"To go from a bacterium to people is less of a step than to go from a mixture of amino acids to a bacterium." - Lynn Margulis, agnostic biologist and ex-wife of Carl Sagan

@karlschmied6218

Жыл бұрын

The larger the gap the more space for the god of the gaps.

The more we discover about the incredible complexity of the information bearing properties of living cells, the bigger the gap becomes. Since the Miller-Urey experiment in the 50’s we’ve made virtually zero progress in the origin of life problem. In fact, the problem has gotten larger over time as we’ve discovered the huge information load contained in cells. Bravo to Paul Davies for not only recognizing what has become obvious, but stating it so clearly.

@jamespenny9482

Жыл бұрын

Hugh Ross has spoken about the gloomy atmosphere at origin of life conventions because the more understanding we gain about the complexity of life, the more remote it makes the possibility of abiogenesis.

@sven888

Жыл бұрын

Do you really believe we don't know the true origin of life? I mean we're dealing with some of the brightest minds here.

@HkFinn83

Жыл бұрын

@@sven888 huh? If you know something we don’t you could always share😂

@MaloPiloto

Жыл бұрын

Fascinating topic for sure. Well said, Rand….

@Kruppes_Mule

Жыл бұрын

@@jamespenny9482 The possibility is 1 given we're here.....

I almost fell off my seat when this guy basically said it's not that big of a transition from non-life to life.

Im with Paul on this one, life is so complex and interdependent.

@leekenyon8705

Жыл бұрын

Frankenstein's monster.

Thank God for this program! Who else gets down to the real questions and finds original thinkers like Mr. Davies to take them on? It gives me hope that this is a rational world with a real purpose. Keep going please!

@godthecreatoryhvh681

Жыл бұрын

Nice talking to you John. I hope you know I have nothing to do with Mr Lawrence Show. I give all credit to Mr Lawrence And is gang of closer to true. also all of us are big fan followers for bit time, and we sometimes ask about subjects or this personne will great. Il y I am part of those subject beening the subject that is why I watch the great show because I love so much earing about my self. I I watch it 24 /7 when I first it. I I start again. HaHa LOL. I just à joke about I know you guy's don't take this seriously Ha Ha Ha. I no but may we all part the show a little because some of you are use to hair hating me never I remember this word sorry. I what this mean hair or hathing it is when someone dont like me or others. I yes believe me lots of people are total brain washe. I so sad seeing and feeling this totally totally crazy situation. I that is why I need people helping by the way because here in Quebec city justin trudeau that tief know that is possible to me that I am able to perceive each thing he did since he is born. He is extremely smart because yes I discovered many many secrets about him. I wonder why. Hahaha. I like he never informed the citizens from Canada that he have mental issues like his mommy. He that he has big issues dealing with stress anxiety. Having issues like manic depress type 1 with phychotic period on the clock after a manie period and fallow by a period of depression. The I truly believe those election with Justin trudeau if he was honest of course could be the first time in history propably in the world history that a candidate with a terrible mental issue like manic depress type 1 with psychotic effects go to run here in Canada run to be the first elected prime minister in the world history. And guess what it was sure justin trudeau pass with a minimum of 55% population vote positive for him. I guess is press team don't know right it's a secret with mommy who as also this terrible mental health problem. Serious not that I am not serious manic depression type 2 or 1 or probably the most painful the most judge mental issue who do not pass in North America culture. The no chance at all already guilty for what they call them self [NORMAL] 😂😂😂😂😂😁😁😁😭😭😅🤣🤣😱🤑🤪🐵🐵🐵🐱 Hahaha LOL... To hard to stop again sorry 🐵🐵🐵😁😢😕😅😅😕😅😂😂🐸 OK let's be serious a little come 0n guy's I have some things Important to say 🐵🐵🐵😭😭😭😭😭😳😭😅😜😜😜😜😜😜🤣🐵🐵🐵🐵🐵🐵😑=me my self and I Hahaha. Iike I was saying good night no talk about some one with is manipulating mommy who use really a sick way to raise the pour guys is mom fuck right up and she did it close door and hide this manipulatrice sickness. I yes the pour guy with a particular Oedipus complex. She was in total visous but with is complite intelligence for those period. The she commit a horrible crime against is son just be able to manipulate here son just about again money heritage. It's easy now to understand the rest with the way justin trudeau act. The I am sure psychiatric will understand better wy he act like this this actually pour guy wish badly to drop is secret nuclear weapons on me. I sorry I talk to much

@1man1bike1road

Жыл бұрын

god had nothing to do with it

@deistormmods

Жыл бұрын

@@1man1bike1road Prove it.

@godthecreatoryhvh681

Жыл бұрын

@@deistormmods what you want me to prouve to you. Did you have a probleme with me. Juste Tell me that is it.

@deistormmods

Жыл бұрын

@@godthecreatoryhvh681 I was speaking to Stephen.

Paul Davies THANK YOU for that profound and deeply insightful talk. And thank you Robert for creating CLOSER TO TRUTH !!! (And asking remarkable questions)

@TEE19622

Жыл бұрын

Mike Bin: rather than insight, what i heard was how adamant he was about "because he didn't know" then "nobody knows" when the truth may be that some know but just didn't share it with him. Im not meaning to discount your opinion just expressing mine.

@aminomar7890

Жыл бұрын

they are thieves, their main goal is what I have wrote before on this KZread channel, I have wrote what they talk about myself it is self concept in mankind and one of the most advanced coding systems in existence that build and uses genes, they have stolen everything including what I have wrote about consciousness, self concept, space, time, gravity, ….. who deleted my comments is Kuhn himself, it is a culture of thievery, they have no morals no values no minds,… they have polluted what I have wrote badly. They use thievery as patching techniques, in some cases they use blunt thievery!

@scambammer6102

Жыл бұрын

@@TEE19622 you didn't state an opinion. obviously you don't know either

@REDPUMPERNICKEL

Жыл бұрын

@@TEE19622 I think there is a sense in which 'know' is not a scientific word. Scientists think, formulate hypotheses, investigate, experiment, come up with theories, etc. With that in mind... Atoms interact according to their nature and circumstance. There is a logic to these interactions. That logic permits the formation of molecules. Molecules also interact according to their nature and circumstance. There is a whole lot more logic governing molecular interaction. If a prerequisite for intelligence is logic then obviously that prerequisite is satisfied by atoms and molecules. Skipping ahead... If it should ever come about that a molecule is formed in accordance with the logic and this molecule interacts with its molecular environment causing a negative copy to accumulate and break off and that copy interacts with its molecular environment causing a negative copy to accumulate and break off, then replication has begun and so has evolution. I find it very, very easy to imagine that happening given the content of the primordial soup and the circumstances simmering it.

Always enjoy Paul Davies talks, he seems to have a no nonsense and understandable way of explanation on a subject.

@Chineseguy001

Жыл бұрын

He has no clue.

@MeRetroGamer

Жыл бұрын

​@@Chineseguy001 Like everyone else, but he at least recognizes it and tries to follow the path that he thinks will start to give some clues, rather than following the mainstream thinking that has been stagnated for decades.

@TheYahmez

Жыл бұрын

@@MeRetroGamer Actually there's far more going on in the field of abiogenesis these days than he's admitted to. I doubt it's ignorance on his part and more to do with ego and/or self deception. RNA can function as both working mechanism and self replicating storage at a very basic level. Lipids form vesicles as a natural consequence of mechanical properties (much like soap bubbles) which can act as a semi-permeable containing membrane. this stuff -practically- literally makes itself. 😉 There's been some very interesting research recently (I forget the exact source) about the level of complexity necessary to maintain a sustainable memetic library of RNA molecules in a competitive co-evolving medium - leading to a discovery of sorts; vindicating apparently non-symbiotic parasitism as a foundationally necessary regulatory mechanism. There's a lot of exciting stuff going on right now and he's not mentioned any of it.

@edenrosest

Жыл бұрын

@@TheYahmez He is talking about the mechanism and the information - software not hardware. "far more going on in the field of abiogenesis" ? Don't be fooled by the exaggeration and media play of scientists.

@TheYahmez

Жыл бұрын

@@edenrosest the {software | hardware} dichotomy is a flawed prescriptive prior rather than a sound descriptive reception. I'll attempt an analogy with physics: like saying "I don't care about waves in a field - our concern should be; where do _particles_ come from?" Like trying to clap with one hand.. The closer model requires understanding of wave-particle (non)duality or collapse of the wave function. Using Newtonian mechanics alone to understand quantum effects is nonsense. He's begun with a flawed query which is alone fairly unscientific. The current investigations aren't hopped up nonsense but very promising physical experimentation followed by tentative best fit analysis, modelling and prediction rather than the other way around.

The idea of an emergent property whereby information is passed on, stored, retrieved, reproduced, etc., reminds me of the same questions asked about consciousness. I'm not being new-age-y here, but consciousness seems to share the same toolbox as life. Of course, consciousness cannot exist without life (at least as far as we understand either), but consciousness seems to exploit all it can from life (if that makes any sense).

I love all your content. Thanks for the continued search.

Excellent episode thanks Robert!

missed this video when it was posted - excellent conversation!

The Cosmos and all of it's forms is eternal energy. It had no beginning. It has no ending. It always was. You are the Cosmos.

@jamespenny9482

11 ай бұрын

Nope! The Big Bang is well established and since it's the beginning, it requires a Beginner.

How information organize itself within the system hmmm I've never stressed on thinking of it this way I've always seen just the objects as they are, even for thoughts food animals..man this applies to everything! like this is what makes each person's experience of life different and unique to himself because the way his information is organized is unique to him alone; we all can have the same inputs, the same data, the same raw objects but each one of us will organize them in their own way that's on the palpable level idk if this goes beyond to how information is organized differently in our DNA or not but it's beautiful to have an explanation for different perspectives to be able to describe it in this way I love it

Thank you so much!! I am a brazilian economics student but i am very interested in philosophy too and this channel provides to me great material about it. I enjoy this channel so much!

Really enjoy P. Davies profound & deeply insightful talks !!

I really like the way Paul Davies thinks and approaches the question. His various books are also well written.

I’ve watched so many of these and this is one of the best

I really like this one. Paul Davis is interesting but also he is good at talking about it. Not good like a rehearsed professional (which is a little annoying at times), but good like he is very thorough and at the same time doesn't just use complicated jargon which makes it difficult for people not directly in his field of study/work. Great interview. Great topic.

@psterud

Жыл бұрын

I agree. Someone like Michio Kaku is annoyingly rehearsed when he talks. There are lots of them in the astronomy/astrophysics realm.

Synthetic chemist James Tour has a lot to say on the chemistry aspect of this question. It would be great to get his two cents on this discussion, great interview.

@sentientflower7891

Жыл бұрын

I agree.

@ronaldmorgan7632

Жыл бұрын

Yep. Did a nine part series on it.

@WayneLynch69

Жыл бұрын

kzread.info/dash/bejne/qn18r9B9Yqmqlbw.html Tour is here supported by 2 Nobel laureates in biology and Craig Venter, co-chair of the human genome mapping and recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom. It's more than worth noting that the lion of "Scientific Atheism", biologist Richard Dawkins, sits mute/deaf/sub-moronic when the above three ALL say: "it is IMPOSSIBLE that humans will EVER know life's origin". THAT IS the sine qua non and distinguishing claim of "Scientific Atheism", without which they're left their opinions ONLY.

@jamespenny9482

Жыл бұрын

Yes, James Tour clears up and exposes a lot of the misinformation and flat out delusion among the "scientific" community. kzread.info/dash/bejne/pGinspN-Ya3Kj7w.html

@Kruppes_Mule

11 ай бұрын

He has a lot to say except to other scientists. James knows how the game of science is played as he's done it literally hundreds of times. Yet when it comes to OOL he screams from the stands how awesome he is at the game and how terrible the actual players are. He made a lame excuse the other night in the debate that it was very difficult and then undercut himself by naming several others who managed it. It's much easier to fool the rubes than to do the work and show that scientists are in fact clueless and everyone but him is a fraud.

Wow. Genuine respect for Paul Davies here, demonstrating genuine humility and honesty like a "true scientist" and not like a politician spinning some rubbish in order to defend an ideological perspective. Kudos! 👏

I recently read an incredible book titled “Life Itself” by Robert Rosen. It’s very technical but an unbelievably enjoyable read that describes life as certain types of systems that are described “relationally” in category theory, independent of substrate, and it draws distinctions between organisms and mechanisms.

@spaceexplorer3690

Жыл бұрын

Go to 33th street on 7.7.2022 at 14:27 youll have best momment of yours life....Gruss auf dem HagenNrw

@rysw19

Жыл бұрын

@@tc25d The book does a much better job than I could

@jacksinger3698

Жыл бұрын

I bought this book a while back and got maybe halfway through, I remember it being very good, but really slow going due to the technicality, which was very hard to parse.

Brilliant conversation! Thank you both!

@jamespenny9482

Жыл бұрын

The guy on the left is totally misinformed while Davies at least appreciates the enormous chasm between what is not life and life, so I'd say it's like a child wanting his way speaking with an adult.

If an attempt is made to completely describe anything, even if it be by a person of the most extraordinary genius, it is impossible not to hit a wall of ignorance at some stage or the other.

