if he were to do that a few dozen times, the noodles would be ~1 molecule thick.

These sorts of arguments heavily weigh on definitions. What do you mean when you say life? Natural selection may not explain the presence of the first 'blueprint molecule' (which would probably be much simpler than anything we'd recognise now as DNA) but it can and does explain the massive expansion of data contained within that molecule.

A good definition is that something is alive when it is embedded with genetic information, and you can only apply the idea of natural selection to living systems. Non-living systems follow the laws of physics, not natural selection.

Similarly, what do you mean when you say 'information'? Clearly you aren't using the word in the way most people do.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information

I think that definition covers the sense in which I am using it. The information in DNA is stored as a genetic code with language, grammatical syntax, meaning, vocabulary, error correction and many other features.

These sorts of arguments heavily weigh on definitions. What do you mean when you say life? Natural selection may not explain the presence of the first 'blueprint molecule' (which would probably be much simpler than anything we'd recognise now as DNA) but it can and does explain the massive expansion of data contained within that molecule.

Similarly, what do you mean when you say 'information'? Clearly you aren't using the word in the way most people do.

The molecule cares

Hey gorillaman, your numbers are surprisingly close to those proposed by the Georgia Guidestones-My personal favorite is #7: Avoid petty laws and useless officials. Planet now is currently at a pace to match or trump the bureaucracy portrayed in Terry Gilliam's film, 'Brazil.'

I think your quote may be wrong, quantum physics deals only with the sub-atomic level.
Atoms and/or molecules do not behave like some particles do. Particles also can't be in 2 places at once, but appear to be able to move from one place to another without traveling between. It's an incredibly difficult science to understand, more so when it's basic principles are misunderstood.
This has nothing whatsoever (or barely anything, nothing directly) to do with evolution. It is an attempt at explaining the sub atomic world, not the atomic one. Evolution happens in the macro/atomic level and larger. It MAY happen in some unknown way in the sub atomic level, but hasn't been noted or studied there that I know of.
Did I state or imply that 'there's no way gawd did it'? I don't think so, you are projecting. While I don't 'believe' in gawd(s), I do leave open the miniscule possibility it exists, or that one did before the big bang....one problem is there's no real set definition for gawd, so if something outside our universe created this one, is that "gawd"? Must it be super-natural, or simply a creator? Must it exist in our universe to count? How about in our perceptible dimensions? Could it just be alien to our universe, but not a supernatural omniscient direct human creator? There's far too many points of view on that to have consensus of what constitutes a 'gawd'.
I will state that there's no proof, or even evidence, of a (or many) gawd(s). That said...Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, (thanks Mr Jackson), so there's also no 'proof' it doesn't exist (it's hard or impossible to prove a negative).
Jumping to the conclusion that, because there's no proof of no gawd, it must exist, is also close minded against the high probability (likelihood) that it doesn't, and never did, exist outside human minds.
Science and gawd don't go together or explain each other any more than addition explains a words spelling. They're totally different arenas of thought. Thinking that science 'proves' the existence of 'gawd' either greatly overstates the 'proof' or completely misunderstands science. At best, science doesn't disprove the existence of 'gawd(s)', but then again that was never the mission of science or real scientists...they don't deal with/in theology at all.
I would point out that, most Christians (or any religious people really) have repeatedly 'proven' the non-existence of 'gawd(s)' to themselves...all gawds except the one they think exists....but for some reason the one they believe in is exempt from all the proofs (math term, not bad English).

EDIT: What science has done is disprove most, if not all 'proofs' put forward alleging to prove the existence of gawd(s), and also removed all requirements for ones existence to explain the universe and existence.

THIS. Quoth wikipedia:
"An organic compound is any member of a large class of gaseous, liquid, or solid chemical compounds whose molecules contain carbon."

Every time you read an "organic" label on something, do your self a favor and mentally replace it with "this product contains carbon". Which puts it in a very very in-exclusive club.

Dude, climate change is the very least of anything you should be worried about folks copping-to or denying. Epochs. Yugas. Eras. HU-mans may or may not get off the planet but the molecule will survive, until the fucking sun assplode, eh? I am so FUCKING tired of hearing about climate change and the pathetic fallacy of an individual's, individual (green) responsibility to the goddamned planet, aren't you??

The fucking dinosaurs should have grown thumbs and made huge spaceships, but they fucked-up and then a giant rock hit and we started over to get to this point to where assholes scream wobal glorming from a mountain of their own shit. Can't deny THAT, can ya??

I agree with ya.

There are a lot of jumping to conclusions and pseudo-scientific & "spiritual" & "mystical" hyper-babble in there.

It's really not about being "right" about anything; I think when people go on their spiels about it - there is a lot of personal fervor and frustration that this is obviously something extremely important to study because it "seems" like the "impossible". That it is so impossible to describe that it seems like anything or everything. Even when I think about times I have been under it and try to imagine what it was like I feel like I am going to bust reality wide open.

