Toward Defining “Will” On A Molecular Level
(excerpted from a book in progress, working title "On Free Will And Other Wills"
by Valery Chalidze)

Despite all the celebrated successes of science, a crucial question for humankind -- "is there free will?" -- remains unanswered. However, it has now become clear that the question is not philosophical, psychological or neurological. Rather, the question is one for physics and molecular biology. The question is not "Is there...?" but "How, if...?" Therefore the basic question "what is an elementary act of will?" should be answered on a molecular level, and that is preceded by an even better question: "what is the simplest act of life?"

-----Order in thermal chaos

Kinetic theory is based on an assumption of the perfectly stochastic movement of atoms of gas presented as elastic spheres. Molecular gas has limitations of stochasticity even in a simplified model of gas: oscillations of small molecules bring some order into the chaos of thermal movement; the frequencies are determined and do not follow stochastic distribution. In multi-atom molecules there is a complex movement of parts in relation to each other. Although amplitudes of that movement increase with the temperature frequencies tend to remain orderly.

The picture is quite complicated for the movement of molecules containing thousands of atoms: each atom oscillates only the way the chemical bonds dictate; therefore, the thermal movement of atoms is far from random. Those oscillations interact with each other, leading to a complex picture of oscillation of different parts of a large molecule with a set spectrum of frequencies.

----Simple model

Let’s now imagine a device that plays with balls and stick models of molecules. After training, this robot performs only optimal movements of its – let’s say -- two fingers on each of two hands, which are grabbing and connecting balls and sticks to build models of a molecule, or to disassemble it. Those fingers and hands perform three-dimensional movements, which can be presented as the sum of oscillations, and can be described by the Fourier spectrum (analytically it is not an easy task, but there are computers).

----Robot-molecule

Now let’s imagine a cleverly-folded, long, complicated molecule -- let it be a protein -- which has two hands with two fingers on each hand. (With the known peculiarities of protein molecules' geometry, such a configuration is quite possible.) With enough complexity of the protein, the hands and fingers of this robot-molecule might have the same kind of Fourier spectrum as our robot, and therefore will be able to manipulate actual parts of molecules as the robot manipulates balls and sticks; of course, the macroscopic robot is much slower, so the natural frequencies of this robot- molecule are proportionally much higher. The robot-molecule will be performing the enzymatic function of assisting in chemical reactions when entropy/energy requirements do not forbid such activity.

Compared with a macroscopic robot playing with balls and sticks, the robot-molecule must affect substrate molecules not only mechanically, but with the necessary frequency field as this or that catalytic function requires; that calls for additional frequencies to be added to the spectrum of oscillations.

The robot-molecule must be large enough to produce an appropriate spectrum, and to possess sufficient inertia to play the role of a "work bench". One should not neglect the effect of pulling apart or putting together, but a mechanical force would hardly be enough without a field of frequency.

Long molecules of enzymes in living cells happen to be proteins, but it might be any other molecule with a similar ability to create clever configurations and possess a complex spectrum of oscillations; at least, there is no reason to believe that this is the prerogative of proteins only.

The initial source of oscillations are thermal attacks by surrounding particles, and if an additional energy source is not needed, those oscillations can lead to enzymatic activity only if the amplitudes are sufficient, which means only in the proper range of temperature.

Of course, configuration with two hands and fingers (although possible) is chosen only for schematic illustration to mimic the previously-mentioned robot. An accommodating active site can be of any appropriate shape, as long as the needed frequencies are delivered to produce a reaction.
“Lock and key" concept usually refer only to the configuration of the active side of enzymes, but we know that that side is usually a small part of a protein; the rest is needed to provide for the appropriate spectrum of frequencies for performing movements inside the active side, and to supply the proper frequency field.

----Not life.

Clearly, such a robot-molecule is not a living entity, as it does not deviate from thermodynamic equilibrium. Interaction between thermal chaos and the orderly oscillations of atoms and molecules is usual for the inanimate world, but the occurrence of large molecules like proteins with their complex spectrums of oscillations -- similar to the chain of command of actual robots -- can be viewed as crossing the line between "it’s happened" and "it was done". It is not an act of life, but a poetically-inclined person could declare it to be the will of inanimate matter. I do not go this far, as in my mind “will” is connected with life.

----Simplest act of life

The ability to use energy in order to lower entropy systematically (not as a result of fluctuation) is the most important property of life.

The robot-molecule can work on the same principle as described above, performing an entropy-lowering reaction if given additional energy. That energy supplied to the robot-molecule means that oscillations will have larger amplitudes, and can transfer energy to reagents.

Using energy to perform an order-increasing reaction is an elementary act of life. Any other attributes of life as we know it, such as metabolism, reproduction or biological evolution are all dependent on such elementary acts of life, and therefor are secondary from the point of view of physics.

The supply of energy to a robot-molecule for performing an act of life can be random, like receiving a photon, or goal-oriented, as using an energy source only when proper reagents are already positioned on an active site. For the latter, there must be some sort of signaling that reagents are present. Actually, the presence of reagents on an active site must change the spectrum of frequencies of all the protein, and that is a signal by itself which can lead to energy-producing reaction on the "energy site" of the robot-molecule. (The variety of signaling methods of proteins does not occupy my attention here, but it is worth noticing that any addition, chemical or physical, to the body of a protein must change the spectrum of oscillations, for example with the incorporation of a hormone to an appropriate place. That provides for a wide possibility of performing logical operations in proteins' behavior.)

----Act of will.

We know what life is (supposedly); we will have to agree on what is “will”. Surprisingly, for the thousands of years that freedom of will was under discussion, every philosopher had an opinion but no one gave a definition of “will” itself good enough to use as a starting point without debate.

Here is a consideration: the act of life discussed above is an entropy-lowering reaction if the protein got a needed supply of energy. Extracting energy for this reaction is not by itself an act of life, yet it happens when the protein's energy-extracting site receives information that the proper reagents are placed on an active site. It is exactly this act of extracting energy for the purpose of performing an order-increasing reaction that can be called an elementary act of will. It is not the will of an organism, not conscious will, and certainly not free will. Yet it accords with the fuzzy concept of “will” as it has been understood over the centuries; it is connected with energy and with a goal. Of course, the entropy-lowering reaction is used here as the simplest example of an act of life. Proteins perform many other functions for which energy has to be channeled when needed; and information about readiness to perform the task must be received for the release of energy to occur. Therefore, receiving a photon even when its energy can be utilized does not constitute an act of will.

My attempt to discuss “will” in terms of physics does not mean that “will” is a physical property. It can be perceived as a physical process -- a process of directing energy toward a goal. Will is informed energy in the sense that energy is directed only when there is information about readiness to use it to achieve a goal (in the case of my robot-molecule, when there are reagents on an active site).

In the absence of reagents, energy would be released for nothing, so there would be no act of will. But then, such an aimless release of energy would also not lead to an act of life because no negaentropy would be produced.

August 22, 2010