@davidcopson5800

Жыл бұрын

What does that matter to the overall quest?

@BuddyLee23

Жыл бұрын

True. How far down can you go? Eventually strays into philosophy and theology.

@keithrelyea7997

Жыл бұрын

Oh yes, we will certainly come to the end/wall, as has always been said, BUT by damm we go on don't we and keep questioning and discovering and will look back on those such as you who bet agnist the human imagination.

@karlschmied6218

Жыл бұрын

And behind this wall of ignorance many people see their personal gap filler, their God of the gaps. Because they are afraid or stressed by their knowledge of ignorance.

This is mind blowing material! 🤯

Thank you for addressing the haunting questions too many gloss over.

All Closer To Truth Videos Are Excellent: Everyone on the program who discusses various scientific hypothesises and theories greatly enlightens all of us. Sincerely, FREE PRESS WITHOUT BORDERS

I’ve often wondered about this question. Good interview!

@kipponi

Жыл бұрын

Yes fundamental question.

Brilliant analysis by Paul - This field of scientific research is in its infancy.

@PatrickOSullivanAUS

Жыл бұрын

No, P. Davies is using the god of the gaps.

@jamespenny9482

11 ай бұрын

It's stuck in it's infancy because it has no future. I would say that nothing has changed since Miller-Urey in 1952, but actually the situation gets worse from year to year for abiogenesis as scientists discover that they are getting further and further away from understanding how life could have possibly originated on it's own. The more we learn, the greater the complexity we discover. Articles and illustrations in scientific journals and magazines depicting possible scenarios for abiogenesis are false, misleading, and strictly wishful thinking and speculation.

One of the best interviews and fundamental questions. So we are basically very organized matter, lnformation and energy working together. It seems so unique compared like stone or whatever.

@aminomar7890

Жыл бұрын

they are thieves, their main goal is what I have wrote before on this KZread channel, I have wrote what they talk about myself it is self concept in mankind and one of the most advanced coding systems in existence that build and uses genes, they have stolen everything including what I have wrote about consciousness, self concept, space, time, gravity, ….. who deleted my comments is Kuhn himself, it is a culture of thievery, they have no morals no values no minds,… they have polluted what I have wrote badly. They use thievery as patching techniques, in some cases they use blunt thievery!

@acfa383

Жыл бұрын

Even stone is made out of very organized matter, information and energy working together Everything in life is like that and that's what makes it fascinating! You can always keep wondering how it works!

Perfectly said Paul!!!

I really like how Paul fully discloses how little we know and the limits of our understanding here. Often when science is communicated it's done so with much certainty and gives the impression much is tied up. I like hearing about where the frontiers are. The physicists talk much about the theory of everything, yet that is unlikely to explain how complicated organisms come to be. It seems that there are many theories of everything to be generated, each providing an answer to a different question.

I respect that man a lot. There's a risk in scientific dogma and a true scientist knows a lot of stuff but also knows what they don't know.

@karlschmied6218

Жыл бұрын

"scientific dogma" is an oxymoron. I'd say there is a risk that people see science as built on dogmas.

@TheCriticom

11 ай бұрын

@@karlschmied6218 To be honest that seems like it is what's taken place at the moment we have big gaps in our understanding at present but by the way some scientists talk it's like we know it all already.

@karlschmied6218

11 ай бұрын

There are always "some scientists". I think Basiten Millecam says it right. So my comment is actually redundant.

Oh I love his books so much!

Paul. I read most of your books. They're a treasure in my bookshelf.

Brilliant. Beautiful. Elegant. Probably truer than other hypotheses. Would love to hear a conversation between Davies and Chalmers!!!

@francesco5581

Жыл бұрын

me too !! i would add also Hameroff. Kastrup and one between Koch and Tononi !!

"The junkyard tornado, also known as Hoyle's Fallacy, is an argument used to deride the probability of abiogenesis as comparable to "the chance that a tornado sweeping through a junkyard might assemble a Boeing 747."

@JamesCormier

Жыл бұрын

If the existence of highly complex life on Earth is the equivalent of the implausible junkyard Boeing 747, the existence of a highly complex god is the "ultimate Boeing 747" that truly does require the seemingly impossible to explain its existence.

