Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 79 (8965 total)
51 online now:
Hyroglyphx, PaulK (2 members, 49 visitors)
Newest Member: javier martinez
Post Volume: Total: 873,225 Year: 4,973/23,288 Month: 94/1,784 Week: 192/353 Day: 1/32 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Does Death Pose Challenge To Abiogenesis
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8905
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 4.3


(2)
Message 3 of 191 (533034)
10-28-2009 9:49 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Cedre
10-28-2009 9:20 AM


Death?
For the first 3 billion years organisms didn't die unless they were killed. When does a bacteria die? When it divides into two?

Life isn't an additional "force" or woo-woo. It is an emergent property of the organization of compounds. If you disrupt the pattern enough the property is lost.

For more complex organisms the reason for death is an interesting question. Why don't the patterns remain intact and self-repairing indefinitely?

I can suggest some ideas but why don't you think about it first.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Cedre, posted 10-28-2009 9:20 AM Cedre has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Cedre, posted 10-28-2009 10:33 AM NosyNed has responded
 Message 182 by EireEngineer, posted 11-03-2009 10:37 AM NosyNed has not yet responded

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8905
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 4.3


(1)
Message 8 of 191 (533047)
10-28-2009 10:55 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Cedre
10-28-2009 10:33 AM


The Challange is... exactly?
Bacteria do die at some point, everything is subject to the second law of energy. Due to predation or limited food supply disease etc. But the fact is when life sin't sustained it does cease.

Of course bacteria are "dead" if they are dismembered by a predator. How is that relevant to the point in any way at all? Your challenge only counts if it is a problem for abiogenesis right?

Of course everything is subject to the second law of entropy(Not "energy"). That is why life ceases without the necessary energy input that is needed to do anything when subject to the 2nd law. So since the 2nd law always applies and food is a way of carrying right on without that being an issue why is the food issue a challenge?

When those disruptive to the pattern influences are removed when exactly does a bacteria die?

NosyNed writes:

"For more complex organisms the reason for death is an interesting question."

Cedre writes:

It's more than interesting I believe it's a real challenge to abiogenesis; the fact that it's close to impossible to maintain life after a certain period with all the essential components for life in tact show that life is not just a matter of having all the components and having them in place it's more than that.

But complex organisms aren't what "abiogenesised" are they? So the issue of death of those organisms isn't relevant either.

As noted it is clearly not at all impossible to maintain life indefinitely since the bacteria like forms did it continuously for 3 billion years after abiogenesis.

NosyNed writes:

"Life isn't an additional "force" or woo-woo"

Cedre writes:

How do you know this?

Well, "know" would be not tentative enough here perhaps. But it is the most reasonable position to hold right now. We have examined the functioning of living things down to minute levels of detail. Everything that happens, so far, is explainable by the chemistry involved. Every little bit of it.

Just like a diesel engine works when it is all assembled but is just scrap when not in the right pattern life is a pattern of chemicals to all levels of current knowledge. You don't, I am pretty sure, understand what an emergent property is.

I would quote Laplace:"I have no reason for that hypothosis."

I have no reason for woo-woo because, so far, all we see is complex chemistry and nothing is unexplainable so far.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Cedre, posted 10-28-2009 10:33 AM Cedre has not yet responded

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8905
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 4.3


Message 73 of 191 (533282)
10-29-2009 6:41 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by Taz
10-29-2009 6:34 PM


Re: Play nice
Don't be so quick to presume sneaky tactics from Buz.

He has demonstrated a total lack of comprehension to any of the science invovled. I doubt very much that he is being so tricky.

He just uses words at random ( ) without having a clue about the nature of the discussion.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by Taz, posted 10-29-2009 6:34 PM Taz has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by Buzsaw, posted 10-29-2009 7:57 PM NosyNed has not yet responded
 Message 83 by Taz, posted 10-29-2009 11:20 PM NosyNed has not yet responded

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8905
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 4.3


Message 124 of 191 (533363)
10-30-2009 11:10 AM
Reply to: Message 95 by Cedre
10-30-2009 5:50 AM


Relevant to the Origin of Life
As noted a number of times, Cedre, the life or death of a large, multicellular organism has nothing whatsoever to do with the origin of simpler-than-we-have-now single celled (or not even with cells as we know) living things.

Stick to bacteria which is closer to relevant. Humans and cats are not.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by Cedre, posted 10-30-2009 5:50 AM Cedre has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by Coragyps, posted 10-30-2009 11:41 AM NosyNed has not yet responded
 Message 135 by Cedre, posted 10-31-2009 4:16 AM NosyNed has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020