Is physics of living matter an undiscovered territory?

[kinchit bihani]

TL;DR Summary

I read few scientists talking about the "physics of living matter" or biophysics and how this is something new and still unexplored areas of science. I wish to know what the experts in the forum think about it.

Is the physics of living matter different from that of non-living matter? If yes, how it is different? What makes it different? Does biophysics present itself as an example of interface between quantum and classical physics?

Any information that you think might shed light on the subject will be appreciated.

 

[Arjan82]

There is no difference whatsoever between the 'physics' of living things or non-living things (by which I mean the 'laws of physics', so quantum mechanics, or relativity theory, the rules governing chemistry or whatever). At the (sub)atomic level everything is 'as dead' as anything else :).

But the physics of biological systems are much more complex. By that I mean not the laws, but the systems you want to analyze are much more complex. Also see https://www.biophysics.org/what-is-biophysics.

 

[vanhees71]

And it is not only complicated, because it's consisting of very many very complicated molecules but also because it's far from thermal equilibrium! If a living being comes to thermal equilibrium, it's dead (for some time).

 

[Ibix]

Any information that you think might shed light on the subject will be appreciated.

In physics classes you will study collisions between two rigid bodies - use energy and momentum conservation to solve for the final velocities of the bodies given their initial velocities. That's all the physics you need, in principle, to analyse a game of snooker (assuming neither player knows how to put spin on a ball). But no one can analyse a break in snooker because there are fifteen balls pretty much in contact with each other which are struck by a single ball on a not-precisely-known trajectory. The result is wildly unpredictable because it depends on very slight differences in how the balls in the triangle are laid out and how and where the white ball hits it.

That's like the problem with biophysics. There's nothing strange or difficult about it at a fundamental level - the difficulty comes at a much higher level. The interesting stuff is the result of the interaction of many separate systems which interact in ways that aren't obvious from the (well understood) dynamics of how a couple of particles behave.

 

[BWV]

And, unlike example of the pool table break, there are emergent properties of these systems - like consciousness - that are not reducable to their individual components

 

[kinchit bihani]

And, unlike example of the pool table break, there are emergent properties of these systems - like consciousness - that are not reducable to their individual components

Thank you everyone for all their inputs.

The aspect of consciousness is very intriguing. Is consciousness only a philosophical concept or there is more to it than meets the eye?

And even amongst living matter, how different it is between humans and the rest? Are these three different systems: living matter alone? living matter acting on non living matter? non-living matter alone?

Schrödinger once remarked about living matter. “One must be prepared to find a new kind of physical law prevailing in it,”

 

[Arjan82]

The aspect of consciousness is very intriguing. Is consciousness only a philosophical concept or there is more to it than meets the eye?

consciousness is a physiological concept. It is entirely within the realms of normal physics, albeit dauntingly difficult. Personally I'm a big fan of Daniel Dennett and the way he is explaining it (to some extent). He makes the argument that in principle you can simulate consciousness on a computer. However, not any currently available computer.

And even amongst living matter, how different it is between humans and the rest? Are these three different systems: living matter alone? living matter acting on non living matter? non-living matter alone?

Humans are animals, who were evolved from other animals. So no differences in the physiological sense between humans and the rest. Nor do we own any special physics, like anything else that is alive.

If you are looking for supernatural explanations (which you are eluding to) you are on the wrong forum ;)

 

[mikelandmeier]

Exploiting the "physics of living matter" is an undiscovered territory. My hobby is to design and eventually build machines using the basic building blocks of living matter; phospholipids, proteins and sugars. My goal is to build a machine which very efficiently captures CO2 from the environment and then does interesting things with the CO2.

The territory of applied biophysics is very lonely. I read as much as I can and find very little current research. I feel if I have an original idea, the idea is original!

Specifically, I am working to exploit the technology of living organisms used to manage and manipulate ions. Biological technology has capabilities not available by today's industrial technology.

Biological technology generally falls into the Biology domain. But the application of Biological technology is pure physics. Not even chemistry. My task at the moment is to determine the energy cost of creating a pool of ions and using these ions to create an increased, concentrated pool of CO2 (HCO3- actually).

I am creating a series of pathways that uptake CO2 from the ocean and concentrates that CO2 for transport, utilization and sequestration. These pathways utilize the same techniques, materials and organization used by living organisms; Kelp, Diatoms and cyanobacteria.

 

[hmmm27]

And it is not only complicated, because it's consisting of very many very complicated molecules but also because it's far from thermal equilibrium! If a living being comes to thermal equilibrium, it's dead (for some time).

Bunch of reptiles out here, demanding to see the manager.