All very confusing...
![Confused :?](./images/smilies/icon_e_confused.gif)
Cont. here:-One of the most puzzling questions about the origin of life is how the rich chemical landscape that makes life possible came into existence.
This landscape would have consisted among other things of amino acids, proteins and complex RNA molecules. What's more, these molecules must have been part of a rich network of interrelated chemical reactions which generated them in a reliable way.
Clearly, all that must have happened before life itself emerged. But how?
One idea is that groups of molecules can form autocatalytic sets. These are self-sustaining chemical factories, in which the product of one reaction is the feedstock or catalyst for another. The result is a virtuous, self-contained cycle of chemical creation.
Today, Stuart Kauffman at the University of Vermont in Burlington and a couple of pals take a look at the broader mathematical properties of autocatalytic sets. In examining this bigger picture, they come to an astonishing conclusion that could have remarkable consequences for our understanding of complexity, evolution and the phenomenon of emergence.
They begin by deriving some general mathematical properties of autocatalytic sets, showing that such a set can be made up of many autocatalytic subsets of different types, some of which can overlap.
In other words, autocatalytic sets can have a rich complex structure of their own.
They go on to show how evolution can work on a single autocatalytic set, producing new subsets within it that are mutually dependent on each other. This process sets up an environment in which newer subsets can evolve.
That would be a large fudge wouldn't it?I suggest these scientists actually put amino acids, proteins and complex RNA molecules into a soup full of different chemical reactions and see if they can create a simple living organism without constantly intervening with their human hand
I have personally gone to the trouble and exercise to download three or four of those ESA and NASA images which appear to show desert areas and made the adjustments to lighting and contrast (with the Free Software Foundations "gimp" package) which turns those images into images of tall buildings and urban infrastructure, to determine for myself whether or not the people making those claims are crazy. You clearly have not made any similar effort.webolife wrote:THolden,
While we agree on a number of things we don't believe, I have to say you have some very fantastical ideas regarding life from elsewhere in the universe salting the earth from time to time. The highly processed [faked?]images of civilizations on Mars or asteroids don't attest well to your sincerity...
How many other things are you a renowned expert on? Danny Vendramini has made a gigantic study of the situation involving Neanderthals over a ten year period. You might want to check the list of resources he provides for his book:webolife wrote:... and the artist reconstructions [Neanderthal illustrations] don't really do justice to the actual bone morphologies. ....
In other words, you're like I am and like to check things out for yourself when possible...webolife wrote: As for my expertise, I do not have a very high opinion of "experts" in general.....
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest