lunamoth
Episcopalian
Abiogenesis, not evolution, addresses the creation of life from non-living forms. I thought it might be interesting to explore this theory here, and also to ask a question.
The current model of aboiogenesis (I am not an expert, I'm taking my info from Talk Origins) simplified goes like this:
simple chemical-->polymers-->replicating polymers-->hypercycle-->protobiont-->bacteria
My understanding leads me to accept that given enough time and the right conditions this might be possible. Various parts of it have either been recreated in the laboratory or observed in nature, for example Self-reproducing system can behave as Maxwell's demon: theoretical illustration under prebiotic conditions. To me the obvious big jump is from a hypercyle (whatever that is) to a protobiont.
From the online article:
"..., because in modern abiogenesis theories the first "living things" would be much simpler, not even a protobacteria, or a preprotobacteria (what Oparin called a protobiont [8] and Woese calls a progenote [4]), but one or more simple molecules probably not more than 30-40 subunits long. These simple molecules then slowly evolved into more cooperative self-replicating systems, then finally into simple organisms [2, 5, 10, 15, 28]. An illustration comparing a hypothetical protobiont and a modern bacteria is given below."
I hope the explore this further online and share what I find here for your critiques, but for now one question has occurred to me that some of our members might be able to answer.
Is there any evidence for the existence of any of these protobionts or the step between self-replicating systems and a protobiont in nature today (outside of bacteria and cells--I know things like prions and RNA enzymes, not to mention all viruses might qualify, but they are only found inside cells)? If not, is it because we are no longer a "primordial soup" conducive to abiogenesis? What would cause abiogenesis to stop? Has it stopped?
Once organisms got to the point of performing chemical reactions (metabolism), they themselves could vastly alter the environment (i.e., the creation of toxic oxygen by photosynthesis, in turn paving the way for organisms utilizing respiration). But even chemosynthesis is way way way down the line from protobionts.
Any thoughts?
lunamoth
P.S. Talk origins addresses a lot of the objections put forth by creationists and ID proponents about the calculations for "life," if anyone is interested.
The current model of aboiogenesis (I am not an expert, I'm taking my info from Talk Origins) simplified goes like this:
simple chemical-->polymers-->replicating polymers-->hypercycle-->protobiont-->bacteria
My understanding leads me to accept that given enough time and the right conditions this might be possible. Various parts of it have either been recreated in the laboratory or observed in nature, for example Self-reproducing system can behave as Maxwell's demon: theoretical illustration under prebiotic conditions. To me the obvious big jump is from a hypercyle (whatever that is) to a protobiont.
From the online article:
"..., because in modern abiogenesis theories the first "living things" would be much simpler, not even a protobacteria, or a preprotobacteria (what Oparin called a protobiont [8] and Woese calls a progenote [4]), but one or more simple molecules probably not more than 30-40 subunits long. These simple molecules then slowly evolved into more cooperative self-replicating systems, then finally into simple organisms [2, 5, 10, 15, 28]. An illustration comparing a hypothetical protobiont and a modern bacteria is given below."
I hope the explore this further online and share what I find here for your critiques, but for now one question has occurred to me that some of our members might be able to answer.
Is there any evidence for the existence of any of these protobionts or the step between self-replicating systems and a protobiont in nature today (outside of bacteria and cells--I know things like prions and RNA enzymes, not to mention all viruses might qualify, but they are only found inside cells)? If not, is it because we are no longer a "primordial soup" conducive to abiogenesis? What would cause abiogenesis to stop? Has it stopped?
Once organisms got to the point of performing chemical reactions (metabolism), they themselves could vastly alter the environment (i.e., the creation of toxic oxygen by photosynthesis, in turn paving the way for organisms utilizing respiration). But even chemosynthesis is way way way down the line from protobionts.
Any thoughts?
lunamoth
P.S. Talk origins addresses a lot of the objections put forth by creationists and ID proponents about the calculations for "life," if anyone is interested.
Last edited: