Lee Cronin

got going so biological evolution and biological selection so for me this seems like a simple continuum so when i mentioned selection and evolution in the title i think and in the abstract we should have maybe prefaced that and said non-biological selection and non-biological evolutions and then that might have made it even more crystal clear but i didn't think that biology evolutionary biology should be so bold to claim ownership of selection and evolution

got going so biological evolution and biological selection so for me this seems like a simple continuum so when i mentioned selection and evolution in the title i think and in the abstract we should have maybe prefaced that and said non-biological selection and non-biological evolutions and then that might have made it even more crystal clear but i didn't think that biology evolutionary biology should be so bold to claim ownership of selection and evolution

got going so biological evolution and biological selection so for me this seems like a simple continuum so when i mentioned selection and evolution in the title i think and in the abstract we should have maybe prefaced that and said non-biological selection and non-biological evolutions and then that might have made it even more crystal clear but i didn't think that biology evolutionary biology should be so bold to claim ownership of selection and evolution

And secondly, a lot of evolutionary biologists seem to dismiss the origin of life questions and say it's obvious. And that causes a real problem scientifically. Because when the physicists are like, we own the universe, the universe is good, we explain all of it, look at us. And the biologists say we can explain biology. And the poor chemists are in the middle going, but hang on.

And secondly, a lot of evolutionary biologists seem to dismiss the origin of life questions and say it's obvious. And that causes a real problem scientifically. Because when the physicists are like, we own the universe, the universe is good, we explain all of it, look at us. And the biologists say we can explain biology. And the poor chemists are in the middle going, but hang on.

And secondly, a lot of evolutionary biologists seem to dismiss the origin of life questions and say it's obvious. And that causes a real problem scientifically. Because when the physicists are like, we own the universe, the universe is good, we explain all of it, look at us. And the biologists say we can explain biology. And the poor chemists are in the middle going, but hang on.

and this paper kind of says hey there is an interesting um disconnect between physics and biology and that's at the point at which memories get made in chemistry through bonds and hey let's look at this close and see if we can quantify it so yeah i mean i never expected the paper to to to kind of get that much interest and still i mean it's only been published just over a month ago now

and this paper kind of says hey there is an interesting um disconnect between physics and biology and that's at the point at which memories get made in chemistry through bonds and hey let's look at this close and see if we can quantify it so yeah i mean i never expected the paper to to to kind of get that much interest and still i mean it's only been published just over a month ago now

and this paper kind of says hey there is an interesting um disconnect between physics and biology and that's at the point at which memories get made in chemistry through bonds and hey let's look at this close and see if we can quantify it so yeah i mean i never expected the paper to to to kind of get that much interest and still i mean it's only been published just over a month ago now

Yeah, that's a really good for selection selection. So I think for selection you need. So this is where for me, the concept of an object is something that can persist in time and not die, but basically can be broken up.

Yeah, that's a really good for selection selection. So I think for selection you need. So this is where for me, the concept of an object is something that can persist in time and not die, but basically can be broken up.

Yeah, that's a really good for selection selection. So I think for selection you need. So this is where for me, the concept of an object is something that can persist in time and not die, but basically can be broken up.

Mm hmm.

Mm hmm.

Mm hmm.

So if I was going to kind of bolster the definition of an object, so if something can form and persist for a long period of time under an existing environment that could destroy other, and I'm going to use anthropomorphic terms, I apologize, weaker objects or less robust objects, then the environment could have selected that.

So if I was going to kind of bolster the definition of an object, so if something can form and persist for a long period of time under an existing environment that could destroy other, and I'm going to use anthropomorphic terms, I apologize, weaker objects or less robust objects, then the environment could have selected that.

So if I was going to kind of bolster the definition of an object, so if something can form and persist for a long period of time under an existing environment that could destroy other, and I'm going to use anthropomorphic terms, I apologize, weaker objects or less robust objects, then the environment could have selected that.

So good chemistry examples, if you took some carbon and you made a chain of carbon atoms, whereas if you took some, I don't know, some carbon, nitrogen and oxygen and made change from those, you start to get different reactions and rearrangements. So a chain of carbon atoms might be more resistant to falling apart under acidic or basic conditions.

So good chemistry examples, if you took some carbon and you made a chain of carbon atoms, whereas if you took some, I don't know, some carbon, nitrogen and oxygen and made change from those, you start to get different reactions and rearrangements. So a chain of carbon atoms might be more resistant to falling apart under acidic or basic conditions.