Proteins don’t improvise. E What if they already knew how to fold?
*“God does not play dice. And perhaps matter doesn’t improvise either.”* — Albert Einstein
From Levinthal’s paradox to the Furrows Theory: when information doesn’t explain reality, but shapes it. Something doesn’t add up. And it hasn’t added up for more than half a century.
The Levinthal paradox is one of those anomalies that science has learned to manage, but perhaps has never truly resolved. A protein, to find its functional form, would have to explore an astronomical number of configurations.
If it actually did so, it would take an amount of time incompatible with life. Yet it doesn’t.
It folds in a few milliseconds. It doesn’t try everything. It almost never makes a mistake. It doesn’t waste time.
So the question is inevitable: how does the protein know where to go? And how does it fold?
The official answer (and its limitation).
Biophysics answers this way: proteins move within a funnel-shaped energy landscape. Some configurations are more favorable, and the system naturally converges toward them. All correct. All elegant. But not everything explained.
Because an energy funnel explains where one goes. It doesn’t really explain how quickly one gets there.
And above all, it doesn’t resolve that subtle sensation: that the system is already oriented.
What if it weren’t just energy? What if there were something more? Something that doesn’t push, but orients. Doesn’t force, but suggests.
The Furrows Theory—studied and drafted together with Sabrina Ulivi—introduces exactly this element. A radical hypothesis, yet surprisingly consistent with the physics of complex systems: the existence of persistent informational traces in spacetime, capable of modulating the behavior of matter.
Furrows are not forces. They are not fields in the classical sense. They are not particles. They are informational imprints. And their action is subtle yet incisive: they alter probabilities.
The point where physics meets memory.
The behavior of a protein is governed by statistical laws.
Each configuration has a probability that depends on its energy: P(ci) = exp( -Ei / (kB * T) ) / Z
Where:
- Ei = energy of the configuration
- kB = Boltzmann constant
- T = temperature
- Z = sum of all possible states
This is where Furrow Theory comes into play. It does not change the rules. It changes the weights.
It introduces an energy-informational perturbation, denoted as dEF, which modifies the energy landscape:
PF(ci) = exp( -(Ei + dEF) / (kB * T) ) / ZF
What does this really mean? Even a minimal variation dEF can increase the probability of certain configurations, drastically reduce others, and steer the system toward the functional state
This effect can be defined as: BF(ci) = PF(ci) – P0(ci) that is, the conformational bias induced by the Furrow. Not because the protein “knows” what to do. But because it can do nothing else but reduce chaos, without eliminating it.
Levinthal’s paradox arises from an exploration problem: too many possibilities. Furrow Theory suggests that the system does not explore everything because: the space of possibilities is already deformed. Not eliminated. Not simplified. Oriented.
A memory that precedes form: If this hypothesis were even partially correct, the implications would be profound. Protein folding would not merely be the result of local interactions, but the expression of a broader memory, inscribed within the system itself.
A memory that:
- is not contained within DNA
- cannot be reduced to chemistry
- but acts as an oriented field of possibilities
Time and acceleration: the detail that doesn’t add up. If we introduce this modulation, time changes as well:
tF = t0 * exp( -dEF / (kB * T) )
Where:
- t0 = time without Furrow
- tF = observed real time
Even a minimal variation can produce a significant acceleration of the process. No enormous force is needed. What is needed is coherent information. Not a substitution, but an additional level.
Note: The Furrows Theory does not undermine biophysics. It complements it.
- The energy funnel remains
- Molecular interactions remain
- Chemistry remains
But on top of all this, a new level is added: information as a modulator of physical reality
Conclusion: a science changing direction? Yes. If we accept even the mere possibility that Furrows exist, then we must rewrite something very profound:
- memory is not merely biological
- information is not merely an output
- the behavior of matter is not merely local
And the question changes radically: no longer “how does a protein form,” but “what information makes that form possible?” It’s an uncomfortable question. But it’s also the point where science, every now and then, takes a leap. And perhaps this is one of those moments.
And so, perhaps, Einstein was right: “God does not play dice.”
If matter truly does not proceed by blind trial and error, if chance is truly not the sole driving force of reality, then we must consider an even more radical possibility: namely, that there exists a deep informational structure capable of guiding what happens, without determining it.
Not a force. Not a law in the classical sense. But a trace. A groove. A Furrow.
And perhaps this is the real discovery. Not that proteins fold quickly. But that they aren’t improvising. And if they aren’t improvising, then they are following something. And if they are following something, then that something exists. And it isn’t visible. But it is effective.
The phrase with which it all began… “God does not play dice.” Perhaps not. But perhaps—today we can begin to say—matter does not play by chance either.
References
- Penrose, R., & Hameroff, S. (2011). Consciousness in the Universe: A Review of the Orch-OR Theory. Physics of Life Reviews.
- Bohm, D. (1980). Wholeness and Implicit Order. Routledge.
- Popp, F.-A. (1999). On the Coherence of Biophotons. Macroscopic Quantum Coherence.
- Cozzolino, G. & Ulivi, S. (2025). The Groove Theory: A Neurophysics of Information in Granular Spacetime.
