Slashdot Mirror


Murchison Meteorite Still Contentious

An anonymous reader writes "The well-known 1969 meteorite that fell 60 miles north of Melbourne, Australia, remains remarkably contentious today. The 100 kilogram carbon rock : a) contains pre-biotic proteins and 12% water; b) harbors 50 amino acids not found on Earth; c) favors the tell-tale signature of biochemistry based on a dominant left-handed chirality, compared to random or racemic mixtures found in test-tube syntheses. While terrestrial contamination (even interior to the meteor) may discount this so-called 'Murchison meteor', its light isotopes of carbon and nitrogen suggest the left-handed amino acids not found elsewhere on Earth have the same ratios as the right-handed ones. This would not be the case if, say, bacteria was just making the left-handed ones after impact. Seems quite a controversy from down-under."

56 of 211 comments (clear)

  1. Relevance? by Vardan · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You'd think that after they found what appears to be microscopic life (fossilized, rather) on Mars, it wouldn't be that big of a stretch.

    However, it is fairly interesting that that many amino acids are left-handed. Organic molecules tend to form in pretty much the same way in any given environment, so I'd think that if those aminos ARE from Earth, they'd be from someplace strange, like a hydrothermal vent. How they would've gotten onto a meteor from there, who knows.

    1. Re:Relevance? by stratjakt · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Except that the 'fossilized microbes' on the martian meteor can be completely dismissed by natural (non-organic) processes.

      I dont know enough about blingblongology to elaborate, I can merely regurgitate what I've learned watching 'UFO week' on the history channel.

      (Rant: WTF do UFOs, Loch Ness monster, bigfoot or Ghosthunting have to do with history?!)

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    2. Re:Relevance? by kavau · · Score: 2, Interesting
      so I'd think that if those aminos ARE from Earth, they'd be from someplace strange, like a hydrothermal vent. How they would've gotten onto a meteor from there, who knows.

      How about this: 10 billion years ago a gigantic asteroid hits earth, sending countless fragments of terran rock into space, many of them harbouring life in its early stages. Now, billions of years later, one of those galactic pieces of rubble happens to cross earth's path again. Hence the amino acids we found might be from earth's own past...

      Just a thought...

    3. Re:Relevance? by helix400 · · Score: 2, Informative
      10 billion years ago a gigantic asteroid hits earth...

      The earth is only roughly 4.55 billion years old.

      But that would just mean the asteroid in your example would only have to hit...say...2 billion years ago.

    4. Re:Relevance? by joethebastard · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Meteoritics is a messy science, because measurements are never conclusive and explanations are always at least partially guesses. To analyze the chirality of the amino acids, you measure how much light it absorbs of different polarizations (circular dichroistic spectroscopy). To measure absorption, you must cut a thinsection; cutting something open always introduces contaminants. Explaining the chirality, once measured, is just as tricky- most scientists would just look at the excess of left-handed acids as proof of contamination.

      Isotopic data is even worse- it's easy to show some difference in a sample, as isotopes on this planet tend to be extremely isotropic, but proving anything with that is difficult. Amino acids make up a small percent of the sample of a chondrite, so the number of particle counts representing (from a secondary ion mass spectrometer, or similar device) them will be fairly low; this makes the relative error very high. Every bit of processing done on the sample introduces terrestrial atoms, and a spectrometer calibrated to look at specific atom masses won't know the difference between nitrogen from a meteorite's amino acid or from a hamster. How do you attach the isotopic excesses to the left-handed chiral amino acids?

      All this just to say: take meteoritics with a grain of salt. Every time I work in a meteorite lab, I take their claims a bit less seriously. It's a really cool, wonderfully hard area of science, but you have to deal with largely destructive and oft imprecise analytical techniques on a limited number of samples, all of which have been partially processed or contaminated.... with never enough funding. This group is doing a good job, but rarely in this field is any result ever conclusive.

  2. Re:Well known? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Guess the DNA spiral the other way just like the water in the toilet down under. ;)

  3. Leftorium by The_Rippa · · Score: 5, Funny

    And chunks of it are now on sale at Ned Flander's Leftorium.

    Fan-diddly-tastic!

  4. Sounds like lawyer talk to me!. by setrops · · Score: 5, Funny

    I m just a simple caveman, your fire scares me. These pre-biotic proteins you speak of are unfamiliar to me!

    1. Re:Sounds like lawyer talk to me!. by Tycho · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Great, the next "In Soviet Russia..."

      --
      Impersonating Tycho from Penny Arcade since before there was a PA.
    2. Re:Sounds like lawyer talk to me!. by setrops · · Score: 2, Funny

      In SOVIET RUSSIA, Ya nie znaiou chto skajit "pre-biotic proteins, Hrug"

      Sorry for the awful phonetic's

  5. Let me ask this... by Mullen · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So if the big debate is whether these "rocks" from space contain the building blocks of life, but are being contaminated when they hit earth. Why don't we send up a robot (Or what have you) into space and collect some rocks that have not been on earth?

    To me, if you collected about 20 or 30 of these things, it would answer the question rather quickly. Yes, I know that does mean we would get rocks with ammo acids, but sitting waiting for the rocks to come to us seems to be a waste of time.

    --
    Linux O Muerte!
    1. Re:Let me ask this... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      To me, if you collected about 20 or 30 of these things, it would answer the question rather quickly.
      Unfortunately, the theories I've heard suggest that the amino acids form in colder parts of space than here, and not very often, so the probe would have to go a long way, and gollect rather more than 30 rocks (Would you look under only 30 rocks on a beach to find evidence of life? Space is quite big, and life is less common there.) This would be very expensive and probably not vey conclusive, unless it happened that it found some amino acids quickly. A conclusive negative result could not be found this way.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    2. Re:Let me ask this... by odyrithm · · Score: 4, Interesting

      but sitting waiting for the rocks to come to us seems to be a waste of time.

      erm... how exactly do we catch them would you suggest? pretty nippy little fuckers when there streaking at about 100k miles a second through space..

      --
      moo
    3. Re:Let me ask this... by br0ck · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Your idea is a valid one and scientists are currently thinking that the best chance to find life in our solar system will be on Jupitor's moon, Europa. However, it is actually extremely difficult to keep the robot probe itself from carrying contamination since modern electronics can't take the extreme heat needed to kill resilient strains which could possibly destroy any life on that planet. Recently scientists have been putting more effort into trying to figure out how to explore Europa without contamination.

      Contamination has already been shown to occur easily. The first Apollo mission found the moon to be sterile, but later Apollo missions found strep bacteria from previous missions. Deeply buried in ancient Antarctic ice, Lake Vostok is an enviroment that is thought to contain ancient life forms, but scientists are reluctant to explore the lake until contamination can be prevented. Bacteria has already been found in drilling to just above the top of the buried lake.

    4. Re:Let me ask this... by CaptainStormfield · · Score: 5, Informative

      The first Apollo mission found the moon to be sterile, but later Apollo missions found strep bacteria from previous missions.

      That's a little misleading. Apollo 12 found microbes inside the camera of Surveyor 3 (which landed three years before). Its not like the strep bacteria are colonizing the moon -- I'm pretty sure that the lunar environment is still sterile.

      --
      "The dinosaurs died because they didn't have a space program." - Niven
  6. The real test... by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    .. is find and orifice and pump the meteorite full of shampoo. If all the 'life' on it dies, then it's extra terrestrial. :D

    1. Re: The real test... by Black+Parrot · · Score: 2, Funny


      > .. is find and orifice and pump the meteorite full of shampoo. If all the 'life' on it dies, then it's extra terrestrial.

      Ah, I wondered why my alien abductors did that!

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  7. Don't get too excited yet. by Sheetrock · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Earth bourne bacteria could express pre-biotic proteins similar to those discovered in the presence of the right catalysts. Chirality studies can be misleading; nearly 50% of a random sampling of biotic material will confirm the existence of left-handed biotes without revealing anything at all about the total material. Additionally, I'd disagree with the position that the presence of light isotopes in the left-handed chiratic samples in and of itself discounts the possibility that the amino acids were created by Earth bacteria.

    The point is simply that you cannot infer any biochemical 'facts' about extraterrestrial compounds once they've been exposed to Earth's lifeforms.

    --

    Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
    -- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.




  8. Just want to ask.. by Visaris · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How would organic material from earth make it into the center of an object like this? Can the force of the impact explain that some how? Just want to know : )

    --

    I am a viral sig. Please help me spread.
    1. Re:Just want to ask.. by Sheetrock · · Score: 2, Informative

      Rocks are porous. It's unlikely scientists are going to find a pigeon in the center of a meteorite, but anything dust particle or smaller could make it in.

      --

      Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
      -- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.




    2. Re:Just want to ask.. by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      "How would organic material from earth make it into the center of an object like this? "

      I used to have a container of mayo in the fridge that'd prove to you it's not impossible for life to grow in surprising places, but it'd also kill your interest in learning how it managed that.

  9. Only on earth... by ackthpt · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Only on earth could it be hotly debated: life on other worlds, no life on other worlds, over a meteorite.

    On thing seems abundantly clear: There's no life left on the world it came from. I hope ours doesn't pose a base for such a heated debate on some other world species some day.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:Only on earth... by NaugaHunter · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The seems abundantly presumptuous. If it broke off of somewhere 4 billion years ago, or even 100 million years ago, it's entirely possible wherever it came from has evolved life and hasn't yet failed.

      In fact, it seems odd to me that no one has yet suggested it originally came from Earth. Think about it. As I understand it, there wasn't much of an atmosphere before life, so it's feasible that for one reason or another a hunk flew off. I'm not about to calculate the path it would have flown, or even argue the likelihood, but I don't think it's impossible.

      For reference, the nearest star is Proxima Centauri, at ~25,000,000,000,000 miles. I looked a number of places and found no consensus on the speed of the meteorite, but the larger number I saw was 20,000 mph. At that speed it would have taken ~150,000 years to get here. Since that is assuming a straight line among other things I feel it is reasonable to conclude wherever it came from it took longer than that, if it was near a star we know about.
      (That really doesn't have anything to do with my point. But I did the research and math so I figured I might as well share it.)

      --
      R: That voice. Where have I heard that voice before? B: In about 365 other episodes. But I don't know who it is either.
  10. Auto-Google by jjjefff · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Perhaps even more interesting (especially if you're already familiar with the debate) is the fact that highlighting a word or phrase on that page causes a browser window to pop up with the results of a Google search on that word or phrase...

    Not technically very difficult, but a cool idea...

    1. Re:Auto-Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      so..... this is probably immoral, if not illegal, but their javascript source for it is in the cleverly named file javascript/showimages.php...

      actually took a little while to find it, thanks to the somewhat deceiving name.

  11. Could these things be ejecta from... by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...Earth. They could be of terrestrial origian and thrown up a billion years ago or so by volcanic activity or a large meteor collision with earth, eventually arriving on earth again after a billion years of orbiting near the Earth. They could be leftovers from a very early time when left handed and right handed life coexisted on Earth.

    --
    Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
  12. Hmmm by mao+che+minh · · Score: 4, Insightful
    "c) favors the tell-tale signature of biochemistry based on a dominant left-handed chirality, compared to random or racemic mixtures found in test-tube syntheses."

    .....compared to random or racemic mixtures found in test tubes on Earth. We have yet had no other "lab" from which to study life and it's building blocks (life as we know it: carbon based and mostly made of water). Therefore, the sudden appearence of such components from the stars might very well appear to be "based on dominant left-handed chirality" when compared to the billions-old formula we have here on our planet.

    We also don't know how the environment of space will effect amino acids contained in the rock. Since these amino acids (and other material) are foreign, then how do we know that it isn't natural for them to be collected in such a manner?

    Never forget the scientific method. You have to ask questions. After you're done asking questions, submit to your peers for them to ask questions.

    It really isn't compelling at all. It's similar to how UFOlogists focus on half truths and anamolies that confirm their theories, while ignoring the evidence that shows how 90-95% of all sightings are reasonably explained (the tons of disconfirming evidence). They also turn their nose up to the community and the world, effectively becoming the closed-minded character that they try to call the real scientists: Real scientists submit their work to thousands of peers and accept feedback and analysis. Psuedoscientists do not, and yet they call the critical thinkers that reject their ideas closed-minded.

    OK, rant over.

  13. Chirality by BWJones · · Score: 4, Informative

    From the article: A curious aspect of Earth's life forms is that they contain (with few exceptions) only left-handed amino acids. In contrast, when scientists synthesize amino acids from nonchiral precursors, the result is always a "racemic" mixture - equal numbers of right- and left-handed forms. Scientists have been unable to perform any experiment that, when starting with conditions believed to emulate those of early Earth, results in a near-total dominance of left-handed amino acids, says George Cody, a geochemist at the Carnegie Institute of Washington.

    In many cases, the levorotary forms are lower energy structures and would be favored during synthesis. The fact that many L based systems are almost exclusively so is dependant upon the larger structures that are based upon amino acids and other small molecules. Often a D form of a molecule will not be able to integrate into a L structure.

    This is not to say that D forms cannot have biological activity however as there are many instances I can think of where racemic mixtures of molecules can have biological activity. For instance, the 2 chiral forms of carvone have completely different smells due to receptors in the olfactory epithelium being activated by each of the racemic forms.

    Some instances of similarity of molecular structure but different chirality have also resulted in catastophies. One only has to think of MPTP poisoning the neurons of the substantia nigra or potentially thalidomide.

    --
    Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    1. Re:Chirality by abhinavnath · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's an interesting theory you've got going there. Unfortunately, the handedness of DNA does not determine the chirality of amino acids used.

      The handedness of DNA is determined by the handedness of the sugar in its "backbone" - that is, B-DNA is right-handed because it contains D-deoxyribose instead of L-deoxyibose. A hypothetical DNA molecule formed using L-deoxyribose would have a left-handed B-DNA helix. (Now remember that the A, B and Z forms of DNA are artifacts of it being a double helix. These are three different stable conformations of a DNA double helix (local minima). Z-DNA is globally unstable, and unusual in nature, because it requires some of the bases in DNA to flip from their usual "anti" conformation relative to deoxyribose to a less stable "syn" conformation.)

      There is no reason that an RNA-based "enzyme" (similar to parts of a ribosome) would inherently prefer one isomer of an amino acid over another. It's just that once machinery had evolved to synthesize/utilize one isomer, it becomes very inefficient to use a whole 'nother set of enzymes for the other isomer of the same amino acid (unless you really really need a D-amino acid, as in bacterial cell walls). Dumb chance dictated that L-amino acids were chosen, for the most part, over D-amino acids.

      Interestingly, the D/L conventions of sugars and of amino acids both derive from the isomers of glyceraldehyde, the simplest 3-carbon sugar. Whether a compound is D or L is determined by the orientation of the major group on the 2-carbon, when the molecule is drawn in the Fischer projection. The D/L convention is just that, a convention, and does not affect the chemical or optical properties of compounds in any consistent fashion. (That is, D/L names are totally distinct from dextrorotatory/laevorotatory names, which denote optical activity. It sucks, but there it is.) Your parent post is just flat out wrong when it says L-amino acids are energetically more favored than D-amino acids.

      --
      My other sig is also a .Porsche
  14. Re:reason why not by davebo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    here's a couple of reasons I can think off the top of my head:

    1) we've got to get the ship someplace where there are "space rocks". a low-earth orbit really isn't going to accomplish that - you'd have to go to the asteroid belt for a ready supply. that's not easy. or, conversly, you land someplace where rocks may have accumulated (ie, the moon, mars).

