The Invented Universe
Content Preview
Introduction
As a patent attorney for over forty years in Silicon Valley, I have worked with highly intelligent people to secure patents for their inventions, which are often highly technical. This has required me to acquire the skill of researching a technical field enough so that I understand the current state of the art as well as how the invention operates in a way that improves existing technology. I then have been required to describe in writing enough information about the invention so that any practitioner in the field can make and use the invention. I also have to particularly point out how the invention improves what is already known in the prior art.
When not working as a patent attorney, I am passionate about investigating and aligning my life with what I believe are the more significant questions of life, such as who we are, where we came from, what our purpose is, and so on. My readings of theology and philosophy have provided me with a lot of beneficial information.
Science has also provided some answers to these significant questions. Unfortunately, the science community often provides information  in such a technical manner that it is difficult for nonspecialists to understand precisely what science is teaching on this subject matter, much less to evaluate the value and reliability of the answers provided by science versus answers that can be found from sources outside of science. That has never been an issue for me, as from my professional experience, I am very comfortable entering highly specialized technical fields and evaluating claims made by technical specialists. But not everyone has this skill and experience.
This book aims to help those who, like me, are interested in the more significant questions. This book describes, in a manner intended for educated nonspecialists, some of what science teaches about the origins of the universe as well as the nature and origin of life. I hope this information is of use to anyone searching for more understanding of the answers provided by the science community. While this book focuses primarily on answers provided by science, it is not because I think these answers are more valuable than those found elsewhere. Instead, I am focusing on the answers provided by science as these answers are not well understood by a large segment of the public, including both those who have accepted them uncritically and want to learn more, as well as those who have rejected them and want to understand more about them so they are better able to defend their own viewpoint.
Table of Contents
Â
🔍 Chapter 1 at a Glance: Perpetual Motion Machines and the Supernatural
A violation of the First or Second Law of Thermodynamics is a reliable indicator of supernatural activity.
Key Concepts
- A violation of the First Law of Thermodynamics is any event or process that results in a net gain or loss of energy in a closed system without an external cause, contradicting the conservation of energy.
- A violation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics occurs when the entropy of an isolated system decreases without external input, reversing the natural trend toward increasing disorder.
- Violations of the First or Second Law of Thermodynamics are impossible in a strictly materialistic framework, because such laws define the permissible behavior of matter and energy in the absence of non-material (e.g., supernatural) intervention.
- A black box analysis treats a system as a whole, examining only inputs and outputs of energy, matter, and entropy—without assuming knowledge of internal mechanisms. This allows for objective testing of whether a system conforms to thermodynamic laws.
- If a black box system outputs more energy than it receives, it signals a violation of the First Law, implying energy creation or loss without physical cause.
- If a black box system reduces entropy spontaneously—without a corresponding input of order—it signals a violation of the Second Law, indicating uncaused organization.
- Because such violations are not observed in any known material process, a confirmed deviation—detected through black box analysis—is defined as supernatural: a measurable break in the natural order that cannot be explained by physical causes alone.
Â
What’s at Stake?
If a system breaks energy conservation or decreases entropy without a directive cause, it is not just faulty—it is impossible by known natural means
Â
Critical Insight
- Violations of thermodynamic law define the supernatural in material terms: a measurable break in natural order.
Â
Question for Reflection
Are we willing to follow the evidence—even when it points beyond natural law?
Â
 
 Chapter 2 at a Glance: The Scientific Method and Methodological Naturalism
The scientific method is an exceptional source of knowledge for any area where empirical evidence can be observed, measured, and tested.
Key Concepts
- The scientific method works best where hypotheses can be tested by repeatable experiments.
- Scientific reliability declines for ancient events, remote processes, and complex systems.
- Methodological naturalism assumes all phenomena must be explained by natural causes, excluding the possibility of supernatural agency—even when empirical evidence might suggest otherwise.
