Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9163 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,410 Year: 3,667/9,624 Month: 538/974 Week: 151/276 Day: 25/23 Hour: 1/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Self-sustained Replication of an RNA Enzyme
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.4


Message 25 of 52 (560100)
05-13-2010 8:17 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by dcarraher
05-11-2010 2:28 PM


Re: ...find a creationist as ignorant as an evolutionist
Hi Dcarraher, and welcome to EvC. I hope you'll stick around
Others have picked up most of your points, but I want to pick up a few points:
1) Information - the RNA is merely undergoing chemical reactions, it is not following "instructions" (e.g. DNA) to regenerate.
What is information? Why is the ability of the RNA in this experiment to catalyse it's own replication not to be considered information? What property of this replication is there that distinguishes it from DNA replication in such a way that this is not information but DNA replication is?
2) Translation - there is no mechanism for "interpreting" the information (non-existent) of the RNA and utilizing to build a product (e.g. Protein)
Ribozymes (that is, RNA with catalytic properties) are a key part of the DNA replication and translation processes, these RNAs are not translated from DNA but rather simply transcribed. Why is it such a problem that the same occurs here? Particularly as the whole point of the experiment is to demonstrate the possibility of simpler systems?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by dcarraher, posted 05-11-2010 2:28 PM dcarraher has not replied

  
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.4


Message 26 of 52 (560101)
05-13-2010 8:18 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by Straggler
05-12-2010 7:14 PM


Re: The definition of life is ... try again ...
He is obviously not going to have one. The question is do we?
No. For the same reason that we don't have a good definition of species: the reality is fuzzier than our abstractions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Straggler, posted 05-12-2010 7:14 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Straggler, posted 05-13-2010 8:51 AM Dr Jack has not replied

  
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.4


(1)
Message 32 of 52 (560139)
05-13-2010 1:48 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by dcarraher
05-13-2010 1:38 PM


Re: The definition of life is ...
No - because you started with something that is unarguably "Life", and ended with more. In the RNA experiment, you started with RNA, which is unarguably "Not Life", and ended up with more "Not Life". QED - Experiments that start with non-life and end up with more non-life = irrelevant to abiogenesis.
So if I build a model rocket engine, secure it in place and measure the thrust it produces that's irrelevant to moon travel because I started with something on the ground and finished with something on the ground? How about an experiment to measure the force of gravity? Is that irrelevant to moon travel because I'm not making a rocket?
Experiments don't reproduce the whole process. This experiment doesn't demonstrate the possibility of abiogenesis, it investigates one small part of one possible route. And there it finds that, gee, you can actually produce self-reproducing RNA just as the theory says.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by dcarraher, posted 05-13-2010 1:38 PM dcarraher has not replied

  
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.4


Message 44 of 52 (560174)
05-13-2010 4:48 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by dcarraher
05-13-2010 2:35 PM


Re: Definitions and Measurements
One of the posters above states that the RNA has information. My own opinion on the subject (speaking only for myself) is that "material information" is qualitatively different than "non-material" information. RNA has what I call material information - information that is a direct result of its physical/chemical properties. This is the kind of information that even a water molecule has. A Living Cell, on the other hand, has nonmaterial information contained in its DNA - e.g. how to build a protein. The ability to build a copy of itself is not a characteristic of its physical binding chemistry, it is a process that requires messengers and translators. Replicating RNA replicates because of its chemical characteristics, not because of the information it contains that can be interpreted.
What I asked you was a bit more specific than that.
The properties of DNA are a direct result of its physical properties. Nothing that happens in transcription, translation or replication is anything other than the interaction between chemicals.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by dcarraher, posted 05-13-2010 2:35 PM dcarraher has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Woodsy, posted 05-13-2010 5:09 PM Dr Jack has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024