quote:
DNAunion No, Your original reply said:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The calculation implicitly relies upon homochirality. If both enantiomeric forms of the bases (actually, the sugar moieties of the bases) were present, enantiomeric cross inhibition would hinder the formation of long polymers needed for replication or other complex function.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This clearly states that if both bases were present, the formation of self-replicators would be hindered.
Close enough
quote:
Rrhain's post clearly demonstrated that relatively simply molecules can selectively extract compounds of the correct chirality. Thus chirality is not a problem in the gross sense.
No, Rei’s post didn’t show that.
For example, saying relatively simple molecules is misleading. It was one type of molecule, not a group of different types of molecules (as your wording suggests); the molecule was a 32-amino acid peptide, with a very specific sequence, synthesized with L-enantiomers exclusively, and was the product of rational engineering (it is not a natural peptide; it is a modified version), and it could not do anything - like "self-replicating" or maintaining homochirality as in the experiment - without the researchers intentionally synthesizing and feeding the specific 17-aa and 15-aa halves, which also had to be preactivated.
And as I pointed out earlier, Rrhain’s article deals with peptides, whereas my statement dealt with nucleic acids. Anyone familiar with biochemistry knows that those are two very different things.
So no, Rrhain's offered article did not show that having racemic mixtures of nucleotides wouldn't be a problem for the calculation I addressed.
[This message has been edited by DNAunion, 11-19-2003]