Meteorites entering the earth would have boiled off any organic matter. It is more likely that meteorites became contaminated with earth bacteria after having landed. Consider the fact that some of the Murchison meteorites from 1969 lay in a field 4 to 5 months before being collected.
I do however believe that certain gas clouds in the universe have just the right mixtures of compounds necessary to create amino acids (from solar radiation). The closest such cloud however, is in the Andromeda galaxy.
Ever heard of the 'garbage theory'... one that states that aliens came to earth, had a picnic and inadvertantly left some food crumbs around before their departure... and bam!! the origin of life. There are many theories out there.
I ignored the responses to my posts because I was seeking yes or no answers, not "yes, but..." answers. I will get to those eventually, but wanted to make sure that some things were agreed on before continuing.
The number 10^-121 is derived from what calculation?
Yes, I realize how unique the physical constants in the universe are. If they were not, we would not be having this conversation.
Last edited by RandomGuy; 09-11-2006 at 11:41 AM. Reason: (typo)
Would H, being less dense than the rest of the gases, over time simply rise to the top of the atmosphere and get blown off by the solar wind?
Just curious.
It is my understanding that planets slowly lose atmosphere over time.
Francis Collins. Isn't he Phil's younger brother? Smart guy, that Frankie.
Except I was already giving you reasons for you not to continue down that path. Reasons you completely ignored.
About 4 pages ago.... remember the 1/(4^200)? -- simple odds for the formation of a DNA molecule with 200 bases...
Ah yes.... The Anthropic Principle...Yes, I realize how unique the physical constants in the universe are. If they were not, we would not be having this conversation.
Of course not. 1 x 10-7 molecules per mole exist as H3O+, and another 1 x 10-7 exist as OH-. A small number of hydrogen atoms exist as deuterium, and an even smaller number exist as tritium.If by "thoroughly routed", you mean "took his 3 year old to the park, spent the weekend doing housework, homework, and having a beer with friends" I guess you are right about that.
I think have actually made my point rather well, and extracted, albeit reluctantly, an admission about the nature of the universe.
Going on to chemistry and randomness.
In a hypothically pure glass of water, are all the molecules identical?
About your earlier point about the likelihood of life emerging by random on a given planet versus the number of planets, nobody can evaluate the Drake equation to a sufficient resolution so as to say with any confidence whether it is statistically expected for life to emerge on 100,000,000 planets or 10 planets or 1 or 0.00000000000001. So your point is speculative.
Oh, I forgot something else you're going to need for life: something to make it out of. We like carbon. Boro-nitrogen structure could be feasible.
So this assumes that
1) The sequence for self replication uses all 4 nucleotides, and
2) is 200 bases long.
An interesting aspect of the coding for amino acids is that many of them can be coded for using only two nucleotides.
Let's go with the assumption that self-replication is simpler by half than the prion given, and that this molecule uses only two nucleotides.
What would the number 2^100 be in base ten?
Good.
So if I were to be able to follow a molecule of water for a billion years in this glass of water, would that molecule always be H2O, or would it occasionally break apart and then become an OH-, float around for a while, then bump into an H30+ and go back to its former iden y as an H2O molecule?
For those who may not know...
Another excerpt from Francis Collins' book:
The Drake equation is most useful as a way of do enting the state of our ignorance. Frank Drake noted, simply and logically that the number of communicating civilizations in our own galaxy must be the product of seven factors:
--- the number of stars in the Milky Way galaxy (about 100 billion) times
--- the fraction of stars that have planets around them, times
--- the number of planets per star that are capable of sustaining life, times
--- the fraction of those planets where life actually evolves, times
--- the fraction of these where the life that evolves is intelligent, times
--- the fraction of these that actually developed the ability to communicate, times
--- the fraction of these planets' life during which the ability to communicate overlaps with ours...
We have been able to communicate beyond Earth for less that a hundred years. So if we assume the earth is 4.5 billion years, Drake's last factor reflects only a tiny fraction of Earth's years of existence: 0.000000022
Drake's formula is interesting but essentially useless, because of our inability to state with any degree of certainty the value of almost all of the terms except for the number of stars in the Milky Way galaxy. Certainly other stars have been discovered with planets around them, but the rest of the terms remain hidden in mystery.
Yeah, but can he play drums like his bro?
I'll answer your question first... 1/(2^100) = 7.89 x 10^-31
And then explain why this is less relevant than the first number...
If anything the prion base pair requirement should not have been halved... it should have been quintupled... i.e. the simplest one is still 1000 pairs long.
So even when we assume that only two nucleotides are used.
1/(2^1000) ends up being a much smaller number than 1/(4^200)....
try.... 9.33 x 10^-302
Now consider where 200 base-pair figure came from: This figure allows for the coding of one of the smallest known proteins; albeit, using the DNA/RNA pathway that requires the existence of roughly 120 other proteins (rather large ones at that).
Even some of the simpler (self catalyzing) ribozymes mentioned earlier by sabar are at least 350 polypeptides long.
Last edited by Phenomanul; 09-11-2006 at 05:16 PM.
So will you.
Imperscrutabilis Deus.
hence the eventual good man.
Denis Bergamp.
Lots of mistakes but remarkable discussion anyway.
And don't forget the key issue.
Why is Nothing (Pure emptyness, Non-Being) non-existent?
And why all sensible "things" exist at all?
but the christian god designed it, intelligently!
"Pure emptyness, Non-Being ... non-existent"
Eastern thought disagrees. Existence and non-existence .... co-exist
It is the concept that lies behind the emergence of 'zero' as a number.... which was introduced by the much saner and more progressive Islamic era.... <--- a distant cry from today's version...
Last edited by Phenomanul; 09-11-2006 at 08:46 PM.
More likely, it would evaporate.
If we were all schooled in Eastern thought... this discussion would be moot.
Yes indeed... I'm accountable before GOD as well - there's no denying that.... except I have One who fights for me, my Just Lawyer -- Jesus Christ.
In either case, the point was that if I'm wrong nothing will happen... I will just die and never again be of any relevance. Nothing negative from my perspective considering I would not be around to perceive that feeling anyways. However if I'm right, I will be glad I chose to place my trust and faith in He who redeemed my inadequacies and shortcomings.
Last edited by Phenomanul; 09-11-2006 at 10:50 PM.
On an off-topic note.
I'd like to think the reason we debate on this thread is to find the truth, to become wise and not push our own points of view.
Now if only politics worked the same.
Keep it up people!
Last edited by sabar; 09-12-2006 at 12:10 AM.
The original comment was made in response to the question of whether or not GOD's existence is relevant to the transcendence of our own. It wasn't made to belittle discussion or repress beliefs.
In other words... If GOD does exist, how does my life fit into a scheme that may have ramifications in the afterlife. And if He doesn't... does it even matter what we believe?
Sorry, wasn't clear, that wasn't in response to anything.
I'll get to the question in a moment. Temp answer then I need sleep to think.
Last edited by sabar; 09-12-2006 at 12:12 AM.
Temporary answers while I think and sleep.
If God does exist, how does your life fit?
This depends on one of two things. Either God does not care what you do, or he expects something of you. If it is the first, it is as if he does not exist. There is no meaning to life and there may or may not be an afterlife. Thus, it does not matter if this is the truth. Your life is as you define it and you must find something to please yourself.
If there is no God?
Then we die, there is no afterlife, there is no reason to life or to live or for anything to exist. This does not matter if this is the truth. Your life is whatever you define it to be, and only you can find your own personal truth to get the most pleasure from life.
So if there is a God and he expects something? What does he expect?
To live a moral life? To just believe in him? To prove his existance and find the meaning of life?
The problem with this subject is that it branches off in a thousand directions.
So to get to the original question.
We should live a just and moral life regardless of the existance of a God. God helps justify this life, but is not required. If he exists, it reinforces my statement. If he doesn't, my statement still stands, as is argued by Plato on why a just life is worth living. It matters what be believe regardless, otherwise people would walk around killing eachother and just doing whatever pleasures them the most.
Last edited by sabar; 09-12-2006 at 12:13 AM.
So this assumes that
1) The sequence for self replication uses all 4 nucleotides, and
2) is 200 bases long.
An interesting aspect of the coding for amino acids is that many of them can be coded for using only two nucleotides.
Let's go with the assumption that self-replication is simpler by half than the prion given, and that this molecule uses only two nucleotides.
What would the number 2^100 be in base ten?
--RG
So by changing the two basic assumptions in your calculation, most of those zeros that made this "infinitesmally small" just went away.
Fascinating.
I gotta get to work, but I will get back to this bit later.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote