Revolution by Natural Selection - Professor Nick Lane, University College London

Revolution by Natural Selection: A radical history of life from inside our cells
Professor Nick Lane’s research is about how energy flow has shaped evolution over four billion years. He uses a mixture of theoretical and experimental work to address the origin of life, the evolution of complex cells and downright peculiar behaviour such as sex. This lecture will outline how a simple cycle at the heart of metabolism drove some of the most important revolutions in the history of life. By turning gases into organic molecules and back again, this deep chemistry links the origin of life with photosynthesis, the abrupt appearance of animals, cancer, and even the emergence of consciousness.
Nick Lane (PhD, FRSB, FLS) is Professor of Evolutionary Biochemistry in the Department of Genetics, Evolution and Environment at University College London. He was a founding member of the UCL Consortium for Mitochondrial Research, and is Co-Director of the UCL Centre for Life’s Origin and Evolution (CLOE). He was awarded the 2009 UCL Provost’s Venture Research Prize, the 2011 BMC Research Award for Genetics, Genomics, Bioinformatics and Evolution, the 2015 Biochemical Society Award for his outstanding contribution to molecular life sciences and 2016 Royal Society Michael Faraday Prize and Lecture, the UK’s premier award for excellence in communicating science. Professor Lane is the author of five acclaimed books on evolutionary biochemistry, which have sold more than 150,000 copies worldwide, and been translated into 25 languages. His most recent book, Transformer: The Deep Chemistry of Life and Death (Profile/Norton 2022) explores the elusive chemical logic of life.

[@PhilipSalen]

Nick Lane's contributions to science have been profound. But I like him as a science explainer and writer even more; he brings the biology of the evolution of eukaryotes from archaea and prokaryotes even the evolution of life itself in fascinating detail; incredibly compelling; incredible lecture!

[@lindawilson8318]

Wonderful lecturer - thank you

[@RobinCrusoe1952]

Of all the origin of life theories out there I find Nick Lane's the most compelling. Everything starts with electricity.

[@martinjan2334]

I am glad you said "theories" ... a better word would be "hypothesis" ... because there is a zero empirical evidence of how life on this planet originated. Scientists (including Nick Lane) are clueless about life's origin. Nick Lane and his colleague Joana Xavier published the following paper only a few days ago NATURE (FEB 26 2024) Nick and Joana sound very frustrated - here is the ultimate Origin-of-life research reality check: some quotes from their paper: ... Explaining isolated steps on the road from simple chemicals to complex living organisms is not enough … … Most scientists agree that these nanomachines are a product of selection - but selection for what, where and how? … There is no consensus about what to look for, or where … … Did life start on Earth in the hot waters of hydrothermal systems on land or in deep seas? … Combine that with the overarching importance of the question and it’s clear why the field is beset with over-claims and counter-claims, which in turn warp funding, attention and recognition … Strongly opposed viewpoints have coexisted for decades over basic questions … For example, if life started in a warm pond on land, the succession of steps leading from prebiotic chemistry to cells with genes is surprisingly different from those that must be posited if the first cells emerged in deep-sea hydrothermal vents. … Building coherent frameworks - in which all the steps in the continuum fit together - is essential to making real progress. … It is too soon to aim for consensus or unity, and the question is too big; the field needs constructive disunity. Embracing multiple rigorous frameworks for the origin of life, as we advocate here, will promote objectivity, cooperation and falsifiability - good science - while still enabling researchers to focus on what they care most about. Without that, science loses its sparkle and creativity, never more important than here. With it, the field might one day get close to an answer. ...

[@kcorreia86]

I thought it was impossible to understand the origin of life until I read the Vital Question. Now I have no mo' questions for the big picture.

[@martinjan2334]

you wrote: _Of all the origin of life theories out there I find Nick Lane's the most compelling._ You are obviously not aware of the latest Nick Lane paper on the origin-of-life. It was published in NATURE, a few days ago (FEB 26 2024) ... Nick and her colleague Joana sound very frustrated ... a few quotes from the paper: --- Explaining isolated steps on the road from simple chemicals to complex living organisms is not enough … … There is no consensus about what to look for, or where … … Did life start on Earth in the hot waters of hydrothermal systems on land or in deep seas? … Combine that with the overarching importance of the question and it’s clear why the field is beset with over-claims and counter-claims, which in turn warp funding, attention and recognition … Strongly opposed viewpoints have coexisted for decades over basic questions … … Building coherent frameworks - in which all the steps in the continuum fit together - is essential to making real progress. … It is too soon to aim for consensus or unity, and the question is too big; the field needs constructive disunity. Embracing multiple rigorous frameworks for the origin of life, as we advocate here, will promote objectivity, cooperation and falsifiability - good science - while still enabling researchers to focus on what they care most about. Without that, science loses its sparkle and creativity, never more important than here. With it, the field might one day get close to an answer. (it is easy to google the full article) From the paper is it clear, that Nick and all the other scientists are clueless about how life on Earth started ...

