Page 10 of 36 FirstFirst ... 6789101112131420 ... LastLast
Results 136 to 150 of 526

Thread: The evolution of complex life

  1. #136 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    34,321
    Thanks
    3,498
    Thanked 11,601 Times in 9,273 Posts
    Groans
    632
    Groaned 1,405 Times in 1,371 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress View Post
    Education doesn't stop when one graduates college, eh? I imagine you've learned more about human knowledge outside of school than you ever learned in school.

    I myself never took genetics or biochem in college. I've just read a lot in the intervening years!
    School is just a helping hand out in the world.
    In the end 90% of what you learn you learn living life,education enhances that!.
    AM I, I AM's,AM I.
    What day is Michaelmas on?

  2. #137 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    57,777
    Thanks
    35,457
    Thanked 50,276 Times in 27,089 Posts
    Groans
    22
    Groaned 2,975 Times in 2,692 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Perry Phimosis View Post
    I disagree with the scale of "billions" of steps. Indeed most of the chemistry that makes up life is pretty straightforward at its core. In fact a lot of these chemicals can do little BUT react and combine in the ways they combine. There's a reason DNA has base "pairs".

    Don't get me wrong: I'm not saying life isn't complex or the overall chemistry isn't complex, but again, that isn't an indicator of some deeper mystery. There is literally nothing "mysterious" about the chemistry of life.



    RNA isn't really that complex, though, is it? It's just 4 bases and a phosphate sugar backbone. As for "complexity" I'd go with proteins which can be EXCEEDINGLY complex but pretty much only because of the secondary structures. And even those are easily explained by hydrogen bonding and other bond angles.



    Unfortunately it appears to be a pretty standard concept, certainly in biology but also in many other systems. It isn't a mystery, it is what happens when a thing with lots of moving interacting parts combine.

    I run statistical models on my data and there are "second order effects" which are interactions between the factors I set for the experiment. I have 4 chemicals but I can wind up with up to 8 or so possible interactions which can end up being rather complex to explain. The interactions have created an "emergent property" of the system by their interaction. The system overall is more complex than simply understanding the level of any individual component. For instance if I increase one component it may cause the effect from A DIFFERENT COMPONENT to suddenly flip directions.

    Granted this is probably a gross oversimplification of the concept but it is a simple example of how a chemical system can become more complex despite just 4 knobs.

    Imagine if you have a knob on your TV with volume and a knob with channel. Now imagine that there's an interaction between the two knobs such that when you increase the volume knob the volume goes up. And when you then turn the channel knob to the right it increases the channel number. But when you turn the volume down the channel knob now decreases the channel number when you turn it to the right. That's an example of an interaction term. A complexity that is not accounted for by the channel knob alone.



    I hope I have explained how that is most assuredly not the case.



    Wait, did you just use the word "emerge"?

    We are not too far apart in our philosophy here, but I am saying that that "inevitability" is nothing more mysterious than just plain ol' chemistry. Literally nothing more. How else could it be "inevitable" unless it were a function of set physical rules? That's chemistry.


    Just like really beautiful complex crystals can form following only a small set of chemical rules (Pauling's Rules).
    I don't think some of the world's top biochemists would be actively working on origin of life research if the answers were so easy and practically staring us in the face, as you have seemingly been implying.

    Claiming that life is a natural consequence of the universe, and that life inevitably emerges from chemistry is a metaphysical claim. Not a scientific one.

    There's nothing wrong with metaphysics in science. Einstein was naturally predisposed to thinking the universe was static and infinitely old, because that was more philosophically satisfying to him -- even though it turned out ultimately to be wrong

    I try to be much more cautious in leaping to conclusions and making unsubstantiated claims about the origin of life

    What seems patently obvious is there are two basic possibilities.

    Life on earth resulted from a complex series of improbable chemical steps; a perfect storm of events if you will. In which case we likely never be able to replicate or stumble across those conditions in a lab.

    Of, we can assume that life inevitably emerges from chemistry and the universe is chock full of cellular life. There's no evidence for that, it is a metaphysical position. But if true (and I'm hopeful it is) there should be much promising research in the decades ahead.

  3. #138 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2022
    Posts
    6,775
    Thanks
    200
    Thanked 1,352 Times in 1,057 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 116 Times in 108 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress View Post
    Claiming that life is a natural consequence of the universe, and that life emerges from chemistry is a metaphysical claim. Not a scientific one.
    Well, so long as you studiously avoid ANY of the chemistry I've mentioned so far you might have a point.

    Life on earth resulted from a complex series of improbable chemical steps,
    Here we differ. You say "improbable" but of course that is not technically accurate. As I've now stated on a NUMBER of occasions these chemical reactions are pretty standard and not in any way mysterious.

    a perfect storm if you will.
    I will agree that the conditions which generated the first "living cell" (such as it was) was possibly rare, but hardly incomprehensibly so. Again, all I can rely on is the chemistry which is pretty jive-old standard chemistry.

