|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 916,385 Year: 3,642/9,624 Month: 513/974 Week: 126/276 Day: 23/31 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Problems with the first life | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Jack Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: Member Rating: 8.3 |
Imagine with me please. Imagination is all very well, but it is a poor guide indeed when it comes to the workings of science.
the earth is born having elements and some simple compounds.most of it is water . atoms are moving colliding with each other, combining ,forming a large molecule such as proteins (which will play a great role in life -later-)how long -do you think- such a procces will take? Amino acids we know can from by random chance - experiments such as the Stanley-Miller experiment show it, later experiments have shown that all 20 amino acids used in earthly life can form this way. RNA can be formed from chains of amino acids. Some RNA chains can replicate themselves. That's all we need to start with. From there, the mathematics of how it all comes together places it well within the bounds of probability given the time scales involved. I don't know how long it would take to form such RNA chains in the first place, but the earth is a very big place and given half a billion years. I doubt it falls beyond the realms of possibility.
what make a molecule rather than the others to be a membrane to protect the cell from outer conditions??!!! Many lipids will form cell-like structures spontaneously. I imagine early cells used these or similar molecules to form 'proto-cells'.
now this living cell found that it must do some procceses to keep living !!okey .reproducing! how could a mindless molecules know how to divide the cell into two similar cells??!how to know what essential components must exist in both to keep living??!!!! The first 'living' thing already had reproduction that's what makes it 'living'. Self-replicating RNA strands have been isolated in the lab. Again, it's just chemistry, it doesn't need to know anything.
do you want me to continue?? All you've provided so far is speculation and personal incredulity. I'd like to see something more solid.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1487 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
what make a molecule rather than the others to be a membrane to protect the cell from outer conditions??!!! In a word, hydrophilia. Lipid molecules have an end that is attracted to water and an end that is repulsed by it (because of the polar nature of water molecules.) When they bind side-by-side, in two layers, they form the "lipid bi-layer" that is the precursor to all cellular membranes. There's no trick to making it happen; this is a natural, self-organizing arrangement that the lipid molecules form spontaneously.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Loudmouth Inactive Member |
quote: Why should we only consider Earth in our calculations? Shouldn't we also calculate the chances for the rest of the Earth like planets in the Universe? I will use two analogies to try and make my point clear. Analogy One Being that you are from Jordan, you may not be familiar with the Lottery here in the US. In this gambling game, you buy a ticket for one dollar. On this ticket you get a combination of 6 numbers between 1 and 46 (using a simplified lottery, ignoring the Powerball for now). They then number 46 balls and pull them out at random. If your numbers and the numbers on the ball match, then you win millions of dollars for your 1 dollar investment. The chances of this happening are about 1 in 60 million. A pretty small chance. Yet, many people have won this lottery. However, given that millions of tickets are sold the chances that somebody will win is almost guaranteed. However, let's pretend that five people in my lab by a ticket each. The chances of any of us winning are 5 in 60 million. Guess what, we win. This should be impossible. However, given that there are so many tickets sold SOMEBODY should win, and anybody will do. This is how it is with only focusing on life developing on Earth. People claim that the chances are astronomically high. However, there are many other "ticket holders" out there in the universe. Let's say that the chances of life arising on earth is one in a trillion. Let's also pretend that only 0.001% of solar systems are capable of sustaining life. There are about a billion stars per galaxy, and about a billion galaxies. So there are a billion billion solar systems. 0.001% of a billion billion is a million billion (1015 solar systems). If the chances are a trillion (1012) to one for life, then there should be 1,000 planets with life in the universe. Earth just happens to be one of those winners. Of course, the chances of life arising and the fraction of systems capable of sustaining life are still unknown, but I think those are workable numbers. Analogy Two: What are the chances that you were born in the exact city or the exact hospital you were born in. Pretend that there about 1 million hospitals and midwifes in the world. You have a 1 in 1 million chance that you were born with a certain midwife present or in a specific hospital. Those chances are so high that I could state that you shouldn't have been born. However, you were born so the chances are 1 in 1, or a positive fact. Life is the same way. Out of the millions or billions of planets capable of sustaining life we just happen to be on Earth. No matter what the odds are, we are here, it is a fact. So far, no one has shown life arising through supernatural causes, but we have seen life continue and prosper through natural means. Within science, the natural means are the one's studied. Honestly, the truth could be found in the supernatural, but natural mechanisms are sufficient for explaining the emergence of life on this planet.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
coffee_addict Member (Idle past 497 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: |
