Jeremy England, at 33 is already being named the next Charles Darwin! Do you know why? A theoretical physicist: skinny, with a long face, an unkempt beard and carelessly groomed tussle of sandy brown hair, this young scientist is challenging the very existence of God. Some things that we consider are inanimate actually may have life in them. It all depends on how we define life and our perception, something England’s work might want us to reconsider. The young MIT professor proposed a theory, based on thermodynamics, showing that the emergence of life was not accidental, but necessary.
“God is on the ropes: The brilliant new science that has challenged the laws of creationists and the Christian rights”
Jeremy England has just disapproved the existence of God. He has created a mathematical model, not merely a working theory, but an estimated mathematical description. The formula is based on established physics and indicates that when a group of atoms is driven by an external source of energy (like the sun or chemical fuel) and surrounded by the ocean or atmosphere, it will often gradually restructure itself in order to dematerialize increasingly more energy. Over time, this system could improve its ability to absorb energy more and more, becoming convincingly lifelike.
“I see God revealed just as much in physics, neurology and cosmology as I do in Scripture and theology and prayer: God is present in all of these places and available if we’re just willing to open our eyes to the wonder and the mystery that is our maker.”
England’s idea may seem absurd, even unbelievable, but it has indeed drawn the attention of an impressive structure of high-level academics. All of us are born not from a single physical parent, but from a physical system, which in turn has the capability to produce similar bodies of living organisms. What Darwin failed to do, and never tried to do, was explain how life began. Also, the increase in disorder in the flow of life is the opposite of increasing order due to evolution, which evolves contradiction as the pulp of life!
But England also says that his theory is agnostic on any religious questions as whether life has meaning or purpose. Some people of Faith would say,“No, this is a slam-dunk. This is more evidence that the universe reflects some creative intelligence or master planner architect.” Whereas Naturalists will say, “Well, of course, the universe is structured this way.” It is a conflict between the statements, “What science knows is science, and what we don’t know is God.” vs “Science is science and what we don’t know are things that science will eventually find out.” England believes that life in its purest form is both a miracle and a gift!