Why Does Biological, Organic Life Exist in a Universe that is Inorganic ?

a reply to: TerraLiga

Back to the science.

How can proteins polymerize all in the L-configuration without the ribosome to ensure it? I'll save you time, there's no way. This renders abiogenesis impossible on this facet alone.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: TerraLiga

Have i really? Feel free to quote and make sure you don't lose context by selectively cutting. I've said it's foolish to think you can understand 600 million years of evolution without any historical record, because it is.

You are confusing me for someone else. I have never mentioned 600 million years or any other specific period of time other than a period just after the formation of Earth.

originally posted by: cooperton
a reply to: TerraLiga

Back to the science.

How can proteins polymerize all in the L-configuration without the ribosome to ensure it? I'll save you time, there's no way. This renders abiogenesis impossible on this facet alone.

I don't know. I don't know biochemistry. I don't know if this polymerisation follows simple rules so is inevitable, or if it is supposedly impossible. Show me something to read.

a reply to: TerraLiga

Indeed, i made a general statement about people who think you can summarize 600 million years of human history into some equations and theory. Hence my claim about not insulting anyone, it's up to you if you want to identify with what i define as foolish. I stand by the statement that i've not called anyone personally a fool, only the flawed logic as foolish. If you took offence then you've taken my statement out of context, im here to offer balance as an agnostic.

No-one knows the definitive answers to these questions, NO-ONE, which is why they're beliefs, on both sides of the argument. The only intellectually safe position to hold is that of an Agnostic, anything else is zealotry or casual belief. Once again, i believe in God, i have no proof he exists, just as you believe he doesn't and you can't prove your position either, which renders it a belief with the same merits as my own. I'm willing to accept your personal belief system as long as you offer me the same courtesy.

a reply to: TerraLiga

That's the spirit.

My take on this as follows..

We don't know when inorganic becomes organic. It is only our definition of what an organic is. The transition is not done in nature in the manner of jump from..to. It is slowly the one becoming the other depending where in time we measure it. It is a process, built up over changes in the state and complicity, new bonds, and those new bonds capable of creating more bonds between ever increasing possible configurations of matter.

It is a gradual process. We gave a definition of 'organic' but in my opinion it is like saying the water has only two states - cold and hot.

a reply to: AlienView

I think "organic life" is WAY more prevalent in the Universe than we think. We simply haven't found it yet. Look at it like this, we are still to this day discovering new species of life on Earth. And we've barely scratched the surface in our own oceans. If the universe contains the necessary materials that created life here on earth, then there HAS to be life on one of the trillions of planets out there.


OR... This IS all just a simulation.

a reply to: DerekJR321

I tend to agree however until such time as we discover life on one of these other planets all we can do is speculate. That’s the crux of my argument, no-one has enough data to say conclusively either way.

a reply to: DaydreamerV

The only flaw I see with this theory is consciousness, at some point organic material gains enough complexity to overcome nature and starts a process of self design and choice. I’m not sure how choice and will can exist in a random universe, when does disorder suddenly become orderly and how can the two co-exist when they’re polar opposites. My experience of genetic mutation over time leads to errors rather than progressive design. Cancer being an example. The universe appears binary, an eternal fight between forces to achieve balance. IMO it’s just too perfect of a system to manifest from nothing but chance.

originally posted by: TerraLiga

I don't know. I don't know biochemistry. I don't know if this polymerisation follows simple rules so is inevitable, or if it is supposedly impossible. Show me something to read.

Here's info about L- and D- configuration:

link

So L and D have the same chemical formula, but are oriented as mirror opposites of each other. Just like your left and right hand. Proteins synthesized in biology must all be in the L-orientation, and have no D-orientation involved in the polymerization.

This is difficult because the D-amino acids are just as commonly formed as L-amino acids. Meaning the amino acid pool would contain about equal amounts of both. Normally in a cell the ribosome will selectively choose the L-amino acids, but without the ribosome there's no way to selectively incorporate all L-amino acids into a protein, so it will get contaminated with D-amino acids.

The dilemma is that a ribosome itself is a protein, in need of a ribosome to ensure it incorporates all L-amino acids into its structure. So proteins could not have formed properly without this protein, meaning abiogenesis could not have happened without these cellular components already in existence

originally posted by: AlienView
Give one reason, any reason, for the occurrence of biological life in a universe that shows no signs of organic life in its infrastructure.

Please don't take the easy way out and say random chance occurrence - Unless you can show how a random chance occurrence can produce
an organic life form that can breathe and reproduce,

Let me make clear this is a 'I want to know' post - I have no particular agenda and am not trying to advocate a Creationist or Evolutionary viewpoint.

So please use facts and not wishfull thinking.

If you start with a physical Universe that does not have biological or organic lfe in it - What are the odds of living, breathing, breeding
biological life forms occurring

I'd like to think that creation of life may just be a matter of having the right ingredients but 'no' it appears the jury is still out on that theory.

Using data from NASA's Cassini spacecraft, researchers found the phosphorus within salt-rich ice grains that the moon launched into space. The ocean on Enceladus is below its frozen surface and erupts through cracks in the ice.

According to NASA, between 2004 and 2017, scientists found a wide array of minerals and organic compounds in the ice grains of Enceladus using data collected by Cassini, such as sodium, potassium, chlorine and carbonate-containing compounds. Phosphorus is the least abundant of those essential elements needed for biological processes, NASA said.

The element is a fundamental part of DNA and is present in the bones of mammals, cell membranes and ocean-dwelling plankton. Life could not exist without it, NASA says.

www.cbsnews.com...

originally posted by: Grenade

The universe “sees” and “laws” of the universe? Like I said I believe life is the universe attempting to understand itself and we’re nothing more than the eyes of a universal consciousness. That universal collective consciousness could be viewed as God. The point I’m making is that I believe consciousness comes from a higher dimension for lack of a better term, and intelligent life is from this undetectable higher plane of existence.

I guess we will agree to disagree here.

I would say it is a nice story, but our consciousness is directly linked to our physical capabilities. If not then I got the short end of the stick as I see people with abilities/thoughts much greater than anything I could possibly reach. I also think energy is just energy and there aren't special categories for it. I fall back to my experiences in life when my consciousness/awareness is directly affected by what is going on with my brain and body on a very physical level. Our awareness is extremely fragile that can easily be affected by even the slightest changes in the chemical process within our brain. If it is as you might think I do not think it would be Grenade there anymore. Do you also think all life has this at some level too? It also seems a little strange that a chunk of this special thing is transported into the sperm and egg as they start the chemical processes of life to form.

originally posted by: TerraLiga

The vanity of man has no bounds

Neither does the imagination and ability to think within the abstract of man.

originally posted by: Grenade

It’s probably only us who have gone to the moon but by no means certain. The moon could hold many mysteries as of yet undiscovered and who knows even ancient life. Seems logical that if life started next door then under certain conditions or subterranean environments life could well have been on the moon in the distant past, whos to say there’s not an offshoot of humanity living under the surface now? I don’t like to talk in absolutes, imagination is a valuable attribute, even if our current hive-minded members of society would like to stifle it.

I really do not want to speak in the absolute. In 2 billion years our equipment and markings on the moon will still be there, so I don't think there would be anything hidden since the process of that would still be a lot of unhidden events such as ours to get to a point they could go inside of the moon.

As to intelligent life, it takes a good deal more than just brain power to go into space. I have said many times if the smartest creature was a sponge on the bottom of the ocean they are not going to the moon...lol

I see life in general as endless, a natural process within our universe that happens anywhere the conditions allow it to. The other part we call species is much different, and so, in general, species are very fragile and they come and go very quickly in terms of the universe. 500k years ago there really wasn't man per se, close but not there yet. In another 500k what we see as man today will be gone, for better or worst. Species, in general, have very short windows so that is what we are dealing with when it comes to whether there is intelligent life out there in some capability we could ever meet with the vastness of the universe and time itself being a very big hindrances for that to happen.

If we are the only species in the life of Earth to at least go to the moon then I would think even if life is abundant that level is extremely rare if it only happened once on Earth in 4.5 billion years.

originally posted by: Grenade

Indeed, i made a general statement about people who think you can summarize 600 million years of human history into some equations and theory.

We can physically explore the earth and make logical assessments. We can physically see that life started to form 3.7 billion years ago. Some suggest 4.3 billion, but we have no fossilized record that goes back that far. We have organic chemicals in asteroids many billions of years old. We know there has been some snowball Earths in the past because we have evidence of massive glaciers at the equator. We also can see about 530 million years ago life expanded from billions of years of just being simple forms which is called the Cambrian explosion which was basically an unparalleled emergence of organisms.

This is all physical evidence we can see and test, so if someone disagrees then so be it, but it is there.

originally posted by: DaydreamerV
My take on this as follows..

We don't know when inorganic becomes organic. It is only our definition of what an organic is. The transition is not done in nature in the manner of jump from..to. It is slowly the one becoming the other depending where in time we measure it. It is a process, built up over changes in the state and complicity, new bonds, and those new bonds capable of creating more bonds between ever increasing possible configurations of matter.

It is a gradual process. We gave a definition of 'organic' but in my opinion it is like saying the water has only two states - cold and hot.

We created the term life to describe a chemical process then we said it is special, but in the end life/organic is made up of non-organic substances that have chemical reactions.

originally posted by: Grenade

I tend to agree however until such time as we discover life on one of these other planets all we can do is speculate. That’s the crux of my argument, no-one has enough data to say conclusively either way.

I find your statements interesting in you have very strong abstract beliefs in consciousness, life force, energy, etc but then suggest you need to see life on other planets to believe life is out there other than Earth. I would say that Earth is 100% proof life is out there and most likely in abundance since it seems to have started very quickly on Earth with the right conditions.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Sure, provide me any convincing scientific explanation for the nature of consciousness or an equation which explains nuanced thought and imagination.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Or it might not exist at all. A LOT can happen in 2 billion years.