Cited by 192Quantum Mechanics and ApplicationsPhilosophy of Biology and Scientific ExplanationHistory of Science and Medicine

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 53 of the 53 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 38 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

The origins of quantum biology

Open access
McFadden, Johnjoe, Al-Khalili, Jim·2018·Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences

Abstract

Quantum biology is usually considered to be a new discipline, arising from recent research that suggests that biological phenomena such as photosynthesis, enzyme catalysis, avian navigation or olfaction may not only operate within the bounds of classical physics but also make use of a number of the non-trivial features of quantum mechanics, such as coherence, tunnelling and, perhaps, entanglement. However, although the most significant findings have emerged in the past two decades, the roots of quantum biology go much deeper—to the quantum pioneers of the early twentieth century. We will argue that some of the insights provided by these pioneering physicists remain relevant to our understanding of quantum biology today.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This historical review argues that quantum biology’s roots lie with early twentieth-century quantum pioneers—Bohr, Jordan, Schrödinger, and others—not only with Schrödinger’s 1944 *What is Life?*. It traces how their ideas about small-number molecular control, quantum indeterminacy, and decoherence resonate with modern quantum biology while noting that several current claims remain controversial or speculative.

Key findings

  • Quantum biology was born shortly after quantum mechanics itself: Pascual Jordan used the term *Quantenbiologie* from the late 1930s and published what is “arguably the first scientific paper on quantum biology” in 1932, while Schrödinger’s *What is Life?* appeared in 1944.
  • Schrödinger argued heredity could not rest on classical “order from disorder” laws because genes were too small; using target theory he estimated a gene as no bigger than a cube of sides 300 Å containing a maximum of about 1 million atoms, implying noise of about one in 1000, or 0.1%, far higher than observed mutation rates of less than 10⁻⁸ per gene per generation.
  • Both Jordan and Schrödinger identified a key point relevant to modern quantum biology: macroscopic biological phenomena may be triggered by the dynamics of relatively small numbers of particles, whose behaviour can be influenced by non-trivial quantum effects.
  • Modern quantum biology now includes sound experimental evidence for quantum coherence in photosynthesis and quantum tunnelling in enzyme action, with entanglement implicated in avian navigation and tunnelling proposed in olfaction and mutation; however, photosynthesis coherence remains controversial, and olfaction, magnetoreception, and mutation remain more speculative.

Methods

  • Design: historical review and narrative synthesis of the origins of quantum biology, drawing on publications, lectures, correspondence, and quotations from early twentieth-century physicists and biologists.
  • Data or sample: no new data; the paper states, “There are no data in this historical review article.”
  • Main analysis: traces intellectual lineages from organicism and quantum pioneers through the Cambridge Theoretical Biology Club, Schrödinger’s *What is Life?*, mid-century scepticism, Fröhlich coherence, and late twentieth/early twenty-first-century experimental and theoretical work.

Limitations

  • The paper states it is a historical review with no data, so it presents no new experimental tests or quantitative synthesis.
  • The text itself notes that some modern quantum biology claims remain controversial or speculative—especially long-lived coherence in photosynthesis, olfaction, magnetoreception, and mutation—and that links between quantum coherence and consciousness have “little support within the neurobiology community.”
  • As a historical narrative, the review does not claim systematic coverage of all primary literature or resolve ongoing debates; it explicitly says the debate has shifted from whether coherence and tunnelling are involved to what role they play.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rspa.2018.0674

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 38 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 22 claims

  • Probably not a substantial claim. 31
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 16
40 of 40
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Quantum biology is usually considered to be a new discipline arising from recent research.

    “Quantum biology is usually considered to be a new discipline, arising from recent research that suggests that biological phenomena such as photosynthesis, enzyme catalysis, avian navigation or olfaction may not only operate within the bounds of classical physics but also make use of a number of the non-trivial features of quantum mechanics, such as coherence, tunnelling and, perhaps, entanglement.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The most significant findings in quantum biology have emerged in the past two decades.

    “However, although the most significant findings have emerged in the past two decades, the roots of quantum biology go much deeper—to the quantum pioneers of the early twentieth century.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Pascual Jordan had been thinking about the question of quantum biology for over a decade and had been using the term Quantenbiologie since the late 1930s.

    “In fact, Jordan had been thinking about this question for over a decade and had been using the term Quantenbiologie since the late 1930s.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    By the 1940s, heredity was known to be governed by genes, but nobody yet knew what genes were made of.

    “By the 1940s, it was known that heredity was governed by genes, but nobody yet knew what genes were made of.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Quantum dynamics taking place within living systems have been subject to 3.5 billion years of optimizing evolution.

    “What remains indisputable is that the quantum dynamics that are undoubtedly taking place within living systems have been subject to 3.5 billion years of optimizing evolution.”
5 of 5

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Haldane quotation is cited to the Watson reference

    Minor

    The text attributes the quotation to Haldane but cites [31], which the reference list identifies as Watson's book. The same quotation is cited earlier to Haldane's [29, p. 82].

  • Jordan's book is dated both 1943 and 1941

    Minor

    The text says Jordan published the book a year before Schrödinger's 1944 book, implying 1943. It later dates Jordan's book to 1941; both passages cite reference [20].

  • Citation [32] cannot support a quotation on page 270

    Minor

    The quotation is cited to page 270 of reference [32], but the listed reference [32] runs from pages 724 to 732.

3 of 3

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 53 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Timofeev-Ressovsky NW Zimmer KG Delbrück M. 1935 Über die Natur der Genmutation und der Genstruktur . Nachrichten von der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Goettingen. Mathematisch-physikalische Klasse. Fachgruppe 6 Biologie vol. 13 p. 190. Berlin Germany: Weidmannsch Buchhandlung.
  2. Watson J, 2012, The double helix

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–189 of 189

Metadata

Authors
McFadden, J., & Al-Khalili, J.
Affiliations
University of Surrey (GB)
Corresponding author
Al-Khalili, Jim
Venue
Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences
Published
2018-12
Volume
474
Issue
2220
Pages
20180674
ISSN
  • 1364-5021 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-2946
OpenAlex
W2906308443
Cited by
192
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 28 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 9
FWCI
1.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Open Research (University of Surrey) (submittedVersion)
  • Surrey Research Insight Open Access (The University of Surrey) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Mechanics and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Philosophy of Biology and Scientific Explanation
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › History of Science and Medicine
Keywords
quantum biology, history of quantum mechanics, quantum coherence, quantum tunneling, quantum entanglement, photosynthesis, enzyme catalysis, avian navigation, olfaction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review