(Disclaimer: This transcript is auto-generated and may contain mistakes.)

Let me give an overview about the contents. First, we will speak about fundamentals in science, systems based on information. Then we will have a look to statements about laws of nature and searching for information in biological systems before we will find the laws of nature about information. And the most important thing of this lecture is to find seven strong conclusions. Part one, fundamentals in science. How to refute false ideas in science? Let me start with an example in mathematics. You see there is an equation and you see the equation is false because the law of mathematics is violated and you see the other equation which is right. That is very important in science that we find what is the wrong situation and what is the right situation. Let me give another example in physics. Nature is running up and falls down in a waterfall as you see here in the picture. Is it possible or not? It is false because the law of energy of condensation is violated. So it is an impossible process. Or another example from chemistry, you see an equation of reaction and there is also the equation is false because the law of stoichiometry is violated. You see in the equation H3O and the right equation must be H2O. Now let me come to an example from biology. Man has evolved from a long process of evolution. False because a law is violated. But the question is, do we have such a law? We will find out laws of nature which can give us the right answer. That is what I want to show you in this session. What is the general term for law of gravity or conversation of energy law? In Germany we say Natuvisetz, in the United States they say scientific law and in England we say law of nature and I will use this term. In nature we observe the non-systems by observation and experiments and so we find out the laws of nature. And if we know the laws of nature we can use the laws for unknown systems and we will find conclusions. That is what I want to show you in this afternoon. Here you see different levels of scientific knowledge. Above of the red line you see the laws of nature and we can say the laws of nature originated from God and the laws of nature are formulated by man. And we have other laws of scientific knowledge. You see models or speculations, hypotheses or theories. All this below the red line we can say are originated and formulated by man. You see there is a very large gap between the laws of nature and all the other levels of scientific knowledge. Therefore it is possible that a law of nature can refute a model or speculation or theory. In our world we have three kinds of realities, matter, information and life. What is the best understanding of such systems? Of course it is if we know laws of nature about these three possibilities. The laws of nature about matter are well known in physics and in chemistry. But the laws of nature about information are very new. We need such laws of nature, we will see it later on. And we also need laws of nature about life. At the moment we only know one law of nature about life. It is from Pasteur coming he said, life is only coming from life. It is the only law of nature we know about life. Let's have a look to systems which are based on information. On this picture you see a walking machine. It has six legs and there is a computer installed and a special program and so this machine can walk on plane and on plane surfaces. It can go upstairs and downstairs and so on. What is the most important detail on this machine? Of course it is the program. The program allows it to do it. If we would delete the program then it cannot walk. Now let's have an idea about this walking machine. If we would weigh the complete system we will find a special value of the complete machine. Afterwards we will delete the information and then we would weigh it once again. What do we think about the weight of the complete system after deleting the information? Will it have more, less or the same weight? Of course it has the same weight. What is the conclusion? Information is not a part of matter. Information is a non-material entity, a very, very important conclusion. On this picture you see a stick insect. It is also a walking machine, a biological walking machine. It has also six legs and we can say it has also a program installed and it can walk in all kinds of bushes and trees and so on. If we would delete this program it cannot walk but we don't know the place where to delete the program. On this picture you see an ant with a microchip. The microchip represents matter plus information and the ant represents matter plus information plus life. Maybe the next generation of computers will be installed by the ants. On this picture you see the development of an embryo that is the most complex information system. Now let me come to a few statements about laws of nature. It is necessary to understand what the law of nature is. We have two kinds of laws of nature, material for material entities, for example energy, power and electricity and non-material entities, for example information. That's what we will speak about this afternoon. Laws of nature are precise statements based on discoveries, so observation and experiment that have been repeatedly verified and never contradicted. Very important statement. Laws of nature are universally valid. They are valid in Australia, they are valid in Germany, in America, on the moon and in the complete universe. Laws of nature do not vary in time. It's also a very important statement. If it would not so in this way, we couldn't construct motors on bridges and so on because all our constructions are based on the laws of nature. Laws of nature are simple, that's a very good thing. Therefore we can learn a few laws of nature about information on this afternoon. And a very important statement is this one, there are no exceptions from laws of nature. That makes it so important for the laws of nature in our using. Laws of nature enable us to determine beforehand whether a proposed process is or is not possible. That's a very, very important statement about laws of nature. Once again this picture with the water which is running up this way and falls down. We can say it is an impossible process because there is a law of nature which says no. So it's an impossible process. Now we will find a definition of information, a scientific definition. What