1. again you're (mis)quoting universe size without understanding. The actual quote is "There are between 10^78 to 10^82 atoms in the OBSERVABLE universe". As in - "universe that is close enough to us that light from it can arrive to us before it expands away FTL". There is no reason to believe universe ends exactly as far from us as we can see. It would be a coincidence much more astounding than the fact that titin exists (it would mean Earth is exactly in the middle of the WHOLE universe and it's exactly the size for us to see everything). It would also mean gravity theory is wrong because with nothing outside of the observable universe - universe should be expanding slower because mean gravity would bring everything towards Earth. Basically it's not the case.
2. genetic code doesn't change only by 1-base pair at a time. There are duplications, inclusions, etc. I'm pretty sure you can find many duplicated fragments in the code for titin.
3. you have choosen your target (titin) without specifying the class that it belongs to. Maybe it only matters that it's long and the endings are kinda this shape? Let's say there's 10^25_000 different viable titin alternatives. No matter which we end up with - it works, and you wouldn't know if you were in these universes instead. It significantly changes the likelihood but you treat the titin as the only possibility.
It's like being amazed that John Smith won the lottery - sure, it's unlikely that this exact person won. But it's pretty likely that SOMEONE wins the lottery. And you can only be amazed if you chose that person before the draw. In case of titin you select the winner after the draw and marvel at the unlikelihood.
These comparisons are usually motivated ideologically and based on misunderstanding of both probability and universe.
1. You really seem hung up on the word "observable". Obviously we can't literally see atoms in distant galaxies -- but we can still deduce that there are atoms there. We use calculations regarding the expansion rate of the universe, the strength of gravity, etc, to "observe" using scientific reasoning. But in any case, what is the point of your argument here -- suppose I am off by a factor of a quadrillion and there are really 10^99 atoms in the universe -- how does that change anything?
2. Proteins are not genetic code.
3. Let's say there are 4 viable titin alternatives.
Also, what is this about "you wouldn't know if you were in these universes"? Do you think there are other universes? The multiverse hypothesis is a transparent attempt to avoid the conclusion that God exists -- but it has no basis in any science or empiricism of any sort -- it's just an absolutely made up speculative fantasy. The fact that people have to resort to it just drives home how impoverished the materialist framework is -- it only works if there is an infinite number of universes for which there is no evidence. At least having in God is having faith in something for which there is evidence.
Apparently I have the solid statistical reasoning here and you are the one motivated by a "materialism of the gaps" ideology.
If you don't know how many tickets the lottery sells you cannot estimate the probability of winning it. Your assumption that universe ends exactly as far away form us as we can see is absurd, so I pointed it out.
> Proteins are not genetic code.
Proteins are generated from the genetic code, and it's the genetic code that evolves and gets inherited over generations not proteins. Proteins are just an expression of this inherited and mutated code. So it makes more sense to focus on the code and not on the result. And the relationship isn't 1:1. See also "Kolmogorov complexity".
For 1 example - Pi is infinite and non-periodic. But the algorithm to generate Pi to an arbitrary digit is quite simple and short.
> Let's say there are 4 viable titin alternatives.
There's more than that in every single human being. And it changes through life.
> The titin gene (TTN), with its 364 exons, encodes the largest human protein. It gives rise to a dizzying array of alternatively spliced isoforms differentially expressed in various skeletal muscles, heart, and in development.
We focus on the ones that lead to sickness, but there are also many that don't.
> Do you think there are other universes?
No. I'm talking about the hypothetical situation in which titin evolved differently. In that case you would think that this version of titin was the only version possible and you would calculate the probability basing on that instead. Yet it's obviously wrong.
> "materialism of the gaps"
It's you who assumes that God must have made it because you don't understand how it could have happened. Depsite your false assumptions about the probability:
1. titin can only works if it's exactly as is (despite the fact there are many working variants present in every single homo sapiens, not to mention inter-species variants)
2. titin could have only evolved in the part of universe that we can see (despite the fact it's obvious there's more universe than that - see gravity distribution)
3. evolution works on proteins directly by changing them 1 particle at a time (despite the fact evolution works on genetic code and not 1 pair at a time)
These assumptions are all false as I've shown above, hence your estimation is useless. It has nothing to do with alternative universes or "gaps".
I’m going to have to move this discussion to a substack newsletter. There are good responses to all your objections, but a hacker news thread isn’t the place. I don’t think you appreciate the difficulty of unlocking the precise proteins that are needed for life, and pointing to a “code” that generates them just makes the situation more miraculous, not less. I’ll drop a comment here when I get a substack newsletter going on this subject. I will welcome your comments and input, since it is clear you are passionate, willing to do research, and eager to find objections to theism.
2. genetic code doesn't change only by 1-base pair at a time. There are duplications, inclusions, etc. I'm pretty sure you can find many duplicated fragments in the code for titin.
3. you have choosen your target (titin) without specifying the class that it belongs to. Maybe it only matters that it's long and the endings are kinda this shape? Let's say there's 10^25_000 different viable titin alternatives. No matter which we end up with - it works, and you wouldn't know if you were in these universes instead. It significantly changes the likelihood but you treat the titin as the only possibility.
It's like being amazed that John Smith won the lottery - sure, it's unlikely that this exact person won. But it's pretty likely that SOMEONE wins the lottery. And you can only be amazed if you chose that person before the draw. In case of titin you select the winner after the draw and marvel at the unlikelihood.
These comparisons are usually motivated ideologically and based on misunderstanding of both probability and universe.