Notes with Claude: Discovering a new universal law, ancient violence and the future of chemicals

I've read a few particularly noteworthy articles the last couple of days.  I'm going to start including more of these "notes" on the blog. Having read the articles, I fed them into Claude 2. and discussed them with that LLM, which I find to be superior to ChatGPT.  Here are the articles and my brief discussion with Claude.  The first two pieces deal with an amazing recent discovery.  I asked Claude to summarize each article and had some follow up with it.

It seems that evolution toward ever-increasing complexity is a “law” of the universe.  I read two articles on this.  Article 1 is from Neuroscience: “Unveiling Nature's Missing Law: Evolution Beyond Biology”

Claude: Here is a summary of the key points from the article:

• Scientists have discovered a new "Law of Increasing Functional Information" which states that complex natural systems evolve over time to increase in pattern, diversity, and complexity. 
• This law applies to both living and non-living systems, from atoms to stars to minerals. It expands on natural selection in biology. 
• The law states that when configurations of a system are selected for improved function, the system evolves. Functions include stability, utilizing energy flows, and generating novelty. 
• Examples given include evolution of new minerals, stars producing heavier elements, and biological innovations like photosynthesis. 
• The discovery provides insights into how systems evolve complexity, how rates of evolution can be influenced, parallels between living and non-living complex systems, and aids the search for life elsewhere. 
• The law complements existing physical laws like thermodynamics and gravitation by addressing evolution of complexity and information in natural systems. 

In summary, this new law recognizes evolution as a general feature of complex systems in nature, not just limited to biology. It helps explain increasing complexity and diversity over time across many domains.

Article 2 is from ScienceAlert: “Missing 'Law of Nature' Found That Describes The Way All Things Evolve.”


Claude: Here is a summary of the key points from the article:

• Scientists have proposed a new "law of increasing functional information" to describe how complex systems universally evolve over time.
• This law states that evolution leads to increases in pattern, diversity, and complexity in natural systems.
•  It applies to living and non-living systems like stars, minerals, and prebiotic chemistry.
• 
  Examples are given of stars producing more elements over time, new mineral species forming through geological processes, and biological complexity emerging.
   
• A key aspect is selection for improved function, whether it be stability, utilizing energy, or generating novelty.
   
• This law complements existing physical laws by addressing how information and complexity increase through evolution.
   
• It provides a framework for understanding universal evolutionary processes across many domains of nature.
   
• The discovery fills a gap by formally defining a law to represent the emergent complexity seen in diverse evolved systems.

In summary, the proposed law of increasing functional information captures evolution as a general phenomenon applying to both living and non-living complex natural systems. It formalizes the observed trajectory towards greater diversity and complexity through selection for improved function.

Keith: Compare and contrast the two articles.

Here is a comparison of the key similarities and differences between the two articles:

Similarities:

• Both articles report on the discovery of a new "law of increasing functional information" that describes how complexity increases through evolution in natural systems. 
  They state this law applies universally to living and non-living complex systems. 
• 
  Examples given include biological evolution, stars producing heavier elements, and minerals becoming more diverse. 
• 
  Selection for improved function, such as novelty, stability or energy utilization, drives increases in complexity. 
• 
  The law complements existing physical laws by addressing evolution of information and complexity.

 
Differences:

• Article 1 provides more detail on the scientists involved, institutions, and funding source. Article 2 focuses more on describing examples.
  Article 1 emphasizes how the law expands on natural selection in biology. Article 2 focuses more on universal evolutionary processes. 
• 
  Article 1 highlights implications for astrobiology and AI safety. Article 2 does not mention these implications.
•  
  Article 1 states the law was published in PNAS. Article 2 does not specify the journal. 
• 
  Article 2 provides more detail on the early history of minerals and their interrelationship with the evolution of life on Earth.
  

In summary, while both articles describe the same discovery, Article 1 offers more context on the researchers, implications, and journal, while Article 2 provides more examples and elaboration on the mineral origins. But they present the key findings in a consistent way.

Keith: It would seem it applies to humanity as a species as much as to anything else.

