I would like to thank the moderator for their recognition of all the people working behind the scenes. The quality of the questions asked by well respected colleagues is a testament to Professor Lane's natural ability at presenting complex and challenging science. If we answer a few baffling questions in this life and leave better questions to others, it seems we are all well served.
I am an unabashed fan of Nick Lane after stumbling on his book, "The Vital Question" about six years ago, and "Transformer" was equally engaging, compelling and inspiring. Thank you for this fascinating panel of experts in fields essential to the study of the origins of life.
I have started slowly working my way through "Transformers" a second time. So glad this presentation popped up now because what I have learned from this excellent lecture will help me (a "normal" person) understand more of Dr Lane's fascinating hypothesis and how it came to be as he describes it in his wonderful book. Thank you very much!
Nick that was a beautiful, elegant and compelling hypothesis for how autotrophic life could have developed supported with tantalising evidence. All the physical and chemical ingredients are there. Anyone can think of chemical additions from space but your hypothesis hangs together. Go you good thing (and your students!)
@@rl7012 what opposing ideas do you feel are better and more plausible? Why not post a video rebuttal so that we can better understand where the issues in his thoughts are and what might be a better theory
The Age of Life The ability to carry out actions differentiates inanimate matter from living matter. In turn, every action involves the management of Information. We do not know what Matter is or what Life is, and we assume that all life forms that currently inhabit the planet descend from a common ancestor (LUCA), an organism whose complexity is evident if we consider that it is attributed the ability to reproduce. Due to the above, it is reasonable to assume that “seeds of life” existed prior to LUCA. Assuming that the “seeds of life” emerged together with the Big Bang is a bold postulate, and as such requires a solid empirical foundation. When observing Evolution considering the information that our ancestors have managed, and that currently managed by humanity, it is possible to distinguish seven evolutionary milestones; Its analysis allows us to postulate that Life goes back to the origin of the Universe, and the existence of an “evolutionary pattern” is evident, which turns out to be the Golden Ratio. Evolutionary Milestones -Emergence of ”Seeds of Life”(1) (thirteen thousand eight hundred million years ago). -Emergence of LUCA (Last Universal Common Ancestor) three thousand eight hundred million years ago -Emergence of the brain (five hundred and fifty million years ago). -Emergence of what was the precursor of human language (2) (twenty-seven million years ago) -Emergence of the language that characterizes us(3) (around two hundred and twenty thousand years ago). -Emergence of “the information age” with the transistor (1950) -Evolutionary Singularity(4) proposed by Ray Kurzweil, who postulates that humanity will access a Singularity as a result of the exponential growth of information management (year 2045). Evolutionary sections Among successive evolutionary milestones we can distinguish the following six “Evolutionary Tranches”, with the duration indicated (in years): Tranche 1: 10,000,000,000 (13,800,000,000 - 3,800,000,000 = 10,000,000,000) Tranche 2: 3,250,000,000 (3,800,000,000 - 550,000,000 = 3,250,000,000) Tranche 3: 523,000,000 (550,000,000 - 27,000,000 = 523,000,000) Tranche 4: 26,780,000 (27,000,000 - 220,000 = 26,780,000) Tranche 5: 219,905 (220,000 - 95(5) = 219,905) Tranche 6: 95 (95 - 0 = 95) The particular variation experienced by the Evolutionary Sections over time suggests using the logarithm of said sections (LT) to analyze their behavior over time. The logarithms in question are as follows: LT1 = 10.0000 LT2 = 9.51188 LT3 = 8.71850 LT4 = 7.42781 LT5 = 5.34224 LT6 = 1.97772
The lines between two successive logarithms have the following slopes (P) P1 = -0.48812 (9.51188 - 10.0000 = -0.48812) P2 = -0.79338 (8.71850 - 9.51188 = -0.79338) P3 = -1.29069 (7.42781 - 8.71850 = -1.29069) P4 = -2.08557 (5.34224 - 7.42781 = -2.08557) P5 = -3.36452 (1.97772 - 5.34224 = -3.36452) After searching for an “evolutionary pattern” we will determine the variation between successive slopes, which is given by the Ratio (R) between them, that is, P2/P1; P3/P2; P4/P3; P5/P4, and is the following: R1 = 1.62538 R2 = 1.62682 R3 = 1.61586 R4 = 1.61324 The above values differ from the Golden Number (1.61803), a number also called the golden number, the number of God, the extreme and average ratio, the golden ratio, the golden mean, the golden ratio and the divine ratio, by 0.45%; 0.54%; 0.13% and 0.30%, respectively. In turn, the average of the sum of the ratios is 1.62032. This value differs from the golden ratio by 0.14%. The results obtained allow us to postulate that Evolution follows a pattern that is a function of Information and the golden ratio, and that Life goes back to the origin of the Universe. (1)The last universal common ancestor (LUCA) is the putative common ancestral cell from which the three domains of life, Bacteria, Archaea and Eukarya, originated. The complexity that LUCA is assumed to have does not give rise to affirming that it arose by “spontaneous generation”, it being valid to postulate the pre-existence of “seeds of life” prior to the emergence of LUCA; It is postulated that the origin of the “seeds of life” dates back to the moment when Matter arose in the Universe, that is, around thirteen thousand eight hundred million years. (2)“We find that the anatomical potential to produce and perceive sounds differentiated by their formants began at the latest by the time of our last common ancestor with Old World monkeys (Cercopithecoidea) about 27 Ma ago”; " Which way to the dawn of speech?: Reanalyzing half a century of debates and data in light of speech” (Science magazine) (3) The last change in the position of the hyoid bone in humans, which would have allowed access to the language that characterizes us, took place approximately two hundred and twenty thousand years ago, and its data is based on archaeological evidence and anthropological studies. There is no scientific source that records this change on an exact date. (4)Due to the exponential growth of information technologies, Ray Kurzweil postulates that a Technological Singularity will occur in the year 2045, at which time technological growth will be so rapid and so profound that it will be impossible to predict what its consequences will be. (5) It is the time between 1950 and 2045, the latter year in which Ray Kurzweil postulates that a Singularity will take place.
@@rl7012Did you watch the video? It's so crazy for you to be making this negative claim like "I have read all of origin of life research in the last 70 years and none of it is new" like there only has to be one counterexample in this video to show you're being hyperbolic.
@@chaotickreg7024 I didn't make that claim as you well know, I wrote there has been zero progress in OoL research in 70 years. Why don't you prove me wrong instead of trying to straw man me? Go on, prove me wrong. Show me the progress. Cite the evidence. I can wait......
If we cant get a krebs cycle or a reverse krebs cycle in one go why not a semi krebs ocillation. on a" daily" basis the system goes forwards and backwards and possibly hving useful precursors leachig off.
To the people who sit here and criticize, do you have anything useful to offer? Such as specific criticisms to what he's saying or other people who would be better for us to listen to? I'm not trolling, I'm genuinely curious because I want to learn.
Here's all they have to offer: "Jesus made us 6000 years and you know it, so you're actually telling a lie and going to Hell by talking about origin of life." That's it.
@@chaotickreg7024 Jesus didn't exist 6000 years ago. He didn't exist until the beginning of the first century. If you ever hear a Protestant talk about Jesus in this way tell him that he is not a Christian because he doesn't actually believe what the bible says. ;-)
If we went back in time 4 billion years how would we know we found life? Just observe life as you go back so you never lose track. Keep looking at it as we go back to directly locate the source...but that depends more on time travel lol which is fiction lol
We have a time machine. The laws of nature haven't changed. Everything that happened back then can still happen in the lab. You will see recreations of these processes within the next few decades.
I don't disagree with your skepticism, but to call this a religion is simply slander. So he didn't show any science? Come on. Get real. The bible shows ZERO evidence of anything. This presentation was loaded with evidence to point us in certain directions.
@@punkypinko2965 He is talking about "we" a group religious mentality. He is talking about "origins of life" like he was there and talking about creative force that is prevalent through time . He is only showing illustrations of things that nobody has seen in real life like it's a church with icons and frescoes . That and much more is why it's a religious doctrine. If you are offended by religious label, it's maybe because you are a religious nutcase who is also deceptive.
As per usual Nick says absolutely nothing definitive but tries to fudge the matter with 'could have's' and 'it is possible' and 'likely', 'seems' etc. He ignores all the big questions and word salads the bejesus out of the simplest of things to say. How did life first form Nick? Answer that. You can't. You have no idea how life formed as you know abiogenesis is absolutely scientifically and mathematically IMPOSSIBLE.
Can you show us the mathematics? And when you fail might you consider taking a deep breath and try to comment on matters you might know something about
@@mcmanustony Google it. Abiogenesis is mathematically impossible. Also you take a deep breath you ignoramus. Go on, get a good gulp of air in there and hope some of it kick starts a brain cell.
@@rl7012 I didn't ask for a google search. You made a claim about mathematics. "As per usual"....you are talking out of your hole. You can't show the mathematics because you haven't a fucking clue about either mathematics or biology. Get yourself to a library and try to salvage an education.....and while you do work on you manners.
There's obviously a lot to figure out. Is there anyone out there who can DEFINITIVELY say WITH PROOF that they know the answer? There tons of science that we don't understand and still need to prove, which is why they are doing experiments and HAVE TO conjecture about how things happen
I'm also curious, about what exactly he's saying isn't scientifically correct? I mean at a technical level because I understand that much of what he says is assumption and speculation, but in order to make progress in science you first have to make those assumptions in order to form a hypothesis, right?
How is it untestable? There are literally teams testing pieces of the theories. I can personally think of ways to test some of it and I'm not a chemist or biologist
I would like to thank the moderator for their recognition of all the people working behind the scenes. The quality of the questions asked by well respected colleagues is a testament to Professor Lane's natural ability at presenting complex and challenging science. If we answer a few baffling questions in this life and leave better questions to others, it seems we are all well served.
I am an unabashed fan of Nick Lane after stumbling on his book, "The Vital Question" about six years ago, and "Transformer" was equally engaging, compelling and inspiring. Thank you for this fascinating panel of experts in fields essential to the study of the origins of life.
You must be a fan of fiction then.
Brilliant, yes I’m rereading Transformers too and this lecture is extremely helpful.
I have started slowly working my way through "Transformers" a second time. So glad this presentation popped up now because what I have learned from this excellent lecture will help me (a "normal" person) understand more of Dr Lane's fascinating hypothesis and how it came to be as he describes it in his wonderful book. Thank you very much!
Nick that was a beautiful, elegant and compelling hypothesis for how autotrophic life could have developed supported with tantalising evidence. All the physical and chemical ingredients are there. Anyone can think of chemical additions from space but your hypothesis hangs together. Go you good thing (and your students!)
It does not hang together it is total conjecture, impossibilities and full of grant chasing phrases. The man is clueless.
@@rl7012 what opposing ideas do you feel are better and more plausible? Why not post a video rebuttal so that we can better understand where the issues in his thoughts are and what might be a better theory
The Age of Life
The ability to carry out actions differentiates inanimate matter from living matter. In turn, every action involves the management of Information.
We do not know what Matter is or what Life is, and we assume that all life forms that currently inhabit the planet descend from a common ancestor (LUCA), an organism whose complexity is evident if we consider that it is attributed the ability to reproduce. Due to the above, it is reasonable to assume that “seeds of life” existed prior to LUCA. Assuming that the “seeds of life” emerged together with the Big Bang is a bold postulate, and as such requires a solid empirical foundation. When observing Evolution considering the information that our ancestors have managed, and that currently managed by humanity, it is possible to distinguish seven evolutionary milestones; Its analysis allows us to postulate that Life goes back to the origin of the Universe, and the existence of an “evolutionary pattern” is evident, which turns out to be the Golden Ratio.
Evolutionary Milestones
-Emergence of ”Seeds of Life”(1) (thirteen thousand eight hundred million years ago).
-Emergence of LUCA (Last Universal Common Ancestor) three thousand eight hundred million years ago
-Emergence of the brain (five hundred and fifty million years ago).
-Emergence of what was the precursor of human language (2) (twenty-seven million years ago)
-Emergence of the language that characterizes us(3) (around two hundred and twenty thousand years ago).
-Emergence of “the information age” with the transistor (1950)
-Evolutionary Singularity(4) proposed by Ray Kurzweil, who postulates that humanity will access a Singularity as a result of the exponential growth of information management (year 2045).
Evolutionary sections
Among successive evolutionary milestones we can distinguish the following six “Evolutionary Tranches”, with the duration indicated (in years):
Tranche 1: 10,000,000,000 (13,800,000,000 - 3,800,000,000 = 10,000,000,000)
Tranche 2: 3,250,000,000 (3,800,000,000 - 550,000,000 = 3,250,000,000)
Tranche 3: 523,000,000 (550,000,000 - 27,000,000 = 523,000,000)
Tranche 4: 26,780,000 (27,000,000 - 220,000 = 26,780,000)
Tranche 5: 219,905 (220,000 - 95(5) = 219,905)
Tranche 6: 95 (95 - 0 = 95)
The particular variation experienced by the Evolutionary Sections over time suggests using the logarithm of said sections (LT) to analyze their behavior over time. The logarithms in question are as follows:
LT1 = 10.0000
LT2 = 9.51188
LT3 = 8.71850
LT4 = 7.42781
LT5 = 5.34224
LT6 = 1.97772
The lines between two successive logarithms have the following slopes (P)
P1 = -0.48812 (9.51188 - 10.0000 = -0.48812)
P2 = -0.79338 (8.71850 - 9.51188 = -0.79338)
P3 = -1.29069 (7.42781 - 8.71850 = -1.29069)
P4 = -2.08557 (5.34224 - 7.42781 = -2.08557)
P5 = -3.36452 (1.97772 - 5.34224 = -3.36452)
After searching for an “evolutionary pattern” we will determine the variation between successive slopes, which is given by the Ratio (R) between them, that is, P2/P1; P3/P2; P4/P3; P5/P4, and is the following:
R1 = 1.62538
R2 = 1.62682
R3 = 1.61586
R4 = 1.61324
The above values differ from the Golden Number (1.61803), a number also called the golden number, the number of God, the extreme and average ratio, the golden ratio, the golden mean, the golden ratio and the divine ratio, by 0.45%; 0.54%; 0.13% and 0.30%, respectively. In turn, the average of the sum of the ratios is 1.62032. This value differs from the golden ratio by 0.14%.
The results obtained allow us to postulate that Evolution follows a pattern that is a function of Information and the golden ratio, and that Life goes back to the origin of the Universe.
(1)The last universal common ancestor (LUCA) is the putative common ancestral cell from which the three domains of life, Bacteria, Archaea and Eukarya, originated. The complexity that LUCA is assumed to have does not give rise to affirming that it arose by “spontaneous generation”, it being valid to postulate the pre-existence of “seeds of life” prior to the emergence of LUCA; It is postulated that the origin of the “seeds of life” dates back to the moment when Matter arose in the Universe, that is, around thirteen thousand eight hundred million years.
(2)“We find that the anatomical potential to produce and perceive sounds differentiated by their formants began at the latest by the time of our last common ancestor with Old World monkeys (Cercopithecoidea) about 27 Ma ago”; " Which way to the dawn of speech?: Reanalyzing half a century of debates and data in light of speech” (Science magazine)
(3) The last change in the position of the hyoid bone in humans, which would have allowed access to the language that characterizes us, took place approximately two hundred and twenty thousand years ago, and its data is based on archaeological evidence and anthropological studies. There is no scientific source that records this change on an exact date.
(4)Due to the exponential growth of information technologies, Ray Kurzweil postulates that a Technological Singularity will occur in the year 2045, at which time technological growth will be so rapid and so profound that it will be impossible to predict what its consequences will be.
(5) It is the time between 1950 and 2045, the latter year in which Ray Kurzweil postulates that a Singularity will take place.
Fantastique! Haven’t heard anyone summarize the life origin story like this. We’re a long way past Urey and Miller.
Not really. If anything origin of life studies has never been so lost and far behind.
@@rl7012why do you say that?
@@YtoRetry Zero progress in 70 years since Urey Miller.
@@rl7012Did you watch the video? It's so crazy for you to be making this negative claim like "I have read all of origin of life research in the last 70 years and none of it is new" like there only has to be one counterexample in this video to show you're being hyperbolic.
@@chaotickreg7024 I didn't make that claim as you well know, I wrote there has been zero progress in OoL research in 70 years. Why don't you prove me wrong instead of trying to straw man me? Go on, prove me wrong. Show me the progress. Cite the evidence. I can wait......
How wonderful Nick explains!!
If we cant get a krebs cycle or a reverse krebs cycle in one go why not a semi krebs ocillation. on a" daily" basis the system goes forwards and backwards and possibly hving useful precursors leachig off.
To the people who sit here and criticize, do you have anything useful to offer? Such as specific criticisms to what he's saying or other people who would be better for us to listen to? I'm not trolling, I'm genuinely curious because I want to learn.
Here's all they have to offer: "Jesus made us 6000 years and you know it, so you're actually telling a lie and going to Hell by talking about origin of life." That's it.
@@chaotickreg7024 Jesus didn't exist 6000 years ago. He didn't exist until the beginning of the first century. If you ever hear a Protestant talk about Jesus in this way tell him that he is not a Christian because he doesn't actually believe what the bible says. ;-)
@@lepidoptera9337 Wow you're so smart
@@chaotickreg7024 I am a Catholic atheist. ;-)
@@lepidoptera9337 And you're gatekeeping Jesus? Nice.
If we went back in time 4 billion years how would we know we found life? Just observe life as you go back so you never lose track. Keep looking at it as we go back to directly locate the source...but that depends more on time travel lol which is fiction lol
We have a time machine. The laws of nature haven't changed. Everything that happened back then can still happen in the lab. You will see recreations of these processes within the next few decades.
Martin Robert Anderson Eric Anderson Deborah
I like his folksy style, but the videos are way too long. The intelligent mind simplifies. I recommend putting out part, one, part two, etc.
Talking about origins of life that can't be seen today, showing only illustrations. This is a religion , a bad religion, the worst religion possible.
Speaking of it makes one get at list some credit ,if one could duplicate any of it a God will arise instantly ,thievery at scientific level .
I don't disagree with your skepticism, but to call this a religion is simply slander. So he didn't show any science? Come on. Get real. The bible shows ZERO evidence of anything. This presentation was loaded with evidence to point us in certain directions.
grow up and try to salvage an education. This is not religion it's science.
@@punkypinko2965 He is talking about "we" a group religious mentality. He is talking about "origins of life" like he was there and talking about creative force that is prevalent through time . He is only showing illustrations of things that nobody has seen in real life like it's a church with icons and frescoes . That and much more is why it's a religious doctrine. If you are offended by religious label, it's maybe because you are a religious nutcase who is also deceptive.
@@mcmanustony Origin of life is religious.
As per usual Nick says absolutely nothing definitive but tries to fudge the matter with 'could have's' and 'it is possible' and 'likely', 'seems' etc. He ignores all the big questions and word salads the bejesus out of the simplest of things to say. How did life first form Nick? Answer that. You can't. You have no idea how life formed as you know abiogenesis is absolutely scientifically and mathematically IMPOSSIBLE.
Can you show us the mathematics? And when you fail might you consider taking a deep breath and try to comment on matters you might know something about
@@mcmanustony Google it. Abiogenesis is mathematically impossible. Also you take a deep breath you ignoramus. Go on, get a good gulp of air in there and hope some of it kick starts a brain cell.
@@rl7012 I didn't ask for a google search. You made a claim about mathematics. "As per usual"....you are talking out of your hole.
You can't show the mathematics because you haven't a fucking clue about either mathematics or biology.
Get yourself to a library and try to salvage an education.....and while you do work on you manners.
Why do you say it's mathematically and scientifically impossible?
There's obviously a lot to figure out. Is there anyone out there who can DEFINITIVELY say WITH PROOF that they know the answer? There tons of science that we don't understand and still need to prove, which is why they are doing experiments and HAVE TO conjecture about how things happen
Great talk. Thank you.
Stories are not science. And all Nick Lane has are stories.
Who provides better science in your opinion? I'm very interested in learning more about the topic so I'd love to look it up
I'm also curious, about what exactly he's saying isn't scientifically correct? I mean at a technical level because I understand that much of what he says is assumption and speculation, but in order to make progress in science you first have to make those assumptions in order to form a hypothesis, right?
@@YtoRetry It is all just a story. It is all untestable.
How is it untestable? There are literally teams testing pieces of the theories. I can personally think of ways to test some of it and I'm not a chemist or biologist
@YtoRetry It's as testable as Stonehenge arising naturally.