    2) if you send a ship to a place with lots of space rocks, the ship is going to get hit by a lot of space rocks. shielding becomes a problem.

    3) if you land some place, you're stuck getting rocks next to where you land (like viking) or you've got to build a way to move around (like pathfinder)

    4) building a reliable, completely automated assay for amino acids is not trivial. if it's mobile, that's going to be even less trivial.

  15. Re:How many times... by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "How many times will science have a victory over the church before we can finally kill God for good?"

    What victory over the church? Science is good for proving that things exist, but it's not very useful for proving that things don't exist. If you're drawing the conclusion that God doesn't exist by what is or isn't on a meteorite, then you're not using science.

  16. Amino Acids? by JRHelgeson · · Score: 2, Funny

    Is this another debate as to which is better? Lefties or Righties?

    --
    Good security is based upon reality and common sense. Common sense is a function of having common knowledge.
  17. Hold on a sec! by FreeLinux · · Score: 3, Interesting

    amino acids not found elsewhere on Earth

    Every time I hear this I get rather angry. Are these people really so arrogant as to be absolutely certain that we have already found and identified ALL amino acids, presently on earth? Is there no chance at all, that these same amino acids could be present somewhere (bacteria in deep sea vents, perhaps) and we simply haven't found them yet?

    I'm not trying to suggest that, the amino acids found on the meteor are not extra terrestrial. But, I just get angry at these people who seem to feel that they have seen everything that there is to see on terra firma.

    1. Re:Hold on a sec! by zenyu · · Score: 4, Insightful

      amino acids not found elsewhere on Earth

      Read it again, slowly.

      It doesn't say "amino acids that do not exist elsewhere on Earth."

      Simply that they haven't been found elsewhere, including, I assume, on rocks near the impact crater.

    2. Re:Hold on a sec! by g4dget · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Every time I hear this I get rather angry. Are these people really so arrogant as to be absolutely certain that we have already found and identified ALL amino acids,

      That's why it says "not found", not "non-existent".

      What matters for the meteorite is whether these amino acids are common enough on earth to have contaminated the meteorite, and the answer to that is clearly "no".

    3. Re:Hold on a sec! by Arcaeris · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Gah! Of course there are more amino acids that we don't know. An "amino acid" is a broad set of compounds.

      However, the importance is in certain amino acids, and the configuration found in almost every life form we know. The fact that nearly every biologically-used amino acid favors one enantiomer over another in biological systems is of great significance.

      There are exceptions to every rule, but it's odd to see our freaky trends differ on a space rock.

  18. Re:Blah, Blah Blah.... by nomadic · · Score: 4, Funny

    This is slashdot, so you're expecting to nod knowingly and pretend you understand it. Or do you really think all those people who discuss quantum mechanics at length really know what they're talking about?

  19. Re:Left-handed? by Xtifr · · Score: 2, Insightful

    no life on Earth uses left-handed Animo Acids.

    Quite the contrary, all life on Earth uses left-handed (levorotary) amino acids. Typing "levorotary" into Google and clicking "I'm Feeling Lucky" returns this short-but-informative article.

  20. chirality by psychogentoo · · Score: 3, Funny
    favors the tell-tale signature of biochemistry based on a dominant left-handed chirality

    Sounds very sinister. :)

  21. Re:Blah, Blah Blah.... by Cyno01 · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's quantum physics, you can't know what your talkign about. Reminds me of a /. sig i saw, "Quantum Theory; Calvinball for grown-ups."

    --
    "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
  22. Hey! How come... by GeneralEmergency · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...all these carbonaceous chondrites look EXACTLY like chunks from the Piggly-Wiggly parking lot on Alderaan?

    --
    "A microprocessor... is a terrible thing to waste." --
    GeneralEmergency
  23. It's really quite obvious ... by Snork+Asaurus · · Score: 4, Funny
    If the meteorite had landed north of the equator, they'd have found mostly laevo-rotatory amino acids. Since, it landed down under, where everything turns in the opposite direction, they found mostly dextro-rotatory amino acids.

