Physicist says Origin of Life Inevitable
- Thread starter Matts00GT
- Start date
I don't think a mathematical formula will ever prove the source of life.
As always, heavy skepticism is the proper disposition towards this physicist's claims. We'll have to wait and see how good his data is and whether his idea can be tested in the laboratory for repeatability.
I'm doubtful that he's correct, but his concept that atoms will eventually organize themselves to disperse heat, and in such a manner that's mathematically describable, is certainly intriguing. Dispersing heat is definitely a critical aspect of life.
I am baffled as to why evolution was mentioned in this article though.
Evolution literally has *NOTHING* to do with the origin of life.
A solid 101 understanding of evolution makes this abundantly clear.
If he's wrong, I do think we'll be able to explain how chemistry led to biology within my lifetime. And it isn't going to involve luck or chance, if I had to guess.
.
I'm doubtful that he's correct, but his concept that atoms will eventually organize themselves to disperse heat, and in such a manner that's mathematically describable, is certainly intriguing. Dispersing heat is definitely a critical aspect of life.
I am baffled as to why evolution was mentioned in this article though.
Evolution literally has *NOTHING* to do with the origin of life.
A solid 101 understanding of evolution makes this abundantly clear.
If he's wrong, I do think we'll be able to explain how chemistry led to biology within my lifetime. And it isn't going to involve luck or chance, if I had to guess.
.
Too much sense made....fail
I saw this the other day and it was interesting. Hopefully some experiments can be designed to test his idea. It seems plausible though because the idea of matter naturally seeking to dissipate heat does perhaps bridge the gap between physics and biology.
My guess as to why evolution was in the article is that the person writing the article asked the question about evolution because they had no clue that origin and evolution are not the same, but the question being posed meant the physicist had to respond.
I read a similar article on another website, and in one of the comments a guy claimed that he had already come to this idea and had it published. He even provided links to the article, but I didn't go digging into it too far though.
Oh, a wise engineer once told me that all models are wrong, but some are useful.
Oh, a wise engineer once told me that all models are wrong, but some are useful.
A direct call out on a specific member mocking his belief system because it doesn't coincides with yours cheapens your view point.
^ Right....because it's NEVER gone the other way. Ever. You're right.
Mr. Mach-ete said:
I called on Rainmaker because he knows everything.
I criticize his worldview, not because it doesn't coincide with mine, but because it doesn't coincide with reality.
My worldview is based on data.
More importantly, it's permeable and subject to change based on new data.
As a bonus, I don't need to shield my worldview from criticism.
And nor do I need anyone to stick up for it on my behalf.
.
He is too busy making new threads to run away from. Check out his post in pics and vid about blood moons. His pal 7.62x51 basically stated we are all going to hell. :shrug:
Last edited:
Planter
Banned
:lol: so much win.
Users who are viewing this thread