- Methodological naturalism allows speculative, unverified materialistic explanations (e.g., multiverses, inflation fields) if they fit within a mathematical or naturalistic framework, but prohibits any explanation that implies intentionality or purpose beyond matter.
- Methodological naturalism acts as a philosophical filter that limits scientific inquiry, forcing scientists to choose convoluted materialistic models over more plausible but non-material alternatives when the evidence points outside known natural laws.
- The result is that science under methodological naturalism becomes biased, no longer a neutral search for truth but a self-reinforcing system that marginalizes challenges to the materialist worldview.
What’s at Stake?
Should a philosophical filter—not evidence—determine what counts as a valid explanation in modern science?
Â
Critical Insight
- Empirical science cannot decisively explain the origin of the universe or life, since these are one-time, unrepeatable events that lie beyond the reach of experimental testing.
- To fill this evidentiary gap, science relies on methodological naturalism, a philosophical rule that restricts explanations to purely material causes—even when those causes are speculative and untestable.
- More fitting or plausible non-material explanations are excluded by design, not because of lack of evidence, but because they imply purpose, agency, or design—concepts banned by the naturalistic framework.
- As a result, science ceases to be an objective search for truth and becomes a system committed to preserving materialism, even at the expense of coherence with the available data.
Question for Reflection
Is it still science when evidence is interpreted to fit a worldview rather than challenge it?
🔍 Chapter 3 at a Glance: The Supernatural Origin of the Universe
The supernatural is an integral part of currently popular explanations for the origin of the universe.
Key Concepts
- For the universe to exist in its current state requires the violation of either the First or Second Law of Thermodynamics, or the violation of both.A beginning to the universe violates the First and Second Law by introducing energy and order from nothing. An eternal universe without a beginning indicates a violation of at least the Second Law because entropy is not in a maximum entropy state.
- For this reason every cosmological model of the universe requires one or more supernatural entities that violate the First or the Second Law or both .
- Examples of supernatural entities within the Big Bang model of universe origins include dark matter, dark energy, inflation field and multiverses. All are speculative phenomena that are imagined to violate natural laws such as the First or the Second Law or both, as currently understood.
What’s at Stake?
Current explanations of universe origins from the science community are more the result of philosophic presuppositions and imagination than observation and repeatable experimentation.
Â
Critical Insight
- Science is of most value when the investigation involves observable phenomena and repeatable activity
- Because the origination of the universe is not observable or repeatable, origin stories from the science community rely heavily on philosophy and imagination.
- Based on the above, speculation from science on universe origins seem to have no more probative value than more traditional explanations provided by philosophy and theology.
Question for Reflection
Why are supernatural explanations involving mindless, law-defying forces welcomed in mainstream cosmology, while those involving intelligent causation are categorically excluded? Is the rejection of purpose-driven explanations based on evidence—or on philosophical preference?
 🔍 Chapter 4 at a Glance: Gravity, Quantum Mechanics, and Multiverses
 Current views of gravity and quantum mechanics have departed from determinism and reliance on empirically demonstrable laws of nature such as the First and Second Law of Thermodynamics.
Key Concepts
- Physics traditionally has interpreted phenomena in conformity to observable laws of nature such as the First and Second Law of Thermodynamics
- More recently, some branches of theoretical physics have departed from relying on physically observable laws of nature and put more emphasis on mathematical models predicting phenomena that do not conform with the observable laws of nature such as the First and Second Laws.
- The mathematical manipulations used to predict the existence of black holes is an early example of reliance on suspect mathematical calculations to arrive at speculative phenomena such as mass of infinite density and gravity as an infinite energy source that disregard observable phenomena such as the conservation of energy.
- Black hole theory paved the way for origin theories like the Big Bang and Inflation theory that all require violating the energy limits defined by general relativity as originally defined by Albert Einstein.
- There is tendency for science to branch out into speculative phenomena that violate observed natural laws like the First and Second Law in areas where observation and testing is not possible. This occurs, for example in string theory and phenomena in some areas of quantum mechanics that cannot be observed with certainy.
What’s at Stake?
When theoretical physics makes claims based on mathematical manipulation and not repeatably observable phenomena, it has departed from hard science into the realm of philosophical speculation.
Critical Insight
- Science provides reliable information about reality when it stays in its lane of interpreting observable phenomena,
- The science community leaves its area of strength when it strays into the realm of speculative conclusions based on imagination and mathematical manipulation rather than what can be observed and tested.
Question for Reflection
When science turns speculative and abandons testable boundaries, is it discovering truth—or inventing it?
🔍 Chapter 5 at a Glance: Fine-Tuned for Life
The existence of an environment in which complex life can exist requires the existence and fine-tuning of so many physical parameters that it points to the involvement of the supernatural.
Key Concepts
• The universe’s ability to support life depends on the precise tuning of countless physical constants and cosmic conditions.
• Even slight variations in fundamental forces or particle properties would make life impossible.
• Earth’s capacity to host intelligent life requires hundreds of narrowly defined environmental and astrophysical parameters.
• The scale and precision of this fine-tuning suggest intentional calibration rather than random emergence.
Â
What’s at Stake?
The sheer improbability of life-permitting conditions existing by chance challenges the adequacy of materialistic explanations. If natural law cannot explain the fine-tuning of the universe, deeper metaphysical or supernatural explanations must be considered.
Â
Critical Insight
• The fine-tuning is not limited to one or two factors—it spans physics, chemistry, planetary science, and galactic structure.
• Multiverse theories and the anthropic principle are often invoked to sidestep the implications of fine-tuning—but both rest on philosophical assumptions rather than empirical evidence.
• The anthropic principle can be tautological: it explains our existence by asserting that only life-permitting universes can be observed, without explaining why such a universe exists in the first place.
• Multiverse models attempt to dilute improbability through infinite trials but are themselves untestable and outside the scope of observational science.
Â
Question for Reflection
When speculative theories are used to avoid the implications of fine-tuning, is the commitment to science—or to materialism?
🔍 Chapter 6 at a Glance: Life vs. Nonlife
Life works to reduce entropy both within itself and in its surroundings, indicating the influence of the supernatural
Key Concepts
• Life uniquely reduces entropy through self-organization—an ability not observed in nonliving matter.
• A black box analysis shows life conforms to the First Law of Thermodynamics but violates the Second Law under its broader interpretation.
• The modern synthesis (Neo-Darwinism) claims randomness and necessity build a directive framework that controls the manufacture and operation of life—but this claim lacks scientific rigor.
• Initial assessment reveals three major flaws in the modern synthesis:
🔸 Random mutations tend to destroy order, not generate it.
🔸 Natural selection, reduced to deterministic physical forces, cannot detect or preserve functional information that is necessary to buid a deterministic framework.
🔸 The information in DNA is insufficient to specify a deterministic framework able to explain the complexity and coordinated activity within life.
Â
What’s at Stake?
If material processes alone cannot produce or sustain life’s ordered complexity, then materialistic explanations fall short, and the role of supernatural agency must be considered.
Â
Critical Insight
• Appeals to “emergent properties” are used to obscure entropy violations rather than explain them.
• The modern synthesis fails as an explanatory framework when its core mechanisms cannot generate, preserve, or direct the complexity life exhibits.
• Life’s entropy-reducing behavior marks it as fundamentally different from any known material system.
Â
Question for Reflection
When a theory relies on vague metaphors and untestable mechanisms to explain away violations of natural law, is it still science—or a philosophical commitment in disguise?
🔍 Chapter 7 at a Glance: Computers and Entropy
Computers Do Not Self-Organize to Reduce Entropy but Operate in Accordance with an Externally Imposed Directive Framework.
Key Concepts
• Computers provide an example of the amount of control information necessary to build and maintain a directive framework for a complex system.
