“Do you believe it’s possible to win the Evolution 2.0 Prize?”

Glen Reuschling writes:

I’ve taken the opportunity to read, then reread several times, your recent paper “Biology transcends the limits of computation” (2021). I’m confused. Wouldn’t a working solution to your prize challenge effectively disprove the assertion of the paper’s title?

So, inquiring minds want to know, are you offering the prize challenge because you don’t believe a solution is possible? In which case it represents a sort of put-up-or-shut-up challenge to your Neo-Darwinists critics.

Or do you in fact believe a solution is possible? In which case the prize should be taken as incentive for someone to commit their own creative energy working actively for a solution. Or is there third possibility I’m missing?


Response: What a wonderful question. A working solution would disprove my paper IF that solution only uses known properties of physics and chemistry.

But I don’t believe our current, conventional understanding of physics and chemistry will ever solve origin of life or even account for the “aliveness” of life. We are missing something. Whatever this thing is, it is very fundamental. More fundamental than gravity.

If there are “undiscovered laws of physics,” in other words if consciousness is an emergent property of matter due to principles we don’t understand (NOW); or perhaps consciousness is a more primary entity that the cosmos itself is grounded in. And this, once understood, enables us to build systems that exhibit negentropy… that would both validate the paper AND solve the prize.

That is where I think the truth lies.

There are two ways to speak about ’emergent properties’: One is when we understand and observe them regularly (like cold air + water = snowflakes); the other is when we don’t, so we just utter the words “emergent property” as a fill-in for something we’ve never directly observed and don’t understand, i.e. “Life emerged from hot vents in the ocean.”

I do believe a solution is possible. And as my paper suggests, science has gotten cause and effect entirely backwards, so we have to take a very different, non-reductionist view of science in order to solve any of this. I offer several fruitful avenues of exploration here: https://evo2.org/ways-to-win/

Meanwhile the prize underscores the fact that we don’t have a clue where the genetic code came from; 95% of the literature is just-so stories.

Download The First 3 Chapters of Evolution 2.0 For Free, Here – https://evo2.org/evolution/

Where Did Life And The Genetic Code Come From? Can The Answer Build Superior AI? The #1 Mystery In Science Now Has A $10 Million Prize. Learn More About It, Here – https://www.herox.com/evolution2.0

4 Responses

  1. Ken Meyer says:

    I posted before on an EVO 2.0 thread about how intelligence defines the origin of life, and the implication being that intelligence defines the very composition of the universe. Perry said “thank you for your contribution” about that and it was encouraging to hear. In particular, I cited a means by which intelligence takes its necessary and unquenchable incidence within what we find to be our reality: whether reality in physics or reality in biology, or in our daily society.

    My own dramatic and only concern as regarding the telling forth of this civilization-defining thesis, is that I am a single voice of its incidence. The $10M prize, of course, is a first order resolution of such difficulty in telling forth life’s origin.

    However, the $10M prize is tailored to … it knows not what. Were it just an information question, maybe simply code could do the trick. But the real question is, “What is the code’s information from?” So the code’s information has to be developed, first, then coded.

    And the process of so doing, I have elaborated in the aforementioned thread post. But as for making it a scientific statement, I don’t have that capability to so define an experiment so it goes unmentioned.

    Just as a discussion, though, the questions of: how is the universe fine-tuned as it is, and just how did prebiology become alive as cells and finally us, those questions are readily and unquenchably answered in my earlier post. Of course, that post finds extraordinary elaboration in further discussion.

    It all boils down to, that since the answer is readily and actually available, but hidden in a thicket, someone could simply ask and thus find.

    • The gold standard of science is not peer review, it’s engineering: Can you built it and does it work?

      Lots of people send us various philosophical treatises claiming to solve origin of life, the information problem or other related questions. It is not often that they conform to any of the prize specifications so unfortunately we can’t do anything with them.

      I would be very interested in anything you have that is physically demonstrable.

  2. To explain the photoelectric effect that won Albert Einstein the Nobel Prize in 1921, he stated that light traps electrons.
    The two Dutch physicists who won it in 1999 Gerard ‘t Hooft and MARTINUS J.G. VELTMAN for enunciating the four fundamental forces of physics, insinuate that there is no one capable of trapping them without generating a chain reaction, therefore what he observed in 1921 were the that the sun produces. And we check it with the COEL test
    The concept that said: It is the energy that moves electrical machines fell into disuse because it is the flow of electrons that are manipulated and produce the known effects such as reflection, refraction, diffraction, interference, electromagnetic waves, organic life, and light.
    They move away from the SUN as it is last, when they cross the atmosphere they recover their identity and chemical reactions occur that generate wireless electricity and enter the plants, animals and human beings, allowing life as it was conceived from the beginning.
    The origin of life is not chemical but physical. It is in the wireless electricity that the Sun generates
    Before Adam and Eve, Lubell a beautiful angell, rebeled and was thrown from even along a third of the angels, so Sata and his hosts appeared Issaiah 14:12
    In Genesis 1;1 it saysthat Godcreated heaven adn esrth all was joy and gladness.
    Evil is the absense of good when they disobeyed that appeared
    By ignoring the creation of the univese is assumes that always exised, however we were ceated in its image according to its likeness that is why have intelligence
    And it created the conditions to seed it on planets of identical characteristis and offer us seed including te atmosperes that we can carry because there are more solar systms to innabit.
    The order creator gave n Geness was clear, grow and multiply the cells copy themselves it is chemical process but need wireless electricity to move everywhere it is phisical
    Have a great day

    José Roberto Víctor Manuel Salas Barboza

  3. The only serious book of antiquity is the Bible because there is archaeological evidence of cities that existed. It was written 1,500 years ago by 44 men who did not know each other. Because it is a reliable source, we take it into account.
    Genesis 1
    1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
    2 And the earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God moved over the face of the waters.
    First verse mean the universe always existed second verse confirm the first and this is void mean without God spirit
    Third day light begin stars twinkled and fourth day start organic live as we know
    You right on 3rd verse of Genesis the live was beginning as chemical reactions, , but they change to phisical and organic after 4rth
    When Pierre and Marie Curie found radium was it like a chemical reaction (Genesis 1:3). The light reaches the Earth it does so as a physical process (Genesis 1:4) and begin the organic live. If we care about other worlds when the Earth shines like a star. We can will start in another planets.

Leave a Reply

You must use your real first and last name. Anonymity is not allowed.
Your email address will not be published.
Required fields are marked *