Missing link of abiogenesis revealed

[shunyadragon]

Source: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/new-steps-shown-toward-creation-of-life-by-electric-charge/?&WT.mc_id=SA_DD_20140917

New Steps Shown Toward Creation of Life by Electric Charge

Simulating a famous experiment to produce life's building blocks by jolting molecules with electricity, scientists may have found a strange new intermediate state

Quantum mechanical simulations of the famous Miller experiment, in which simple molecules are exposed to an electrical discharge to produce amino acids, as may have happened on the early Earth as a precursor to life, suggest that a previously unseen intermediate, formamide, may play a key role in the chemical pathways.

The researchers, A Marco Saitta of UPMC in Paris, France, and Franz Saija of the Institute for Chemical and Physical Processes in Messina, Italy, also suggest that localized electrical fields on the surface of minerals may have had a bigger part in prebiotic chemistry than has been appreciated.

Saitta and Saija used newly developed quantum mechanical computations that can simulate the behaviour of atoms and electrons in a strong electric field to ‘observe’ the chain of events during the reactions. ‘We are doing this on a picosecond timescale, looking at the very early steps of Miller-like reactions,’ says Saitta.

The simulations identified formic acid and formamide as early, short-lived intermediates in the reaction, something that has not been seen before. Saitta suggests that a potentially important aspect of electricity as a source of energy is its ‘directionality’ – that it can align atomic and molecular species within the electric field and promote chemical reactions in a way that is different from other sources of energy such as simple heating. The researchers propose that short-range, localized electric fields on the surface of minerals may have played a part in directing the chemistry that led to the molecules of life. ‘My feeling is that an electric field gives something else besides energy,’ says Saitta.

Other researchers in prebiotic chemistry are not entirely convinced by the findings. Jeffrey Bada of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in the US, a pioneer in the field, says: ‘This paper might be an advance in water-based ab initio molecular dynamic calculations, but this does not in my opinion advance the field of prebiotic chemistry in a major way. At best the synthesis pathway proposed in this paper would be only a minor contributor to the overall amino acid yield.’

Nir Goldman, of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in the US, says that the work does provide ‘new insights into the idea that electrical discharges, for example lightning, could have played a role in the formation of prebiotic molecules on early Earth’. Goldman adds, however: ‘One criticism is that the authors chose to use a somewhat reduced or hydrogen-rich mixture in their study, whereas the atmosphere on early Earth is thought to have been carbon dioxide rich, which could entail very different chemistry in the presence of an electric field. Similar studies on a more realistic prebiotic mixture could yield interesting predictions for future experiments.’

© Copyright Original Source

[Teallaura]

Nir Goldman, of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in the US, says that the work does provide ‘new insights into the idea that electrical discharges, for example lightning, could have played a role in the formation of prebiotic molecules on early Earth’. Goldman adds, however: ‘One criticism is that the authors chose to use a somewhat reduced or hydrogen-rich mixture in their study, whereas the atmosphere on early Earth is thought to have been carbon dioxide rich, which could entail very different chemistry in the presence of an electric field. Similar studies on a more realistic prebiotic mixture could yield interesting predictions for future experiments.’

Um, isn't that kind of a big kink in the thing?

[shunyadragon]

Um, isn't that kind of a big kink in the thing?

No. not necessarily, it just, as usual, brings up the need for future research and experiments.

[whag]

Um, isn't that kind of a big kink in the thing?

You'd like to think.

[klaus54]

Why do fundy-wundies feel the need to limit the Creator's means of action?

Hmm...

K54

[Jedidiah]

. . . scientists may have found a strange new intermediate state



. . . as may have happened on the early Earth as a precursor to life, . . . may play a key role in the chemical pathways.

. . . may have had a bigger part in prebiotic chemistry than has been appreciated.

Saitta and Saija used newly developed quantum mechanical computations that can simulate the behaviour of atoms and electrons in a strong electric field to ‘observe’ the chain of events during the reactions. ‘We are doing this on a picosecond timescale, looking at the very early steps of Miller-like reactions,’ says Saitta.

. . . may have played a part in directing the chemistry that led to the molecules of life.

‘My feeling is that an electric field gives something else besides energy,’ says Saitta.

. . . could have played a role in the formation of prebiotic molecules on early Earth’.

Yes quite a revelation, maybe.

[Jedidiah]

Why do fundy-wundies feel the need to limit the Creator's means of action?

I am not a YEC but it seems that you are limiting the Creators possible means as much as they.

[klaus54]

No I ain't limiting nothin'.

Just amazed as always.

Studying tangible means of the action of Creation itself makes it more wonderful. Adds rather than subtracts in the arithmetic metaphor.

K54

[whag]

I am not a YEC but it seems that you are limiting the Creators possible means as much as they.

The creator wouldn't leave strong evidence that life evolves while expecting you to believe the contrary, would he? It's not about limiting the creator but acknowledging the rich evidence for evolution. That proof is a gift to you, but you reject it.

[whag]

Why do fundy-wundies feel the need to limit the Creator's means of action?

Hmm...

K54

Because they're scared of what a revised protology will do to their commitment. You've seen Mr. Black's posts.

[Jorge]

Source: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/new-steps-shown-toward-creation-of-life-by-electric-charge/?&WT.mc_id=SA_DD_20140917

New Steps Shown Toward Creation of Life by Electric Charge

Simulating a famous experiment to produce life's building blocks by jolting molecules with electricity, scientists may have found a strange new intermediate state

Quantum mechanical simulations of the famous Miller experiment, in which simple molecules are exposed to an electrical discharge to produce amino acids, as may have happened on the early Earth as a precursor to life, suggest that a previously unseen intermediate, formamide, may play a key role in the chemical pathways.

The researchers, A Marco Saitta of UPMC in Paris, France, and Franz Saija of the Institute for Chemical and Physical Processes in Messina, Italy, also suggest that localized electrical fields on the surface of minerals may have had a bigger part in prebiotic chemistry than has been appreciated.

Saitta and Saija used newly developed quantum mechanical computations that can simulate the behaviour of atoms and electrons in a strong electric field to ‘observe’ the chain of events during the reactions. ‘We are doing this on a picosecond timescale, looking at the very early steps of Miller-like reactions,’ says Saitta.

The simulations identified formic acid and formamide as early, short-lived intermediates in the reaction, something that has not been seen before. Saitta suggests that a potentially important aspect of electricity as a source of energy is its ‘directionality’ – that it can align atomic and molecular species within the electric field and promote chemical reactions in a way that is different from other sources of energy such as simple heating. The researchers propose that short-range, localized electric fields on the surface of minerals may have played a part in directing the chemistry that led to the molecules of life. ‘My feeling is that an electric field gives something else besides energy,’ says Saitta.

Other researchers in prebiotic chemistry are not entirely convinced by the findings. Jeffrey Bada of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in the US, a pioneer in the field, says: ‘This paper might be an advance in water-based ab initio molecular dynamic calculations, but this does not in my opinion advance the field of prebiotic chemistry in a major way. At best the synthesis pathway proposed in this paper would be only a minor contributor to the overall amino acid yield.’

Nir Goldman, of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in the US, says that the work does provide ‘new insights into the idea that electrical discharges, for example lightning, could have played a role in the formation of prebiotic molecules on early Earth’. Goldman adds, however: ‘One criticism is that the authors chose to use a somewhat reduced or hydrogen-rich mixture in their study, whereas the atmosphere on early Earth is thought to have been carbon dioxide rich, which could entail very different chemistry in the presence of an electric field. Similar studies on a more realistic prebiotic mixture could yield interesting predictions for future experiments.’

© Copyright Original Source

Nothing more than yet another expression of the Materialist's irrational, pseudo-scientific myth that, "all you need is mass and energy and, PRESTO, you get life". What a freaking waste of time, money and resources!

Jorge

[Teallaura]

You'd like to think.

Modelling what you want the early Earth to have been like instead of what it probably was like is called 'bad methodology' - and a waste of time. Unless it's a PR stunt it serves no purpose.

But go on believing that every criticism must be wrong because you disagree with what you think someone believes (I don't take a position on this) and make it so much easier for everyone to ignore you.

Or you could just tell me why it's not bad methodology if you think it can be defended - you know, act civilized.

[shunyadragon]

Modelling what you want the early Earth to have been like instead of what it probably was like is called 'bad methodology' - and a waste of time. Unless it's a PR stunt it serves no purpose.

But go on believing that every criticism must be wrong because you disagree with what you think someone believes (I don't take a position on this) and make it so much easier for everyone to ignore you.

Or you could just tell me why it's not bad methodology if you think it can be defended - you know, act civilized.

There were many environments on the earth in it's early history, and where life first formed was not likely exposed to the atmosphere. For example ocean sea vents are a hydrogen rich reducing environment, where prelife components possibly formed. It is unfortunate that the critics did not note this.

The atmosphere at the time would be obviously toxic to the early life forms and every other possible life form.

[Paprika]

There were many environments on the earth in it's early history, and where life first formed was not likely exposed to the atmosphere. For example ocean sea vents are a hydrogen rich reducing environment, where prolife components possibly formed. It is unfortunate that the critics di not note this.

I'm not quite sure that deep sea vent environments would have a 1.6:1.6:1.6:2:1 ratio of water, ammonia, methane, carbon monoxide, and nitrogen. Given the concentration of the products used, it seems obvious to me that the closest reasonable environment would be one exposed to atmosphere.

[shunyadragon]

I'm not quite sure that deep sea vent environments would have a 1.6:1.6:1.6:2:1 ratio of water, ammonia, methane, carbon monoxide, and nitrogen. Given the concentration of the products used, it seems obvious to me that the closest reasonable environment would be one exposed to atmosphere.

I believe volcanic vent conditions can occur near the surface, i. e. Iceland.