon can react with water rapidly enough to be of practical use for on-demand hydrogen generation," coauthor Mark Swihart, Professor of Chemical and Biological Engineering at the University of Buffalo, told Phys.org. "This result was both unexpected and of potential practical importance.
While I do not believe that oxidation of silicon nanoparticles will become a feasible method for large-scale hydrogen generation any time soon, this process could be quite interesting for small-scale portable applications where water is available.",,,

http://phys.org/news/2013-01-nanosilicon-rapidly-electricity.html
Although water is semi-famous for its many mysterious and 'miraculous' characteristics that enable physical life to be possible on earth. This following article goes even deeper than the 'science of water' to reveal many mysterious 'spiritual characteristics' of water found in the Bible that enable a deeper 'spiritual life' to even be possible.

WATER, as a metaphor (in the Bible)
http://www.biblesecrets.org/METAPHOR.htm

Visible light is also incredibly fine-tuned for life to exist. Though visible light is only a tiny fraction of the total electromagnetic spectrum coming from the sun, it happens to be the "most permitted" portion of the sun's spectrum allowed to filter through the our atmosphere. All the other bands of electromagnetic radiation, directly surrounding visible light, happen to be harmful to organic molecules, and are almost completely absorbed by the atmosphere. The tiny amount of harmful UV radiation, which is not visible light, allowed to filter through the atmosphere is needed to keep various populations of single cell bacteria from over-populating the world (Ross; reasons.org). The size of light's wavelengths and the constraints on the size allowable for the protein molecules of organic life, also seem to be tailor-made for each other. This "tailor-made fit" allows photosynthesis, the miracle of sight, and many other things that are necessary for human life. These specific frequencies of light (that enable plants to manufacture food and astronomers to observe the cosmos) represent less than 1 trillionth of a trillionth (10^-24) of the universe's entire range of electromagnetic emissions. Like water, visible light also appears to be of optimal biological utility (Denton; Nature's Destiny).

Extreme Fine Tuning of Light for Life and Scientific Discovery - video
http://www.metacafe.com/w/7715887

Fine Tuning Of Universal Constants, Particularly Light - Walter Bradley - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4491552

Fine Tuning Of Light to the Atmosphere, to Biological Life, and to Water - graphs
http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AYmaSrBPNEmGZGM4ejY3d3pfMTljaGh4MmdnOQ

Michael Denton: Remarkable Coincidences in Photosynthesis - podcast
http://www.idthefuture.com/2012/09/michael_denton_remarkable_coin.html

Intelligent Design - Light and Water - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4669620

Moreover, at the 21:00 minute mark of the following video, Dr Suarez explains why photosynthesis needs a 'non-local', beyond space and time, cause to explain its effect:

Nonlocality of Photosynthesis - Antoine Suarez - video - 2012
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhMrrmlTXl4&feature=player_detailpage#t=1268s
Cells Know Their Physics - October 2010
Excerpt: the Complex I macromolecular complex. This machine employs a railroad-like piston and coupling-rod mechanism,, to create the proton gradient that drives ATP synthesis.“It is remarkable that the most fundamental energy-generating machinery in cells is based on the wave properties of electrons, which allow for an efficient transport of energy-carrying particles along the chain of redox cofactors toward molecular oxygen via quantum tunneling as demonstrated by this study.”
http://www.creationsafaris.com/crev201010.htm#20101027a
As well, the ATP synthase molecular machine, which is an integral part of the photosynthetic process, operates at 100% thermodynamic efficiency:
Your Motor/Generators Are 100% Efficient – October 2011
Excerpt: ATP synthase astounds again. The molecular machine that generates almost all the ATP (molecular “energy pellets”) for all life was examined by Japanese scientists for its thermodynamic efficiency. By applying and measuring load on the top part that synthesizes ATP, they were able to determine that one cannot do better at getting work out of a motor,,, The article was edited by noted Harvard expert on the bacterial flagellum, Howard Berg.
http://crev.info/content/111014-your_motor_generators

Bio-Mechanics – Don’t the Intricacy & Ubiquity of Molecular Machines Provide Evidence for Design? by Casey Luskin – Spring 2012
Excerpt:,, biomolecular machines have a major difference that distinguishes them from human technology: their energetic efficiency dwarfs our best accomplishments. One paper observes that molecular machines “are generally more efficient than their macroscale counterparts,”7 and another suggests that the efficiency of the bacterial flagellum “could be ~100%.”8 Human engineers can only dream of creating such devices.
http://www.salvomag.com/new/articles/salvo20/molecular-machines-evidence-for-design.php

Proverbs 3:19
"The Lord by wisdom founded the earth: by understanding He established the heavens;"
The scientific evidence clearly indicates the earth is extremely unique in this universe in its ability to support life. These facts are rigorously investigated and cannot be dismissed out of hand as some sort of glitch in accurate information. Here materialism can offer no competing theory of blind chance which can offset the overwhelming evidence for the earth's apparent intelligent design which enables her to host complex life. A materialist can only assert we are extremely 'lucky'. This is some kind of fantastic luck materialists believe. The odds of another life-supporting earth 'just so happening' in this universe (1 in 10^1054) are not even remotely as good as the odds a blind man would have in finding one pre-selected grain of sand, which has been hidden in all vast expanses of deserts and beaches of the world, with only one try, and then the blind man repeatedly finding the grain of sand, first time every time, several times over! These fantastic odds against another life-supporting world 'just so happening' in this universe have not even been refined to their final upper limits yet. The odds will only get far worse for the atheistic materialist.,,, When faced with such staggering odds against life 'just so happening' elsewhere in the universe, I find the Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence by SETI to be amusing:

SETI - Search For Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence receives message from God,,,,, Almost - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4007753

I find it strange that the SETI (Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence) organization spends millions of dollars vainly searching for signs of extra-terrestrial life in this universe, when all anyone has to do to make solid contact with THE primary 'extra-terrestrial intelligence' of the entire universe is to pray with a sincere heart. God certainly does not hide from those who sincerely seek Him. Actually communicating with the Creator of the universe is certainly a lot more exciting than not communicating with some little green men that in all probability do not even exist, unless of course, God decided to create them!
Isaiah 45:18-19
For thus says the Lord, who created the heavens, who is God, who formed the earth and made it, who established it, who did not create it in vain, who formed it to be inhabited: “I am the Lord, and there is no other. I have not spoken in secret, in a dark place of the earth; I did not say to the seed of Jacob, ‘seek me in vain’; I, the Lord speak righteousness, I declare things that are right.”

“When I was young, I said to God, 'God, tell me the mystery of the universe.' But God answered, 'That knowledge is for me alone.' So I said, 'God, tell me the mystery of the peanut.' Then God said, 'Well George, that's more nearly your size.' And he told me.”
George Washington Carver

Inventors - George Washington Carver
Excerpt: "God gave them to me" he (Carver) would say about his ideas, "How can I sell them to someone else?"
http://inventors.about.com/od/cstartinventors/a/GWC.htm
Hearing God – Are We Listening? – video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4200224/

To answer our third question (What evidence is found for the first life on earth?) we will look at the evidence for the first appearance of life on earth and the chemical activity of the first bacterial life on earth. Once again, the presumption of materialistic blind chance being the only reasonable cause must be dealt with.

What evidence is found for the first life on earth?
http://lettherebelight-77.blogspot.com/2012/02/what-evidence-is-found-for-first-life.html

2 comments:

radar said...

Astonishing! I have to take my time with this so I have to save it and revisit it and consider the content thereof. I just wanted to say that you have much to say and I hope you do continue to blog!

adifferenceforyourlovedones said...

Excellent. I a glad I found you, though it would help me to have shorter blogs, since we live in this decaying world where so many people need physical help, since their mental capacities are already depleted, including mine. I also recommend to blog in Wordpress, where I blog as time permits.
You have given us a valuable resource. However my atheists have mostly deleted me on face book and God gave me Muslims to witness to now, who are easy to please about since, since they can't think outside their religious box much.
Shared on face book.

Followers