    Case closed and make mine a Foster's. G'day.

    --
    Sigs are bad for your health.
  24. Re:Blah, Blah Blah.... by Fembot · · Score: 5, Informative

    c) favors the tell-tale signature of biochemistry based on a dominant left-handed chirality, compared to random or racemic mixtures found in test-tube syntheses.

    If a molecule has a carbon with 4 different groups bonded to it then there are two different ways of making the same thing but with different physical layouts eg:

    W
    |
    X -C- Y
    |
    Z

    Or:

    X
    |
    W -C- Y
    |
    Z

    Basicaly these have a "non superimposable mirror image" (no matter how much you rotate them and you can never have all the x,y,x and z's lined up)

    Generaly the left handed and right handed molcules have very quite different behaviours, for instance some drugs use only one of the versions, whilst the other version is a poision.

    A racemic mixture is a mixture of 50-50 of the left handed and right handed molecules, and generaly chemical processes will produce a racemic mixture.

  25. Ugh. News and Science don't Mix well by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The signal to noise ratio in this article was essentially zero.

    Fact: the meteorite contains ammino acids, and chirality that is not generally found in terrestrial organisms.

    Fact: This meteroite is HEAVILY polluted with terrestrial organic matter.

    Conclusion: While ammino acids are generated in space, they seem to mimic the compositions found when we try to synthesize them in the lab.

    Aside: You can produce the same results with some methane gas, water vapor, and ionizing radiation.

    Move along, no controvesy here.

    --
    "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
    --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    1. Re:Ugh. News and Science don't Mix well by joethebastard · · Score: 4, Insightful

      News and science mix much better if you read the article. Try this:

      Fact: the signal to noise ratio would be outside error limits or they wouldn't report it

      Fact: there are only two chiralities, and synthesizing them in the lab always makes both. biological syntheses always make just one kind.

      Fact: isotopic data was used to ensure that contamination didn't effect this chirality data

      Conclusion: Some other process that we didn't know about is going on

      Aside: if you're interested in this sort of thing, you should read the article.

  26. Re:Left-handed? by benzapp · · Score: 2, Interesting

    However, in many cases only dextro varieties of pharmaceuticals are active.

    D-methamphetamine is used as an illicit stimulant. L-methamphetamine is used in those Vicks inhalers and is nearly inert in humans.

    Dexedrine is pure dextroamphetamine, where as levoamphetamine is not even sold. It is however part of the Adderall mixture.

    --
    I don't read or respond to AC posts
  27. Re:How many times... by Surt · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Victory over the church hardly seems relevant to the question of god's existence.

    --
    "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
  28. Agreed... but... by joshuaos · · Score: 3, Interesting
    All your reasons why collecting asteroids would be quite difficult are valid. I also think that it would be an interesting, and likely fruitful, way to answer this rathering important question. More importantly however, I think that we have lots and lots of other reasons to go get us some ansteroids. There's a big asteroid belt out there with a lot of useful minerals, where we don't have a pesky ecosystem to worry about destroying, we can do all the damn mining we want on any unocupied asteroids we should find out there.

    Although of course this would be an imense venture, probably requiring a permanent base on the moon and who knows where else, but it would remove the dependency of technology on earth from our fragile ecosystem, and let's face it, we've taken a lot of the easy metals out of the ground, and it's only going to get harder and harder to find. Another important point to remember is that although going up is expensive, going down is dirt cheap. ;)

    My two cents. Joshua

    --

    When in danger or in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout!

  29. evidence of extraterrestrial life? by g4dget · · Score: 2, Interesting
    So, we have meteorites that contain molecules and chiral mixtures that are indicative of life. On the other hand, those mixtures do not correspond to anything terrestrial life forms would be expected to produce.

