Chemist Lee Cronin hopes for a breakthrough by getting robots to motor through millions of chemical combinations, looking for self-replicating systems:
Cronin posits an assembly index of 15–20 as the cut-off, which would mean that one molecule formed by chance in a mole of a substance. The simplest amino acid, glycine, has an index of 4, but the energy currency of the cell, ATP has an index of 21, which implies that it was not the product of chance processes. His paper on the topic is open access.
[He also hopes to find proto-life developing on Venus:]
While many researchers believe that natural selection acting on random mutations (Darwinism) could cause life to form, it’s worth noting that, prior to the existence of life, there is nothing doing the selecting and nothing to select.
It’s not clear how the robots, themselves entirely a product of design, can help with that one.News, “Will AI chemistry robots finally discover the origin of life?” at Mind Matters News (March 4, 2022)
Takehome: One problem: Before life exists, there is nothing for purely natural selection to select. How the robots, themselves a product of design, can help is unclear.
You may also wish to read:
Elon Musk tweet shows why many doubt origin of life studies. Musk was talking about the origin of machines, not life, but the principle is, perhaps surprisingly, the same. Creating a machine that manufactures or a cell that reproduces is much harder than creating a prototype of either. It’s a search for a search. (Jonathan Bartlett)
Is life from outer space a viable science hypothesis? Currently, panspermia has been rated as “plausible but not convincing.” Marks, Hössjer, and Diaz discuss the issues. Famous atheist scientists have favored panspermia because there is no plausible purely natural explanation for life on Earth that would make it unnecessary.
13 Replies to “At Mind Matters News: Will AI chemistry robots finally discover the origin of life?”
As if the self-replication is the only problem for OOL research ….
But i see where this is heading …
Darwinists desperately need something to mislead lay public….
Then, Cronin can say – look! it self-replicates = life
Moreover, DNA does NOT self-replicate … so i don’t entirely understand what is this guy trying to prove …. it is still the same nonsense …. Nothing changed … Szostak, Cronin … the same nonsense …
PS: i bet, that even involving so called AI, Cronin won’t find anything usable … But one thing is really disturbing … all these Darwinists are clever, well educated people… they pefectly know, that in order to create life, hundreds of parts have to work in concert … but they still BELIEVE that life somehow emeged naturaly … this is really disturbing …. such clever people …. it is a shame….
How hard could it be to create life from no-life? Not much different from food that prepares and cooks itself. Not like you need a designer to make it happen.
Bob, you got it all wrong … when you want to cook something, among many other things, you need to add energy, right? The right amount, and the right sort of energy … Otherwise, the cooking won’t even start, or, you get a mess… Also, among many other things, the cooking needs to know when to stop, right ? no designer needed? Really? When you believe in miracles, then probably not …
“helps the robot choose”???
But algorithms don’t ‘choose’ either, but are deterministic mathematical models that are the result of prior human, free will, choices. i.e. “algorithms don’t “write themselves” but are “the outcome of thousands of human (free will) decisions.”,,, “as algorithms get more complicated”,, “there is actually more opportunities for human beings to influence the final product.”,,,
Besides algorithms themselves being the product of prior (biased) human decisions, robots themselves are, obviously, also the product of human decisions (i.e. intelligent design). In fact, I hold that finding a robot on a beach, (mindlessly churning out chemical experiments, hunting through “vast swathes of chemical space”, trying to find a self-replicating molecule), makes Paley’s watch argument seem very tame in comparison.
As to this comment from the article:
Of related interest to that comment is the fact that RNA catalysts with partial self-copying capacity have already been ‘designed’, “after, not before, the information problem has been solved.” (Stephen Meyer)
Moreover, even if Darwinists found a self-replicating molecule, their belief that natural selection will then somehow kick in and magically overcome the second law of thermodynamics is, at best, a misguided belief on their part.
Spiegelman’s Monster is a clear example that their belief is misguided
In further note to natural selection being unable to overcome entropy, (as is falsely believed by Darwinists),, also see, Sanford; “Genetic Entropy”, and Behe; “Darwin Devolves”
Of supplemental note: Regarding information as being independent of matter and energy readily explains why life can be so far out of thermodynamic equilibrium.
How hard could it be to create life from no-life?
You are a funny guy …
Obviously, it is pretty hard, and, it might surprise you, but after 150 years of Darwinism, no OOL- researcher came even close … they have got nothing … no progress at all … zero …
Bob, one more thing … could you give me an example of a food which prepares itself? I am curious …
All the ingredients of life are known and exist in labs all over the world. Take a cell and puncture it. It ceases living. But every ingredient for life is still there.
Does it then have to be modified in some way (temperature, pressure, or some appropriate catalyst) for it to regain life? This should be a good place to start. But they don’t. Why?
What disappears when the cell wall is punctured that was there before?
Indeed you are but that’s beside the point.
How about bananas? They grow without any human assistance and mass produce themselves in bunches. They come in a durable and biodegradable packaging and, even though we had nothing to do with their “design”, according to some “experts” they are perfectly shaped for grasping by the human hand.
How’s working :
same like evolutionists( mom- authority ,ignorance and hypocrisy) and their apprentices(son-blind respect for a hypocryte : “experts say” ) that repeat like parrots without having an understanding whatever authority says.
The result? “food which prepares itself” 😆
Of related note to the insurmountable thermodynamic/information hurdle facing a purely chemical Origin of Life scenario, (including the present ‘robotic chemical lab’)
As to “chemical events are linked into pathways, so that the products of reactions do not accumulate”, here is, according to a Darwinist, a ‘horrendously complex’ metabolic pathway diagram of a ‘simple’ cell:
I showed that particular metabolic pathway diagram to a Darwinist once when he asked me for ANY evidence of intelligent design in biology. His response upon seeing that diagram was to go into ‘denial mode’ and say something along the lines of, ‘Just because it is ‘horrendously complex’ does not prove it was designed.’. ,,, To which I responded something along the line of, “Well such ‘horrendous complexity’ certainly does not support the VERY extraordinary Darwinian claim that such ‘horrendous complexity’ can possibly be the result of ‘selected chemical accidents’ either! Intelligent Design is, by far, the better conclusion to draw from such ‘horrendous complexity’!
Seversky, you are so confused … it is no longer funny …
The metabolic pathways diagram … very nice … poor Darwinist … i have heard it so many times … ‘complexity proves nothing …’ and Creationists are the stupid ones …
When you look at the diagram, how on earth, can a rational educated 21st century person think, that there is no intelligent agency behind it ? Is it really some atheist conspiracy ? This is sick …
You regularly eat banana peels?