Find solution
Describe the Theory of the Origin of Life?

Is this theory for the origin of life (using quantum physics) as ridiculous as it sounds?

  • I was just letting my mind wander on the subject of life's origins, and I came up with this absolutely ridiculous theory on how life started (based on my skewered interpretation of quantum mechanics). It involves the theory of virtual particles; and is such: If virtual particles are able to technically appear in any shape etc. then what was to stop them, 3 billion or so years ago, just generating a life form (as in popping into existence as a strand of RNA or similar). It has been proven that natural processes can provide the organic substances this would have needed to survive, and from there it could have gradually evolved into the life we see nowadays. At first I thought this was completely stupid, but after giving it some more thought (with a VERY open mind), this doesn't seem as ridiculous as it first did. If you use the cat in the box thing with it, then the universe would have needed something to observe it, and therefore this may have been powerful enough to create life to observe it (though this does sound a bit spiritual and mad). So, is my interpretation of physics completely wrong, or do I have an (insane) point or idea here that might be possibly right?

  • Answer:

    I recently read Stephan Hawkins' "A Briefer History of Time" and very recently his "Theory of Everything". Two books I can recommend to you. They may not have all the answers, but will put the chaotic mind somewhat at peace.

James at Yahoo! Answers Visit the source

Was this solution helpful to you?

Other answers

Every theory needs to be backed up by logically and rationally consistent apparatus and experimentally verified, otherwise it is just a hypothesis. Do that work. There are a lot of such "theories" coming from minds of people mostly from esoteric background, which also may have some physics training, but the problem is that they do not follow the proper discipline and scientific method.

Kayode Zaire

As the other answer so correctly put it, yours is just a hypothesis (aka, an educated guess) until falsifiable tests and/or observations have validated it by showing it to be not false. Only then can it be correctly called a theory. And experiments and/or observations to validate the consensus hypotheses on the origins of life have shown that life did not begin as a spontaneous quantum event, which is what you just described. Life in fact, according to lab experiments and biology, began when atoms bound to form simple molecules, which in turn bound to form simple organic compounds including amino acids. These under the right conditions (usually including water as a basis) then formed RNA and subsequent DNA, with the ability to replicate. And as the DNA combined to form simple single cell bodies, life by most definitions began. To be alive, a body must be capable of responding to external stimuli and reproducing. So, yes, your interpretation is completely wrong.

oldprof

Related Q & A:

Just Added Q & A:

Find solution

For every problem there is a solution! Proved by Solucija.

  • Got an issue and looking for advice?

  • Ask Solucija to search every corner of the Web for help.

  • Get workable solutions and helpful tips in a moment.

Just ask Solucija about an issue you face and immediately get a list of ready solutions, answers and tips from other Internet users. We always provide the most suitable and complete answer to your question at the top, along with a few good alternatives below.