Amino acid synthesis

[Newtonian]

I am continuing my research in this forum section because in the thread "Does God exist" in the religion section too many other subjects are being discussed and few are addressing the need for different environments to produce different amino acids.

The lack of the chemical reaction product proportions in the famous Miller-Urey experiment is typical - thankfully not universal. Some of the details are found in tables 3-2, 3-3. 3-4 and 3-5 on pages 23-29 of:

https://www.krusch.com/books/evolution/Mystery_of_Lifes_Origin.pdf

Note that the most abundant chemical reaction product in the spark discharge experiments is formic acid not amino acids. And that most of the amino acids produced (exceptions: Glycine, Alanine and in lower proportion Aspartic Acid) are not found in proteins.

The reason for the predominance of formic acid is that these experiments are done in the presence of water with a theorized atmosphere of methane (CH4), ammonia (NH3) and hydrogen (H2) which produces hydrogen cyanide (HCN). Hydrolysis is the adding of water (H2O) to a molecule. In the case of HCN:

HCN + H2O yields formamide + H2O yields formic acid.

The hydrolysis of HCN is largely ignored in peer reviewed journals discussing amino acid synthesis. Actually, hydrolysis stops many chemical reaction pathways involving HCN and on to proteins. In fact, popular reports deceive people into thinking water is required whereas water is really an enemy of amino acid synthesis and polymerization.

Thaxton et al note some of the many hydrolysis reactions that dead end pathways to amino acids on page 50. These include: [see the article for structure e.g. bonding type and shape]

1. HCN to Cyanogen (C2N2) +H2O yields cyanoformamide (C2H2N2O) + H2O yields ethanediamide (C2H4N2O2)

2. HCN to dicyanamide (C2N3) + H2O yields cyanourea (C2H3N3O) + H2O yields Biuret (C2H5N3O2 )

3. HCN to Cyanamide (CH2N2) + H2O yields Urea (CO(NH2)2 = CH4N2O = NH2CONH2)

4. HCN to Cyanamide (CH2N2) + H2O yields carbodiimide (RN=C=NR.) + H2O yields Urea

[Note: The carbodiimide dicyclohexylcarbodiimide (C13H22N2 ) is used in peptide synthesis,"]

5. HCN + H2O yields formamide (CH3NO) + H2O yields formic acid (HCOOH = CH₂O₂)

6. HCN + H2O yields formamidine (CH4N2 ) + H2O yields formic acid

7. HCN to Cyanoacetylene (C3HN) + H2O yields Cyanoacetaldehide (C3H3NO).

You all- feel free to post anything concerning amino acids synthesis or to respond concerning any chemical reaction I posted above.

 

[ReinyDays]

"Once is enough" ... run Miller-Urey for ten million years and see if vital amino acids are formed ... all we need is one self-catalysing protein to form in that time span ... are there zillions of other products formed, of course, just look at how much CN(-) is in our oceans today ...

 

[Newtonian]

"Once is enough" ... run Miller-Urey for ten million years and see if vital amino acids are formed ... all we need is one self-catalysing protein to form in that time span ... are there zillions of other products formed, of course, just look at how much CN(-) is in our oceans today ...

I think you forgot the law of large numbers. The higher the number of trials the closer the result will be to the predicted probability. More detail here:

Law of Large Numbers

www.probabilitycourse.com

Excerpt:

"The law of large numbers has a very central role in probability and statistics. It states that if you repeat an experiment independently a large number of times and average the result, what you obtain should be close to the expected value."

In other words, the larger the number of trials the smaller the standard deviation from predicted probability. The actual chemical reaction proportions will vary less if done repeatedly over a longer time period.

However, this law only applies to amino acid synthesis with identical experiments. For example: identical to the famous Miller-Urey experiment.

Bottom line - in spark discharge experiments of the Miller-Urey type the primary chemical reaction product will always be formic acid, not amino acids. The proportions will be more and more predictable the larger the number of times the experiment is repeated. Or, simply, the standard deviation from the predicted reaction product proportions will be lower the larger the number of trials. Besides Formic Acid, only the proteinous amino acids Glycine and `Alanine will be produced in a significant percentage - and even then we need an intelligent chemist to select the biologic amino acids from the many amino acids not found in proteins.

