UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (27) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Prev | Next | Next Thread
Author: adonsant Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 25025  
Subject: Re: Poll: First Life Form Date: 12/19/2012 6:36 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 9
For the record, I chose the last option. I don't have my own model, outside of the idea that whatever the genetic material was, it was probably replicated semiconservatively. It also probably wasn't as nice and need as modern biology. Since there's only one vote besides mine which is probably Loren's, I'd be interested to know which answer you would have chosen.

More vagueness to the point of uselessness.

Wait, are we talking about the Bible (particularly the Genesis account) again? Or maybe the definition of "irreducibly complex"?

Of course, the ion pumps (and just about every other molecular process that occurs in a living cell) requires energy, generally as ATP.


That's not quite true. Arguably one of the most important processes for modern cells, glucose transport is mediated by diffusion through a passive transporter in the vast majority of cells. A number of metals also are imported through channels passively. Passive transport works just fine as long as you can in some way consume or make unavailable the item transported.

There's at least one lab working on testing the hypothesis that an early life form might have been a genetic molecule whose replication was enhanced by a small molecule catalyst. They basically shake up a mixture of the "genome", catalyst, and lipid component to produce membrane bound "genomes". When they add monomer, the monomer can freely diffuse into and out of the "cells", but when they're incorporated into a copy of the genome, they can no longer diffuse out of the cells. This basically creates a gradient to maintain a net flux of monomers into the "cell". No fancy transporters or ATP needed. Just some basic chemistry.

But just livin' in volcanic vent doesn't somehow lead to ATP or any energy-rich molecule. It's basically just hot.

Methane and hydrogen sulfide aren't energy rich molecules? You might want to tell the modern-day organisms that rely on these molecules for energy that they're doing it wrong.

-Anthony
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post  
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (27) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Prev | Next | Next Thread

Announcements

Post of the Day:
Macro Economics

U.S. Stable, Europe Stalling
What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Community Home
Speak Your Mind, Start Your Blog, Rate Your Stocks

Community Team Fools - who are those TMF's?
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and "#1 Media Company to Work For" (BusinessInsider 2011)! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.
Advertisement