• The directive framework that produces order within a computer system is described and implemented by control information supplied by human designers.
• The granularity and complexity of a computer system determine the amount of control information needed to build and maintain its directive framework.
• Every aspect of a computer’s manufacture and operation—down to each transistor and software instruction—is explicitly controlled by the directive framework.
• There are many layers of complexity with a computer system. Every layer of complexity needs its own control information to control organization and synchronization of operation of components at each layer of complexity.
Â
What’s at Stake?
Computers give an example of the quantity and quality of control information necessary to build and operate a complex materialistic system. This informs us of the quantity and quality of control information that would be necessary to build and operate a living cell if the living cell were to be solely materialistic in nature.
Â
Critical Insight
• As the number of components in a computer system increases, and as their interactions become more intricate, the volume of control information within the directive framework needed to design, manufacture, and operate the computer system increases accordingly.
• From hardware design to software execution, every layer of components and their interactions requires additional information in the directive framework.
• Technologies like AI and machine learning depend on pre-engineered code and structure—they do not operate independently of designed order within an existing directive framework.
Â
Question for Reflection
If modern computers requires massive amounts of control information within a directive framework to build and maintain order at every level, how much information would be needed to build and operate a directive framework for a living organism?
🔍 Chapter 8 at a Glance: Living Cells
Proteins appear to be a locus where the supernatural interacts with the material universe to instigate entropy reduction.
Key Concepts
- A single living cell contains billions of proteins and other molecular components that self-organize into systems for manufacturing, transportation, structural maintenance, and energy production—rivaling the infrastructure of a complex city.
- Despite this sophistication, DNA provides no directive information to build or operate these systems—except in one narrow role.
- The primary use of the information encoded in DNA is in the translation of RNA segments into amino acid sequences during protein manufacture and in regulation of the quantity and mix of proteins produced.
- No material explanation accounts for how such vast molecular coordination occurs without a known source of control.
What’s at Stake?
If DNA lacks the information to direct cellular operations, the source of that direction must lie beyond the material components of the cell.
Critical Insight
- DNA’s limited role suggests that the directive framework guiding cell functionality originates from outside the genome—and possibly outside material explanations altogether.
Question for Reflection
If a living cell operates with the complexity of a city but DNA offers no blueprint for that operation, where does the guidance come from?
 Chapter 9 at a Glance: Reproduction and Multicellular Life
Reproduction and formation of higher life forms requires ongoing control that is nowhere available in the natural material world, which indicates ongoing involvement of the supernatural.
Key Concepts
• If the information content of DNA is used up in the process of translation from RNA to amino acid sequences and regulation of protein quantities in a cell’s protein manufacturing process, where in the cell is the information content that provides a directive framework that controls the complex operation of reproduction and multicellular life?
• While single living cells contain billions of proteins that self-organize into complex components that work in tight coordination with each other, sophisticated multi-cellular life like humans contain trillions of cells that self-organize into  highly sophisticated and complex subsytems and perform intricately complex functions in close coordination with each other.
• The nervous system is called out as an example of one of the systems orders of magnitude more complex than our most significant computer system. Yet there is no information within DNA or anywhere else in a cell that is available to provide a directive framework that explains the organization or operation of any feature of the components of this subsystem or any other subsystem of multicellular life.
Â
What’s at Stake?
The process of reproduction to form complex multicellular life such as humans point to the necessity of direction that comes from a source other than a materialistic directive framework.
Â
Critical Insight
• Reproduction involves trillions of cell divisions and subsequent specialization of cells to self-organize into sophisticated systems and subsystems that make up the physical part of multi-cellular life.
• There is no information available in DNA or in any other part of a cell to implement a directive framework to guide this formation of multicellular life. Nor is there any information within DNA that is available to guide any of the interactions among these trillions of cells as they cooperate with each other to perform intricate tasks.
