Assembly Theory Explains and Quantifies the Emergence of Selection and Evolution

Since the time of Darwin, scientists have struggled to reconcile the evolution of biological forms in a universe determined by fixed laws. These laws underpin the origin of life, evolution, human culture and technology, as set by the boundary conditions of the universe, however these laws cannot predict the emergence of these things. By contrast evolutionary theory works in the opposite direction, indicating how selection can explain why some things exist and not others. To understand how open-ended forms can emerge in a forward-process from physics that does not include their design, a new approach to understand the non-biological to biological transition is necessary. Herein, we present a new theory, Assembly Theory (AT), which explains and quantifies the emergence of selection and evolution. In AT, the complexity of an individual observable object is measured by its Assembly Index (a), defined as the minimal number of steps needed to construct the object from basic building blocks. Combining a with the copy number defines a new quantity called Assembly which quantifies the amount of selection required to produce a given ensemble of objects. We investigate the internal structure and properties of assembly space and quantify the dynamics of undirected exploratory processes as compared to the directed processes that emerge from selection. The implementation of assembly theory allows the emergence of selection in physical systems to be quantified at any scale as the transition from undirected-discovery dynamics to a selected process within the assembly space. This yields a mechanism for the onset of selection and evolution and a formal approach to defining life. Because the assembly of an object is easily calculable and measurable it is possible to quantify a lower limit on the amount of selection and memory required to produce complexity uniquely linked to biology in the universe.

[1]  N. Bell,et al.  Multimodal Techniques for Detecting Alien Life using Assembly Theory and Spectroscopy , 2023 .

[2]  Alastair R. G. Murray,et al.  Formalising the Pathways to Life Using Assembly Spaces , 2022, Entropy.

[3]  M. Cortês,et al.  The TAP equation: evaluating combinatorial innovation in Biocosmology , 2022, 2204.14115.

[4]  M. Cortês,et al.  The TAP equation: evaluating combinatorial innovation , 2022 .

[5]  Leroy Cronin,et al.  Exploring and mapping chemical space with molecular assembly trees , 2021, Science advances.

[6]  Douglas G. Moore,et al.  Identifying molecules as biosignatures with assembly theory and mass spectrometry , 2020, Nature Communications.

[7]  Stuart A. Kauffman,et al.  ORIGINS OF ORDER , 2019, Origins of Order.

[8]  Leroy Cronin,et al.  Quantifying the pathways to life using assembly spaces , 2019, ArXiv.

[9]  Richard J. Oosterhoff,et al.  The Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy , 2018, Oxford Scholarship Online.

[10]  Alastair R. G. Murray,et al.  A probabilistic framework for identifying biosignatures using Pathway Complexity , 2017, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[11]  Chiara Marletto,et al.  Constructor theory of life , 2014, Journal of The Royal Society Interface.

[12]  David Deutsch,et al.  Constructor theory of information , 2014, Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[13]  S. Benner,et al.  Synthesis of carbohydrates in mineral-guided prebiotic cycles. , 2011, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[14]  Sanjeev Arora,et al.  Computational Complexity: A Modern Approach , 2009 .

[15]  T. Ryan Gregory,et al.  Understanding Natural Selection: Essential Concepts and Common Misconceptions , 2009, Evolution: Education and Outreach.

[16]  Guy Sella,et al.  The Coevolution of Genes and Genetic Codes: Crick’s Frozen Accident Revisited , 2006, Journal of Molecular Evolution.

[17]  E. Lutz.  Power-law tail distributions and nonergodicity. , 2004, Physical review letters.

[18]  G. F. Joyce.  The antiquity of RNA-based evolution , 2002, Nature.

[19]  S. Carroll.  Chance and necessity: the evolution of morphological complexity and diversity , 2001, Nature.

[20]  Lalit M. Patnaik,et al.  Genetic programming based pattern classification with feature space partitioning , 2001, Inf. Sci..

[21]  P. Chesson.  Mechanisms of Maintenance of Species Diversity , 2000 .

[22]  David L. Dowe,et al.  Minimum Message Length and Kolmogorov Complexity , 1999, Comput. J..

[23]  Michael H. Hecht,et al.  Protein Design: The Choice of de Novo Sequences* , 1997, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[24]  C. Cole,et al.  The Universal Turing Machine: A Half-Century Survey , 1996, Inf. Process. Manag..

[25]  R. Lenski,et al.  Punctuated Evolution Caused by Selection of Rare Beneficial Mutations , 1996, Science.

[26]  Walter Fontana,et al.  The Barrier of Objects: From Dynamical Systems to Bounded Organizations , 1996 .

[27]  M. Cross,et al.  Pattern formation outside of equilibrium , 1993 .

[28]  Stuart A. Kauffman,et al.  The origins of order , 1993 .

[29]  R. Herken,et al.  A half-century survey on The Universal Turing Machine , 1988 .

[30]  Charles H. Bennett.  Logical depth and physical complexity , 1988 .

[31]  Richard E. Korf,et al.  Depth-First Iterative-Deepening: An Optimal Admissible Tree Search , 1985, Artif. Intell..

[32]  D. Tilman.  Resource Competition and Community Structure. (MPB-17), Volume 17 , 2020 .

[33]  D. Tilman.  Resource competition and community structure. , 1983, Monographs in population biology.

[34]  John von Neumann,et al.  Theory Of Self Reproducing Automata , 1967 .

[35]  A. Gray,et al.  I. THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES BY MEANS OF NATURAL SELECTION , 1963 .

[36]  A. Turing.  On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem. , 1937 .

[37]  A. Bennett.  The Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection; or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life , 1872, Nature.