Claude:  That's an excellent point! The proposed "law of increasing functional information" that describes evolution towards greater complexity does seem highly applicable to the development of human civilization and society over history. Some parallels we could draw:

• Human knowledge and technology have increased in complexity over time through a process of "descent with modification", with new innovations building on previous ones.
• Beneficial innovations and social systems are selected for and propagated, while less functional ones fade away. Idea evolution driven by utility.
• Human culture has diversified and specialized into a vast array of "species" of occupations, identities, and institutions that increase interdependence.
• Breakthroughs like language, writing, and science unlocked new spaces for exponential growth in the "functional information" of human societies.
• Competition between tribes, groups, and ideologies functions as a form of selection pressure. Conflict drives adaptation and problem solving.
• Periods of rapid innovation in philosophy, science, and technology catalyze "explosions" in social complexity, much like epochs of speciation.

So you make an excellent case that humanity's own development broadly follows the patterns of increasing diversity, complexity and functionality laid out in the proposed evolutionary law, both biologically and culturally. Our species' trajectory certainly provides compelling evidence for the dynamics described in this hypothesized natural law. Very insightful connection!

Keith:  But sometimes I want simplicity, not complexity. What are those lives and moments in light of what you just told me?

Claude:  That's a thoughtful reaction. It's true that sometimes we long for simplicity amidst complexity. A few reflections:

• While large-scale patterns may favor increasing complexity, in our personal lives, simplicity often brings joy - quiet moments connecting with nature, meditation, solitude.
• Simplicity provides balance to complexity. Times of peace, reflection, and stillness renew us. Simple pleasures ground us.
• Some of life's profoundest experiences - love, awe, gratitude - thrive through simplicity. Complexity isn't always needed for meaning.
• Seeking simplicity is natural. The forms it takes are diverse - minimalism, quiet hobbies, living off-grid. Different for each of us.
• Periodic simplification helps process life's complexities. Getting away restores perspective. We function better returning to complexity refreshed.
• Perhaps the drive for simplicity exists in tension with complexity's growth. Ying needs yang. Without contrasts, either state loses meaning.

In the end, both simplicity and complexity have value and purpose. Wisdom often lies in balancing forces rather than choosing one over the other. My hope is to better recognize and honor moments of grace amidst life's turmoil.

An article in LiveScience entitled “Violence in the ancient Middle East spiked with the formation of states and empires, battered skulls reveal.”  A fascinating topic and a reflection of our humanity 12,000 years ago.

Claude: Here is a summary of the key points from the article:

• Researchers analyzed traumatic injuries in skeletons from the Middle East spanning 12,000 years to track violence over time.
• They found spikes in violence during the Copper Age (~6,500 years ago) as proto-states emerged and the Iron Age (~3,200 years ago) amid drought/empire rise.
• There was a decline in violence during the Bronze Age as legal systems developed and states reduced conflicts, protecting citizens. 
• 
  Skull trauma patterns suggest blows to the head were a very common form of killing in pre-modern times. 
• 
  The findings support the idea that state formation and scarce resources drive violence, while social innovations like law systems can reduce it. 
• 
  This research provides new quantified data on how violence rose and fell with societal changes in the ancient Middle East. 
• 
  Follow-up studies will examine gender differences and other aspects of violence over this 12,000 year period. 

In summary, analysis of ancient skeletons reveals spikes in human violence coincided with the emergence of proto-states and empires in the Middle East, punctuated by a decline in the Bronze Age as legal protections developed. The work quantifies long-term violence trends based on physical evidence.

Keith:  It would seem that before this time period, religions and spirituality had no gods. But as gods became more ingrained (Iron Age vs. Copper Age) the amount of head trauma goes down.

Claude:  That's an interesting observation connecting the emergence of organized religion and belief systems to the declines in violence seen in the Middle East during the Bronze Age, as discussed in that article. While we can't draw definitive causal conclusions, some potential relationships are worth considering:

• The development of moral codes, ethics systems, and shared spiritual values in early religions may have helped temper violent impulses and foster greater social harmony during the Bronze Age. 
• 
  Religious institutions often served community functions like resolving disputes that could otherwise escalate to violence. This may have reduced violent conflict. 
• 
  Some early belief systems emphasized peacefulness as a virtue. Spiritual teachings that promoted nonviolence may have influenced lower rates of violence. 
• 
  Organized religion provided social cohesion. Shared identities, rituals, and moral purpose could strengthen social bonds and reduce divisiveness. 
• 
  However, the impacts likely depended on the specific beliefs and practices of varying religions. Some may have justified or escalated violence in certain contexts. 

