In the Beginning Was Information (17 page)

Q20:
Are laws of nature always quantifiable? Don’t the statements only achieve this status when the observations have been successfully expressed in mathematical equations?

A20:
In 1604, Galileo Galilei (1564–1642) discovered the law of falling bodies. He expressed the regularities he discovered in the form of verbal sentences in Italian (in
La nuova scienza
) which can be translated into other languages. Later, these sentences were translated with the help of a meta-language, that is the mathematical language. The mathematical language has the advantage that it allows an unambiguous and especially short presentation. Equations are an expression of quantitative details; however they only represent a part of the mathematical equipment. The phraseology of mathematical logic uses a formula apparatus but does not deal with quantitative dimensions. They represent a different and indispensable form of expression. With relation to question 20, we have to consider two aspects:

1. Not all observations in nature which can be formulated in mathematical terms are necessarily laws of nature. These must fulfill two important criteria: laws of nature must be universally valid and absolute. They must not be dependent on anything, especially not on place or time. It is therefore irrelevant who is observing nature, when and where and in what stage nature is. The circumstances are affected by the laws and not vice versa.

2. In order to be a law of nature, the facts under observation need not be formulated mathematically, although this does not exclude the possibility that a formal expression may one day be found (see examples a, b). It must also be noted that a number of correctly observed laws of nature could later be included in a more general principle. A law of nature need not necessarily be represented by quantitative values. The description of an observation in qualitative and verbal terms suffices, if the observation is generally valid, i.e., can be reproduced as often as you like. It is only important to remember that laws of nature know no exceptions. These aspects should be made clearer in the following examples:

a) Rotary direction of a whirlpool: In the northern hemisphere of the earth, the whirlpool caused by water flowing out of a receptacle rotates in a counterclockwise direction, in the southern hemisphere in a clockwise direction. If this test should be carried out on other planets, a connection between the sense of rotation of the planet and the location of the test site above or below the equator could be established as well.

b) The right hand rule: According to the discovery made by the English physicist Michael Faraday (1791–1867) in 1831, electricity is induced in a metal conductor if it is moved into a magnetic field. The direction of the electrical flow is described in the law of nature which the English physicist John Ambrose Fleming (1849–1945) described by means of the "right hand rule" in 1884: "If one creates a right angle with the first three fingers of the right hand, and the thumb indicates the direction in which the conductor is moving and the forefinger indicates the direction of the lines of force, then the middle finger indicates the direction of the flow of electricity."

c) The Pauli principle: In 1925, the Austrian physicist and Nobel Prize winner Wolfgang Pauli (1900–1958) put forward the principle which carries his name (the exclusion principle). It maintains, among other things, that only electrons which are different from each other at least in one of the quantum numbers can be involved in forming atoms and molecules. That is, no identical electrons can exist next to one another. This principle is a law of nature which was not mathematically formulated but which is of greatest importance for the understanding of the periodic table of elements.

d) Le Chatelier’s principle of least restraint: The principle formulated in 1887 by the French chemist Henry-Louis Le Chatelier (1850–1936) and the German Nobel Prize winner in Physics (1909) Karl Ferdinand Braun (1850–1918) qualitatively describes the dependence of the chemical equilibrium on external conditions. According to the principle, the equilibrium continually shifts in order to avoid external forces (e.g., temperature, pressure, concentration of the reactionary partner). Example: In the case of a reaction linked with a change in volume (e.g., the decomposition of ammonia: 2 NH
₃
↔ N
₂
+ 3 H
₂
), an increase in pressure must lead to a reduction in turnover. Accordingly, the turnover of a reaction involving a reduction in volume is increased through an increase in pressure: in the case of ammonia synthesis N
₂
+ 3 H
₂
↔ 2NH
₃
, the equilibrium is shifted under the high pressure toward NH
₃
. Taking this result into account, the Haber-Bosch procedure of ammonia synthesis is carried out under high pressure. The principle also says that under additional heat influx, in exothermic reactions the equilibrium shifts toward the original substances and in endothermic reactions toward the produced substances. The Le Chatelier principle applies not only to reversible chemical reactions, but equally to reversible physical processes, such as evaporation or crystallization.

e) The principle of least motion: Hine recognized a law of nature which helps us to predict chemical reactions. The principle maintains that the reactions which involve the least changes to atom compositions and electron configurations are more likely to happen. Thus, using this principle, it is possible to predict why, in the Birch reduction of aromatic connections 1,4 dienes and not 1,3 dienes are produced. Dienes or diolefines are unsaturated aliphatic and cycloaliphatic hydrocarbons which contain molecules with double bonds. Note: In the first two examples (a and b) it was possible to express the verbal statements in mathematical equations. a) The rotary direction of a whirlpool can be derived from mechanics (Coriolis force). b) In 1873, the English physicist James Clerk Maxwell (1831–1879) found a mathematical description ("A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism") which the German physicist Heinrich Hertz (1857–1894) in 1890 expressed in the first and second Maxwell equations which are still used today. c) As a result of the observations in conjunction with the Pauli principle, later a mathematical deduction of the principle using the wave function of an electron became possible. These reasons are based on the validity of the wave function. However, the law itself is still usually formulated verbally.

