What is Life? - with Paul Nurse

[@MilesDavisKDAB]

Paul was one of my tutors when he was just a post- doc researcher. He was/is a lovely man as well as being a very good scientist.

[@StaringCompetition]

Miles Davis I clicked on this one bc he reminded me of a nice teacher lol and I was thinking I bet students like this guy

[@pansepot1490]

He looks a character out of a Christmas tale! 😁 A hobbit, elf or something like that. Perhaps because of his round nose and red cheeks. Btw no offense meant.

[@laurenth7187]

And a not so good philosopher

[@MilesDavisKDAB]

@@laurenth7187 Is it possible to be a good philosopher?

[@laurenth7187]

@@MilesDavisKDABIt's difficult, i know only one living, myself. So yes for scientists it's hard because they didn't study phil, so no background.

[@bouncybounce4589]

What a remarkable lecture. Incredible that he was able to lay out all the principles of life, in such detail and clarity, considering the complexity, in just an hour. Bravo, Paul Nurse!

[@joselama6739]

[[[Looo[oooooo

[@joselama6739]

[O

[@joselama6739]

L[[o[0mooo[o[[[oo[o[o[[oo

[@gjovanovic]

For someone who so many times (unnecessarily) emphasizes "without a need for a creator" Sir Paul expresses astonishing admiration for BEAUTY of the building blocks of life :-)

[@deepstrasz]

So then the universe created itself, then evolved to us who can create within it. If we could create a universe of our own, then we might end up creating an infinite loop. Virtual reality and computers... oh wait...

[@krishiprasad1730]

A befitting work which should probably termed Masterpiece. Hands of to you Mr. Nurse. Infinite respect and love from India.

[@healthyone100]

you probably don't really know what love is!

[@laurenth7187]

Regarding the principle underlying life, it's amazing that such a knowledgeable person seems to ignore Bichat : « La vie, dit-il, est l'ensemble des fonctions qui résistent à la mort. » Life is a set of functions resisting to death.

[@deepstrasz]

You can't just happen to know everything though. Some things you are bound to miss, many actually.

[@zetacrucis681]

Paul Nurse is always a pleasure. Thank you RI!

[@kevinshort3943]

"Life, don't talk to me about life" -- Marvin

[@MilesDavisKDAB]

Here I am, brain the size of a planet....

[@kevconn441]

"The first million years were the worst"

[@kevinshort3943]

@@kevconn441 “The first ten million years were the worst," said Marvin, "and the second ten million years, they were the worst too. The third ten million years I didn't enjoy at all. After that I went into a bit of a decline.”

[@kevconn441]

@@kevinshort3943 Should have left the quote marks off, I wasn't even close. Thanks for the correction though, always funny.

[@kevinshort3943]

@@kevconn441 "I wasn't even close" Only 9 million years out, I bet you were distracted by those pesky doors :)

[@hopegold883]

Unusually well-written as well typically informative. The structure illustrates the content. So glad I clicked! Usually I’m more drawn to the physics ones. But then it is!

[@nangtran4504]

L

[@merrickjagger1704]

Instablaster.

[@OnlineMD]

SUCH a coincidence...I just got done reading his superb book "What Is Life." Sir Paul Nurse has more titles and accomplishments than most authors I've read lately. Five of the chapters in his book have these chapter headings: Cell; Gene; Evolution by Natural Selection; Chemistry, and Information. Next on my reading list is "What Is Life" by Lynn Margulis and Dorion Sagan.

[@whowereweagain]

Read lily e Kay's books The molecular vision of life, and who wrote the book of life? Brilliant historian of life science if you want to know the serious history

[@whowereweagain]

Also reading Kay's works will teach you how to fdo book research like a pro if you look into the notes

[@yadibalderlou1443]

I was expecting a definition from the lecturer for life ,all he gave me was a description of a living things. Not the life itself

[@Thom3748]

Exactly.

[@j0hnX44]

Probably one of the best lectures about life I've seen!!

[@gondwana6303]

This is a brilliant framework of principles by Sir Paul on how analyze what is life? Hope it becomes a course that he can teach. The other brilliant scientists such as Schrodinger, Mendel, Darwin and Pasteur are amazing that they could have surmised so much from so little observable things, since they didn't have any of our current sophisticated tools.

[@whowereweagain]

And Schrodinger's importance in the history of biology is mostly a retcon

[@lucyhanks500]

There are these phrases such as ‘What is a faux pas?’ and ‘what is considered as ill manners?’