is information? The American mathematical Norbert Wiener said, information is information neither matter nor energy. It's a very good statement. He said information is not matter and information is not energy. But he didn't tell us what it is. That's what I want to show you now. On this picture you see different signs and my question is, is it information? And the answer is, it could be but it could also not be. What is the right answer? In 1799 soldiers of Napoleon found in the Neill town of Rosetta this stone. On the same stone there are texts in three languages, in Greek, Demotic and in hieroglyphics. It was a long time of research to find out, to read the hieroglyphics. But nowadays we understand what it means and therefore we can say it is a language and it's real information. Nowadays the hieroglyphics are understood. On this picture you see a translation made by computer. The input of the computer was a German text and the output of the computer by a plotter was a translation into hieroglyphics. It is because we understand this language and therefore translations are possible. A definition in science must be precise and very clear. It must have sharp distinct borders that include only the subjects of the definition and exclude everything else. We need such a definition also for information. If we use such a term in science we have to make a very clear definition. Let me say it an example of energy. Energy is in many cases in our normal speech used. If a sportler is very good in sport so we say he has very good energy or if somebody is writing many letters or books or whatever we say he has energy to do it. But it is okay if we do it in normal speech. But if we use the term energy in physics for a law of nature we have to make a very very clear definition. And the definition of energy in physics is force multiplied by distance. Now it's clear what energy is. And now it's possible to formulate the law of nature. The same is what we have to do for information. Information is a term we use in many many cases in our normal speech and if we want to formulate laws of nature about information we need a very clear definition of information. Information in the natural law theory of information includes five levels. Statistics, syntax, semantics, pragmatics and apopedics. I will explain it a little bit more. Here we see the five levels. The statistic level is if we for example would count all the letters of a book that's what we do in statistics. And if we look at the book we see there are many sentences and they are written in a special syntax. And that is the second level of information. And the most important thing is the semantics. What does it mean? We come to the fourth level of information. It is pragmatics. We have seen a few machines which are working under the condition of information and that is the pragmatic level, the action. And the highest level of information is the purpose, the result and the name I gave it is apopedics. So if we find in an unknown system all the five levels of information then we are sure it is a system with information. There are many definitions possible but we can do it. But let me say the definition domain A is the right one in a scientific way. In the domain of A we see syntax, semantics, pragmatics, apopedics and also statistics. All the other cases we don't find all the five levels and therefore we are outside of the definition domain of information. Now let's have a few examples and we will make a decision. Are we inside or outside of the definition domain of information? On this picture we see all the letters of our alphabet and also the numbers. The Swedish photographer Kjell Sandvig was it. He saw the letter F on the wing of a butterfly and was amazed. And so he took a microscope to look at the wing of a butterfly to find other letters. That he couldn't find. And so he was looking to other butterflies and you see the solution here. After a long time of 15 years and travelling among 30 countries he had found the complete alphabet. My question is, is this information in the case as I have defined it before? The answer is no. We see the letters but they have no meaning, no pragmatics and so on. There are only ornaments on the wings of butterflies and there are many ornaments on the wing. So we can say in this case we are outside of the definition domain of information. Another example, if we look to a star or to a galaxy, in normal speech we say we get more information about the system. But in my definition of information, is it information or is it not? We don't see letters, we don't see a syntax or semantics and so on. So we are very clear outside of the definition domain. Another example is this information, what we see here. We don't see a letter, we don't see all the other levels and therefore it is also outside of the definition domain of information. But now there is a name here with letters and a meaning and so we can say this is information. Now another example, could this be information, the signs what you see here on this picture? At the moment we cannot say what it is. But let me give the solution. In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, the darkness was over the surface of the deep and the spirit of God was hovering over the water and God said, let there be light and there was light. God saw that the light was good and he separated the light from the darkness. So God called the light day and the darkness he called night and there was evening and there was morning, the first day. You see there is a special code system and we can translate the complete Bible in this way. So therefore we can say this example, we are inside of the definition domain. Let me give another example. Here you see a tablet on the pioneers base vehicle with this picture. Is it information or not? Now normally we would say this picture gives information if there are living beings outside of the earth system. They can conclude that there are people living in another part of the universe. That was the idea behind this. But we don't see letters and not the five levels of information and therefore we can say we are very clear outside of the definition domain. You see it is very easy to find out if a system is inside or outside of the definition domain. Now let me come to the laws of nature about information. There are ten laws of nature about information. The first one is anything material such as physical, chemical processes cannot create something non-material, a very important law of nature about information. Let me come to the second one. Information is a non-material fundamental entity and not a property of matter. In many books nowadays you find the idea that information is a part of matter. That is a wrong idea. The third one is information requires a material medium for storage and transmission. The fourth one, information cannot originate in statistical processes. Number five, there can be no information without a code. We have seen it in the examples I showed to you in all cases there was a code system. Number six, all codes result from an intentional choice and agreement between sender and recipient. Number seven, the determination of meaning for and from a set of symbols is a mental process that requires intelligence. That's what we see in all cases in all known systems. Number eight, there can be no new information with an intelligent purposeful sender. That's what we observe in all systems which are known, there is a sender and also one or more recipients and we see all the five levels are important on both sides, on the sender side and also on the recipient side. For example on the level of semantics you see the communicated ideas on the sender side and on the recipient side is a question, is this meaning understood? Number nine, any given chain of information can be traced back to an intelligent source. Let me give an example to understand it a little bit better. If you drive with a car and you listen to your radio, is the radio the source of information? No, not the radio. Is the antenna the source of information? No. If you trace back you come to a sender, to an author who gave the information and that's what we see in all cases. In most cases we cannot see the sender, for example if you go to a library and you see thousands of books in the library, very seldom you will see the sender, the author of the books. Nevertheless it is information. Number ten, information comprises a non-material foundation for all technological systems, works of art, biological systems. Now let's have a look about information once again because there are so many other definitions about information, you will find it in many textbooks. Here you see a source of a philosopher and he said everything in the universe is information. So that's his definition of information. Or let me come to another definition, you see here systems with a code. That's the definition of Shannon. Shannon is not interested in the meaning of the code. His question is only are there letters or numbers, there can be random numbers or whatever, everything like this is information in his definition. Now let me come to my definition of information. So we see here is a complete universe, you see systems without code, for example stars and snowflakes and crystals. You see random characters which are also outside of the definition domain and you see here proteins and cars and so on, we say that is specified complexity but it's not information. The field, the red one, that's my definition of information. It is always possible to find out if a system is within or outside of the definition domain. Now let's have a look to the different kinds of definition of information. One philosopher said everything is information, the advantage is done if he makes such a definition. The disadvantage is not for practical use. Shannon, he made a mathematical theory of information, the advantage is measuring of information by formulas, thus the disadvantage is only valid on the level of statistics not more. Dembski has defined the specified complexity, it is a very good idea, the advantage is very to understand systems which are made by intelligence. The disadvantage from Dembski is no clear definition of the domain, no strong conclusions are possible. Therefore I have another definition of information. Law of nature information theory advantages are a loss to formulate laws of nature. First time that laws of nature are formulated for a non-material entity and therefore strong conclusions are possible, the disadvantage is no mathematical formulation. Let's have a look to biological systems. Does a code found within DNA fit into the definition domain of information? That is a very important question. The decoded portion of the DNA contains words that are three letters long, the three letters represent specific amino acids, adenine, thymine, cytosine and guanine. There are four letters in the genetic code. On this picture you see the twenty amino acids and the genetic code. One word has three genetic letters. It is a ternary code with three letters in the word. There are four different letters in the genetic alphabet. You see here the chemical formulas of the four letters and once again the DNA molecule. And the DNA molecule we find the highest density of information. If I would have a pinhead of this material, the DNA molecule, my question is how many books as you see here in the book store we can store in one pinhead. I have calculated this and it is amazing how much books we can store in one pinhead. The distance from the earth to the moon there are 384,000 kilometers. The pile of books we can store in one pinhead is 500 times higher. That is the highest density we know. Another example, I have a very small bible. Yesterday I said my heaviest bible is 11 kilograms, my smallest bible is only a slide. And this slide contains the complete bible and I have compared the density of information of this slide with the density of information in the DNA molecule. And we see here on this picture in the DNA molecule the information is 7.7 million million times more in density. So it is very, very, very high density in information. All the proteins we have in our body there are 50,000 different proteins and all the proteins contain amino acids. Here for example the human insulin has 51 amino acids in two chains. Now we are familiar with the laws of nature about information. We know the definition domain, we have learned to see if we are inside or outside of the definition domain and now we can come to the conclusions. And you will see there are very, very strong conclusions which we can make from the laws of nature about information. Let me come once again to the definition domain. All five levels of information are found, statistics, syntax, semantics, pragmatics and apobatics. And if we are inside of the