Slashdot Mirror
Cometary Impacts May Have Provided Key Elements of Life
trendspotter writes with news of research indicating that impact events might be responsible for seeding the Earth with reactive forms of the precursors to amino acids. From the article: "Early Earth was not very hospitable when it came to jump starting life. In fact, new research shows that life on Earth may have come from out of this world. Lawrence Livermore scientist Nir Goldman and University of Ontario Institute of Technology colleague Isaac Tamblyn (a former LLNL postdoc) found that icy comets that crashed into Earth millions of years ago could have produced life building organic compounds, including the building blocks of proteins and nucleobases pairs of DNA and RNA. Comets contain a variety of simple molecules, such as water, ammonia, methanol and carbon dioxide, and an impact event with a planetary surface would provide an abundant supply of energy to drive chemical reactions."
The paper (PDF).
Panspermia http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/life-unbounded/2012/10/15/the-panspermia-paradox/
Is this even a new idea?
I've heard this for quite some time now, and I thought this was a prevailing understanding.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Well, I for one am extremely unfashionable and actually RTFA:
"The flux of organic matter to Earth via comets and asteroids during periods of heavy bombardment may have been as high as 10 trillion kilograms per year, delivering up to several orders of magnitude greater mass of organics than what likely pre-existed on the planet," Goldman said.
The words "heavy bombardment" have particular meaning in the context of solar system history; the most well-known being the (not quite ubiquitously accepted) Late Heavy Bombardment, on the moon, 4.1–3.8 billion years ago. The bit about "millions of years ago" was probably added by the public relations science writer and should have been "billions." They get this stuff wrong all the time.
Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
No-one's saying there was life on the comets - just some very useful chemicals.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
According to Hawking, Gravity (capital G) created the Universe: http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/13013/stephen-hawking-says-universe-can-create-itself-from-nothing-but-how-exactly
According to TFA, Gravity (capital G) created life (via the kinetic energy of the comets obeying laws of Gravity)
According to Genesis, God created the Universe and life.
Therefore, Gravity = God.
Glad we finally solved that! Can we move on now?
I initially misread the headline as "Cemetery impacts..." and assumed that this was going to be a nice discussion of zombies and/or how to be successful with necromancy.
Unfortunately, once again, it's only a discussion of how to set up abiogenesis.
Take it to the limit, everybody to the limit, come on, everybody fhqwhgads.
You'll have to narrow your scope a little: we're pretty sure that all of the interesting bits of evolution (the distinction between bacteria and archaea, the rise of animals, plants, protists, and fungi, multicellularity, and everything since) happened right here. To use a surprisingly good computing analogy, not only do we have the fossil records, but we can compare the source code and see where the forks happened. A lot of the most interesting adaptations are serendipitous re-uses of really old code.
The possibility that living cells might have arrived on Earth is considered something of a toss-up. There have been quite a lot of difficult-to-test proposals about how they could've arisen from fairly basic building blocks here, and they all seem pretty plausible. We're pretty sure about the RNA world hypothesis (the idea that life only started using proteins for enzymes and DNA for storage later, and started off using just what we think of as a makeshift intermediary for everything) but we don't have much of a clue about what happened before that, and we can't say for certain it happened here or not. We also don't know how life went from being a single self-replicating molecule into a membrane-protected cell, nor if there was some storage molecule before RNA that was even simpler to operate on.
However, this article is almost certainly wrong because RNA's inherent stability causes it to evolve at a much faster rate. So at the very least, it's still possible that there was enough time for life to evolve here from pure abiogenesis.
Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
Sure it is. Scientific explanations are a priori naturalistic. Supernatural explanations are forbidden. What else can science produce. If God, Buddha, or a certain noodly being is responsible, it is not science.
Scientistics typically believe the science can explain everything, it certainly seems to be the best (most accurate and most useful) explanation for a very large number of observable phenomena.
This does not guarantee that it true for any phenomenon though. God could be actively moving atoms, sending photons, etc. continually just so it appears to follow natural laws. Everything could be a Matrix simulation, etc. This is the realm of philosophy, not science. Science is a useful tool even if God is prime mover of every phenomenon because it allows you to make predictions that actually match observable phenomena. Not so much for something in the non-historical past, but certainly for pretty much everything that is observable today.
Unless -- science discovers something in "the natural world" that is indisputably "unnatural" -- thus breaking the scientific presumption of natural causes. What would be proof?, say a sequence of bits in pi that contains perfect unicode copies of the Bible in the 100 most popular translations followed by of the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek text (and clearly labeled as such) guarded by a billion zeroes on each side beginning exactly at 2**666 bits should suffice for any honest scientist. A far more likely "unnatural sequence" was "accepted as proof" by Carl Sagan in his novel, Contact - but I don't recall the details of his example. BTW, if the Bible is to be believed, no such proof will ever be provided by God as that which is proven is not a faith and faith will not become knowledge before the 2nd coming of Christ (Romans 13, somewhat long explanation though).
Interestingly, with infinite bits of pi this sequence is certain to exist an infinite number of times (since pi in transcendental). Infinity is not just a really big number, it is so much more.
And billions of years is still millions of years (just more of them).