Slashdot Mirror
The Origin of Life and the Hidden Role of Quantum Criticality
KentuckyFC writes One of the great puzzles of biology is how the molecular machinery of life is so finely coordinated. Even the simplest cells are complex three dimensional biochemical factories in which a dazzling array of machines pump, push, copy, and compute in a dance of extraordinarily detailed complexity. Indeed, it is hard to imagine how the ordinary processes of electron transport allow this complexity to emerge given the losses that arise in much simpler circuits. Now a group of researchers led by Stuart Kauffmann have discovered that the electronic properties of biomolecules are entirely different to those of ordinary conductors. It turns out that most biomolecules exist in an exotic state called quantum criticality that sits on the knife edge between conduction and insulation. In other words, biomolecules belong to an entirely new class of conductor that is not bound by the ordinary rules of electron transport. Of course, organic molecules can be ordinary conductors or insulators and the team have found a few biomolecules that fall into these categories. But evolution seems to have mainly selected biomolecules that are quantum critical, implying that that this property must confer some evolutionary advantage. Exactly what this could be isn't yet clear but it must play an important role in the machinery of life and its origin.
"Complexity" is a very subjective thing. It's solely determined by the intellectual capabilities of the person or people involved.
Just look at computer programming. We have smart people who understand C++. To them, it isn't complex. It's just a really powerful tool. Then we have less-smart people who use Ruby. They don't have the mental capacity or acuity to understand C++, so they see it as being complex. The complexity of C++ really just depends on who you are and what your mind is capable of working with.
It's totally the same for the SQL versus NoSQL issue. Some people are intelligent and totally capable of understanding and using SQL. They don't find it complex. But there are other people who lack the intellectual ability to comprehend SQL. To them, it's "complex". So to try to combat their inability to understand SQL, they come up with NoSQL and shenanigans like that. SQL itself isn't complex. It's just that some people find it to be complex, based on their limited intellect.
Complexity is subjective. While these biological phenomenon may appear difficult for some people to comprehend, they aren't really all that complex at all.
Yes, the gut reaction is call it pseudo science and get a good laugh out of it
No, the gut reaction would be to test the effect by placing a transmitter next to somebody's head, see that nothing happens, and then get a good laugh out of it.
I did my Ph.D. in physical chemistry, focusing on electron transport in DNA, proteins, and other organic molecules. I read the arxiv paper and found it almost incomprehensible from this perspective. There is no reference to existing models of electron transport in biological systems(*), and it's not clear that their "generalized fractal dimension" for a protein has anything at all to do with electron transport. While it's possible that this approach is just so revolutionary that it doesn't need to be grounded in what's already known/believed about this field, it's more likely that this is just pseudoscience. Further supporting this hypothesis is the existence of phrases like "Why life persists at the edge of chaos is a question at the very heart of evolution" in the text. Serious science doesn't need that kind of hype in the paper.
*except at the end where they reference a couple experimental papers that tangentially relate to this topic
Complexity is a real property of natural systems. Biological systems are highly complex by any measurable standard. Proteins and protein complexes are nanomachines that operate on principles that have no counterpart in modern technology, such as computers. Take a look at detailed maps of protein complexes like the ribosome, proteosome or F1/F0 particle in mitochondria, and how they operate and are regulated. They are extremely complex despite being only nanometers in size.
A brain is a terrible thing to waste... Mind? That's debatable.
The reaction to seeing a tiger in the bushes is a mix of chemical and electrical. Electrical signals in the nerves are pretty fast. Release of stress hormones takes a little longer. Of course, at the microscopic level, pretty interesting stuff happens, with plenty of details that we don't fully understand yet. Nothing that involves unknown energy though. It's pretty much all the same electromagnetic force throughout.
The problem with arguments from personal incredulity is that the dumbest person in the room always wins.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
>>"But evolution seems to have mainly selected biomolecules that are quantum critical, implying that that this property must confer some evolutionary advantage. Exactly what this could be isn't yet clear but it must play an important role in the machinery of life and its origin."
A scientist should understand evolution sufficiently well to not use arguments like this.
Why are we carbon based and not silica based? Either works just fine. Evolution doesn't pick the "best" option, it picks a "functional" option. After something has proven to function, evolution stops caring (until it no longer functions). Why iron and not copper in our blood? Either works fine.
Why quantum critical "bio"molecules? Because they work. There is NO other criteria. They could be better than the alternative, they could be worse, they could be the same. But they work. That is all we can assert.
The Zoroastrians and Greeks called. They want their afterlife back. And it's not hard to imagine doing a better job of creation than Yahweh, especially with infinite power and knowledge to hand. Plus, sacrificing yourself to yourself to stop yourself from doing something you can freely chosse to do or not to do makes as much sense as a screen door on a spaceship, especially when it mostly doesn't work (and a bad weekend isn't much sacrifice...)
