This is a maths & calculator exercise to scale what had to happen in those millions of years.
The easy mistake to make is that something is as complex as its size or its outside appearance, until recently it was often a reasonable assumption. We do not always remember it is only an assumption. We now accept black box technology, where we no longer understand, know or think about how things work inside, just how to control or connect them.
How could we show a caveman the extra complexity of a computer chip compared to his axe?
We all think in terms of manipulating with our hands. So if the computer chip was enlarged to a scale where each working part could be made or assembled by hand or pointed to by an instructor. Easy enough because it is only going back sixty years or so, when the first computers were being made to do useful tasks. In those days a computer might fill a couple of rooms, today it would be a town of wires, (i.e. valve instead of semi-
This caveman can now wander through the rooms of parts, each part big enough now to be seen, explained then understood while touched by his curious fingers.
So the creations of man are.
Size of an Atom,
Nature works at atomic levels of scale (so nano-
[Books vary, so choose for yourself, the number above is on the big side as atoms are not all the same size. Many sources will give 100,000,000 in a centimetre (Hydrogen). But its best to give your opponent the benefit of doubt.]
Now if an atom was missing from its place in living tissue, it might cause a local problem or might not. Somewhat similar to a screw missing from a large construction by us, should not be but (fortunately) often get away with it. You can play around with the scales here, what we will be trying for is an approximation of life to our manufacture scales, so follow along for now. We could imagine a screw on the small side at one centimetre long.
Thus make models of the atoms one centimetre in diameter (small marble or large pea), our row of atoms increases in size.
10,000,000 atoms one centimetre in diameter divide by one hundred for metres =
100,000 metres divide by one thousand for kilometres =
100 kilometres. (It's big but the detail we now see.)
So if we could walk around an enlarged to logical scale, one centimetre cube of life (about the size of a finger tip). Where each model atom was now the size of a pea so we could examine one between finger and thumb, like the caveman earlier. The model would be one hundred kilometres high, and each side the same one hundred kilometres square. (or 62 miles by 62 miles by 62 miles, made of model atoms at; fifteen in each six inches)
Consider the sourcing of components and assembly speeds for manufacture.
In a similar manner let us try an animal of a reasonable size;
Think of a ten centimetre (=one decimetre/four inches) cube of life (scale of child's pet, like a rabbit), the cubes dimension in atoms is one hundred million atoms x one hundred million atoms x one hundred million atoms
= 1 to the power 24 (one septillion)
=1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 atoms in small rabbit
a/ so everybody can see it, numbers will be in full -
b/ Calculators that can handle exponent figures, vary in performance with big numbers, most should agree the multiples of ten above & below the decimal point, but digits may be different.]
Lets divide this by seconds since the “big bang”, dated at fifteen billion years ago; 15,000,000,000.
=years since big bang x days in year x hours in day x minutes in hour x seconds in minute.
=15,000,000,000 x 365.4 x 24 x 60 x 60
rabbit cube atoms divided by seconds since big bang
1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 atoms divided by 473,558,400,000,000,000 seconds
=2,111,671 atoms every second big bang to present.
To build just a little pet rabbit with a cubic decimetre of flesh and bone, installing an atom at a time, we must insert: two million+ atoms per second, starting at the moment of the big bang and every second since then until now. Now is that fast work, or is it easily explained as the small changes took place over millions of years? I will suggest to you that while I admit, I cannot put a creator in a bottle for display. Life seems to be far too big a logical machine assembly, for it to be formed by random chance assembly at least in the space/time universe we know.
So because atoms are so small, life forms are vastly larger in terms of complexity of construction, there are not enough years in our Universe! The full evolution time span still requires a creator perhaps?
[additional: The figures will vary in material density as atoms space out in liquids or gas, reducing the numbers. The complexity of the task increases if allowance for different atoms are included, there are about a hundred different kinds of atoms on Earth, about twenty different used in life. So select the right order from twenty without inserting any of the eighty, after all we have millions of years?]
[additional: Atoms, try a blue whale or a human brain and have fun, C.O.B.E. results may alter the standard figures I have used. Believers have been so obsessed with the seven days or millions of years, but, creation is still a prodigious task whatever way we view it. Reduce the atoms per second and see how big a life form can be constructed at more practicable one per second speed. Try the argument; since life has only been on Earth for four billion years -
[additional: So if life has evolved by accidental mutation & this is a "proved" scientific fact, answer this;
i] where is this “science” applied to automate our technological development or automate our Research & Design work?
ii] where are the repeatable demonstrations of unguided development?]
[additional: Looking at the fossil displays as to the estimated age and progress, starting very slowly at first but gaining speed and magnitude all the way to the present. I came to notice the curve is the wrong way for evolution! Simple life should develop faster and things should slow as life forms became more complex with more types reducing each types resource space.
There are some possibilities:
i] It looks like a learning curve, slow then exponentially speeding up? Which could be the case if Earth is the first created terra-
ii] Consider any big construction, work begins on basic superstructure many smaller items must wait and there tends to be an increase as work progresses.
iii] The dating methods are out by an undetected factor which could be multiplying the time more the farther back we go?
It is considered reasonable in human systems;
a] that the scale, magnitude, technical merit(s) be measured as best possible before assertions are made,
b] to assess ability by the performance or product, so in the light of a] the complexity of evolution or the ability of a creator can be considered.
[additional: James 2 v 19]
[additional: Note some of the evolutional difficulties are cumulative]
Millions of years does it sound enough for the scale of Nature.
Next: 14/ ATGC in DNA code,