Â
Question for Reflection
If DNA doesn’t direct the formation and operation of complex life, what—or who—does?
🔍 Chapter 10 at a Glance: Darwinism and the Modern Synthesis
Darwinism and Neo-Darwinism fail to provide a plausible explanation for the origin or operation of life.
Key Concepts
- Darwin proposed that natural selection acting on heritable variation could explain all biological diversity.
- The modern synthesis (Neo-Darwinism) combines this idea with genetics, asserting that random mutations in DNA generate variations and natural selection filters them.
- Neo-Darwinism fails to explain abiogenesis—the origin of life—since the mechanisms it relies on (mutation and selection) presuppose already-living systems.
- Random changes to DNA does not impact the overwhelming majority of life’s complexity not controlled by the information coded within DNA.Â
- Even within DNA’s limited role in controlling amino acid sequences in protein manufacture, Â random mutations are statistically insufficient to account for the emergence of any new functional proteins.
- Natural selection acts to preserve the status quo and hinder discovery of new functional proteins by eliminating the preservation of low-fitness intermediates required to evolve one functional protein into another.
Â
What’s at Stake?
If the modern synthesis cannot account for the origin, complexity, or functional systems of life, its explanatory power collapses—and the door reopens to non-material causes that had been ruled out on philosophical, not scientific, grounds.
Â
Critical Insight
- Abiogenesis demands fully functioning systems before mutation and selection can even begin.
- DNA’s limited information contentis insufficient to build or control the majority of cell systems, much less the layered complexity of multicellular life.
- The fitness landscape for functional protein amino acid sequeces is largely barren, with only tiny islands of functionality surrounded by vast regions of nonfunctional possibilities. This makes random mutation an implausible generator of amino acid sequences for functional proteins.
- Persistent commitment to the modern synthesis may be driven more by worldview than by evidence.
Â
Question for Reflection
If life requires a directive framework that cannot be found in DNA and cannot be generated by random mutation, what kind of cause is sufficient to account for life’s origin and complexity?
🔍 Chapter 11 at a Glance: Final Comments
Â
Key Concepts
- Big Bang cosmology rests on speculative, unverified phenomena such as quantum gravity, repulsive gravity, dark energy, and inflation—all beyond current empirical validation.
- The multiverse hypothesis extends speculation beyond the realm of science into untestable philosophy, driven by a commitment to methodological naturalism.
- The modern synthesis fails on empirical grounds: the mutation rate is too slow and too statistically constrained to account for the vast complexity and informational content of life.
- Natural selection preserves existing structures more than it enables innovation, making meaningful evolutionary change increasingly implausible.
- The Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLT) and barren fitness landscapes severely restrict the likelihood of beneficial mutations while accelerating genetic degradation.
- DNA lacks the control information necessary to construct or operate even the simplest cells, much less complex organisms.
- The modern synthesis offers no viable explanation for abiogenesis—the origin of life itself.
Â
What’s at Stake?
When the dominant scientific paradigms rely on untestable assumptions or mechanisms that contradict empirical evidence and physical law, their credibility collapses. A materialistic worldview may be preserved—but only at the expense of intellectual honesty and explanatory power.
Â
Critical Insight
- Big Bang cosmology and Neo-Darwinism persist not because of compelling evidence but due to a cultural and philosophical allegiance to materialism.
- The enormous informational demands of consciousness and cellular complexity far exceed what the modern synthesis could produce, even if it worked as claimed.
- The assumption of an ever-ascending fitness landscape is incompatible with real-world data, where most mutations degrade rather than improve.
- Since control information sufficient to direct formation and operation of life is not found in DNA or anywhere else in a cell, the source of direction and control must exist outside material structures—pointing directly to a supernatural explanation.
- A coherent account of life must grapple with agency, purpose, and directive frameworks that are external to matter.
Â
Question for Reflection
If the best material explanations fall short, are we ready to entertain the possibility that life is not merely physical—but personal and intentional in origin?