Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Can quantum mechanics explain spontaneous mutation of DNA?

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Despite otherwise “astounding precision”?

The molecules of life, DNA, replicate with astounding precision, yet this process is not immune to mistakes and can lead to mutations. Using sophisticated computer modelling, a team of physicists and chemists at the University of Surrey have shown that such errors in copying can arise due to the strange rules of the quantum world.

The two strands of the famous DNA double helix are linked together by subatomic particles called protons – the nuclei of atoms of hydrogen – which provide the glue that bonds molecules called bases together. These so-called hydrogen bonds are like the rungs of a twisted ladder that makes up the double helix structure discovered in 1952 by James Watson and Francis Crick based on the work of Rosalind Franklin and Maurice Wilkins.

Normally, these DNA bases (called A, C, T and G) follow strict rules on how they bond together: A always bonds to T and C always to G. This strict pairing is determined by the molecules’ shape, fitting them together like pieces in a jigsaw, but if the nature of the hydrogen bonds changes slightly, this can cause the pairing rule to break down, leading to the wrong bases being linked and hence a mutation. Although predicted by Crick and Watson, it is only now that sophisticated computational modelling has been able to quantify the process accurately.

University of Surrey, “Quantum mechanics could explain why DNA can spontaneously mutate” at Eurekalert (May 5, 2022)

The paper is open access.

Comments
FH, This is an unproven fiction. As you know, most mutations are neutral or harmful. Next, to be passed on, the mutation must exist in the appropriate genetic material. A working eye, for example, cannot exist by itself. Aside from the eyeball, there needs to be an optic nerve which connects to the right part of the brain to decode the incoming information. The rods and cones in the eye just happened to appear one day? More wishful thinking. In the human head, the eyes "knew" how to separate precisely at the right distance apart in the skull, which also somehow invented eye sockets, to allow for stereoscopic vision?marker
May 6, 2022
May
05
May
6
06
2022
01:29 PM
1
01
29
PM
PDT
Martin_r SO PLEASE SHOW ME, WHERE ARE ALL THE FAULTY SPECIES …
:) The faulty species haven't been caught in Flood, they managed to escape with an Alien Ship. The "evolutionists" have no clue about basics of genetics it's just a bluff .Lieutenant Commander Data
May 6, 2022
May
05
May
6
06
2022
11:52 AM
11
11
52
AM
PDT
And in another post, I provided the following information. Random mutation and natural selection is a lousy explanation for genetic change! It is used by Darwinists to rationalize all new discoveries, but has never made a successful prediction, but tons of wrong ones including so-called "vestigial" organs and "junk DNA."
According to his book, Evolution 2.0, Perry Marshall claims there are five, maybe six ways that a genome can change. The weakest one is random mutation. 1. Transposition 2. Horizontal gene transfer 3. Epigenetics 4. Symbiogenesis 5. Genome duplication 6. Random mutation (maybe rarely) He’s offered a $10,000,000 US prize to anyone who can replicate cellular evolution. Details here: https://www.herox.com/evolution2.0
This would also be a good book to bone up on rather than just blather on about random mutations and impossible rates of change hidden beneath an impenetrable cloak of millions of years originating from the age of wooden ships that's been used (and in some cases, still used) to justify European colonialism, African slavery, eugenics, and genocide of indigenous peoples. -QQuerius
May 6, 2022
May
05
May
6
06
2022
11:37 AM
11
11
37
AM
PDT
Martin
i discussed this issue before, nobody seems to understand what i mean
Your English is fine. They know exactly what you mean.Silver Asiatic
May 6, 2022
May
05
May
6
06
2022
11:37 AM
11
11
37
AM
PDT
JVL, Hickson and Co. you don't get it... ( i discussed this issue before, nobody seems to understand what i mean, perhaps it is because English is not my first language. So please let me know if you don't understand my English or what's the problem ... ) Darwinism claims, that copying errors created millions of perfectly working species ... because, what we see today, plus, what we can see in fossil record, are ONLY perfectly working and fully developed species ... we don't see any faulty species ... SO PLEASE SHOW ME, WHERE ARE ALL THE FAULTY SPECIES ... YOU SAID, ONLY THE 'GOOD DESIGN' HAS BEEN SELECTED, I AM OK WITH THAT, BUT YOU HAVE TO SHOW ME THE FAULTY SPECIES AS WELL. HAD TO BE MILLIONES OF THEM IF NOT BILLIONS (in fossil record). SHOW ME ONE.martin_r
May 6, 2022
May
05
May
6
06
2022
11:27 AM
11
11
27
AM
PDT
LCD
Yep and you have no logical explanations. Isn’t it wonderful that smart people blunder like toddlers.
That's false. JVL gave a reasonable summary of the two core porcesses of evolution: random variation and non-random selection. I don't believe anyone in the ID fold has yet proposed an alternative hypothesis. Can you?Fred Hickson
May 6, 2022
May
05
May
6
06
2022
09:50 AM
9
09
50
AM
PDT
Copying errors created genetic variations which translated to physiological variations
:))) Yep and you have no logical explanations. Isn't it wonderful that smart people blunder like toddlers.Lieutenant Commander Data
May 6, 2022
May
05
May
6
06
2022
09:41 AM
9
09
41
AM
PDT
Martin_r: COPYING ERRORS created MILLIONS OF PERFECTLY WORKING SPECIES :)))))))) So how perverted a Darwinian scientist has to be to claim such absurd things ? Copying errors created genetic variations which translated to physiological variations some of which were better able to survive and exploit the local environment and resources. A lot of the variation generated died out and left no offspring; it's a wasteful process. No one says any of the species were 'perfectly working'. All the ones that left offspring were well-enough adapted to their environment to leave offspring. The ones with the most offspring(s) had the greatest influence. It's not an engineering problem. It's a trial-and-error scenario.JVL
May 6, 2022
May
05
May
6
06
2022
09:32 AM
9
09
32
AM
PDT
I'm sure a lot of people in Wall Street have asked the same question. I wonder what the stock answer is?Seversky
May 6, 2022
May
05
May
6
06
2022
08:27 AM
8
08
27
AM
PDT
A more useful question would be can QM explain the stock market………chuckdarwin
May 6, 2022
May
05
May
6
06
2022
08:21 AM
8
08
21
AM
PDT
The molecules of life, DNA, replicate with astounding precision,
as to astounding DNA replication precision Darwinists claim, that DNA replication process is astounding precise. Yet, they BELIEVE, that DNA replication errors created millions if not billions of species on this planet. COPYING ERRORS created MILLIONS OF PERFECTLY WORKING SPECIES :)))))))) So how perverted a Darwinian scientist has to be to claim such absurd things ? Seriously, what is wrong with these people (Darwinists) ?martin_r
May 5, 2022
May
05
May
5
05
2022
11:32 PM
11
11
32
PM
PDT
A theory that works only when the tenured Scientist is present can explain anything the tenured Scientist wants it to explain.polistra
May 5, 2022
May
05
May
5
05
2022
10:59 PM
10
10
59
PM
PDT
1 2 3

Leave a Reply