@timstanley8201

Жыл бұрын

@@JamesCormier actually, we're talking about two categorically different things, the naturalistic mechanisms and a being. Logically the implications of one are not the same as the implications of the other. If I say on a much simpler level that shaking the box of Lego will never produce the object pictured on the outside but will rather only wear out the box or the Lego before anything is possibly created. Then to say that it requires a being with intelligence to assemble it, is reasonable. We know what it takes to assemble Lego, then why not look for the same categorical type of thing? I understand the difficulty of proposing a being like God , but I don't think it makes him an illogical option. but I think you are right, explaining how God has existed for forever is unanswerable to us. And what would be the difference definitionally between God and whatever the supercapable materialistic power be? We can't propose the idea of an all powerful God but we can propose the idea of a materialistic mechanism that has brought forth the information, energy, material and proper composition of life? Still sounds like an all powerful god.

I like the scientific integrity of prof. Paul davies

@francesco5581

Жыл бұрын

one of the most likable scientist around

I 2nd the need for a James Tour interview on this subject.

"No, see I think the big gap is the first step (from chemical soup to life)" It amazes me that one of my biggest shifts in thinking was to listen to Prof Davies so many years ago and concluding that science points so clearly to the existence of God, and then to find out that he doesn't have the same conclusion. He has a 'cosmic religion' that there must be an underlying purpose, but he doesn't see God as the go to answer. Every time I listen to him, he reinforces my faith. I sincerely hope that one day he will have his Damascus moment as a reward for leading so many of us to God by his work in crystalizing the questions that have no answers (in science). Thanks Prof Davies!! (Although I am sure he would at this point rather be remembered as a brilliant physicist than an evangelist!)

"Circular arguments occur when a person's argument repeats what they already assumed before without arriving at a new conclusion."

I read a book by Paul Davies many years ago on the search for extraterrestrial life called The eerie silence and his clarity of explanation and frankness on the topic changed my way of thinking. A real beacon in a world bedazzled by chimeras. Robert Lawrence Kuhn's work is invaluable. He has created an inspiring encyclopedia of work, touching on topics that others would feel embarrassed to discuss. I hope his work is given the recognition it deserves!

He is totally right. There's a huge gap and scientists are looking in the wrong place, similar to looking for the keys lost in the dark house outside under the street light ... because it's easier to see there.

@keithrelyea7997

Жыл бұрын

Well them please show us where you have hidden all the keys. Otherwise STFU.

Beautiful 💪🙏🙏💪

Finally finally finally! Somebody getting real about this topic. The Drake equation is rubbish.

@homerinchinatown2

Жыл бұрын

Drake is interesting, but if this very unclear factor is added to the mix (of the odds of the creation of life from non life), it can take down the whole equation. {A gazillion stars/planets} x {various other stuff} x {unknown process of creating life} = ??? It's like adding a null factor to an equation, making the outcome unknown

Excellent..... thanks 🙏.

@maxwellsimoes238

Жыл бұрын

Paul Davis are lost in his owns minds when he shows archaic and pedantic anwers. IoI

Thank you Robert for giving us a sense of belonging when it comes to the questions that haunt us all. My question is: why is everybody ignoring "Darwin's Black Box..." by Behe, beyond his controversial idea of intelligent design? Isn't he asking the right questions and proposing just a right/wrong answer? I read his book a long time ago and his detailed explanation of what is needed to kick-start life goes right into the essence of Paul Davis' concern. And: no, is not about God or religion...

@nissimhadar

Жыл бұрын

Behe is ONLY about God. Read here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin%27s_Black_Box

@keithrelyea7997

Жыл бұрын

It was with Behe. Davis is much more circumspect.

i totally agree with Paul Davies.

Love this guys mind met him accidentaly in Balmain Sydney when he was doing a show for the ABC tv

when people die it feels like anaesthesia, which there is no time and you probably find your self struggling somewhere to survive, so if there is no time there should be some think takes place, the think is you will never die. I support my idea that some people felt into coma for decades, when they woke up they can't believe it took decades, you can go watch video about them and see them talking about their experience, for my self I have underwent 10 hour cosmetic surgery and it felt like seconds, how amazing the nature.❤

Great talk, rarely do we get a real take on where science really is at this point in time on the genesis of life. Most people think it’s a foregone conclusion that it is known the way most other scientists talk

@karlschmied6218

Жыл бұрын

I've never seen a leading scientist in that field talking like your straw men.

Without an intelligent agent this would never happen.

@Chineseguy001

Жыл бұрын

True

@chrisbarnett5303

Жыл бұрын

god of the gaps

@deistormmods

Жыл бұрын

@@chrisbarnett5303 So non intelligence giving rise to intelligence is a better explanation? I didn't even mention God. Keep your illogical statements outta here.

@Chineseguy001

Жыл бұрын

@@deistormmods just comes to show the atheists have a religion and agenda of their own.

finally someone who admits that asking how is possibile life from non-life is a very good question and there's not an easy answer. But apparently lots of people (ordinary people and scientists) think that it's not big deal, that the answer is easy. They have no clue. Understanding how we get life from a non living matter is THE big mistery of reality.

To understand the gap it's useful to analyze the seeming "discontinuity" arising when a being dies.

@scambammer6102

Жыл бұрын

no it isn't

''Life'' : an enclosed biochemical system which tries to survive in the sea of entropy...and it finally fails''

Truth is simple but difficult to understand from the point of complexity. 👍

Wow yes

Go ahead! Make a simple living cell. Win the Nobel.

Yes, we know.

Research into abiogenesis is further on than most people think. There was a breakthrough in the last couple of weeks that showed that volcanic glass could act as a catalyst for forming RNA.

The biggest mystery there is!

Get married and in a few years you will find what the gap is from life to no life.

@2kt2000

Жыл бұрын

Whoaa!! Bada Bing! That was cold LOL😆

@Kgio-2112

Жыл бұрын

Haha! Awesome And true!

@kipponi

Жыл бұрын

If you meant birth. It is first non life then life when fertilization has happened.

@Thedudeabides803

Жыл бұрын

Wow you know too....😂

@cyberspore00

Жыл бұрын

“You have to get married sometime. You can’t go on enjoying yourself forever.” - Benny Hill

I think this is why consciousness is so hard to substantiate in any substrate other than the brain because the material must be alive (whatever alive actually means)

around 07:20 Terrence Deacon would first state that you need a system generates equally entropy and negentropy so that both tendencies constrain - in order to obtain an identity - and energize - in order to obtain biological process within the identity - the system. Plus, that reasoning is in straight line with Lupasco's logic of energy which states that when heterogeneous and homogeneous forces are equally present in system, a third included - here life - that includes both antagonistic forces has no choice but to emerge.

How about involving Embryology in the process of finding out what life is ( fertilization, gastrulation, the development of the ecto - meso - endoderm), the development of the different organ systems …. Etc. & trying to find out the difference between a hen, & human beings & what makes a human being human - with all its qualities !

Lots of ideas in the direction of neural networks these days, i.e., you get some cellular structure to do one-to-many comms, link them to each other -- and then just condition them from external stimuli to seem to "take the next step." So as NN-based AI advances, we'll see it outclass lots of people and human routines. But if it self-bootstraps into the truly mathematical realm of logic and number theory _on top of_ its seemingly intelligent routines -- yeah, then we've got something. Abstraction is seemingly a superpower a few of us have in spades. And of course the subtle of poetry or music is another superpower we seem to have -- once again not universally, rather, just a select few of us. BTW, some biologist gave a talk about intelligence where she noted that tiny creatures without any sort of neurological equipment nonetheless were doing "intelligence." That was amazingly profound.

@tbardoni5065

Жыл бұрын

Single-cell organisms ‘seem’ to have consciousness and awareness. Hameroff talks about sucking up a paramecium in a syringe and it learns to escape faster and faster. So not only does it have situational awareness and learning power, it also has a desire to leave the syringe. No neural network required.

@vonBottorff

Жыл бұрын

@@tbardoni5065 Exactly! Wild! But some would say we're just beginning to understand intelligence/sentience. So we've got some "off-site" things like computers going for some comparison with our own intelligence. Well, Nature seems to be able to take many matter configs and make intelligence/sentience out of them. And of course aboriginal peoples have believed forever that all things, living and otherwise, have a "spirit" behind them. Gaia stuff, too.

Information can only arise from intelligence period. Design requires a designer

This question assumes that the entirety of reality is not alive and aware. Because, another way of looking at things is that the reality that we generally think is all-encompassing, is actually something completely different and something that we could not have previously believed or even thought of.

Getting from chemicals to DNA is not understood at all. How DNA creates cells in multiple configurations is not understood at all. Life is a mystery to science.

@chrism.1131

Жыл бұрын

Agreed, even if you have 100% of what it takes to create a living creature as in one that has just recently died, after a short period of time it is impossible to bring that creature back to life.

Information and storage managment...how was it done? Cells are amazingly complex. Viruses less so but they need cells to replicate.

The RNA model is a very good one

Life starts with formation of hydrocarbon from inorganic materials. Then from hydrocarbon (organic) to life is a mystery. I think somehow the ETC electron transport chain or it's simplistic form has to be first molecule needed for self propagation as it captures energy by redox from sun (photosynthetic life) or other way (chemosynthetic life). I think chemosynthetic evolved from photosynthetic life.

