Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Earth Science

Cometary Impacts May Have Provided Key Elements of Life 85

trendspotter writes with news of research indicating that impact events might be responsible for seeding the Earth with reactive forms of the precursors to amino acids. From the article: "Early Earth was not very hospitable when it came to jump starting life. In fact, new research shows that life on Earth may have come from out of this world. Lawrence Livermore scientist Nir Goldman and University of Ontario Institute of Technology colleague Isaac Tamblyn (a former LLNL postdoc) found that icy comets that crashed into Earth millions of years ago could have produced life building organic compounds, including the building blocks of proteins and nucleobases pairs of DNA and RNA. Comets contain a variety of simple molecules, such as water, ammonia, methanol and carbon dioxide, and an impact event with a planetary surface would provide an abundant supply of energy to drive chemical reactions." The paper (PDF).
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Cometary Impacts May Have Provided Key Elements of Life

Comments Filter:
  • Except.. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 05, 2013 @11:50AM (#43915201)

    ..that life emerged billions of years ago.

    Not that I am finding fault with the underlying theory, but still..

    CAPTCHA: creator!

  • by Samantha Wright ( 1324923 ) on Wednesday June 05, 2013 @12:57PM (#43915843) Homepage Journal

    You'll have to narrow your scope a little: we're pretty sure that all of the interesting bits of evolution (the distinction between bacteria and archaea, the rise of animals, plants, protists, and fungi, multicellularity, and everything since) happened right here. To use a surprisingly good computing analogy, not only do we have the fossil records, but we can compare the source code and see where the forks happened. A lot of the most interesting adaptations are serendipitous re-uses of really old code.

    The possibility that living cells might have arrived on Earth is considered something of a toss-up. There have been quite a lot of difficult-to-test proposals about how they could've arisen from fairly basic building blocks here, and they all seem pretty plausible. We're pretty sure about the RNA world hypothesis (the idea that life only started using proteins for enzymes and DNA for storage later, and started off using just what we think of as a makeshift intermediary for everything) but we don't have much of a clue about what happened before that, and we can't say for certain it happened here or not. We also don't know how life went from being a single self-replicating molecule into a membrane-protected cell, nor if there was some storage molecule before RNA that was even simpler to operate on.

    However, this article [slashdot.org] is almost certainly wrong because RNA's inherent stability causes it to evolve at a much faster rate. So at the very least, it's still possible that there was enough time for life to evolve here from pure abiogenesis.

  • Re:An act of faith (Score:3, Interesting)

    by gewalker ( 57809 ) <Gary.Walker@nOsPAM.AstraDigital.com> on Wednesday June 05, 2013 @01:10PM (#43915979)

    Sure it is. Scientific explanations are a priori naturalistic. Supernatural explanations are forbidden. What else can science produce. If God, Buddha, or a certain noodly being is responsible, it is not science.

    Scientistics typically believe the science can explain everything, it certainly seems to be the best (most accurate and most useful) explanation for a very large number of observable phenomena.

    This does not guarantee that it true for any phenomenon though. God could be actively moving atoms, sending photons, etc. continually just so it appears to follow natural laws. Everything could be a Matrix simulation, etc. This is the realm of philosophy, not science. Science is a useful tool even if God is prime mover of every phenomenon because it allows you to make predictions that actually match observable phenomena. Not so much for something in the non-historical past, but certainly for pretty much everything that is observable today.

    Unless -- science discovers something in "the natural world" that is indisputably "unnatural" -- thus breaking the scientific presumption of natural causes. What would be proof?, say a sequence of bits in pi that contains perfect unicode copies of the Bible in the 100 most popular translations followed by of the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek text (and clearly labeled as such) guarded by a billion zeroes on each side beginning exactly at 2**666 bits should suffice for any honest scientist. A far more likely "unnatural sequence" was "accepted as proof" by Carl Sagan in his novel, Contact - but I don't recall the details of his example. BTW, if the Bible is to be believed, no such proof will ever be provided by God as that which is proven is not a faith and faith will not become knowledge before the 2nd coming of Christ (Romans 13, somewhat long explanation though).

    Interestingly, with infinite bits of pi this sequence is certain to exist an infinite number of times (since pi in transcendental). Infinity is not just a really big number, it is so much more.

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (5) All right, who's the wiseguy who stuck this trigraph stuff in here?

Working...