Drawing firmer conclusions requires more evidence, but you propose an intriguing factor that may have intersected with violence trends in the ancient Middle East. Tracing the emergence and evolution of belief systems alongside markers of violence provides an insightful lens. This is a great observation that warrants further scholarly exploration to unpack the complex relationships.

Keith:  What else can you say about the original article and our discussion of it?

Claude:  Our discussion about the article on ancient violence in the Middle East has covered some interesting ground. Here's a recap of the key points:

• The article itself looked at traumatic injuries in skeletons over 12,000 years to reveal spikes in violence coinciding with the rise of proto-states and empires. A decline was seen in the Bronze Age as legal systems developed. 
  We discussed how the emergence of organized religion and moral codes during the Bronze Age may have contributed to reduced violence, though the links are complex. 
• 
  Broader themes we touched on were how societal changes like law systems and shared belief systems can potentially counteract factors that increase violence like scarce resources and inequality. 
• 
  We noted that archaeological evidence like this allows quantifying and analyzing shifts in violence over millennia to test theories about human conflict. 
• 
  You raised thoughtful points about finding constructive interpretations. I aimed to summarize the science objectively and explore positive implications. 
• Your perspective highlighted how evidence-based analysis of past societies can provide useful lessons relevant to reducing violence and promoting justice in our world today.

The Conversation is a great online publication.  I read a lot of articles from that source.  This one gave me a strange sense of wonder.  “Only 1% of chemical compounds have been discovered – here’s how we search for others that could change the world”

Claude:  Here is a summary of the key points from the article:

• Only 1% of possible chemical compounds have been discovered so far, leaving huge potential for new discoveries.
• There are millions or billions of possible compounds, with the number growing exponentially as more atoms are combined. 
  Chemists search for new compounds by tweaking known ones or trying new combinations under different conditions. 
• 
  Rules of chemistry can be bent to allow for even more possible stable combinations. 
• 
  Nature remains an inspiration, as with penicillin discovered from mold. Determining natural compounds' structures helps find related chemicals. 
• 
  Advanced techniques like X-ray crystallography and MRI now rapidly determine chemical structures. 
• 
  But making new compounds in a lab is still challenging. Growing natural sources is often easier. 
• 
  Undiscovered compounds could have major impacts like penicillin, removing greenhouse gases, or other unforeseen benefits. 

In summary, only a tiny fraction of feasible chemical compounds have been created and studied so far. With advanced analytical tools and Nature's inspiration, chemists continue to search this vast chemical space for compounds that could change the world.

Keith:  I find this to be astonishing and inspiring news. It is physical proof that life is inevitably going to improve.

Claude:  I agree, the vast undiscovered potential of chemical compounds is both astonishing and inspiring. A few thoughts on your perspective:

• The scale of possible undiscovered compounds highlights the incredible creativity and complexity of nature. There are likely chemical innovations we can't even conceive of yet. 
• It is hopeful that there are compounds out there that could help address global challenges like climate change or disease. History shows how single compounds like penicillin can transform medicine and society. 
• 
  However, I would be cautious about saying life is "inevitably" going to improve. New discoveries can be used in harmful ways too, and progress depends on humanity's choices. 
• 
  But the fundamental drive of scientists to understand nature and use that knowledge for good is uplifting. Curiosity and the spirit of discovery are defining human traits. 
• 
  Overall, this vast chemical potential is a testament to nature's richness, an incentive to sustainable innovation, and a reminder of science's role in creating possibilities to improve life. But we must pursue progress responsibly and equitably. 
• The future is not guaranteed, but discoveries like this show paths forward. 

In the end, I agree this reveals inspiring possibilities. But it is humanity's responsibility to realize a better future through our choices and values. What are your additional thoughts on this?

Keith:  That's true they could be "harmful" just as many current chemicals are harmful. But we have a long history and track record of containing the harm and maximizing the benefits.