[@lucyhanks500]

@@whowereweagain then there is ‘what is a community?’

[@mdb1239]

The machines within our cells are living and intelligent entities. Actually visually seeing them at work shows they are alive, reacting to the environment, and making purposeful decisions.

[@stephanieparker1250]

Wow, brilliant lecture, well done! Even with only a few simple slides and reading from paper notes stapled together instead of a fancy laptop, he delivered a hugely informative and fascinating presentation. 🙌

[@walkabout16]

In words of wisdom, Paul Nurse did share, The core principles of life, a truth so rare, Nobel Prize-winner, in science's brilliant glare, He unveiled life's secrets, beyond compare. Principle one, the heart of all existence, Information's flow, a grand persistence, Genetic code, in cells it finds its stance, Life's blueprint, in every single instance. Principle two, diversity's graceful dance, Variation's key, in each life's advance, Evolution's art, through time's expanse, Survival's essence, in nature's romance. Principle three, the mighty energy's exchange, In every cell, a balance we arrange, Metabolism's dance, so intricate and strange, Life's spark, in every molecule's change. Principle four, the cells, life's building blocks, Complexity emerges from simple locks, From molecules to tissues, in paradox, Life's beauty in cells, where harmony docks. Principle five, the generations' thread, Reproduction's gift, where life is spread, Inheritance's tale, from ancestors led, Life's tapestry, in the DNA's spread. Paul Nurse, in science's quest profound, Unveiled these principles, on fertile ground, In Nobel's glory, his knowledge unbound, Life's mysteries, in his wisdom found. So let us heed these principles five, In nature's grandeur, let us derive, The essence of life, where mysteries thrive, In Paul Nurse's wisdom, let us survive.

[@manifold1476]

I'd guess he made an impression on you.

[@toni4729]

This was the most interesting talk I've ever had the privilege to hear. Thank you very much Paul. Please, let us hear more.

[@Truth_Seeker567]

Just say thank you so much for your kindness to take effort to teach us.

[@mdb1239]

Visually being able to see the smallest parts/living-machines at work within a cell and it is shocking. The smallest workings in our cells are intelligent and alive. Seeing them at work is astonishing. They are intelligent and alive. Seeing them visually doing their work is a wonderment. This is not just a chemical reaction in a test tube, but living intelligent machines responding to its environment and doing purposeful work.

[@quinoline3865]

2:36 Schrodinger was not the guy who discovered uncertainty principle. It was Heisenberg.

[@kevinshort3943]

You tell his cat that ! :)

[@frhe1970]

Heisenberg did not discover the principle,like you find something that was hidden.He discovered a problem in the way that the basic physical properties of a particle in a quantum system could be measured.Then DEVELOPED the uncertainty principle to explain the problem..

[@rad858]

@@frhe1970 Schrödinger developed Heisenberg's principle into his own much more general uncertainty relation, which is much more useful

[@quinoline3865]

​@@frhe1970 I meant the same thing. I anticipated somebody is going to nitpick.

[@bernardofitzpatrick5403]

@@rad858 interesting ...

[@kevinwilliams5873]

God bless the Royal Institution. Information provided by the informed, without bias, for public consumption. God bless you all.

[@jayarava]

There's really nothing here that I didn't learn at school 40 years ago. The one thing I learned post-school was that symbiosis gave us eukaryote cells and complex life. RIP Lynn Margulis.

[@michaelawford7325]

I achieved A Level Botany and Zoology 60 years ago and found this new and fascinating

[@patrickboudreau3846]

It is easy to visualise birds evolving but entirely something else to grasp the evolution of molecular machines without whom nothing works anymore. How did particules jump from wave matter duality to agglomerate into what would eventually become the human brain ? Evolution is certainly one of our universe’s most myserious acheivement. Thank you for this lecture. This subject is facinating.

[@santiagomarshall1447]

I was expecting the George Harrison hit “what is life” but I actually found a great video I will remember for a long time! Thanks

[@Garcia-elf]

He was awarded an Honoris Causa during my MSc convocation at McGill, June 2017 :)

[@lukekubat3882]

The Schrodinger uncertainty principle: “you can never be 100% certain I’m not Heisenberg” :-)

[@bernardofitzpatrick5403]

nice one! LOL

[@theuniques1199]

Luke Then you must 100% also believe you are Heisenburg to believe you are 100% not Heisenburg and you must believe you are 100% not Heisenburg to believe you are 100% Heisenburg because you can't have one concept without the other.

[@doubleirishdutchsandwich4740]

I was listening to this on my way to work and I almost pulled over to leave this comment. How can you get something so fundamentally wrong in your presentation to the royal academy. Not a big deal as to the substance of the presentation, just a tiny hiccup. Schrodinger created the wave equation while Heisenberg created the uncertainty principle. Ugh.

[@quadlearningstudios1216]

Perhaps they climbed into Schrodinger's cat box together and became a Schroberg-Heisendinger superposition...

[@Sophiedorian0535]

Strange ... when I am NOT watching this video, it seems like the uncertainty principle is both from Heisenberg and Schrödinger, AT THE SAME TIME!

[@this_is_neerajj]

Though I was knowing most of the things he was telling because I'm from a plant sciences background.... Still I found this lecture very interesting and I listened very carefully. Thank you so much Ri for uploading this. 🙏

[@whizkid235]

If only college courses were taught like this… students would be much more excited to study the material. For some reason I fully understood and remembered all the small details (names, dates, biochemistry concepts, etc..) in this lecture from listening to it once, and I walk out of my college classes being more confused than before and learning nothing

[@NeoStoicism]

The importance of polymers in connecting information to chemical reaction will be an interesting indicator of other life forms as we push further into the universe.

[@MiodragovSvet]

We are not pushing anywhere. Forever bound to tiny Earth.

[@deepstrasz]

I think we would have a chance with biophoton detection.

[@muthuk]

What an amazing lecture! The amount of fundamentals covered here is just amazing. Learning from first principles, understanding the basics clearly are extremely important...I am glad i watched this! Thank u guys!

[@muthuk]

@@waltermoss7718 ok maybe u can suggest me a couple

[@JaySheikh22]

Nothing pisses me off more than searching youtube for "what is life" and finding most of search results are about shallow songs.. and it shows this video in the 10th page. It shows how shallow our society is

[@plrndl]

Has it occurred to you, that you may be looking in the wrong place?

[@JaySheikh22]

@@plrndl Maybe , do you suggest a better place

[@TheBoatmad]

What an awesome talk. If I was still a teacher I would want to share that talk with all my students!

[@StormedX2]

This man looks like 3 people: 1: Old guy from Up! 2: Robin Williams 3: Close relative of Patton Oswalt

[@stumccabe]

4. Alcoholic uncle.

[@corretorescompartilhados385]

5. Ronnie Barker.

[@furbs9999]

Can not unsee.

[@LearningWithSuj]

I was about to say Robin Williams and Joe Pesci :)

[@e-t-y237]

fusiform gyrus is good at lookalikes, I have it too and it goes with jumble/unscrambling skillz ... just saying

[@haitranb3383]

So premative, just survived and hopping one day when compassion realised then we must what is life....

[@glynndraper437]

Learn to spell fro fcuks sacke

[@avonsternen6034]

The cell is an organizational functional unit. The efficacy of chemistry is based on its subject, dealing with consistent patterns of relations and interactions. However, describing life in terms of chemicals is like describing a picture in terms of colors. 👍:)

[@induchopra3014]

Life is emergent property of organic compounds . Two atoms have join together for stability, then form compounds which form cells which are more stable. So its search for stability . Purpose of life is to find more stabilty . Which we call peace in pychology. Its search for peace. When chaos sets in, stability is disturbed ,it leads to death.

[@nipudas1771]

And now I have watched two interviews regarding this book!

[@McLKeith]

This a very informative lecture on how cells function. Paul Nurse is very good lecturer. Far better than my first genetics 101 lecturer. But Nurse has not answered the question "What is life?" To answer that question, I believe we need an up-to-date Miller-Urey type experiments showing how those chemical reactions got started.

[@grmalinda6251]

Life's the ability to respond.

[@joqqy8497]

2:36 Werner Heisenberg formulated the uncertaintly principle, not Schrödinger(whose equation the principle was based upon because of the probabilistic interpretation of it).

[@caricue]

I'm beginning to think that the reason it is so hard to answer this question, what is life, is because it isn't actually a thing in itself. We see a part of the universe moving around and doing stuff and we call it life, but this is a concept or even a category that we have in our heads. You can say the same about tornadoes or hurricanes. They are self-assembled structures that form due to an energy imbalance, but they are not really a thing. That is why nothing is lost when a whirlwind finally dissipates, because it was never really more than an identity put on it by some human mind. If life is like this, and it seems to be, then the most you can ever do is describe it and work out its dynamics, but you will never really be able to say what it is.

