According to Some Folks, New Theory in Physics has "Creationists Terrified".

[Sunstone]

New physics theory that could explain how life began 'has creationists terrified' - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk

A New Thermodynamics Theory of the Origin of Life | Quanta Magazine

The basic idea behind the theory seems to be that, under the right conditions, life will inevitably arise from non-living matter.

What do you make of this?

 

[psychoslice]

I have always felt that life came from the planet, it more or less grew from the planet.

 

[Ouroboros]

The basic idea behind the theory seems to be that, under the right conditions, life will inevitably arise from non-living matter.

What do you make of this?

The way I see it is that if the argument that this world is "fine tuned" for life, then this shouldn't be a surprising discovery.

 

[JRMcC]

It makes a heck of a lot of sense! It doesn't make me feel like life is any less remarkable though.

 

[Bunyip]

Creationists are immune to science and fact, if such things had any impact on creationism it would have ceased to exist more than a century ago.

 

[Sunstone]

It makes a heck of a lot of sense! It doesn't make me feel like life is any less remarkable though.

Indeed. In many ways, life becomes even more remarkable if the new theory holds up.

 

[Baladas]

This only makes reality even more remarkable to me.

 

[idav]

New physics theory that could explain how life began 'has creationists terrified' - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk

A New Thermodynamics Theory of the Origin of Life | Quanta Magazine

The basic idea behind the theory seems to be that, under the right conditions, life will inevitably arise from non-living matter.

What do you make of this?

Yeah inanimate matter doing things doesn't seem implausible. Consciousness however is a feat and is easier said than done, so the saying goes.

 

[Sunstone]

It's a pity it might be ten or twenty years before we know how this new theory pans out. Even more pitiful is that, if the theory does indeed pan out, then the kids of the future will be rolling their eyes at us simple minded older folk when we try to explain to them how something "everyone knows" was revolutionary "back in the day".

 

[RedDragon94]

under the right conditions

Does anybody know what the conditions are besides the necessity of an external force of energy?

 

[Sunstone]

Does anybody know what the conditions are besides the necessity of an external force of energy?

1) A group of atoms.

2) An external source of energy (such as the sun).

3) A heat bath (such as an ocean).

4) Enough time.

 

[idav]

Does anybody know what the conditions are besides the necessity of an external force of energy?

That is a very fundamental question. Does will have force?

 

[RedDragon94]

1) A group of atoms.

2) An external source of energy (such as the sun).

3) A heat bath (such as an ocean)

4) Enough time.

So the actual size of the body of water is what makes the difference, I assume? A bottle of water won't evolve if left underneath a lamp for billions of years, right?

 

[Sunstone]

So the actual size of the body of water is what makes the difference, I assume? A bottle of water won't evolve if left underneath a lamp for billions of years, right?

I don't know.

 

[RedDragon94]

Right, that's probably a question for the scientists.

 

[Bunyip]

Right, that's probably a question for the scientists.

Water is a molecule, what do you mean by it evolving?

 

[RedDragon94]

Water is a molecule, what do you mean by it evolving?

I thought that molecules changed over time. You know how water in a bottle sort of tastes different after like 6 months right? I figure that means something must have changed in its chemical makeup.

 

[SomeRandom]

I thought that molecules changed over time. You know how water in a bottle sort of tastes different after like 6 months right? I figure that means something must have changed in its chemical makeup.

I thought that was because by 6 months the chlorine in tap water has gone by then so bacteria and algae is allowed to grow again. Which is why it's not advised to drink tap water older than 6 months.

 

[Ouroboros]

Does anybody know what the conditions are besides the necessity of an external force of energy?

I'm not sure that's part of the equation. My understanding is that his theory is based on entropic systems, like the universe, that goes from a low state entropy to high state entropy, and because of its nature of being chaotic and changing over time, metabolic systems will evolve naturally to funnel energy. That's my wild speculation and probably somewhat inaccurate paraphrase of the little I read.

 

[Ouroboros]

So the actual size of the body of water is what makes the difference, I assume? A bottle of water won't evolve if left underneath a lamp for billions of years, right?

No, it wouldn't. And I suspect his theory doesn't say that either. You have to have a changing system, not a static. Having something under a lamp for billions of years is a static condition. You need something that stir things up, and you need more than just water molecules since there has to be competing chemistry in it. I think there's some 30-40 elements involved in life. Carbon being the most important (complex carbon molecules have been found to occur naturally in space for instance).