Posts Tagged ‘origin of life’

The Origin of Life – Difficult or Easy?

September 2, 2017

IF the origin of life was difficult then we are most likely not here.

If the origin of life was not difficult then we are most likely here.

The fact that we ARE here suggests that the origin of life was most likely not difficult.

The Lab

See tomhendricks.us

Advertisements

Life Origin Hypotheses

March 24, 2017

Life popped out of nothing in a one in a billion fluke event. Then with the least amount of defenses in its genetic structure it survived one of the most harsh environments in Earth’s history. That makes sense?
No the opposite does. Life is the chemical system that was the most adapted to that environment. It was chemically selected as the most stable response to the environment and that kept it from being destroyed, allowed it to continue and then to prosper.

Report – O2 on earth earlier than thought

October 7, 2015

Life is not a fluke one-time assembly, of chemicals that popped up out of nothing in one place. It’s a reaction to the environment over millions of years.

My ideas on the origin of life, are based on the idea that life was a reaction to UV and sunlight, in a daily cycle. That gets some support by this article showing how far back photosynthesis goes – much further than many had thought.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/10/151006192107.htm

==========

My paper:
UV PAPER http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/U/UV_origin_of_life.html
Catabolic and Anabolic evolved, but they did not blend.

Photo 3

Convergent Evolution – Letter to Dr. Morris

July 8, 2015

Dr. Simon Conway Morris

Convergent Evolution is a fascinating idea. Here are some aspects that may interest you.

1 The Origin of Life may have been, not a one time fluke chemical event, but the most stable chemical system in that environment over millions of years – specifically that which best survived the daily UV (day and night cycle), and turned it into a way to become more stable – stable in two ways, 1. stable in keeping what works, and 2. stable in changing what doesn’t.

2. Convergent evolution may work for catabolic and anabolic processes too – such that the better catabolic and anabolic methods are selected for across all life.

3. Being bipedal, not only freed the hands for tools, but perhaps more importantly allowed the mother to hold, carry, caress, and soothe the baby. Thus developing strong social bonds. I tend to think social bonds are a part of convergent evolution.

This is an article on Dr. Morris’s book.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/07/150702163902.htm

Tom Hendricks
UV PAPER http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/U/UV_origin_of_life.html
Catabolic and Anabolic evolved, but they did not blend.

Photo 1

(Alien Garden)

Had Earth = Cheeseburger, then Life = chem. adaptation to Cheeseburgers

April 13, 2015

Had Earth = Cheeseburger, then Life = chem. adaptation to Cheeseburgers

Had the earth been a cheeseburger, life would have evolved as the best chemical adaptation to cheeseburgers. In other words, no matter what existed, life would be defined as the best most stable reaction to that environment.

My suggestion as to how life began:

#1
UV energy from the sun –> strikes chemicals during the day, then goes away at night in a daily cycle that continues for 4 billion years.
#2
Chemicals hit by the sun react in one of two ways
———-> 1. they are destroyed.
———-> 2. they continue to exist another day.
#3
The UV cycle of energy repeats itself every day.
#4
The chemicals that are not destroyed in this cycle develop two types of stability:
a. they are stable in not changing what is stable in that environment.
b. they are stable in changing what is not stable in that environment.

UV energy –> selection on chemicals —> the most stable continue to exit —>
they are stable in two ways —>

Stable a. take in and hold what is nurturing —> metabolism —-> anabolic
Stable b. block out, and excrete out what is not nurturing —> replication –> catabolic

There IS a direction to natural selection. With every step life gets better anabolic or catabolic processes.

============
BIOLOGY HYPOTHESIS http://wp.me/p5S9X-eO
BIOLOGICAL SPECULATIONS Through The Years
http://wp.me/P5S9X-Pp
UV PAPER http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/U/UV_origin_of_life.html
Catabolic and Anabolic evolved, but they did not blend.

These posts are built on the premise of the evolution of catabolic and anabolic processes to other separate deconstructive and constructive processes.
Catabolic and anabolic processes evolve but they do not blend
http://wp.me/p5S9X-eO (bio summary)


%d bloggers like this: