Anthropic Multiverse Origin of Life

In summary, according to molecular geneticist JohnJoe McFadden's book Quantum Evolution, the emergence of life can be explained through the Many Worlds approach where quantum measurement by a self-replicating biomolecule within a cell caused branching in the multiverse. Each peptide addition resulted in multiple branches, with only one universe eventually harboring the self-replicator and leading to the emergence of life. This theory also suggests that we may be alone in our branch of the multiverse due to anthropic selection bias.
  • #1
dwilkerson
17
0
"Quantum measurement by a self-replicating biomolecule was the key event that caused life to emerge."

"Using the Many Worlds approach, peptide addition within the first (proto-) cell would have taken place, not in a classical universe, but within the multiverse of all possible states."

"Each peptide addition was a multiple branch point where the growing peptide chain evolved in all directions simultaneously. The multiverse expanded with every addition to the peptide chain as the quantum tree of possibilities grew in every direction."

"But once one branch lighted upon a self-replicating peptide, then quantum measurement would have become inevitable. Decoherence shattered the unity of the quantum tree, which split into 20^32 separate branches, each representing a different universe. Only one of the 20^32 descendent universes harboured the self-replicator, but in that one universe life emerged."

The 20^32 is the amount of ways possible to put together peptides 32 amino acids long.


Please comment on what you think about this interpretation of how life first emerged from this QM point of view. I couldn't get anyone in the Biology room to follow me, so I'll try my luck over here in the QM room. All of this was taken from molecular geneticist JohnJoe McFadden's book Quantum Evolution.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
dwilkerson said:
"But once one branch lighted upon a self-replicating peptide, then quantum measurement would have become inevitable. Decoherence shattered the unity of the quantum tree, which split into 20^32 separate branches, each representing a different universe. Only one of the 20^32 descendent universes harboured the self-replicator, but in that one universe life emerged."

The 20^32 is the amount of ways possible to put together peptides 32 amino acids long.

Yes, that's also more or less a potential view I have on these things. I tried to get a discussion started on the bio forum but it didn't really work out I guess.

Ok, in the above formulation, there are some inaccuracies, in that "the quantum measurement would have become inevitable" etc...
Decoherence is continuously at work, and nothing special happens when these peptides get into a long chain. The only point is that there are MANY PARALLEL branches, each evolving slightly differently, so in SOME of them, "life happened". So instead of having a "classical computer" figuring out replicating chains, you'd have a parallel quantum computer doing so.
It doesn't have to be that way of course, but it is a way out of the "probability problem" in the development of life. I'm absolutely no expert, but some claim that the probability for life to start on Earth was way too low for it to be a reasonable explanation - however, that's assuming a classical approach. If you include the many many alternative branches in a multiverse, this increases vastly the probability of it happening in SOME branch (evidently the branch we're in!).
It would have another implication: we would be alone in our branch (universe). Indeed, if the classical probability of life happening would be "rather high" so that it was likely to happen in the first billion years or so of the Earth's existence, then it is also likely to happen elsewhere, so the universe should be full of life, so to speak. If however, the classical probability of life to happen would be zilch, and we needed the "branch factor" to make it happen, then there are of course other branches where it happened, but in THIS branch, it would probably be the only occurrence (within a decohered branch, things happen as if they are classical).
It all depends on the estimated classical probability of life happening spontaneously.

Of course, you don't need such an exotic explanation of course if the universe is infinitely large, because then the classical probability of life to happen *somewhere* is always large enough ; this would then follow the same argument as with the many branches.

cheers,
Patrick.
 
  • #3
vanesch said:
I'm absolutely no expert, but some claim that the probability for life to start on Earth was way too low for it to be a reasonable explanation - however, that's assuming a classical approach. If you include the many many alternative branches in a multiverse, this increases vastly the probability of it happening in SOME branch (evidently the branch we're in!).
It would have another implication: we would be alone in our branch (universe). Indeed, if the classical probability of life happening would be "rather high" so that it was likely to happen in the first billion years or so of the Earth's existence, then it is also likely to happen elsewhere, so the universe should be full of life, so to speak. If however, the classical probability of life to happen would be zilch, and we needed the "branch factor" to make it happen, then there are of course other branches where it happened, but in THIS branch, it would probably be the only occurrence (within a decohered branch, things happen as if they are classical).
It all depends on the estimated classical probability of life happening spontaneously.

This is very much consistent with what I was proposing at the end of this thread. The idea is that I think we can make reasonable inferences about the probability of there being extraterrestrial life if we have some basic information about the model of "universe" generation. I suggest various alternatives, including "evolving universes", random universes, and intelligent design. I included the possibility for many universes with random physical laws, but I now realize that I omitted an important one: many universes which are just different iterations with same physical laws. An example of such a situation would be the many-worlds interpretation of QM. In this model, I think the implication would indeed be that we are alone (assuming a finite universe), because of the anthropic selection bias.
 
Last edited:
  • #4
dwilkerson said:
"Quantum measurement by a self-replicating biomolecule was the key event that caused life to emerge."

"Using the Many Worlds approach, peptide addition within the first (proto-) cell would have taken place, not in a classical universe, but within the multiverse of all possible states."

"Each peptide addition was a multiple branch point where the growing peptide chain evolved in all directions simultaneously. The multiverse expanded with every addition to the peptide chain as the quantum tree of possibilities grew in every direction."

"But once one branch lighted upon a self-replicating peptide, then quantum measurement would have become inevitable. Decoherence shattered the unity of the quantum tree, which split into 20^32 separate branches, each representing a different universe. Only one of the 20^32 descendent universes harboured the self-replicator, but in that one universe life emerged."

The 20^32 is the amount of ways possible to put together peptides 32 amino acids long.


Please comment on what you think about this interpretation of how life first emerged from this QM point of view. I couldn't get anyone in the Biology room to follow me, so I'll try my luck over here in the QM room. All of this was taken from molecular geneticist JohnJoe McFadden's book Quantum Evolution.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

It shows that the author is as ignorant about how/why life first
emerged as the rest of us. :-)
 

Related to Anthropic Multiverse Origin of Life

1. What is the Anthropic Multiverse Origin of Life theory?

The Anthropic Multiverse Origin of Life theory proposes that life on Earth is a result of the unique conditions and properties of our universe, which are necessary for the development of complex life forms. It suggests that our universe is just one of many possible universes, and that the specific physical laws and constants in our universe are finely tuned to allow for the existence of life.

2. How does the Anthropic Multiverse Origin of Life theory explain the origin of life?

This theory suggests that the origin of life can be explained by the concept of the multiverse, which is the idea that there are many parallel universes with different physical laws and constants. In some of these universes, the conditions may not be suitable for the formation of life, but our universe happens to have the perfect combination of factors for life to arise.

3. What evidence supports the Anthropic Multiverse Origin of Life theory?

While there is no direct evidence for the multiverse, there are several pieces of evidence that support aspects of the Anthropic Multiverse Origin of Life theory. For example, the fine-tuning of physical constants and the existence of complex life on Earth are both in line with what would be expected in a universe that is finely tuned for life.

4. What are the criticisms of the Anthropic Multiverse Origin of Life theory?

One of the main criticisms of this theory is that it is difficult to test or prove. Since we currently have no way of observing other universes, it is impossible to gather empirical evidence to support the multiverse. Additionally, some argue that the fine-tuning of our universe could be a result of natural processes rather than a deliberate design.

5. How does the Anthropic Multiverse Origin of Life theory impact our understanding of the universe and our place in it?

This theory challenges traditional beliefs about the uniqueness of our universe and our place in it. It suggests that our universe is just one among many, and that the conditions for life may not be as rare as previously thought. It also raises philosophical questions about the purpose and meaning of our existence in a vast and potentially infinite multiverse.

Similar threads

  • Biology and Medical
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
875
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
2
Replies
51
Views
5K
  • Cosmology
Replies
21
Views
6K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
26
Views
19K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Back
Top