People working in this field wrongly think that a primitive form of
biology can work with only simple chemical compounds and that you can
extend biology this way to the very beginning. This idea has been
rigorously disproved theoretically and also the lack of experimental and
observational evidence for a more primitive biology demonstrates this.
Why are people pursuing this if it doesn't work? This is because of the
argument that that sufficiently early in the universe there were only
simple molecules and it is (wrongly) thought that the only way one can
get to very large and complex organic molecules is via biological
processes.
Saibal
On 21-01-2021 00:52, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote:
For Chemistry, specifically biochemistry, we still cannot after 70
years(?) go beyond the Stanley Miller-Harold Urey experiment to see if
the can run a chemical process that starts with elements and leads to
even simple life. I am not asserting religion here, but what have we
missed? This is worse than nuclear fusion's time-lag, or Waiting for
Godot.
-----Original Message-----
From: smitra <smi...@zonnet.nl>
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Wed, Jan 20, 2021 12:32 am
Subject: Re: Evolution 2.0 Prize - $10 million
That's an interesting paper! Note that the theoretical physicist Paul
Davies is the one who took the initiative to set up this prize and he
is
strong skeptic against all current approaches in prebiotic chemistry.
I've read the work of his research group (Paul Davies and Sara
Walker),
their no-go arguments are quite strong, but they don't propose
solutions
that I find all that attractive. That led me to do my own work in this
field.
Saibal
On 19-01-2021 18:01, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
I do not know if you have seen this paper:
Molecular Codes in Biological and Chemical Reaction Networks
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0054694
They claim that in random chemical networks one can find some
semantic:
"High semantic capacity was found in the studied biochemical systems
and in random reaction networks where the number of second order
reactions is twice the number of species."
I guess that they should apply for the prize.
Evgeny
Am 19.01.2021 um 00:58 schrieb smitra:
On 18-01-2021 18:03, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
Am 18.01.2021 um 01:01 schrieb Lawrence Crowell:
There are molecules that already do this. DNA and polypeptides
are
sequences that are in effect codes.
Yes, this is exactly the point by the prize. The question is to
show
how something like this could happen spontaneously.
Evgeny
It requires violating local thermodynamic equilibrium. I'm working
on
an article and a few presentations for upcoming conferences where I
explain this in detail. This then proves that none of the current
models for prebiotic chemistry can explain the origin of life. A
viable scenario is to get to a large random organic structure
forged
in an interstellar ice grain, where organic molecules at low
temperatures under UV irradiation will only interact with nearest
neighbors. Thermodynamic equilibrium is never reached, the system
moves farther and farther away from this as the reactions under UV
radiation continue. This way one gets to large so-called
percolation
clusters of organic molecules that have a random structure.
Such random organic structures look totally useless to explain the
origin of life, because what you want are the very specific
molecules
that are involved in the biochemical processes in living organisms.
However, the structure of these random organic molecules is such
that
it has interior structures with compartments containing large
random
polymers and random interior surface structures. These can then
serve
as micro-environments within which prebiotic chemistry under normal
local thermodynamic equilibrium conditions can work. With a finite
number of N structures in a compartment one will break symmetries
such
as chiral symmetry at a level of 1/sqrt(N). Small molecules can
escape
the compartments via pores in the random structure while large
molecules get trapped inside.
Saibal
LC
On Monday, January 4, 2021 at 12:28:18 PM UTC-6 use...@rudnyi.ru
wrote:
"How do you get from chemicals to code? How do you get a code
without
designing one?"
"What You Must Do to Win The Prize
You must arrange for a digital communication system to emerge or
self-evolve without "cheating." The diagram below describes the
system.
Without explicitly designing the system, your experiment must
generate
an encoder that sends digital code to a decoder. Your system
needs
to
transmit at least five bits of information. (In other words it
has
to be
able to represent 32 states. The genetic code supports 64.) "
https://www.herox.com/evolution2.0
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/4f5386b035f1970dece5c3151f25c2f6%40zonnet.nl.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/1915006299.3754755.1611186728354%40mail.yahoo.com
[1].
Links:
------
[1]
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/1915006299.3754755.1611186728354%40mail.yahoo.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/131eed22f97bbde6bf6fd8c39157ee1e%40zonnet.nl.