[@kevinsmith-qj1bz]

This is the most well-reasoned thought on this blog, something that seems to elude even the noble laureate who, I suppose, has been working on the topic for a long time, if not his entire career.

[@kn9ioutom]

LIFE IS SOMETHING TO DO !!!

[@vjnt1star]

I am always baffled by the complexity of a cell which is like a factory. It is very hard to imagine that the first cell has been put together by chance

[@MrWhiteav6]

Who says the first cell was ad complex as a bacteria or eukaryotes? It could be as simple as a micelle.

[@bremayak]

I'm with you on this preposterous idea that life accidentally self assembled. Arrogance and vanity seem to blind them to the obvious problem with that world view. There is an airplane junkyard in the middle of nowhere America and not once has a 747 put itself back together again from its pieces.

[@bremayak]

Only a fool can be deceived into thinking that random proteins can magically self assemble into complex DNA and RNA. Especially since there has never been a repeatable experiment done that demonstrates the hypothesis of random self assembly of organisms. If you are so clever and I am so foolish, then please recreate the genesis of complex life in a lab. If this theory were true, everyone on the planet should be able to combine the ingredients needed for life and then magically get these ingredients to become a complex life form. You can't do it, nor can anyone on this planet. It has never happened and will never happen, because it's an incorrect hypothesis. The data does not support the notion that life just happened to happen. Or, put into simple terms that a child can understand - 747s do not build themselves even when all of the pieces are present. Apparently, that analogy is over your head or beyond your cognitive capabilities since you felt the need to attack it. Maybe you can get a distinguished biologist to prove that random chemicals and proteins can be brought to life in a lab. If that ever happens, I will rescind my opinion and apologize for my error. I doubt that you will ever prove that but anything is possible.

[@MrWhiteav6]

@@bremayak so because we dont completely understand abiogenesis, it goes to divine creation by default? Hey, life is crazy, we find it so amazing that we are mystified by it and naturally substantiate its existence due to divine resources. The history of science shows everything has a natural explanation eventually and I dont think abiogenesis is any different.

[@z42O]

Jesus planted coconuts and that is how you have life on earth Google it lol

[@patrickm8316]

For a bit of a fool like me, this talk was a thing of beauty.

[@avonsternen6034]

Nicely done! Nevertheless, essential to a genuine quest for naturally enduring Truth, is not only insight but humility. The latter provides the possibility of Awareness, which gives a field potential meaning beyond information. Without meaningful purpose for humanity, what do science and technology ultimately serve? Scientism, for example the mantra of darwinism, appeals to institutionism more than intuitive understanding, depending more upon superficial structural authority than enlightening appeal.

[@livethemoment5148]

blah blah blah....you are a fool who loves to use woowoo words and says nothing.

[@Gabrielhlc]

Yeah, we are mechanisms that stores information, after all... But why? I think that life comes to us with a intrisic need to survive, and that is life, we eat to survive, we have kids to survive for us, we make computer to survive our ideas. Its very important thinking about it, because sometimes we are so instinctive for surviving that we start wars, we tend to defend territory and our fake sense of property. Everyone is connected, we need the efforts of every type of life to survive. We need to stop thinking that we are apart of everthing! We have to have faith in ourselfes but most of all we have to have faith in everyone to live better!! Thank you for this awesome time, it opened my mind for a lot of things

[@deepstrasz]

We are not apart from everything but we are individual entities within one entity. You can the greed of existence by looking at the deep dark space. Planets have formed, basically, as separate entities, some bigger, some smaller, some solid, some gaseous. So, while the universe might have unity inside in what celestial body and ultimately life form organization is concerned, its constant expansion and separation of galaxies doesn't help this we are all one philosophy. It seems, that what actually stays together and seems likely to win, is entropy.

[@guillermozuluaga5643]

Machinery, communication, programming, purpose? Yes Dr Nurse: Maybe a computer doesn't need a creator after all. Or, does it?

[@qf1150]

2:42 "Schroedinger, he of the Uncertainty Principle". The Uncertainty Principle was formulated by Werner Heisenberg. Erwin Schroedinger formulated the equation . the wave function of a quantum system.

[@simonbassett818]

Excellent talk Sir, thank you.

[@adon2424]

Great information! I must say that at the end of the monolog you contradicted yourself. You said parasitic and symbiotic life is aware of the environment. Then, at the end, you stated that humans are the only life which sees the connectivity of life. Symbiotic life also "sees" the connection. Otherwise it wouldn't know which life it needs a symbiotic relationship with.