definition domain then we can make very strong conclusions. Let me come to the first conclusion. Since the DNA code of all life forms is clearly within the definition domain of information we conclude there must be a sender. It is a very important conclusion. If somebody would say life is coming without a sender we can say from a viewpoint of law of nature it is a wrong idea, total wrong. What is the conclusion we can make here? We can say atheism is a wrong idea. We can say it by using a law of nature. And law of nature has the highest level of science. We can say if we have a look to the living systems we find all the levels of information now we will get more information about the sender. What can we say about the sender? From the viewpoint of laws of nature about information. The first conclusion we have found, there must be a sender. But we can say more about the sender. Since the density and complexity of the DNA encoded information is billions of times greater than man's present technology we conclude the sender must be supremely intelligent. I had a lecture on a university in Germany and I was speaking about the DNA molecule about the density of information and so on. And also I was using the term sender, the sender of the information. And then a student asked me, I understand what you want to say. You will say there is a God necessary. Oh, I say it's a very good conclusion. Very good conclusion you have understand what I want to say. But she said now, but my question is another one. Can you tell me who gave the information to God? Very good question. No, I said to her, no problem, there is an over God and the over God has more information than God has. God needs only so much information to construct and to program the DNA molecule. And the over God has more information and gave him the information to do this. But the next question is who gave the information to the over God? No, there must be an over over God. And the over over God gave the information to the over God. And so it is okay. But there is another question. Who gave the information to the over over God? No, there must be an over over over God. And you see what happened. How many Gods do we need? An infinite number of Gods. And each God has a little bit more information than the God before. That's what this conclusion can be made from the information we find in the living systems. What can we say about the last one in this long sequence? If we are speaking about the infinite number, we cannot speak in the term the last one. But I will do it now for understanding it better. The last one in this sequence must have all information, all information about everything. He must know all the snowflakes on the Himalaya, all the sands on all beaches around the world. He must know what all cells in our body are doing at this moment. He must know everything about each atom in the sun, what is the pressure, what is the temperature, everything. And he must know everything about our life, everything. He has the total knowledge. But it is easier in the same way to say not an infinite number of Gods. It is from the viewpoint of logic the same statement if we say there is only one God. But what is the conclusion for this one God? He must have all information, infinite. He must have infinite information. So we can make the second conclusion about the sender. The sender is omniscient. He has infinite intelligence and information. We can make another conclusion which is very important because he knows everything. We can say he knows everything at the moment. But he also must know everything in the past. But what about the future? He must know everything in future. If he didn't know everything in future, so he has not an infinite information. But we have made a conclusion he must have an infinite number of information and intelligence, therefore he must know everything in the past and in the future. What is the conclusion? This sender, this God must be eternal. You see we can make this conclusion from the laws of nature about information. The sender is omnipotent we can also say in the same way as I have made the conclusion in the way of information. Since the sender must have encoded the information into the DNA molecules, constructed the molecule by machines required for the encoding, decoding and synthesizing processes and designed all the features for the original life forms, we conclude the sender must be purposeful and supremely powerful. Where did the sender's information and creative power originate? There are two possibilities, a regression of senders extending back to a sender processing infinite information, intelligence and power or one eternal sender with infinite information intelligence and power. So we see, we know a little bit more about the sender. Number three, the sender must be omnipotent and the sender, number four, must be eternal. Let me come to another conclusion, number four. Since information is a non-material fundamental entity and cannot originate from material quantities, we conclude the sender must have a non-material component. The sender must be spirit. God is spirit. Now let's see our conclusions about the sender from the point of view of laws of nature about information. We see on the left side the five points we find out. There must be a sender, the sender must be omniscient, infinite intelligence and information. The sender must be omnipotent, almighty. The sender must be eternal and the sender must have at least a non-material component. Now after finding the conclusions by using laws of nature, we can have a look at the Bible and to see if our conclusions are right. And you see, to the five conclusions, you see here a few verses of the Bible which says the same. The fool says in the heart, there is no God. Now we can see that you know all things, that is for number two. Number three, I am the alpha and the omega, who is and who was and who is to come the almighty. Number four, from everlasting to everlasting you are God. And number five, we find it in John chapter four verse twenty-four, God is spirit. Now the next question is who is the sender? Who is the creator? And we see we come now to a scientific boundary. We cannot say from the viewpoints of laws of nature about information who the person of the sender is. Now we need another source of information. And this other source of information is the Bible. The Bible tells us in Genesis one, ten times was