These examples confirm that laws of nature do not necessarily have to be quantifiable. If preferred reactions, rotary directions, or other general principles are being described, then mathematical formulas are not always effective. In some cases, the observations of the laws of nature can be deduced from more general laws. Thus, for example, the law of induction is already contained in the Maxwell equations. All the aspects of the laws of nature discussed here are equally valid in relation to theorems about information. According to their nature, the generally valid facts about information can be observed, but they are not quantifiable. Thus, the statements are described verbally. This type of description is no criterion as to whether a fact is a law of nature or not.

Q21:
Can the laws of nature change in time?

A21:
The laws of nature are valid everywhere in the universe and at all times without exception. There can be absolutely no exceptions. It would be tragic if the laws of nature did change as time went on. Every technical construction and measuring apparatus is a practical application of the laws of nature. If the laws of nature changed, bridges and tower blocks, calculated correctly taking the laws of nature into account, could collapse. As all physiological processes are also dependent on the laws of nature, then a change in these laws would have catastrophic consequences.

Q22:
Is the sender already included in your definition of information? If a sender is already included in the definition, then the conclusion that there must be a sender is self-evident.

A22:
Of course, the sender is included in neither the definition nor the prerequisite. That would be a circular argument. The laws of nature are deduced completely from experience. Thus, the existence of a sender when there is a code, has been observed a million times over. In the work in hand, the difference between theorems and definitions is clearly made. Theorems should be viewed as laws of nature. They are observed. In Theorems 1, 9, and 11, we talked about a sender. I would like to stress that this is neither a definition nor a prerequisite. The statements are much more the result of countless observations.

Q23:
Can a law of nature be toppled? Or, to phrase it differently, are the laws of nature confirmatory?

A23:
If we are talking about true laws of nature (true in the sense that they are not merely what we assume to be laws of nature), then they are universally valid and unchangeable and they can never be toppled. Their main feature is that they are fixed. In their practical implementation, the laws of nature cannot be proven in a mathematical sense, but they are founded and refuting in character. With their help, we are able to make accurate predictions about the possible and the impossible. For this reason, no invention which offends a law of nature is accepted by a patent office (e.g., perpetua mobilia offend the principle of the conservation of energy). Assumed law of nature: A law which is often assumed to be a law of nature but which in reality is no such thing, may be held as such for a period of time. However, it can be toppled by an example showing the opposite (falsification). True law of nature: These are true laws of nature which can never be toppled because examples of the opposite cannot exist. The validity of a law of nature cannot be proven mathematically; however it is proven in continual observations.

Q24:
How many laws of nature are there?

A24:
The total number of laws of nature cannot be stated exactly for two reasons: We can never be sure whether we have recognized all phenomena reliant on the laws of nature. Sometimes a number of laws can be summed up in the framework of one superordinate standpoint. There is then no point in listing each individual law. The quest for the world formula which is often mentioned assumes that there is one formula which can express all our laws of nature. However, this seems to be a utopian goal.

Q25:
Have you lectured on your concept of information as a law of nature in front of specialists?

A25:
I have lectured on this topic in countless national and international universities. In June 1996, I also presented my concept at an international congress which was especially concerned with the discussion on information [G18]. There was always a lively discussion, and the specialists tried to find an example of the opposite (one example would be enough to topple an assumed law of nature). A true law of nature cannot be toppled.

PART 3:

Application of the Concept of Information to the Bible

The information concept was discussed in Part 2, and many theorems having general validity were formulated. This concept figures prominently in practically all scientific disciplines. We will now consider the essential and distinctive properties of information, taking the Bible as example. Certain aspects will be clarified, and we will obtain a new way of looking at the message of the Bible. An important conclusion will be that the natural laws about information fit completely in the biblical message of the creation of life.

Chapter 12

Life Requires a Source of Information

The common factor present in all living organisms, from bacteria to man, is the information contained in all their cells. It has been discovered that nowhere else can a higher statistical packing density of information (see appendix A1.2.3) be found. The information present in living systems falls in the category of "operational information" as discussed in chapter 7. This information is exactly tuned in to the infinitude of life processes and situations, and its origin can be ascribed to creative constructional information (chapter 7). The different information aspects are depicted in Figure 26, where the statistical level has been omitted for the sake of simplicity. This diagram is of a general nature and can therefore be applied to any piece of information (see chapter 5 for domain of definition); it is in every case under consideration only necessary to identify the sender, the recipient, and the specifics of the various levels, syntax, semantics, pragmatics, and apobetics. The properties characteristic of life are indicated next to each level in Figure 26. In the case of the recipient, these levels can in principle be investigated scientifically, although we have to admit that our present knowledge only scratches the surface.

According to the information laws, every piece of information requires a sender. The demarcated region in Figure 26 is in principle not accessible for scientific research, namely the person of the sender. Since the sender cannot be investigated by human means, many people erroneously conclude that He does not exist, and thus they contravene the information theorems. The requirement that there must be a personal sender exercising his own free will, cannot be relinquished. This sender, the Creator, has revealed himself so that we do have information about Him. He, Jesus, was in the world and the world was made through Him (John 1:10). Everything in the entire universe, without exception, was created by Him, as is stated in the first verses of John’s Gospel and in Colossians 1:16: "For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him."