[@robertphillips93]

Such a comprehensive review of biochemistry and really, all current scientific POVs! Alas, the titular question contains a paradox that is not addressed -- namely, what is the role of life in a cosmos that appears to be inanimate? He comes close to this in his summation, noting the interdependence of living organisms -- but apparently the balance of the universe is simply "stuff" . . .

[@pjsteinsongs]

We may someday understand the pathway from how, from the first RNA strand several billion years ago, to the present moment, we came to be, but there may never be an understandable “role” or “purpose” in nature, other than for living things to make copies of themselves.

[@robertphillips93]

@@pjsteinsongs Can't dispute that -- but it is interesting to note that there can be two very different meanings of "understand". One, as you use it, refers to knowledge and its manipulation. Another is perhaps more personal, bringing the knower's character or state to bear on his knowledge. Think of a great musician engaging an audience, or one who is technically just as proficient but doesn't quite deliver the same experience.

[@pjsteinsongs]

@@robertphillips93 The musician metaphor is excellent. Can you expand on how this relates to your original comment, i.e., the relationship, if any, between life (the biosphere), and the inanimate cosmos?

[@robertphillips93]

@@pjsteinsongs We study cells and stars with similar instruments and methods. For stars there may be few other options -- but for a certain kind of organism, of our own phenotype, there is another instrument available to us -- the first-hand observation of the inhabitant. It is easy to dismiss such a notion as unscientific fantasy, but it is probably a safer bet that few have tried it because it is extraordinarily difficult and quite possibly dangerous to our comforting notions and preconceptions. Nevertheless, there have been notable examples of those who apparently have done just this. One thing to consider that any scientist will agree with -- any valid principles discovered in this way must have a corresponding analogue in the macro world. Laws are everywhere the same -- so this micro-investigation can yield results transferrable on a cosmic scale. Thus, under-standing . . . or, pie in the sky. So, is musician A a scientist? Not in the ordinary sense, but he has apparently identified certain "elementals" in his experience and can instinctively or consciously put them in a relationship that (in a repeatable manner) yields a new result. You don't really think "music of the spheres" was the invention of savages?!

[@pjsteinsongs]

@@robertphillips93 I think that you are suggesting the use of some quality or qualities of subjective experience that may serve as an instrument or gauge of some kind, but different from the observations of a “naturalist”?

[@ewigeliebe4690]

Life, as WE consider t to be live, is popping out automatically wherever the circunstances are favourable

[@genghisgalahad8465]

A wonderfully concise and excellent primer lecture on cellular biology by Paul Nurse! Love the playlists by science topics!

[@John777Revelation]

DNA is "Coded" and "Digital" Information. *_"Language: All Digital communications require a formal language, which in this context consists of all the information that the sender and receiver of the digital communication must both possess, in advance, in order for the communication to be successful."_* (Wikipedia: Digital Data) During an interview, when asked if the genetic code is really a code, Dr. Richard Dawkins answered, *_“It [the genetic code] IS a code. It's definitely a code.”_* (Source: Jon Perry - Genetics & Evolution Stated Casually KZbin Channel Interview with Dr. Richard Dawkins on 4-2-2022. Dr. Richard Dawkins is widely regarded as the world’s foremost expert on Darwinian Evolution) *_"After Watson and Crick, we know that genes themselves, within their minute internal structure, are long strings of pure digital information. What is more, they are truly digital..."_* (Richard Dawkins, River out of Eden, 16. Dr. Richard Dawkins is widely regarded as the world’s foremost expert on Darwinian Evolution) What prebiotically relevant or even modern chemical process has been observed in nature or experimentally demonstrated to be capable of producing coded digital functional information / language? Modern scientific discoveries in Genetics (i.e. biology) have shown that functional / coded / digital Information (i.e. DNA code) is at the core of All Biological Systems. Without functional / coded / digital information, there is No biology. The only known source (i.e. cause) in the universe that has been Observed (i.e. Scientific Method) in nature to be capable of producing functional / coded / digital information, such as that found even in the most primitive biological systems, is mind / consciousness / intelligence.

[@jonathanbethune9075]

I'm am humbled in the presence off our nature.

[@PaintDrumTravel]

A brilliant instructor and an amazing tie.

[@nyworker]

He's so brilliant and so humble and generous in how he simplifies this for us mortals.