I do believe that it is bizarre that this chemical exists and seems to interact with us in an extremely intense and vivid way. It will be interesting to find out what scientists find out about this thing in the next 50 years and hopefully they can figure out more than "It is attaching to 5-HT_ & 5-HT_ receptors".

In 2013 scientists found that a rat's pineal gland contains this molecule so the future is going to be pretty interesting on this topic.

Sorry man, really went-off with my idealistic view of the way humans might police themselves by first policing the police. I have had no hand in creating this monster save my own limitations in keeping my fear and ignorance from consuming me-Back to enjoying the hell out of life and not thinking to deeply.

Seriously and freal, it's when I'm the happiest, not having to think of the world as a surveillance prison. Happened in Europe, inevitable here considering the gullible peeps that make-up, "population now".

The criminal class is by design because we let an elite cabal (dicks who make policy with a view to a boot in every face, a camera in ever bedroom) design this illusion for us. Time to evolve, the molecule wants off the planet.

No-telling what vile industrial chemical compounds are attached to all those water molecules....Lacquered Lung Syndrome.

One person is NEVER responsible for another person's emotional state or reaction to stimuli. It is not YOUR fault that an entire nation of emotionally damaged, abused, affected, incapable, ineffectual, developmentally-disabled human beings are now covering the landscape like a fungus...HOWEVER:
Self-preservation, species advancement, psycho-spiritual evolution, and the innate sensibilities that afford humanity a chance to get the goddamn molecule off-planet being the prime directive, one should when given the opportunity assist said molecule so much as is does not cause undue stress or fatigue to one's body, mind, or soul.

YouTube comments mean jack and or shit, as does most of the prattle filling servers faster than they can be manufactured. Get over it Missy, yer sexy to some, ugly to some, stay on task, make yer magnet videos, eat, shit, fuck, sleep, and die like the rest of us so the planet can produce more coal, fishes, coffee and mosquitoes, life goes on.

Sexism, racism, ism ism motherfucking isms, get the fuck over yourselves you bunch of self-satisfied, privileged, whining cake-hole stuffing fucks, and BIG HUGS for everyone with sandy vaginas, hashtag, smiley-face, fuck-off.

Oh yeah, and TROLLS??? That's YOUR emotion state telling the molecule to be un-molecular. Everyone commenting on the internet is a goddamn troll, in case you haven't figured that shit out yet, get a clue.

Great post. Don't know why you used "God" in your explanation, it's a totally irrelevant reference.
Let me describe Entropy wholly and completely to you:
"Probability"
As you mentioned evolution creates structure. Hell, atoms, molecules, galaxies, stars, gravity, magnetism, create structure.
In an atomic world, a noisy chaotic world, systems are far more likely (think brownian motion) to drift into noise than to maintain their structure. ie. There is a billion ways a system can be disrupted, and only one way where it is perfectly intact... Hence systems (or evolution or life or matter whatever) will always move towards disorder. This is Entropy.And yes, life, gravity, matter, are all working against this disorder.

I appreciate the vote for my intelligence, but I was hoping my intended conclusion would be more understood.

What I basically meant by that was: what if what clay is to us in the difference of perceived intelligence, happens to be what we are to a supposed higher-being.

You can never rule out the impossible, and as much as I believe in human kinds miracle of existence and legitimate accomplishments on the human-scale, I can never agree to be so egotistical as to not accept the possibility that I am far less consequential than a molecule in some other unfathomably-complex creatures universe.

In the end: doesn't much matter! We should just all have sex to our hearts content, and make sure everyone like us is warm at night and well fed.

My physics lab prof in college said:

"If you ever see a question about 'why does water do x while {insert other liquid here} does y', the answer is always 'because it's polar'".

Expanding when frozen? Polar.
Strong surface tension, adhesion and cohesion? Polar.
Complex molecules dissolving in water? Because the water AND the dissolving molecules are polar. Non-polar things *won't* dissolve in water, for the reverse reason.
...
And I guess this can be thrown on the list also, although just saying "polar" misses some of the details/nuance that Sagemind covered.

From Reddit:
"This can be explained through the principles of cohesion and adhesion. Water has strong cohesion to itself and strong adhesion to the sponge. Mercury has strong cohesion to itself but weak adhesion to the sponge.

Cohesion arises from attraction between something and itself. Cohesion is strong in water due to the large amount of hydrogen bonding between water molecules, causing water to stick to itself. Cohesion is strong in liquid mercury due to something called metallic bonding between metal cations and delocalized electrons in the liquid metallic liquid, causing the mercury to stick to itself.

Adhesion arises from attraction between something and something else. Since water molecules are polar, they can hydrogen bond with the polyurethane sponge. Mercury's metallic bonding, however, does not interact with the non-metallic sponge. Mercury will, however, adsorb to other metals such as gold or silver and form an amalgam.

Basic mercury clean up kits usually contain metal sulfides, which can react with the metal, disrupting metallic bonding, and permitting other forms of intermolecular forces to facilitate clean up."