[@crabb9966]

​@@martinjan2334 the fact that James Tour seems to be right about the crux of this is wild.

[@crabb9966]

​@@martinjan2334it's important to note that Nick Lane has some intriguing ideas and a formidable scientist.

[@maridouma8037]

Awesome presentation!

[@garydecad6233]

Awesome lecture from Prof Lane as usual. Thank you !

[@anonanon289]

Thank you for making this wonderful talk available.

[@justinyang5989]

Fascinating lecture, thank you!

[@noellecuisine8912]

Wonderful, lecture and lecturer. Thank you so much for sharing this.! Happy 2024 ❤ since we are talking about the evolution! Cheers you all!

[@Arkalen]

Great talk!

[@advocate1563]

We are electric. We are energy. Work of Michael Levin fascinating.

[@tangatoto362]

Wonderful that us lesser mortals share the planet with people like this and their phenomenal knowledge and zest for answers. Thank you Mr Lane for enlightening us yet again to the stupefying complexity of life.

[@KennyHBCA1]

Why not call it the Alfred Wallace series ?

[@johnjames5988]

Wonderful, been reading “The Vital Question” a top ten but very dense. This was a much appreciated lecture.

[@LaboriousCretin]

23:10 the project name to get scientists out of Germany was named " Project paper clip"

[@calvinhobbes1617]

I think paper clip was after the war,not before.

[@lordemed1]

Could archaea and bacteria have different origins?

[@sentientflower7891]

No. LUCA preceded both. The two organisms differentiated and then later along, several billion years after their separation, they met together and became symbionts and it worked out.

[@Arkalen]

There are other talks where he addresses this, with lists of similarities and differences between archaea and bacteria that point to a strange LUCA. The upshot is basically that no, the commonalities between the two (in various aspects of metabolism, protein translation, RNA replication, etc) point to a common ancestor.

[@sentientflower7891]

37:50 is quite an understatement. You are only 0.0001% to your destination with nowhere to go and no means to get there.

[@xf_jaguar1162]

Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace are renowned for their contributions to the theory of evolution by natural selection, However, they did not directly address the origins of life itself. The question of the origin of life remains a separate field of study known as abiogenesis, which explores how life may have arisen from non-living matter. While Darwin and Wallace laid the groundwork for understanding biodiversity, they did not address the ultimate origin of life. "In the realm of Particle Physics and Particle Chemistry, a captivating debate surrounds the fundamental constituents of matter, specifically focusing on the intricate building blocks of Quarks: Up, down, charm, strange, top, bottom. Leptons: Electron, muon, tau, electron neutrino, muon neutrino, tau neutrino. Gauge bosons: Photon, gluon, W and Z bosons (mediators of the electromagnetic, strong, and weak forces, respectively).Higgs boson: Associated with the Higgs field and gives mass to other particles. Can we unravel the profound essence of these particles and their interactions, which ultimately sculpt the very fabric of our universe? Delving into the heart of this discourse lies a fundamental question: What are the elemental particles that constitute quarks, electrons, gluons, etc, and how do their dynamic interplays delineate the fundamental architecture of matter? Let's delve deeper into some of the scientific origins and compositions of these fundamental components like: 1. **Ammonia (NH₃)**: Ammonia is a compound composed of one nitrogen atom bonded to three hydrogen atoms. - It is primarily produced through the Haber process, where nitrogen gas (N₂) and hydrogen gas (H₂) react under high pressure and temperature in the presence of an iron catalyst. Alternatively, it can be produced biologically through the decomposition of organic matter by bacteria. 2. **Phosphoric Salts**: Phosphoric salts, such as calcium phosphate (Ca₃(PO₄)₂) or sodium phosphate (Na₃PO₄), consist of phosphorus atoms bonded to oxygen atoms, along with cations such as calcium or sodium. - They are commonly found in nature as minerals, and they can also be synthesized through various chemical reactions involving phosphorus-containing compounds and metal salts. 3. **Heat**: - Heat is a form of energy associated with the motion of atoms and molecules in a substance. - It is typically generated by the conversion of other forms of energy, such as chemical energy (e.g., combustion), electrical energy (e.g., resistance heating), or nuclear energy (e.g., nuclear fission). At the molecular level, heat is manifested as the kinetic energy of particles, causing them to vibrate and collide with each other. 4. **Light**: Light is electromagnetic radiation with wavelengths visible to the human eye, ranging from approximately 400 to 700 nanometres. - It is produced by various natural and artificial sources, including the sun, stars, incandescent bulbs, and lasers. At the atomic level, light consists of photons, which are packets of energy that exhibit both wave-like and particle-like behaviour. 5. **Electricity**: Electricity is the flow of electric charge, typically carried by electrons in a conductor. - It can be generated through various processes, such as chemical reactions (e.g., batteries), electromagnetic induction (e.g., generators), or direct conversion of energy (e.g., solar cells). At the atomic level, electricity involves the movement of electrons between atoms or molecules, creating an electric current. These fundamental components have diverse origins and molecular compositions, ranging from chemical reactions to physical phenomena How do the fundamental components of ammonia, phosphoric salts, heat, light, and electricity originate, and how are their molecular compositions and formation processes brought them into existence ? As we probe deeper into the subatomic realm, we unravel the mysterious dance of quarks, the elementary particles that make up protons and neutrons. Are they truly indivisible, or do they harbour deeper complexities awaiting discovery? Likewise, electrons, the enigmatic carriers of electric charge, stand as solitary entities, yet their behaviour perplexes even the most astute physicists. How do these particles, seemingly devoid of internal structure, exert such profound influence over the properties of matter? And then, there are gluons, the mediators of the strong force binding quarks together within the confines of atomic nuclei. How do these elusive particles govern the stability and structure of the very matter from which life itself emerges? In the grand tapestry of existence, proteins and sugars, the very building blocks of life, find their genesis in the intricate arrangements of these fundamental particles. Can we decipher the profound implications of these subatomic constituents on the macroscopic world, shedding light on the origins of life itself? Thus, the discourse unfolds, as we delve into the depths of particle physics, seeking to unravel the mysteries of existence through the lens of quarks, electrons, and gluons, and their profound implications for the nature of reality and the origins of life." The intersection of science and spirituality has long fascinated scholars and thinkers alike. As we delve deeper into the mysteries of the universe through scientific inquiry, we often uncover awe-inspiring complexities that evoke a sense of wonder and reverence. Some argue that the more we uncover through science, the more we perceive the intricate design and orderliness of the cosmos, which hints at a guiding force or intelligence behind it all - what many refer to as "God." The elegant precision of physical laws governing the cosmos to the intricacies of biological systems, scientific discoveries continually illuminate the grandeur and sophistication of existence. Each revelation unveils a new layer of understanding, prompting reflection on the profound questions of existence, purpose, and the origins of life itself. In this light, some view the pursuit of scientific knowledge as a journey toward uncovering the handiwork of a divine creator. They see the intricate web of interconnected phenomena and the delicate balance of nature as evidence of an intelligent design imbued with purpose and meaning. For them, science is not just a tool for understanding the natural world but a pathway to deeper spiritual insight and appreciation. However, it's important to acknowledge that not all interpretations of science lead to the same conclusions about spirituality or the existence of a higher power. Science operates within the realm of empirical evidence and testable hypotheses, while matters of faith often transcend the boundaries of empirical observation. Therefore, while science may provide insights into the mechanisms and processes of the universe, it can not definitively prove or disprove the existence of God. Ultimately, the relationship between science and spirituality is deeply personal and subjective, shaped by individual beliefs, experiences, and interpretations. In essence, the journey of scientific exploration can indeed deepen our appreciation for the mysteries of existence and inspire a sense of awe and wonder that some interpret as evidence of a divine presence. Yet, the quest for understanding is ongoing, and whether one finds God in the revelations of science or elsewhere remains a deeply personal and profound journey of discovery of the origins of life. "All aspects of the phenomenon are attributed solely to the cognitive processes within his imagination. "In scientific terms, one could state: "The phenomenon is exclusively contained within the neural networks of the individual's brain, Charles Darwin characterized by imaginative constructs that remain unexplained or rejected by many current scientific understanding"

[@vinodpractical]

Why would nature select?

[@davidwilkie9551]

Resetting the glossary of terms for the many states in stages of Singularity-point Quantum-fields Mechanism Holographic standing wave(s) of everything spinning around everything else not superimposed in harmonic sync-duration resonance requires many complex systems to analyze from a start at Euler's Unit Circle derivivation of inside-outside ONE-INFINITY holography-quantization of logarithmic condensation-coordination self-defining infinitesimal information In-form-ation vanishing-into-no-thing Perspective in/of the Calculus (Oxford Mathematics has some of the right understanding). Holographic Quantum-fields Mechanism is where-when to begin.