[@olmostgudinaf8100]

This lecture does not explain what life *is.* It merely describes how life is implemented on planet Earth. It may or may not help us to recognize something as "alive" on other planets.

[@dominicvijayanand1971]

SIR THANK YOU FOR UNDERSTANDING LIFE AND HELPING US TO APPRICIATE LIFE ON EARTH AND PERHAPS SOMEWHERE ELSE, WE ALL NEED TO RESPECT LIFE . WITH LIFE . IN LIFE THERE IS EVERYTHING ELSE WHATEVER.

[@scottkoshland2475]

Life must be in terms of information defined as an intelligent sustaining information system. Simply life meets all the definitions of an intelligent system.

[@-_Nuke_-]

Life is a very stubborn illusion of our circumstances. Either 1) Nothing is life or 2) Everything is. At the most fundamental level, everything is nothing more than, quantum indeterminacies on some fundamental mathematical fields. (like the EM, Gluon, Higgs fields etc)

[@terrytibbs]

lol what

[@-_Nuke_-]

@@terrytibbs There is no way to distinguish life from non-life . The Earth itself could be viewed as a living organism and if the Universe is teeming with life, then the entire Universe should be considered a living organism too. Or otherwise, since there is no real distinction (down to the fundamental levels of QM) from life and non-life, nothing should be considered "living". We Humans believe that living things have some kind of special property to them (soul) but such thing doesn't exist when we examine their fundamental quantum parts. Everything is just a collection of atoms, a rock and a Human brain share no distinction. The laws of physics make the one collection of atoms act as a rock and the other as a human brain. Some complicated collection of atoms might look alive (collections of atoms like animals and humans) but they are not, they are just inanimate matter drifted away by the laws of physics. Nothing is really alive.

[@NetAndyCz]

@@-_Nuke_- Just because people do not agree about at which wavelength the light is still red does not mean that the blue life and the red light are the same.

[@JobANable]

I kept imagining Robin Williams talking about what is life throughout this talk; that would be hilarious and also very illuminating!

[@palmbeach4825]

Yeah, ame too. I kept thinking about Flubber. The movie with the green blob.😂🟢

[@Heart-Core]

❤Life is movement on itself♥️Movement creates life & time❤️Without movement neither life nor time would exist❤

[@asrmail2009]

Brilliant exposition. Thank you for posting this.

[@pradnyasaravade8934]

Totally enlightening! Loved the idea of turning inside out the lifeless information stored in the DNA to the reactive machines-proteins-which do the work. In that case, maybe ribozymes or the ribosomes are the first step to life? Viruses being a case in point-storing only the information without the ability to translate that information as living beings on their own.

[@indricotherium4802]

Moderately interesting but this lecture really ought to have been titled 'What are the Mechanisms of Life?'

[@indricotherium4802]

@@piefiuma ; so is plate tectonics, so is the Solar System.

[@olmostgudinaf8100]

@@indricotherium4802 correct. Life is yet another example of a mechanism.

[@indricotherium4802]

@@olmostgudinaf8100 : are you seriously saying that 'What mechanisms do we find in living organisms?' poses the same question as 'What is life?'

[@olmostgudinaf8100]

@@indricotherium4802 yes, that is _precisely_ what I am saying. Figuring out what makes a thing alive equals figuring out what life is.

[@indricotherium4802]

@@olmostgudinaf8100 : does that work then for, say, 'figuring out what makes a thing think equals figuring out what thought is?'

[@baseeraslam436]

What an amazing lecture!

[@AnkitSingh-xg2uv]

A very precise lecture but without considering epigenetic control.....

[@davemmar]

These parameters fit well into the earth’s environmental changes. But on another planet, for sample, with no environmental changes there may be no need for evolution or reproduction, etc. This video should not and cannot be the only basis for our search for extraterrestrial intelligence. But this video does make one wonder how fantastic are the differences of life in our universe. And just how soon will we have the ability to connect with the universe’s other self aware entities? I only wish it could happen in my lifetime. Thank you, Paul.

[@Sophiedorian0535]

The uncertainty principle is from Heisenberg, not from Schrödinger, professor.

[@CZorba]

Meaning of life => meaning of meaning of live => meaning of meaning of meaning of life .... = factorial meaning of life, a recursive path to go .... ; Thank you for your video

[@grmalinda6251]

Life is the ability to respond.

[@chrissmith7259]

Beautifully explained.

[@vida-zoe.itamarsantos270]

Good description how LIFE WORKS but it didn't answer the question what is life. How could chemicals be alive? They are not life. A clock calls for a designer. All cells have a patterns to follow and to reproduce itself. DNA has a patterns to follow in great harmony. You mentioned all living beings have patterns that follow. But you forgot to mention who made and sustain LIFE. "In Him was life, and the life was the light of men." John 1:3. Jesus is the Life-giver and the Sustainer of life. Even though many may not accept this truth. Life can not be define by chemistry only. There is chemistry in life. But life is not chemistry. It was a good observation how life works but it did not answer the question WHAT IS LIFE.

[@johnstewart8849]

Life is a brief, sentient entanglement, brought about by no act of our own, in the web of things all moving along the continuum of time.

[@NobleRoyalEarthling]

Life is simply Adaption and Adoption.

[@jameswiliams]

What is Life? Life gives a purpose to life by itself!

[@manifold1476]

Ok, so - - - what is Life?

[@leighedwards]

Heisenberg formulated the uncertainty principle, Schrodinger gave us wave mechanics with an equation for atomic wavefunctions

[@林则梁]

can’t stop looking at his tie

[@dalton6173]

Charles Darwin being famous for the theory of evolution after his grandfather was essentially run out of business for having that idea is kind of an amazing story I mean I do wish that his grandfather would have gotten the credit whenever it was his idea but still inspiring in its own unique way

[@cdb5001]

There's a book.coming out this week which contends that Darwin was a fraud and plaigirized everything from contemporary Patrick Matthew. Gonna check it out, sounds pretty interesting.

[@pritom7]

Life is more than Chemistry. Every human can feel it

[@therealzilch]

Nicely done. I would say that it's quixotic to try to define "life" exactly. Order merges imperceptibly with life.

[@richardtendyke3422]

Two comments, I believe it was Heisenberg and not Schrodinger who developed the uncertainty principle. Second, certainly purpose evolves as a result of evolution, but I think it is a more significant element than that. It is purpose that drives evolution. It is purpose that provides a measure of success for a new birth to succeed and therefore reproduce. This concept of being able to measure the relative value of one option vs. another is the key to be able to create order from disorder. It applies in areas other than life.

[@mehdibaghbadran3182]

Thanks for your explanation on the easy ways.

[@daiduongdaviddinh140]

Very academic talk from a very scholastic scientist.

[@jprakash7245]

Do his(Paul Nurse) documentary of Science Under Attack is available free?!

[@davidford694]

I spent much too much of a long life trying to get some computer to do something useful. One thing that plagued me was that any error, no matter how slight, made my code fail. If, as Dr. Nurse says, life is based on coded information, where did it come from? We all know that DNA code is immensely complex and sophisticated. Yet it is present in all life we have ever found, no matter how old or how primitive. So, where did it come from? A side note. I am really interested in knowing why Dr. Nurse is so keenly intent on eliminating the possibility that there was an intelligent creator. What is the psychological need here?

[@zinafandel3672]

Who created the intelligent creator? Is he alive? Is he DNA based?

[@davidford694]

@@zinafandel3672 No and no. Not a he either.

[@caricue]

David, life has a terrible and unforgiving logic to it that explains your question quite well. Anything that makes an error, no matter how slight, dies. Evolution is all about death. The reason all the wild animals almost always look perfect and error free is because the defective or weak die, either before birth or shortly after, sometimes by mom's appetite. If you see your creator around the coffee shop, you might inquire about his penchant for killing the weak in gruesome fashion.

[@davidford694]

@@caricue Sorry, but the question I asked was "where does the code come from?".

[@harmless6813]

It evolved. I thought the lecture explained that rather well?

[@sgatea74]

Science (chemistry/physics) of life at explained at it's best using common sense arguments. Thank you !

[@SparkBerry]

The biggest question ever posted by RI... My other plans are cancelled for tonight

[@Thom3748]

This is a very well done lecture, and really worth an our of time, but something is missing--the proverbial Elephant in the room. Nurse describes the organization and processes of the cell quite nicely (and in some depth), but he doesn't give any explanation as to what starts the processes, and what drives them. In other words, what is the make up and character of the force behind the most fundamental aspect of biology? What is that life force?

[@solomonlalani]

Good summation of scientific knowledge on this topic so far, esp the concept there is only 'One Life', all of us connected. I generally don't mix religion and pursuit of knowledge but can't refrain from saying the following understanding which is entirely mine: Quran attributes Al-Hayi (essentially all life) and Al-Haazir (omnipresent) to God! So if God is omnipresent and also Alive, that means 'everything is Life'. Science still tries to distinguish between living and non-living, but I essentially see no difference. One day, humanity will understand and agree to this that we, together, are all One, and connected, and not separate from each other!

