The 3rd realm where information originated is not before or after the material universe nor is it combined with it-

the spiritual realm is for me along side the physical world-

what we witness as information is actually an interpretation of physical matter through the mind via the spirit- matter itself has no significance or actual form what-so-ever. Third means that questions about “the origins of information” as if it came from a particular place in matter- are non starters.

In fact, for me, we as spirits are only limited by our spiritual constraints- that is our minds and bodies are limited by the nature of the third realm- and nothing more. Without a soul we could just imagine anything in our minds and thus there would be no reason for matter to have to exist at all! It is out drive to know true reality that brings us down from our dreams-

So information for me is a subjective thing that objectively exists. Whoever said that “the subjective” cant also be “objective“?

In the real world epistemology and ontology do in fact over lap and logically comprise one (the limits of the understanding should actually be objectively defined).

So the matter is actually nonexistent on the deepest level- thus the world and it’s apparent information manifests itself to us through the faculty of the mind, ultimately because of the “significant-cognizance” that we experience due to the true nature of the prime reality of which we call “the spirit”.

So for me the world is inside out so to speak – in comparison to the common interpretation of the world as that in which the soul is merely some little dysfunctional thing left over from Darwinian evolution trapped inside the physical of our shell.

That is the world in which I see does not appear “out of nothing” as modern science says– but it actually objectively parallels the prime and ultimate truth. Information is an interdimensional medium between the spirit and the physical world.

My greatest concern for science and science education is that the political left is slowly erasing the word design from our vocabularies. This would be like eliminating the word “right” or “wrong”. Such tings are objectively true states of being and to try and eradicate them away is to try and change the spiritual core of man- which is not material and so cannot be done.

Perhaps that is the only good news. Materialism is destined to fail. Heisenberg (ontologically) and Gödel (on the epistemological level) demonstrated this sufficiently well.

re; preferring the absentee composer over the orchestra leader.

It just seems to be the simplest explanation and through the application of Occam’s Razor the simplest is that which is given precedence.

I’m not sure absentee is a good term though. If the composition and orchestra are both perfect the composer can just sit back and enjoy the performance instead of fiddling with it (so to speak) as it is played. In that case he’s not absent he just has no reason to be actively involved.

That said, nothing in that stops us in principle from being able to detect design. Even if life was programmed into the universe at the big bang we can still use statistical mechanics to determine the probability of certain patterns arising from chance and that includes the patterns found in living things. All it really does is pushes the design input back in time, it doesn’t make evidence of design disappear. There would be no argument about the design of life if chance worshippers weren’t so willing to wave their hands in the air with wild explanations that attempt negate the plain truth revealed by statistical mechanics. Evidence of design is everywhere from the largest to the smallest scale.

But if the information necessary for life was encoded into the universe at the Big Bang, then the materialist can simply respond, “The universe itself can produce meaningful information. So there’s no need to posit a mind as the source of information in DNA.”

It seems to me that if this is the case, we would be able to pin down a law or physical property of self-organization of information. However this law just doesn’t seem to exist. The only examples we have of CSI generation directly involves agency.

If the universe can produce meaningful information on its own, then there’s no sense in appealling to our experience of minds as the only information producing entities.

Except that we have one and only one example (without begging the question) of an information generating system, a mind.

It’s one thing to suggest a law, or to imagine that one might exist; it’s altogether different to demonstrate and quantify it.

This doesn’t stop a materialist from suggesting various naturalistic scenarios for the presence of information — but until such a law can be shown to exist, it’s all storytelling.

Just my two cents.

The only problem with Deism (for those wishing to argue for biological ID) is that it undercuts the argument from information within DNA. One of the main points of this argument is that “the only thing we know in our experience that can produce meaningful information is a Mind. Therefore, a Mind must have produced the information in DNA.”

But if the information necessary for life was encoded into the universe at the Big Bang, then the materialist can simply respond, “The universe itself can produce meaningful information. So there’s no need to posit a mind as the source of information in DNA.”

If the universe can produce meaningful information on its own, then there’s no sense in appealling to our experience of minds as the only information producing entities.

I would like to think that all the information needed for the universe to unfold was encoded at the Big Bang.

Such, of course, may be true—it’s called Deism. And Dave is right—Einstein was a strict determinist and (like Will Provine) he denied the existence of free will.

But this is decidedly not the historic Judeo-Christian religion—even among its more renegade elements. I once heard Phil Johnson observe, if memory serves, that the materialists aren’t much bothered if the Deity (i.e., Design) can be pushed to the other side of the Big Bang, and so he suggested that ID would be far more provocative in biology than in physics. If there is no evidence of an interventionist God (Exodus, Resurrection …) then that’s Einstein’s God—not Moses’ or Jesus’.

I would like to think that all the information needed for the universe to unfold was encoded at the Big Bang.

I suspect that’s the likely truth of the matter and you’re in fine company in holding that thought – Einstein being one of the more recognizable names to hold that belief. If conservation of information is a law like conservation of mass/energy then it is indeed the truth. Stephen Hawking recently paid off on a famous bet. He bet that he could provide a proof that information can be lost in a black hole. After years of trying he conceded that information can’t even be lost in a black hole, to say nothing of being lost by any lesser mechanism. The alternative would be that information was somehow added between now and the big bang but there’s no proven way for that to happen. Of course in the opinion of many an entity such as God which exists outside the observable universe could have imported information but it doesn’t look like science is going to be able to prove or disprove that anytime soon.