    In which case we likely never be able to replicate or stumble across those conditions in a lab.
    That doesn't necessarily follow. Just because we have not yet found those conditions does not make it unlikely in any sense. It is like saying that no one can win the lottery just because the odds of finding the exact combination are low.

    Of, we can assume that life inevitably emerges from chemistry and the universe is chock full of cellular life. There's no evidence for that, it is a metaphysical position.
    It is in no way a "Metaphysical" position. It is an hypothesis predicated on only available concepts all of which are well established.

    It is akin to finding a book in a field. You don't know how it got there but you are pretty sure you know how it did based on what you know about where books come from, how they are made, and how they can be carried around etc. It is not a "metaphysical" position to suggest that the book was made by people using standard book-making techniques and was carried to the site.


    But if true (and I'm hopeful it is) there should be much promising research in the decades ahead.
    Of course there will be promising research as their should. It's more akin to the efforts to get fusion going than anything else. We know the pieces parts, we just need to figure out how they go together to get the expected results.

  4. #139 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    57,777
    Thanks
    35,457
    Thanked 50,276 Times in 27,089 Posts
    Groans
    22
    Groaned 2,975 Times in 2,692 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Perry Phimosis View Post
    Well, so long as you studiously avoid ANY of the chemistry I've mentioned so far you might have a point.



    Here we differ. You say "improbable" but of course that is not technically accurate. As I've now stated on a NUMBER of occasions these chemical reactions are pretty standard and not in any way mysterious.



    I will agree that the conditions which generated the first "living cell" (such as it was) was possibly rare, but hardly incomprehensibly so. Again, all I can rely on is the chemistry which is pretty jive-old standard chemistry.



    That doesn't necessarily follow. Just because we have not yet found those conditions does not make it unlikely in any sense. It is like saying that no one can win the lottery just because the odds of finding the exact combination are low.



    It is in no way a "Metaphysical" position. It is an hypothesis predicated on only available concepts all of which are well established.

    It is akin to finding a book in a field. You don't know how it got there but you are pretty sure you know how it did based on what you know about where books come from, how they are made, and how they can be carried around etc. It is not a "metaphysical" position to suggest that the book was made by people using standard book-making techniques and was carried to the site.




    Of course there will be promising research as their should. It's more akin to the efforts to get fusion going than anything else. We know the pieces parts, we just need to figure out how they go together to get the expected results.
    We'll have to agree to disagree

    You think the origin of life is super easy to understand and figure out.

    I think it is an active area of research by the world's top biochemists and it's one of the great unresolved scientific questions.

  5. #140 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2022
    Posts
    6,775
    Thanks
    200
    Thanked 1,352 Times in 1,057 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 116 Times in 108 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress View Post
    We'll have to agree to disagree
    Agreed. Let me know if you want to talk about the chemistry since that's essentially the topic at hand.

  6. #141 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    57,777
    Thanks
    35,457
    Thanked 50,276 Times in 27,089 Posts
    Groans
    22
    Groaned 2,975 Times in 2,692 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Perry Phimosis View Post
    Agreed. Let me know if you want to talk about the chemistry since that's essentially the topic at hand.
    70 percent of what I know about origin of life research comes from Robert Hazen, a well regarded abiogenesis researcher.

    This is basically his money quote on this scientific topic:

    "The great mystery of life’s origins lies in the gap between simple organic molecules and primitive cells."

    Robert Hazen

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to Cypress For This Post:

    Doc Dutch (02-03-2023)

  8. #142 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2022
    Posts
    6,775
    Thanks
    200
    Thanked 1,352 Times in 1,057 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 116 Times in 108 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress View Post
    70 percent of what I know about origin of life research comes from Robert Hazen, a well regarded abiogenesis researcher.

    This is basically his money quote on this scientific topic:
    Cool.

  9. #143 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    136,585
    Thanks
    46,734
    Thanked 68,590 Times in 51,902 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 2,506 Times in 2,463 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress View Post
    70 percent of what I know about origin of life research comes from Robert Hazen, a well regarded abiogenesis researcher.

    This is basically his money quote on this scientific topic:
    "The great mystery of life’s origins lies in the gap between simple organic molecules and primitive cells."

    Robert Hazen
    That gap is certainly a mystery since life hasn't been found anywhere but Earth and can't be replicated by science...yet. Maybe never.
    God bless America and those who defend our Constitution.

    "Hatred is a failure of imagination" - Graham Greene, "The Power and the Glory"

  10. #144 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2022
    Posts
    6,775
    Thanks
    200
    Thanked 1,352 Times in 1,057 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 116 Times in 108 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doc Dutch View Post
    That gap is certainly a mystery since life hasn't been found anywhere but Earth and can't be replicated by science...yet. Maybe never.
    To be quite fair we've looked in vanishingly few places. So to claim it hasn't been found anywhere but earth is quite limited in value.

    In addition we tend to look for life using relatively crude proxies.

  11. #145 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    136,585
    Thanks
    46,734
    Thanked 68,590 Times in 51,902 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 2,506 Times in 2,463 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Perry Phimosis View Post
    To be quite fair we've looked in vanishingly few places. So to claim it hasn't been found anywhere but earth is quite limited in value.

    In addition we tend to look for life using relatively crude proxies.
    The Drake Equation and Fermi's Paradox indicate they should be finding us.

    God bless America and those who defend our Constitution.

    "Hatred is a failure of imagination" - Graham Greene, "The Power and the Glory"

  12. #146 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2022
    Posts
    6,775
    Thanks
    200
    Thanked 1,352 Times in 1,057 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 116 Times in 108 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doc Dutch View Post
    The Drake Equation and Fermi's Paradox indicate they should be finding us.
    I am not necessarily talking about intelligent life that has achieved the ability to broadcast their existence.

    I'm talking about life qua life.

    And besides, the Drake Equation has a lot of "fudgefactors" or unknowable quantities as of this time.

  13. #147 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    57,777
    Thanks
    35,457
    Thanked 50,276 Times in 27,089 Posts
    Groans
    22
    Groaned 2,975 Times in 2,692 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doc Dutch View Post
    That gap is certainly a mystery since life hasn't been found anywhere but Earth and can't be replicated by science...yet. Maybe never.
    I am hopeful that in decades to come, the transition between inert prebiotic molecules and cellular life will come into clearer focus.

    At the same time, I don't think a responsible scientist should leap to conclusions. We can't yet rule out the possibility that life was a result of a perfect storm of a series of unusual chemical steps which are unlikely to be replicated in a lab.

  14. #148 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2022
    Posts
    6,775
    Thanks
    200
    Thanked 1,352 Times in 1,057 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 116 Times in 108 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress View Post
    I am hopeful that in decades to come, the transition between inert prebiotic molecules and cellular life will come into clearer focus.
    What counts as "pre-biotic"?

    At the same time, I don't think a responsible scientist should leap to conclusions. We can't yet rule out the possibility that life was a result of a perfect storm of a series of unusual chemical steps which are unlikely to be replicated in a lab.
    Define "unusual".

    Maybe I'm getting too hung up on the chemistry technical information but I'm seeing a lot of loose language that papers over possibly deeper flaws. What do you mean by "unusual chemical steps"?

  15. #149 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    136,585
    Thanks
    46,734
    Thanked 68,590 Times in 51,902 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 2,506 Times in 2,463 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Perry Phimosis View Post
    I am not necessarily talking about intelligent life that has achieved the ability to broadcast their existence.

    I'm talking about life qua life.

    And besides, the Drake Equation has a lot of "fudgefactors" or unknowable quantities as of this time.
    The question remains: in a galaxy of a 100 thousand million stars, why aren't there any signs of life out there?

    https://www.esa.int/Science_Explorat...n_the_Universe

    If life is just chemistry, why can't you whip up a batch?
    God bless America and those who defend our Constitution.

    "Hatred is a failure of imagination" - Graham Greene, "The Power and the Glory"

  16. #150 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2022
    Posts
    6,775
    Thanks
    200
    Thanked 1,352 Times in 1,057 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 116 Times in 108 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doc Dutch View Post
    The question remains: in a galaxy of a 100 thousand million stars, why aren't there any signs of life out there?
    It appears you are assuming that our failure to, in the space of what, maybe 60 years now, find evidence of an advanced civilization which could broadcast it's existence means there is likely no life out there? Is the development of radio broadcast capability the measure of "life"?

    No, the fact of the matter is we have found lots of organic molecules that are used by living things all over the place. We have meteorites carrying isolated amino acids and sugars. So why would you assume there ISN'T life just because we haven't found a life form that has developed radio or other broadcast means?

    And spectroscopically I honestly don't see how you could look at an entire planet and draw a conclusion about it's potential life forms. In fact many of the "planets" we know of outside of our solar system are essentially inferred by gravitational effects on larger objects. So it's not like we are in any way REALLY looking.

    Right now suggesting that life is "rare" in the cosmos is a relatively weak and unevidenced position.

Similar Threads

  1. The New Special Happiness Money Will Lead The Life Evolution On Earth
    By legendarysavior in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-19-2021, 02:25 AM
  2. Replies: 18
    Last Post: 08-22-2020, 05:37 AM
  3. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-07-2013, 02:14 PM
  4. Replies: 19
    Last Post: 05-27-2011, 06:08 PM
  5. Ok, Im getting a complex.. or maybe ...
    By klaatu in forum Off Topic Forum
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 07-31-2006, 11:52 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •