So, a new theory about how life started has landed just like our astral ancestors did on earth eons ago.
Jeremy England’s theory doesn’t challenge Darwin.
“On the contrary,” he says, “I am just saying that from the perspective of the physics, you might call Darwinian evolution a special case of a more general phenomenon.”. It just kinda zooms out on the bigger picture of why and how it was not only possible but probable. To “get it”, I kinda had to read the article I saw a few times. But the idea is basically this. First, you start with a blob of atoms. Then you put that blob in an atmosphere and add 1.) an external energy source (like the sun), 2.) a heat bath (like the oceans – which were basically giant witch cauldrons back then) and 3.) time.
And boom.
Creation born of chaos.
The idea is that as time progresses, the second law of thermodynamics pops in and does that same thing it’s doing to my coffee right now – reaching thermodynamic equilibrium. That law has to do with entropy. While some of us commoners equate entropy to anarchy and craziness and carnival orgies, what it really has to do with is energy dispersal. Entropy is the measure of the natch tendency for energy to disperse – and how diffused particles are in a space. Like this coffee cup, for instance. My luke warm cup of coffee got cold in this room because the energy of the heat that was in it had to do with the concentration of the rapidly moving particles in it. Those particles’ proclivity is to disperse and diffuse energy (It’s just that it happens superfast in here because I have nightmare insulation). And once that happens, the process is irreversible as unscrambling an egg.
Unless you add in a microwave. Which I’mma ‘bout to do now.
Similarly, our grand-atoms had to disperse energy somehow in this brave new world. So, the way they did it, England proposes, is by restructuring themselves. And that new structuring became the ingredients for life. With a bit o’ sun and steamy water, he claims that it was almost inevitable.
“You start with a random clump of atoms, and if you shine light on it for long enough, it should not be so surprising that you get a plant,” England said.
But this doesn’t make sense for us later on down the line, does it? I’m all organized on the inside – not at all like that coffee cup (even though its contents and my blood are arguably interchangeable at this point.) So what’s that all about? YOUR MOVE, science! Well, that’s because there’s a difference between an open and closed system. Because you, me, and the poinsettia I forgot to water are all open systems, we’re interacting with our environment. So we can keep our overall inside entropy lower the way you keep your workload stress in a company low – by dividing energy. And much like the pay my office manager at my last gig got versus what I got, the energy gets divided unevenly. Horribly, unjustly, nonsensically, unevenl-… I’m getting off topic here. The point is that we add to the entropy by breathing, expelling waste, and a variety of other activities. Or: if you’re a plant, you shoot out infrared light when you do photosynthesis.
Or: SEX.
Yup. Procreaction, England says, is an excellent way to dissipate energy. Or as England puts it, “A great way of dissipating more energy is to make more copies of yourself.” (Yeah, man. That energy dissipates right through my screen from my Facebook feed and hits me like a club of disgust”)
This new-ish theory obviously has a ways to go – particulary inasmuch as research on open systems is something they’ve not done much with. I’m half interested to know what that’s gonna mean. But I half already know it means probably a shiz ton of vivisections on unassuming lab rats, monkeys, and dogs. Poor bastards.
I’m just left brain-rewinding back to the beginning though:
All’s we gotta have is an atom blob in a giant wet microwave of energy source (could be a field, doesn’t even need to be the sun) and water. So… that means… we could grow life with light and hydration in a lab out of absolutely nothing if we wait long enough? Aren’t there other planets that have at least some variation of this setup? Like a crazy field of energy and lava oceans? Why don’t they have life then? Dude! Could that Brendan Fraser movie where there’s a world in the center of the world be f’real then?
(I liked this movie far more than I intended to…)
Keep in mind, it’s still just a theory.
A cool food-for-thought one, but just a theory nonetheless.