According to assembly theory, Before Darwinian evolution can proceed, something must select multiple copies of the High AI object from the Assemblable object. Cronin said chemistry alone might be able to do that by narrowing down relatively complex molecules into small subsets. In ordinary chemical reactions, certain products are already “chosen” among all possible permutations due to their fast reaction rates.
It is therefore possible that certain conditions in the prebiotic environment, such as temperature and catalytic mineral surfaces, began to sort out pools of molecular precursors of life among possible assemblies. According to ensemble theory, these prebiotic preferences are to be “memorized” in today’s biomolecules, which encode their own histories. As Darwin’s selection carried over, preference was given to objects that could self-replicate better. In the process, the encryption of this history has grown stronger. This is precisely why scientists can use the molecular structure of proteins and DNA to infer the evolutionary relationships of living things.
Set theory thus “provides a framework that unifies the description of choice across physics and biology,” say Cronin, Walker, and others. I have written. “The more ‘composed’ an object is, the more choices it needs to make to exist.”
“We’re trying to develop a theory that explains how life arises from chemistry, and we’re doing it in a rigorous and empirically testable way,” Cronin said.
One measure to rule them all?
Krakauer feels that both assembly theory and constructor theory offer exciting new ways of thinking about how complex objects are created. “These theories are more like telescopes than chemistry labs,” he says. “They allow us to see things rather than make them. That’s never a bad thing and can be very powerful.”
But “as with all science, evidence will come in tacit terms,” he warns.
Zenir, on the other hand, believes that assembly theory is just a thing, given that there are already sizeable complexity metrics, such as Kolmogorov complexity. reinventing the wheel. Mr. Mallett disagrees. “There are several complexity measures, each of which captures a different concept of complexity,” she said. But most of those measures aren’t related to real-world processes, she said. For example, Kolmogorov’s complexity assumes a kind of device that can combine everything that the laws of physics allow. Mallett said this was an appropriate measure for a “possible parliament” but not necessarily for a “monitoring parliament”, she said. In contrast, assembly theory “is a promising approach because it focuses on operationally defined physical properties rather than abstract notions of complexity,” she said.
Missing from these previous complexity measures, Cronin says, is some sense of the history of complex objects: they do not distinguish between enzymes and random polypeptides.
Cronin and Walker hope that set theory will eventually address very broad questions in physics, such as the nature of time and the origin of the second law of thermodynamics. But those goals are still far away. “The assembly theory program is still in its early stages,” Marlett said. She hopes to see this theory explored in the lab. But it can also happen in nature. To look for authentic processes taking place in other worlds.
original story Reprinted with permission from Quanta Magazine, editorially independent publication Simmons Foundation Its mission is to enhance public understanding of science by addressing research developments and trends in mathematics, physical sciences and life sciences.
