What is Chemical Evolution and how does it work?

Post Reply
User avatar
jonperry
Posts: 137
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 10:00 pm
Location: Corvallis Oregon
Contact:

What is Chemical Evolution and how does it work?

Post by jonperry » Tue Mar 17, 2015 12:21 am

Hello again. It's been a while since I've made a new animation but I'm just about to publish one I've been working on for Georgia Tech on Chemical Evolution. I'd love your feedback in two areas

1. Is the chemistry easy enough to follow for those outside the field of chemistry? I'm not a chemist a but I've been working on this too long to remember what it's like to be unfamiliar with the subject. This animation shows some complex concepts like self-assembly but I worry I don't give enough background information to have it make much sense to those who are not already familiar with the concept.

2. Are the claims too strong for your taste? The idea that life can emerge from Chemistry is supported by observation but is still an unproven hypothesis. I try to point that out in the animation but may not have done a good enough job.

Here it is in rough draft form. Props to Jason Moon who helped with the 3D parts: https://youtu.be/p2pNV1CaMiQ

dizerner

Re: What is Chemical Evolution and how does it work?

Post by dizerner » Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:29 am

I liked it okay. I hate how many assumptions are left out of these types of videos (necessarily I suppose), but for what it is, it's good.

User avatar
mattrose
Posts: 1920
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:28 am
Contact:

Re: What is Chemical Evolution and how does it work?

Post by mattrose » Tue Mar 17, 2015 7:14 am

jonperry wrote: The idea that life can emerge from Chemistry is supported by observation but is still an unproven hypothesis. I try to point that out in the animation but may not have done a good enough job.
Could you elaborate on this particular comment?

If it (life emerging from chemistry) is supported by observation then it wouldn't be an unproven hypothesis.

So are you saying that life emerging from chemistry has been observed in the present, but it remains an unproven hypothesis about the origin of life?

If so, can you provide references to these present observations of life emerging from chemistry?

And if so, what is the roadblock preventing such observations from being a 'proven' source for the origin of life? (I'm assuming it has to do with proving certain conditions were present on earth way back then?).

The statement kind of baffled me because I have never been very impressed with any of the claims of observed 'life from non-life via chemistry' (I'm sure you're aware of more and better examples...), but you state quite boldly that this is the case. Are the examples you might cite really examples of natural chemistry or do they depend on intelligence?

The video quality is, once again, high. I think your position is stated clearly.

User avatar
jonperry
Posts: 137
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 10:00 pm
Location: Corvallis Oregon
Contact:

Re: What is Chemical Evolution and how does it work?

Post by jonperry » Tue Mar 17, 2015 3:10 pm

Mattrose,
So are you saying that life emerging from chemistry has been observed in the present...
Great question. We have observed parts of living cells develop (fatty acids, amino acids, and so on), we have seen large dynamic structures develop like the cell membranes shown in the animation, we have seen legitimate metabolisms form (by metabolism I mean the formation of cycling reactions that sustain their own survival. They pull in molecules from the environment, assimilate them into the system, and excrete waste). That said, we have not observed an entire living thing (a self-reproducing chemical system) develop without human intervention.

The observations I speak of which suggest that life can emerge from chemistry come mainly from two lines of research:
1. Research into the level of chemical complexity that can develop under natural (non-living) conditions.
2. Research into how living cells work. Living cells are extremely complex and organized. That said, as far as we can tell, there is no vital force powering a bacteria. It appears that a cell can be accurately described as a series of ongoing chemical reactions - life is chemistry. Keep in mind, I'm not speaking of sentient life forms, just reproducing cells like bacteria. The emergence of Consciousness appears to be a separate puzzle.

The goal right now for life origins chemistry is to observe the development of at least one self-replicating chemical system that is produced under plausible ancient Earth conditions, and without the need of human intervention. Any chemical system capable of descent with modification is technically a biological entity. It can evolve according to the principals of biological evolution and It can be considered to be alive, not in the way that a thinking human is alive, but in a way that a self-replicating bacteria is alive.

Once we observe basic chemistry giving rise to reproducing chemical systems, start to finish, we will know that chemical evolution is capable of giving rise to life. We will not know how it actually happened though. As of now, the actual pathway that life on earth followed in its development appears to be lost to history.
Are the examples you might cite really examples of natural chemistry or do they depend on intelligence?
If you don't mind, let me reword your question to see if I understood it correctly:

If scientists recreate life or parts of life, wouldn't that be intelligent design, not evidence of natural processes?

That depends on how the experiments are done. Scientists study life origins in several different ways but the most important way is by setting up scenarios they think are possible in space, or on the ancient Earth. They then watch what happens. The "intelligence" involved in these types of experiments is in trying to accurately create probable environments, and in setting things up so that we can observe the chemical reactions as they occur (not an easy task). These scientists do not design the resulting chemical products. The environment they setup does all the "designing".