dandon83 writes:
I see that you are new, so I am going to go easy on you, for now. If we accept that life had been exist due to some chemical reactoins ;we -surely-will face the truth that the earth age is too short to be enough .Such reactions (that can creat a such various complicated organisms)will take many many multiples of earth time (if it could be realy). Would you mind telling us how you got such an idea? Some probability math work would be just fine. The Laminator
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
tubi417 Inactive Member |
" Out of the millions or billions of planets capable of sustaining life we just happen to be on Earth. "
How exactly do you know that there are millions and billions of planets that can sustain life?' We could be the only planet in the solar system with life or we could be 1 of millions and millions of planets with life. We just don't know, so really cannot make say something like that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
dandon83 Inactive Member |
You said:
RNA can be formed from chains of aminoacids .some RNA chains can replicate them selves.that's all we need to start with. This RNA is the important molecule that controls the cell procceses, so to have a life it must exist in all cells .and for good look it was found to be cabable to replicate it self .what a clever mindless life??!!!!!! OR ..OHH!! let me guess .you want to say that life originated by true and false principle.that is somthing happens ,if it was good it lasts .but if it was not good the cell finishes and life-to be originated-will wait another long time .waiting something good to happen to keep it existing!!!!!!!!! This message has been edited by dandon83, 07-20-2004 04:50 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
dandon83 Inactive Member |
Thank you LAM but I prefer that you would be just scientific . and thank you for your kindness.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Jack Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: Member Rating: 8.3 |
This RNA is the important molecule that controls the cell procceses, so to have a life it must exist in all cells .and for good look it was found to be cabable to replicate it self .what a clever mindless life??!!!!!! No. No cell is needed. RNA is capable of replicating itself without the presence of a cell - it's just chemistry. Cells possibly originated from the lipid shells that Crash has been telling you about.
OR ..OHH!! let me guess .you want to say that life originated by true and false principle.that is somthing happens ,if it was good it lasts .but if it was not good the cell finishes and life-to be originated-will wait another long time .waiting something good to happen to keep it existing!!!!!!!!! I'm really not sure what you're saying here.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
dandon83 Inactive Member |
analogy reply one:
If we pretend that there is a chance to have another life on other planet.do we feel it ??do we contact with??did life originated on earth match with it any moment??? surely no .so it has no effect on life development on earth. and do not forget our whole topic is to prove the presence or not of a great creater that created universe. analogy reply two:it is a small chane to me to be born in exact hospital for an exact midwfie as you says . but it did happen that's the truth .Is not it?? okey I AGREE WITH YOU but how long time did it take to happen??since humanbeings was found .that is a very very long time . if I ask you to make it happen in afew years ;that is the impossiple thing it needs some one's cabable to do it;that is GOD. notice that this is just someone was born how about if i ask you to form a high-level and complicated organisation of such a persons!!!!!!!but how I did know that the earth's age was not enough for life origination in such a way; that is what i am realy trying to explain. just give me some time .cause i can use the internet one hour a day-except friday and saturday- i have a6 hours long inorganic chemistry lab. This message has been edited by dandon83, 07-20-2004 05:24 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
dandon83 Inactive Member |
let me ask you the question in an opposite way.
now we have the RNA which can replicates it self. why did it have the cabablity to control cellular activities . why did not any other molecule -that can not replicate it self-have this property?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Jack Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: Member Rating: 8.3 |
now we have the RNA which can replicates it self. why did it have the cabablity to control cellular activities. It didn't. It just replicated itself, and produced by-products.
why did not any other molecule -that can not replicate it self-have this property? I don't understand the relevance of your question?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
contracycle Inactive Member |
quote: Surely yes. At the moment, we have no reason to think there is NOT life on (some) other planets. Of course, our space exploration is only very recent so we have no confirming evidence yet.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
dandon83 Inactive Member |
I said "surely no" as an answer of the question"do we feel any life on other planets?" and you reply "surely yes"
what did you mean? do feel another existance of life?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
dandon83 Inactive Member |
what do you think about Darwin's theory .is it acceptaple?
This message has been edited by dandon83, 07-21-2004 05:59 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Jack Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: Member Rating: 8.3 |
Acceptable is what sense?
Darwin's theory has been developed on since it's conception, but broadly speaking - yes, it correctly describes the process that has led to the shaping of all life on earth, and yes it is more than capable of accounting for the variety that we observe.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024