[@cdb5001]

As a non-Muslim, I was astonished to discover of the many contributions to philosophy, math and science by prominent Muslim academics. I tend to agree with their and your summation which transcends science into the "why".

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

There is nothing better than listening to the voice of Robin Williams talking about life!

[@klausgartenstiel4586]

"it goes a little bit like this. well, *actually* it goes completely like is." you gotta love the british. 😎

[@Silly.Old.Sisyphus]

actually, you gotta hate the British because they hate everyone else - just look how isolationist they are

[@klausgartenstiel4586]

@@Silly.Old.Sisyphus well, i don't know about you, but i don't hate any humans. because in the end, they are not really responsible for what they are. i *do* however hate god. *if* he exists.

[@Jesse__H]

@@Silly.Old.Sisyphus that was a very silly thing you just said.

[@PeterPete]

Quote - you gotta love the british Huh? They are a right miserable unhappy bunch of people. I wouldn't recommend anyone to live in UK unless they want to lose their peace of mind. I see lots of unhappy people here. The only fun they get is laughing at others misfortunes!! You want to visit a care home in UK, not many people laugh there!!

[@Sophiedorian0535]

Everything that goes completely like this, starts with going a little bit like this. Nothing, ever, goes completely like this all at once. Nothing that goes like the, goes like that!

[@Muham485]

Life is: The most important aim of the universe; Its greatest result; Its most brilliant light; Its subtlest leaven; Its distilled essence; Its most perfect fruit; Its most elevated perfection; Its finest beauty; Its most beautiful adornment; The secret of its undividedness; The bond of its unity; The source of its perfections; In regard to art and nature, a most wondrous being endowed with spirit; A miraculous reality which makes the tiniest creature into a universe; A most extraordinary miracle of divine power that connects the animate creature to most beings and makes it a tiny universe as well as being the means whereby the universe is situated in a tiny animate creature and displays a sort of index of the huge universe in the creature; Flashes[2021] - 421 By Bediuzzaman Said Nursi

[@TheThunderSpirit]

Very nice idea of wetwares

[@luckysurfer9097]

One dimension missing from the lecture....the inputs of life. Sir Paul touched on it with "energy." Do this....make a list of the inputs of life, sun, heat, water, etc. Then remove each one at a time and postulate whether life could exist without it. Could life (a cell) exist without one of the 6 principles? Probably not. I imagine life would be nil without water, so in my opinion, life is more than the 6 principles, the raw materials are another principle. But this is all for the life of a cell...could there be a different life system based on other than carbon polymer chemistry??

[@walkingmap]

Very nice lecture, wonderful tie.

[@sonarbangla8711]

Life, consciousness, intelligence, intuition, faith etc., are metaphysical dimensions evolving out of matter (physics). These extra dimensions are what string theorists indicate.

[@donk1822]

Cracked me up when he said. 'Science is the art of the soluble', after listening to his lecture I feel he should have said. 'Science is the art of the malleable'.

[@grmalinda6251]

Life is the ability to respond.

[@donk1822]

@@grmalinda6251 Certainly all life has that ability Linda, but it is far more complex. Consider, computers respond to our commands, but they do not have life.

[@grmalinda6251]

@@donk1822 computers dont respond in and of themselves . That's a programmed response.

[@donk1822]

@@grmalinda6251 Most of our responses are also programmed into us, be it by instinct, education, or experience. The difference is metabolism. We, fauna and flora, are to use a primitive analogy, are like electro chemical capacitors, when we have no capacitance left, we die.

[@grmalinda6251]

@@donk1822 sad belief.

[@jamesstewart7212]

Professor Nurse talks about the mechanics of life with chemistry but not a word about consciousness. There does not seem to be a chemistry of consciousness as it is never mentioned. Perhaps the driving force behind the chemistry is actually consciousness?

[@RonTodd-gb1eo]

Is the big divide between life and not life or conscious life and not conscious life?

[@piruz3243]

Correction: the Uncertainty Principle is Heisenberg's, not Schrödinger's.

[@Thom3748]

Schrödinger was the guy with the cat, no?

[@1o1s1s1i1e]

Fascinating lecture!

[@drgrahambeards9776]

Excellent. He could have mentioned seeds, which look totally dead until placed in a nourishing environment. They are similar to viruses in this regard.