Slashdot Mirror


CERN Lends a Hand To the Origin of Life

SpaceKangaroo writes "In May, a small group of chemists and biologists gathered at CERN to get advice from high-energy physics experts on how to 'organize a scientific community from disparate research groups and how to access powerful computational resources.' One guy has already run simulations about the origin of life on the LHC computing grid, finding that a group of 65,000 chemicals has a good chance of creating a 'self-sustaining' system of chemical reactions (similar to life)."

7 of 69 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Gee, I dunno... by tloh · · Score: 2

    I think I'll hold off on any speculation until I've reviewed the writings of various Bronze Age goatherders on this subject.

    Is that supposed to be a clever GNU joke?

    --
    Stay sentient. Don't drink bad milk.
  2. Re:65000.. by maxwell+demon · · Score: 2

    I'd like to see they're source code

    You would prefer them to be an uncompiled program?

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  3. Re:Gee, I dunno... by SeaFox · · Score: 2

    Is that supposed to be a clever GNU joke?

    Sounds like a really, really old joke to me.
    Like pre-historic.

  4. Re:Humans seeking complex answers to simple proble by Hartree · · Score: 2

    Simple?

    Yeah, right. Some joker says "Let there be light.", and I end up having to wade through vector calculus and Maxwell's equations.

  5. Re:The origin of life, hah, thats easy... by VortexCortex · · Score: 2

    In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth

    I know most of you don't like that answer, but its much more sane than arguing for a giant explosion out of nothing, some accidental joining of proteins in primordial soup, and billions of years of accidental gene mutation and natural selection culminating in the world as we know it. Believing in either option requires faith, but believing in God takes less faith than believing in that!

    Really, think about it.

    Hmm. Not sure if troll. Meh, here goes.

    We have evidence of the big bang in the form of cosmic background radiation. The big bang is an interesting anomaly, in that we don't know what caused it (that scares the shit out of me -- how do I know one isn't going to happen anywhere at any time!) However, we also see little bangs that sort of mimic big bang processes (supernovae), and evidence of other strange anomalies such as black holes (which compress and heat things beyond imagination). To me, these evidences lend credence to the big bang theory.

    We have experimented by applying heat and electricity to sterilized rocks, minerals, and gases believed to prevalent in our early planetary history, and found amino acids -- The building blocks of life.

    By our estimates this planet has been around for approximately 4 billion years, that's a lot of time. It doesn't seem too far fetched to think that chains of amino acids could form, and that those chains of molecules (RNA?) could replicate. It seems reasonable to think that the more sturdy of the replication techniques would naturally yield more than other forms, and that replication may be possible from within the protective, semi-permeable envelope of fatty acids (lipids), and that this may be even more conducive to replication given the increased durability and ability to keep from breaking down in a bit harsher environments.

    What does sound ridiculous to me is that a mythical sky wizard was bored of all the nothingness, talked himself into creating a universe out of the nothingness (hmm, big bang?). Got bored (over eons?) with all the predictable rock collisions and stars etc, and manually assembled organic life (through trial and error? over eons?), then got bored with that and created sentient beings (with chemical computers in their heads, via trial and error? -- I mean, lots of other pretty smart chemical computer organisms exist), got bored with them, and abandoned the experiments (for some other great purpose? Perhaps to try again on another planet?).

    Yes, to me it seems ridiculous that an all powerful being, possessing the same inquisitive nature as his human creations, would not create control groups, or as much diversity as possible -- I mean, if one planet is dandy, why not billions of worlds of life? (That would be even neater to God, eh? Oh yeah, that's right... I forgot about the "Angels" o_O).

    I can't fathom why many believers in God reject the process of evolution -- I mean, If I were a God I would look for some sustainable solution to life procreation and development so I didn't have to spend my whole time doing everything for everyone forever... Perhaps something exactly like evolution -- It seems the simplest way to manufacture "free will" that doesn't require God's constant exertion of power. I myself do not believe a God exists, but if you do, at least give the guy some credit for what he's done!

  6. Re:The origin of life, hah, thats easy... by TapeCutter · · Score: 3, Insightful

    giant explosion out of nothing

    Sigh - The universe expanded from a singularity, a singularity is not nothing. However that major misconception is the least of the problems in your post.

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  7. Re:Life could have started anywhere by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Estimates of the age of the universe haven't changed in any major way in decades.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.