[@meahoola]

You should take your pills more regulally.

[@jewlzbulls]

Tesla knew 💯

[@user-io1nb1wl1u]

I don't agree with you Prof Lane. You mentioned a lot about bacteria. Let me ask you, many bacteria has got over 2000 proteins. These are not just random proteins but highly interactive proteins. How did random mutations get there and how did natural selection select them. In human brain ypu get 100,000 chemical reactions every second via 50 neuropeptides. These interact with 500 components of the brain in varying combinations which humans even don't understand. How did random mutations and natural selection get there.? When take one step, our brain automatically co-ordinates 200 muscles. Our computer systems can not replicate them. How did the 2 mechanisms get there? DNA most complex code known to man. It took 2800 scientists 13 yrs to decode it. Was this code random and a chance occurrence?

[@mcmanustony]

Have you tried reading books? Are you allergic?

[@b-m605]

he's quoting heckle who falsified the embrio drawings. really? such a great foundation .

[@mcmanustony]

It's Haeckel. He exaggerated some drawings. Is Lane using those drawings?

[@b-m605]

@@mcmanustony haeckel didn't exagerate, he falsified. those drawings were still in use in the seventies textbooks, long after the fraud was exposed. Evolution takes the the top honors for the most successful scientific frauds. Source? Jay Goulding who's promotion of the punctuated eqalibrium theory, which is a tacid admission that the fossil record does not support the evolutionary creation myth, from one of the most celebrated atheist evolutionists of his day. but play on, show me another fraud.

[@kennethbransford820]

=== The first cause singularity for the beginning of the universe was more organized and compact like a wound up clock. Energy flow always decreases with entropy becoming more and more chaotic and unorganized over time. Chemistry and the machinery needed for biological structures for life to exist using amino acids and folding protein molecules are required, using complex geometrically shaped patterns for LIFE to exist was not by accident. The evidence for this and much, much more is proving design. Interactomes and the Ribosome and Chromosomal structures needed for life, along with the memory retrieval systems of DNA/RNA is proving design. Why is everyone, especially the so-called accredited scientists who are towing the line and working so hard to wipe Jehovah God out of existence is beyond reason with willful ignorance and intellectual blindness and prejudice at work here . If one can not see the EVIDENCE for DESIGN, than that is your fault. === Evolution = Self Assembling Atoms = Impossible === Deuteronomy 32 : 5 They are the ones who have acted corruptly. They are not his children, the defect is their own. They are a crooked and twisted generation! ===

[@NineInchTyrone]

Laser pointers are lame

[@b-m605]

"explain this strange tragetory" ya so you are going to explain why the data doesn't fit the theory and we'll all go back to sleep?

[@jaimeapablaza8041]

Whose data?

[@mcmanustony]

Bit of a lying smear monger aren't you....

[@RAJIVRNJ]

Nick lane brings in too many assumptions and imagination to explain his hypothesis that Life evolved by chance. Not convincing. Even quantum mechanics has reached at a point where it's not sure whether fundamental unit of matter are wave or particle. The universe is real or virtual is beyond human perception. Even if it's true then it's complexity cannot be explained with out intelligent design and designer. Now a days it is fashionable amongst scientist to push a dogma that everything is happening by itself. Absurd theory of scientism not science which is always ready to explore further

[@mcmanustony]

If you think he argues that life emerged by chance then you haven't thought enough.

[@baraskparas9559]

Banal misinformation. Pumps and ATP synthase came about late in molecular natural selection. Missed out all of the important developments.

[@shonufftheshogun]

Area KZbin commenter accuses Nick Lane of spreading misinformation about biology.

[@baraskparas9559]

@@shonufftheshogun Look Shauna F Bogan, I have written a whole 350 page book on origin of life to be published this year and Nick Lane doesn't get a mention. That's how much I value his talks. FU very much for your brain dead interest.

[@PifflePrattle]

@@baraskparas9559 That sounds interesting. Pease could you let me know title and author when it is published? Thanks.

[@baraskparas9559]

@@PifflePrattle Algorithm deletes self promotion of books but " From Chemistry to Life on Earth " by Barask Paraskevopoulos with Austin Macauley Publishers. This year, 290references.

[@PifflePrattle]

@@baraskparas9559 Thank you. I didn't know that about the algorithm.. I'll copy the title immediately just in case your comment disappears.

[@Gringohuevon]

Who's the goon in the cape?