zlacker

>>qqqqqu+(OP)
Abiogenesis. I understand that this is not considered understood but I'd be interested in hearing a qualified scientist talk about how we get from "dumb" matter to self-replicating, goal-driven matter. The closest I've ever heard anyone get (in a personal conversation) is that chemistry is about transformation, so "dumb" matter isn't really dumb in the sense that it's static. Still lots of hand waving to get from baking soda and vinegar volcanoes to me typing this question, however.

What's the playing field look like for proto-life? How "smart" are the simplest molecular interactions? What does almost-replication look like? Could we use a computational model for this?

Not sure how much of this is known, but I'd love to hear an expert paint a picture of their mental model of the subject.

>>abioge+WY
This question interests me as well, and I've done some thinking about it over the years. In particular, what I'm interested in is a hypothetically simplest object that can reproduce in a solution of simpler components, along with some differentiating characteristic. For example, maybe you have toroids that pick up particules, grow the torus until its too big, and then splits - and the ends of both halves click together, forming a total of two toroids. Another characteristic that very simple life must have (I believe) is some level of circularity in the sense that the element is an "accumulation of experience" - we might say a reduction of its environment. In the same way Schordinger was interested in life thermodynamically[1] I am interested in speculating about the simplest possible mechanisms in the beginning. (NB I'd expect none of these very simple machines to survive to present day - in fact, I'd imagine there to be several generations of early life, each obliterating/consuming/sublimating the ones before.)

1 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Is_Life%3F