I'll go into this in depth in my next animation for Georgia Tech called "What did we learn from the Miller Urey Experiment?". That video should be ready to see in October. The Miller Urey experiment is the one you've probably heard about that produced amino acids from simple gasses. It was the first life origins experiment ever performed. The conditions used in it are now known to be wrong for ancient Earth but the concepts used have inspired much of the research ever since.

Several groups are trying to intelligently design cells from scratch. If they succeed, this will not be evidence of nature producing life but it will help guide researchers who are looking for environments that would facilitate the reactions that give rise to life.

Sorry for writing such a long response :) Thanks for the thoughtful questions.

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: What is Chemical Evolution and how does it work?

Post by Paidion » Tue Mar 17, 2015 3:47 pm

The goal right now for life origins chemistry is to observe the development of at least one self-replicating chemical system that is produced under plausible ancient Earth conditions, and without the need of human intervention.
A very lofty goal! Why not try merely to produce a "self-replicating chemical system" using only chemicals and without any "life substances"? Never mind the "ancient Earth conditions." Since such systems supposedly came into existence in the distant past without intelligent design, and so it should be relatively easy for highly intelligent scientists with their wide knowledge of the processes of evolution, to brings such a system into existence now.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

User avatar
TheEditor
Posts: 814
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 9:09 pm

Re: What is Chemical Evolution and how does it work?

Post by TheEditor » Tue Mar 17, 2015 4:35 pm

Hi Jon,

I agree with Paidion on this, it is a lofty goal. I have always been fascinated by science; how things work. But I have always been more intrigued by why they work. For example, a person can give me a detailed explanation of how a computer works, but it's always been the why that's puzzling.

You made this comment: "The goal right now for life origins chemistry is to observe the development of at least one self-replicating chemical system that is produced under plausible ancient Earth conditions, and without the need of human intervention", followed by, "Scientists study life origins in several different ways but the most important way is by setting up scenarios they think are possible in space, or on the ancient Earth. They then watch what happens. The "intelligence" involved in these types of experiments is in trying to accurately create probable environments.

This may explain the how but not the why. And the use of the words "setting up" and "create" seem to argue against the conclusion that some may draw from the experiment.

Regards, Brenden.
[color=#0000FF][b]"It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery."[/b][/color]

User avatar
jonperry
Posts: 137
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 10:00 pm
Location: Corvallis Oregon
Contact:

Re: What is Chemical Evolution and how does it work?

Post by jonperry » Tue Mar 17, 2015 5:41 pm

Paidion wrote:
Why not try merely to produce a "self-replicating chemical system" using only chemicals and without any "life substances"? Never mind the "ancient Earth conditions." Since such systems supposedly came into existence in the distant past without intelligent design, and so it should be relatively easy for highly intelligent scientists with their wide knowledge of the processes of evolution, to brings such a system into existence now.
The first steps of this have been done. We have created an artificial genome, inserted it into a gene-less cell, and watched it come alive. In this case we were dependent on the gene-less cell's parts to make the artificial genes work. To create a cell from scratch we need two things: 1. A perfect knowledge of all parts needed, 2. a way to manufacture all those parts and correctly position them. We have a lot of progress to make still on both fronts before we can make life from scratch but people are working on it. Setting up the conditions for life to emerge on its own may actually be easier. Time will tell.

I'd like more feedback on the actual animation if you all wouldn't mind. Any specific parts that didn't make sense, jumps in logic that made the conclusions unreasonable and so on.

User avatar
robbyyoung
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:23 am

What is Chemical Evolution and how does it work?

Post by robbyyoung » Wed Mar 18, 2015 4:42 pm

jonperry wrote:I'd like more feedback on the actual animation if you all wouldn't mind. Any specific parts that didn't make sense, jumps in logic that made the conclusions unreasonable and so on.
Hi Jon and God bless,

Try not to get to flustered. What you are asking, is in fact, the feedback you're getting. The "jumps in logic that made the conclusions unreasonable" are being challenged. I see two fundamental claims in your videos:

1. The science of how things work.
2. The assumption and non-scientific claims of the origin of life.

These two questions cannot conflate with logic, as the latter (#2), does not and cannot be proven by science, it is a faith-based platform. Your videos will serve a more scientific approach if you remain diligent to the discovery of "How Things Work" and "Their Purpose". The Origin or Genesis question should not be included in the search for scientific discovery, for it is neither necessary for progress or obtainable.

I like your work, but I really wish that you stick with the science. No one is against the discoveries and knowledge obtained by the discipline. However, you will get push-back when you stray from science to promote non-science.

God Bless.

Post Reply

Return to “Creation/Evolution”