There ay be a God. I think there is. It's not the genocidal egomaniac of the abrahamic religions. If YOU want to spend eternity in Hell with it, be my guest, the sooner the better.
No, I'm saying that the theory of evolution is being called upon to explain increasingly complex layers of life's intricacies that are more simply explained by the existence of a creator.
That's only true if you completely ignore the complexities of the creator itself.
The reason it's called pseudo science is because studies =shown there is no difference in effect between placebo groups and the group receiving EMF radiation.
As a former molecular biologist who happens to be in the middle of a course on the design/synthesis of biomolecular electronics (biological semiconductors, conductors, LEDs, solar etc.), I wonder if the solution isn't as simple as this:
Essentially all biomolecules are synthesized by enzymes. Most are acted upon by enzymes or have some enzymatic activity during their functional life. Quantum criticality could be a useful property to enhance binding and catalysis at enzyme clefts (or other active sites) by enhancing charge/electron transitions in/on a molecule. Criticality may allow transitions and thresholds to be sharper, snappier, more selective.
"Quantum criticality" is just a label we give to a group of mechanisms (and the structures that encourage them) based on some test. I might label the many things that scare my friend's neurotic but otherwise imposing German Shepard as "Fido-phobic". This category might even be scientifically interesting -- if pulling pranks or stealing from my friend were major scientific goals at this point in time. That doesn't mean that squeeze toys that groan, rubber cubes that bounce erratically, and electric toys that "awaken" at random or after a delay share a fundamental property. They simply have properties that have interesting effects toward a certain goal (keeping her dog from interfering in our hijinks)
that watches are not really all that complex. Nor do they ever evolve to better survive in a changing environment, or reproduce of their own accord. But (scientifically) the fact that we do not completely understand how something works does not mean that, a "God" must therefore have created it. The fact that we find something difficult to understand is not an excuse to abandon the Scientific Method, shrug our intellectually lazy shoulders, and attribute (said difficult to understand thing), to a creator...You are not suggesting we do...are you...really?
The USA is only 4X older than me...perspective
But evolution seems to have mainly selected biomolecules that are quantum critical, implying that that this property must confer some evolutionary advantage. Exactly what this could be isn't yet clear but it must play an important role in the machinery of life and its origin.
Why talk as though evolution has a purpose, a mind , as if evolution itself is some sentient being?
Stop anthropomorphizing or deomorphizing evolution. Evolution hates such talk. :-)
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Same thing. You haven't explained the creator itself. You haven't explained the creation process. You can't predict anything.
I agree it's simple, but it's also meaningless. You have no answers. The only thing you've accomplished is that you've stopped asking questions.
Gentlemen, I submit to you another shining example of the Salem Hypothesis.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
So does ordinary chemical reaction, especially in conductors specifically designed for fast propagation, such as nerves. In fact, even the exotic phenomenom called "sound" moves at 340+ meters per second, and will thus take all of 1/150 of a second to cross your body.
Ancient healing techniques, for the most part, don't work. It doesn't really matter what they're focusing on, since they fail to actually heal the patient, and in many cases actually cause harm. So, crazy or sensible, they're simply wrong.
Modern science, on the other hand, eradicated smallpox and has polio on the ropes. Even AIDS and cancer are on the retreat. The only things it seems unable to cure in foreseeable future are human evil and stupidity.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
Darwin was quite some time ago, and while he had some remarkable deductions for his day, and deserves credit for establishing the field, he's practically speaking irrelevant to the science of evolutionary biology. Even in Darwin's day, however, before genetics, his theory made a remarkable prediction: that taxonomy would be cladistic (to use the modern term). That is, you could organize species in a hierarchy based on common features.
You can't do this with e.g vehicles: there are features common to all pick-up trucks, features common to all Fords, features common to all passenger vehicles made after a certain year, and so on: it's immediately obvious that you can't make any sort of hierarchy based on features with any predictive value. A pickup truck bed doesn't tell you who made the alternator, the Ford logo doesn't tell you whether a vehicle has airbags, and so on. Remarkably, you can do this with plant and animal species, and the millions of cataloged species all fit this model: extreme confirmation of the prediction made from the hypothesis of common ancestry.
But that's all old-school, pre-genetics naturalism: 19th century and early 20th century stuff.
"Evolution" means "the statistical distribution of alleles in a population changes over time". Evolutionary biology is about statistical models of dynamic systems: good, solid mathematical models used in research daily. There's even an engineering aspect, as it's sometimes preferred for research organisms to manipulate the genome without directly splicing genes, or to ensure a stable population with a given modification for long-term research.
TLDR: read the Talk.Origins FAQ I've linked to the best starting point, but there's a wealth of information there, that directly speaks to the claims of skeptics of evolution. The materials are 20 years old now, but they're very well written arguments with counter-arguments with all the flame wars removed.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.