Whenever we go too deep into the nature or casue of something we fail to understand it.

So good discussion. There is no mirror in the universe where life sees (senses) itself. Whether strictly organized multicellular structures or so simple primitive single-cell structures even the simplest interacting objects, there is no space in which life resides. We, as if-cartoon characters who are drawn on the two-dimensional page, have been trying to stand up to touch another face on this page.

@pastcolours

Жыл бұрын

"I tawt I taw a Puddy Tat"

Information is a type of energy, and energy has mass. Did you know Information has a weight. Meaning gravity works on Information. Information has a tangible quantifiable weight and actually gets heavier with density just like everything else too, and that just blows my mind.

Explanations are at different layers of abstraction. The lower the abstraction layer, the more closer to the basic building principles one gets. At every abstraction layer there are assumptions that hold true for that layer; some scientists refer to these as "miracles". Some assumptions may hold true all the way down to the lowest layers. Will we ever reach an abstraction layer with no first assumptions? Somehow I doubt this. That is why I have written a paper on "angelic" agency and its role in information transfer for the formation of life. It is at a high level of abstraction. I hope Paul Davies and his team will be able to drill down to the lower abstraction layers and come up with a principle that is more grounded in lower level scientific principles. Donald Hoffman with his theory of "conscious agents" may be closer to my abstraction layer, and could well be grounded in first scientific principles.

There my be a pattern connection with amino acids...and the ability to turn into proteins in milliseconds...to the correct protein...which the odds are something like 1 followed by 300 zeroes...against. To run through the computations would take forever...but somehow...the amino acids pick the right combination every time...almost instantly. That is some serious software.

Wow..omg 👌👍

Something which I think is not generally appreciated is the size of the system where this takes place. The mass of the oceans is about 10^21 kg. The development of life happened in perhaps 300 million years. The measure of opportunity is 3*10^29 kg-years. Maybe only a fraction of the ocean volume is in play, perhaps geothermal vents, but is is still an enormous volume. That represents a very large number of throws of the dice. You cannot hope to replicate this in a laboratory where you can do an experiment using, say, a liter for one year. The earth has 10^29 times more chances for the right thing to happen. Mars had a much smaller amount of liquid water for a much shorter period of time so for Mars to have a chance, it must be a lot easier than if earth needed all of those chances. It is also possible that it took billions of earths for one to have got lucky.

And so it all boils down to Information The last observation, that there has to be a pattern to this information, leads quite naturally to Consciousness

To use the brick to city analogy, scientists are not even close to understanding how a naturally occurring and quite complex substance such as clay could organise itself spontaneously into a building block without some intelligent input let alone how bricks could organise themselves into a city. I am intrigued as to why the scientific community along with government and private backing do not set up some institute to explore how bricks came from clay in the same way they developed the Hadron Collider to explore sub atomic particles or launched space stations and telescopes to explore space.

Thank you Paul. As one of deterministic leanings and a molecular biologist this is the one area I have a real dilemma with my “faith” in science. I concluded many moons ago we are missing something fundamental in our current theories of Abiogenesis. There’s not even any point looking at the maths of it all until the mechanism is known and pushing the solution out to another planet isn’t a satisfactory solution either.

@jamespenny9482

Жыл бұрын

Right, and the very idea of a "mechanism" from a random collection of molecules is in itself contradictory. It's shocking to me that this guy on the left thinks it's not that big of a deal to go from not life to life. That's Joe Biden level delusional. He says to Davies that his skepticism about the ease of transition from non-life to life is not a common one, a lot of scientists blah blah blah. He is completely misinformed. I suppose he also thinks it's not that big of a deal for the universe to come into existence from nothing (no space, time, matter, or energy). The God "hypothesis" solves these and many other fundamental questions, but not a lot of people WANT to hear that.

Goedel said that consciousness is a ground force.

Taking about the information of life. We tend to think of information as something that intelligence uses to achieve an end. Forget that. We are talking the first life or even proto-life. At this stage, or maybe it's 'form this point of view', information is structure. Structure made of DNA or RNA. This structure, these structures, have various rudimentary capabilities, which capabilities can be improved in terms of conserving the original structure. How structure supports capabilities and how capabilities are extended are the questions. At some point we call an extended capability intelligence.

If you are interested in this topic, check out Terrence Deacon. Reading his book "Incomplete Nature" right now, pretty mind-boggling stuff.