    One logical conclusion seems to be that the meteorite contained extraterrestrial life, or perhaps a complex network of biochemical reactions that isn't quite life but a precursor. Those may have existed briefly in space and ceased long ago, or it may have been destroyed when the rock fell to earth, or we may simply not recognize it. I mean, if it doesn't have distinct membranes or other structural features, we wouldn't easily recognize life or close precursors of life at all with our current technology.

  30. circular polarized light could forms L-amino acids by searleb · · Score: 4, Informative

    Recent research suggests that there is an excess of L-amino acids (the specific enantiomer used in life-proteins) found in space, suggesting that the chiral specific process involving circular polarized light (mentioned in the article) could have lead to the amino acids that were found on the Murchison (and other meteorites).

    From the article:
    Recently it has been discovered that an excess of L-amino acids is present in the Murchison and Murray meteorites indicating that a preference for L-amino acids existed in solar system material before there was life on Earth. This supports an idea, first proposed by Rubenstein et al. (1983, Nature 306, 118), for an extraterrestrial origin for homochirality.

    In this model the action of circular polarized light on interstellar chiral molecules introduced a left handed excess into molecules in the material from which the solar system formed. ...

    If our own solar system formed in such a region of high circular polarization, it could have led to the excess of L-amino acids which we see in meteorites and to the homochirality of biological molecules. It is possible that without such a process operating it would not be possible for life to start. This may have implications for the frequency of occurrence of life in the universe.

  31. One can imagine... by neurojab · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think of civilization and technology as a major/minor cycle. Technology doesn't always advance... sometimes it's lost. Sometimes entire advanced civilizations are wiped out and a hunter-gather society emerges in its stead. Now imagine this happening to the whole of civilization. Imagine we DO go to Europa, and leave behind a streptococcus. We then lose spacefaring technology for a period of a million years, then regain the technology to complete the cycle.

    The new civilization travels to Europa, and finds... simple creatures with earthlike amino chains! At that point we will have discovered extraterrestrials.

    Of course one has to wonder if the earth-europa contamination hasn't already happened millions of years ago by an ancient civilization now forgotten. Or perhaps it was vice versa... spooky.

  32. Re:Blah, Blah Blah.... by Theaetetus · · Score: 2, Informative
    Generaly the left handed and right handed molcules have very quite different behaviours, for instance some drugs use only one of the versions, whilst the other version is a poision.

    Or sugar - right-handed - and sucralose - left-handed. Sucralose is equally sweet, but non-metabolizable, hence its use in diet food.

    -T

  33. lucky they were pre-biotic proteins... by cyril3 · · Score: 4, Funny

    otherwise they would be sitting in a detention centre right now appealing their refusal of refugee status by the Australian Gumment. Bloody alien queue jumpers will not be tolerated.

  34. read the article? by twitter · · Score: 2, Informative

    Assides from the non sequetor, which applies regardless, did you read the article? If you had read it and the intro above, you would have noticed that the amino-acids not found on earth also are mostly "left-handed" which is not how they form in a lab.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    1. Re:read the article? by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Well the correlation, while strong in their opinion, was not available from the article. The fact the you have some amino acides with the opposite chirality shows that it was obviously NOT produced by an organism. If it was manufactured by an organism that produced left-hand chirality acids, we would see all left-hand acids. It it were manufactured by an organism that produced right-handed acids, the proportion would be much higher (and not the same isotope) as was revealed in the story.

      I was waiting for the alien autopsy at the end of this article, or a discussion of the gunman in the grassy knoll.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
  35. Re:Blah, Blah Blah.... by mikerich · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Generaly the left handed and right handed molcules have very quite different behaviours, for instance some drugs use only one of the versions, whilst the other version is a poision.

    The most famous example being thalidomide. The early production methods produced both versions of the compound. One isomer relieved morning sickness, the other was teratogenic and affected the unborn child.

    Nowadays, thalidomide can be produced in the pure form and it shows promise against Hansen's Syndrome (leprosy) and some forms of cancer.

    Best wishes,
    Mike.