it and God said. And in Psalm thirty-three we read, to come the almighty. Number four, from everlasting to everlasting you are God. And number five, we find it in John chapter four verse twenty-four, God is spirit. Now the next question is who is the sender? Who is the creator? And we see we come now to a scientific boundary. We cannot say from the viewpoints of laws of nature about information who the person of the sender is. Now we need another source of information. And this other source of information is the Bible. The Bible tells us in Genesis one, ten times was it and God said. And in Psalm thirty-three we read, for he spoke and it came to be he commanded and it stood firm. The sender, God, can do it in a very short time. And more about the person of sender we find in the New Testament in the beginning of the Gospel of John we read, in the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. To him all things were made, without him nothing was made that has been made. If you read further in chapter one of Gospel of John we see this person is Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is the creator. It's not possible to come to this conclusion using the laws of nature, therefore we need the Bible. We need both the laws of nature about information and also the Bible. The Bible is a higher level of information. Let me come to the fifth conclusion. Since information is a non-material fundamental entity and cannot originate from material quantities and since information also originates from man, we conclude man's nature must have a non-material component. The materialism is saying man is only matter. We can see the laws of nature about information says it is a wrong idea. Can we give an answer about the Big Bang? Of course we can use also the laws of nature. Since information is non-material entity we conclude that the assumption the universe is composed solely by of mass and energy is false. That is the idea of the Big Bang. In the beginning there was only matter and energy. Energy and matter are material entities and one law of nature say the matter cannot create a non-material entity. In our world we find many books with information. We find in ourselves there is a lot of information. So we see in this moment there is a lot of information in many places in this world. So the information cannot come from matter and energy. So we can say this idea is wrong. I would say it is the shortest way to say the Big Bang is a wrong idea. We don't need all the aspects from astronomy or whatever, we can do it also. But in this way we can refute it in a very short way. Let me come to the seventh conclusion. Since biological information originates only from an intelligent sender and all theories of chemical and biological evolution require that information must originate solely from mass and energy alone, it means no sender, we conclude all theories or concepts of chemical and biological evolution are false. All ideas. And if you will see tomorrow or a year later a new idea about evolution we can say also this idea will be false. Evolution is an impossible process. We can say it from the highest level of science, from the viewpoint of laws of nature. Anyone who disagrees with these laws and conclusions must falsify them by demonstrating the initial origin of information from purely material sources. That is what must be done if somebody would say I disagree with the conclusions. Therefore the laws of nature about information have refuted the assumption of scientific materialism and theories of chemical and biological evolution and established the existence of an eternal omniscient, omnipotent being. All philosophies or theories based on the assumption of scientific materialism including chemical and biological evolution are falsified by the laws of nature about information. So we see the conclusions, the seven conclusions are very very strong. They give us the possibility to show which ideas are wrong, which are published in science. I have seen if a good idea in science is right we find also this idea in the Bible. My question is, do we find the five levels of information also in the Bible? And I will give you one example, you see it here, we find it in Acts chapter 8. Here we find a very good example which shows us the different levels of information. The Ethiopian came to Jerusalem and wanted to find God. But he didn't find God in Jerusalem. But he bought a scroll of the Bible. And then when he was travelling home and he was in the desert, you see the situation is written here in Acts 8 verse 30 to 31. Then Philip ran up to the chariot and heard the man reading his eye as a prophet. Do you understand what you are reading? Philip asked, how can I, he said, unless someone explains it to me. We can see very clear here on which level of information he is. He is only on the syntax level. He could read the words and the sentences but he couldn't understood it. And now we will see how he is coming to the next level of information. We find it in verse 35. Then Philip began with that very passage of scripture and told him the good news about Jesus. Philip explains, here is written about Jesus Christ. And that is the good news, that is the gospel. And he explained it to him and he understood it. And so he came to the next level of information and that is what we read in the verses 37 to 38. The official answered, I believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God. And he ordered the chariot to stop. Then both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water and Philip baptized him. It was, he became a believer and he also is baptized. And that's next. You see, that's what we see on the pragmatic level. And what is the highest level of information in this case, we see in verse 39, he went on his way rejoicing. What was the reason for this? Because he became a believer, he also became eternal life. And therefore he was rejoicing. And so that is the highest level of information in this case, the result, the apabetics, that he came to eternal life. So we see this idea of the five levels of information we also find in the Bible. Not named with this special scientific terms, but the idea is the same. Thank you so much for your attention to this lecture. Thank you so much for your attention to this lecture. Thank you so much for your attention to this lecture. Thank you so much for your attention to this lecture. Thank you so much.