Information requires mind/intelligence

So how did the first cell.form on its own

There are theoretical biologists like Stuart Kaufmann who know that this is an open and fundamental question. Kaufmann wrote about it 25 years ago. Check out his page turner book: At home in the universe.

Robert asked a question; what is the first step you have to have for the structure of life to exist. The answer is the photon, Photon should be the first particle on the periodic table with atomic number 0. Photons are particles of mind and this makes mind the fundamental stuff that generates life.

@aminomar7890

Жыл бұрын

they are thieves, their main goal is what I have wrote before on this KZread channel, I have wrote what they talk about myself it is self concept in mankind and one of the most advanced coding systems in existence that build and uses genes, they have stolen everything including what I have wrote about consciousness, self concept, space, time, gravity, ….. who deleted my comments is Kuhn himself, it is a culture of thievery, they have no morals no values no minds,… they have polluted what I have wrote badly. They use thievery as patching techniques, in some cases they use blunt thievery!

I wonder if you can program a primordial soup and leave it to run randomly? Off to find out...

I appreciate Paul Davies recognizing that the problem of the origin of life: 1. Is currently nowhere close to being solved (in a naturalistic way) 2. Requires an explanation of the origin of information, and information processing and copying systems I wish he was more open to the theory of Intelligent Design, which offers a very good explanation for these problems.

Information is energy. Or the other way around. Maybe.

There are currently no known examples, in nature or science, where one life form will convert to a different life form (i.e. different body plan) by change in the DNA. Current understanding in the field of genetics seems to indicate that varying body plans (for example, the difference between an octopus and praying mantis) do not reside within the DNA. Genes within the DNA of a particular organism code for the different proteins required to build and allow that particular organism to function.

The lifeless nature and the living nature = everything.

Are the patterns of mathematics for matter / non-life similar in kind to the patterns of chemicals and DNA in life, just different in degree or magnitude?

@melgross

Жыл бұрын

Well, math is math. What we have is physics, which, while it seems so complex these days, is the basis of everything else. It’s similar to computer programming. The lowest keel kanguage is machine language, where you program each bit in. Each level above that requires the same basic math and the same bits. But as you go up, you can make more comp,ex combinations of these bits by programming in first 8 bit bytes, each of which has a much more comp,ex meaning because the different combinations of the 8 bits in a byte allow many different bytes. Then you can have two 8 bit bytes to firm a “word”, and the 16 bit combinations are far more comp,ex than that 8 bit byte. Then we have the double word with 32 bits. I think you get where I’m going with this. Whereas combining two bits gives you very little in comp,exits, combining two 32 bit double words are orders of magnitude more complex. As a result the programs written with them can be much easier to write than attempting it in machine language. It’s the same thing with physics, chemistry and biology. You can think of physics as that first level machine language, with chemistry a level up, and biology a level up from that. All use the same math as their base, but biology has vastly more combinations available. There are a limited number of particles at level one, but an almost infinite number of chemicals formed from them. Biology is almost infinitely more complex than chemistry. But if you break down the most complex chemicals and biological equivalent, such as proteins, you’ll find that you’re back to the very same particles you have in physics, behaving in the same way. I hope this helps.

"It's got a life of it's own. There must be laws of information management and organization which we have yet to write down. And at that point we'll be getting close to our answer." "A life of it's own" . . . "Management" without a manager . . . "Organization" with no organizer . . . Are they refusing to acknowledge the obvious? How can they find something they have long since rejected. It is inexcusable.

Watch the Martin Hanczyc TED talk on the line between life and non-life, here on KZread. You'll be amazed by the demonstrations of very simple chemical mixtures behaving in ways that are uncannily similar to living organisms...including self-replication.

@chrism.1131

Жыл бұрын

And yet, no lab has ever created life from scratch.

@kipponi

Жыл бұрын

@@chrism.1131 Intelligent life not at all.

@alfresco8442

Жыл бұрын

@@chrism.1131 Neither has any god...and it's had far longer.

3:35

Matter and energy are hand in hand....Matter and energy tend to organise into Patterns....which organise into yet more complex patterns....and so on and so on...are Lifeforms an extremely complex organisation of Matter/energy ?....is a complex arrangement of energy what some call the Soul ?....does the soul require complex Matter to keep it arranged/together?.....

Conclusion: Life is not well defined.

In my opinion why transformation from non life to life is impossible now is the rate of space expansion at that time is different from what is now and the rate is far more enormous then and there than we experience here and now localy.