*life
In: Earth Science
19
Evening came, and morning followed—the fourth day.
20
i Then God said: Let the water teem with an abundance of living creatures, and on the earth let birds fly beneath the dome of the sky.
21
God created the great sea monsters and all kinds of crawling living creatures with which the water teems, and all kinds of winged birds. God saw that it was good,
22
and God blessed them, saying: Be fertile, multiply, and fill the water of the seas; and let the birds multiply on the earth.j
23
James Tour gave a take about [the origin of life](https://youtu.be/zU7Lww-sBPg) The speaker in the link is obviously biased, as well as the publishing entity, but I think he gives a solid description of the problem your asking about as well as difficulty we have in answering it and clearly outlining our car ignorance on the matter.
The issue of life origins is by far the biggest hole in evolution that I can think of. I would love to see some solid evidence or logical arguments for spontaneous biogenesis. Someone here said “like flipping 100 year in a coin in a row, but with billions of years and billions of people working on it.” (Paraphrased). But I’m pretty sure it would be more akin to winning a jackpot lottery 100 times in a row (however,. I have no idea how these probabilities are “measured”)
Actually ELI5. There used to be a ton of chemicals in the ocean. They would just mix and combine into new chemicals as time passed. Most of them did nothing, but eventually a chemical was made that could copy itself using other chemicals around it.
Naturally, this chemical took over because there was no other chemical doing the same thing. It had the whole ocean to itself. But as it copied itself, some copies were imperfect. Most of the imperfections would just stop the chemical from being able to copy itself ever again, but sometimes they would make the chemical do something new. Such as make the surrounding environment more toxic to its other cousin chemicals.
Repeat this brute force method of chemicals mixing and copying themselves enough, and you get a cell. The cell goes through the same process, and you get multicellular life.
See, life is just about making copies. All other things like blood and math and music are just parts of that.
they didn’t. consciousness comes first. there is only consciousness, expressing as physical matter, in its various forms.
Occam’s Razor, put simply, states: “the simplest solution is almost always the best.”
There is a Creator of life. Every attempt at explaining life from dead matter is a far reach.
There is no live matter. There is no dead matter. The atoms in your body are no different to the atoms of the wooden table you’re leaning against. Your body incorporates atoms that are exactly the same as the stone floor you’re standing on.
Life is a process, a particular configuration of atoms where they make up one or more cells, and those cells are capable of replicating themselves. Theoretically we could study a cell well enough to assemble the right atoms in the right configuration and we would “create” life.
How we got from a state where there was no life to the first self replicating system is a matter for much debate. It seems likely though that this step is not actually very difficult, however in a world that is now full of life anything naturally arising from these processes would be immediately consumed by something who’s ancestry goes back billions of years and is specialized in generally eating anything the same size as it.
Electricity is needed to generate consciousness and it is used by our nervous systems to transmit information and to my mind, that process holds the secret to life.
I will get voted down to Hades for saying it but I believe the Universe is comscious and we all have souls. Those things invested matter with life.
I highly doubt that it happened as described in any religious text, but I also don’t buy the notion that matter animated itself through mechanistic means. And, as of now, there is no proof it happened the way that has been hypothesized by mainstream science. it is all theoretical.
One of life’s biggest mysteries is as yet unsolved, so I doubt any ELI5 will give you the answers.
“Life” is just chemistry and physics of a myriad of compounds. The same laws and reactions govern the interactions of “dead” matter. There really is no fundamental difference between “living” and “dead” matter.
This makes your question confusing and hard to answer – there really cannot be a clear cut answer on how A turned into B, if there is no celarly defined difference between the to begin with. I guess the answer would be “It didn’t – the chemical system just got more complicated, but it’s still not that different”.
Are you failing your God Apprenticeship 101 and looking for some online help?
It’s a bit easier to grasp when you reflect that life is just chemistry and physics.
That’s happening all around us all the time whether it’s in life or not.
Asking why “dead” things can make life is kinda like asking why sand, metal, and plastic can become computers, or why simple atoms can become the Himalayas.
No atom in your body is “alive” yet the aggregate…is. Nifty things can happen when lots and lots of things come together in specific ways.
Latest Answers