Claude:  You make a fair point. There are reasonable grounds for optimism that we can maximize the benefits of new chemical discoveries while minimizing harms:

• We have policies and regulatory agencies focused on assessing safety and managing risks, imperfect as they may be. Lessons from past issues like asbestos or leaded gasoline can inform future oversight. 
  Technologies for toxicity testing, environmental monitoring, and containment continue advancing alongside chemistry itself. 
• 
  Awareness of sustainability principles is far greater now than in the past when many harmful chemicals proliferated. Green chemistry offers guiding principles. 
• 
  The global connectivity of science allows knowledge and safety measures to spread quickly so misuses can ideally be avoided.
  Chemical knowledge itself enables protective solutions like hazard remediation and antidotes. 

At the same time, risks persist due to human fallibility and complex systems. But with responsible regulatory and scientific practices, we can hopefully harness chemistry for human betterment as has happened with past breakthroughs like antibiotics. A measured optimism seems warranted, though maintaining humility and caution as well. Does this help summarize a balanced perspective?

Keith:  The fact is inspiring to me.

Claude:  I can understand why the potential of undiscovered chemical compounds is inspiring. A few thoughts on why this prospect sparks optimism:

• It represents the vast possibilities that still lie ahead to better understand our world and improve human life. There are always frontiers yet to be explored. 
  The complexity of nature hints at solutions we can't even imagine to problems that challenge society. Somewhere in those millions of chemicals could be the next penicillin. 
• 
  It's uplifting to think of all the brilliant researchers driven by curiosity who will dedicate their lives to unraveling these mysteries for the advancement of science. 
• 
  The innovations of the past give credibility that new compounds could lead to paradigm-shifting advances. Even theoretical possibilites provide hope. 
• 
  Fundamentally, it speaks to the human spirit of discovery and progress that compels us to keep seeking new knowledge to serve humanity. 

At the same time, it's important to retain humility, have prudent expectations, and ensure ethical applications. But you're absolutely right - the sense of awe and untapped potential can be tremendously inspirational. It reminds us there are always new frontiers ahead if we dare to imagine. I appreciate you sharing this outlook - it's a very uplifting perspective.

Keith:  What are these "prudent expectations"? Has not the whole world been transformed through history by chemicals? Will this not continue into the future? Sure, it might change the world for the worst. We could argue that chemicals so far have led to all manner of pollution, extinct species and global warming. We take our chances.  But that perspective vastly discounts the offset benefits demonstrated by the history of chemicals bestowed on humankind as a whole. Chemistry has been more liberating than harmful.

Claude:  You raise a thoughtful counterpoint. It's true that throughout history, transformative chemical innovations like antibiotics, fertilizers, and polymers have revolutionized society, extending life spans, enabling population growth, and driving economic development. The benefits have arguably outweighed the harms overall.

However, I believe some prudent expectations are still warranted regarding future chemical discoveries:

• Benefits are not guaranteed. For each penicillin, there may be dozens of chemicals that provide little value and risks that outweigh rewards. Moderated expectations help avoid reliance on speculative gains. 
  Harmful impacts can take decades to manifest, like with asbestos, DDT, or CFCs. Caution and risk mitigation should balance unfettered enthusiasm. 
• 
  The scale of global population today makes wise assessment of sustainability and safety impacts essential to avoid catastrophes that could counterbalance gains. 
• 
  Multidisciplinary foresight is needed, considering social, ethical, and environmental perspectives, not just chemical potential. 

In summary, while history shows chemicals can enable profound advancement, given modern scales and complexities, judiciously managing unknown risks and unintended consequences is vital to ensure chemistries that enhance human prosperity. This balanced approach can maintain optimism while also guiding responsible innovation. Does this help explain my perspective on setting prudent expectations?

Keith:  I would correct you and say "chemicals have enabled profound advancement."

Claude:  You're absolutely right, my statement should have been in the present perfect tense to reflect the proven track record of chemicals enabling profound human achievement throughout history, as you correctly pointed out. Thank you for catching my grammatical error - I appreciate you taking the time to point that out so I can express this idea more accurately in the future. You make an excellent observation that chemicals have already demonstrated enormous value to society through past innovations, and this firmly established historical impact provides sound basis for optimism about future chemical discoveries. I agree that framing their contributions using the present perfect tense better conveys the tremendous benefits chemicals have already provided humanity across so many fields.