 

[Newtonian]

You all - the law of large numbers also makes the rate of formation more predictable the larger the universe or number of universes.

For example, let us say that a specific polypeptide with the correct 3-d shape, L- chiraltiy, and correct isomerization has a probability of 10^21 at any give time. The universe contains about 100 billion galaxies = 10^11 galaxies. So the probability for any one galaxy to have that polypeptide would be 10^10. But a galaxy may have more than 10 billion solar systems (stars) = 10^10 stars. This leads to the probability that one such polypeptide will form in each solar system.

However, our universe has been here roughly 14 billion years. So, the 10^10 quantify of this specific polypeptide will be once every 10^4 (10,000) years in each galaxy. So how does the polypeptide in Andromeda galaxy meet up with the polypeptide formed 10,000 years later in Milky Way?

Of course, there is no universal organic soup. So this scenario is actually science fiction.

Thus the need for an intelligent chemist to create life - or even to select the correct 20 amino acids that are required for a simple protein of about 200 amino acids assembled in an informational way rather than just a statistical set.

Oh, and the intelligent chemist has to be superior to human chemists since they cannot created life.

Remember the need for all the required informational molecules to be in the same place at the same time! Not just the same year and not just in one square mile!

Not to mention that the variant environments for each essential amino acid cannot exist in the same place at the same time. Not just atmosphere - but also wet vs. dry; acid vs. alkaline; hot vs. cold.

 

[Hollie]

You all - the law of large numbers also makes the rate of formation more predictable the larger the universe or number of universes.

For example, let us say that a specific polypeptide with the correct 3-d shape, L- chiraltiy, and correct isomerization has a probability of 10^21 at any give time. The universe contains about 100 billion galaxies = 10^11 galaxies. So the probability for any one galaxy to have that polypeptide would be 10^10. But a galaxy may have more than 10 billion solar systems (stars) = 10^10 stars. This leads to the probability that one such polypeptide will form in each solar system.

However, our universe has been here roughly 14 billion years. So, the 10^10 quantify of this specific polypeptide will be once every 10^4 (10,000) years in each galaxy. So how does the polypeptide in Andromeda galaxy meet up with the polypeptide formed 10,000 years later in Milky Way?

Of course, there is no universal organic soup. So this scenario is actually science fiction.

Thus the need for an intelligent chemist to create life - or even to select the correct 20 amino acids that are required for a simple protein of about 200 amino acids assembled in an informational way rather than just a statistical set.

Oh, and the intelligent chemist has to be superior to human chemists since they cannot created life.

Remember the need for all the required informational molecules to be in the same place at the same time! Not just the same year and not just in one square mile!

Not to mention that the variant environments for each essential amino acid cannot exist in the same place at the same time. Not just atmosphere - but also wet vs. dry; acid vs. alkaline; hot vs. cold.

What your misapplying of course is the LLN being applicable to number sets. Biological organisms combine and disassemble in unpredictable ways, hence the Wuhan virus as well as the continuously evolving flu virus.

What evidence do you have for an intelligent, supernatural designer who you are suggesting has supernaturally, intelligently designed anything?

 

[ReinyDays]

I think you forgot the law of large numbers ...

I'm very familiar with the law of large numbers ... as a casino gambler I can say I'm quite intimate with the "gambler's fallacy" ...

That answers the wrong question ... we don't care how small the probability is that a more complex amino acid forms in any given year ... having enough years the probability of this amino acid to form just once approaches certainty ... thus "once is enough" ...

Consider the "one in a trillion" mutation that allows the individual to double their successful reproduction ... in so many generations this mutation will come to dominate the gene pool ... just one mutation occurring just once ...

Remember ... time we have in abundance ...

 

[Wuwei]

The beginnings of life does not have to be DNA surrounded by cellulose, etc. Research (I forget where) found that a viable form of "life" that can replicate is in the form of RNA surrounded and protected by lipids. Furthermore perhaps not all four, AGCT bases are necessary. Maybe (or maybe not) just two can work. Once a very simple system that can replicate arises, mutations and evolution will do the rest.

.

 

[Newtonian]

I think you forgot the law of large numbers ...

I'm very familiar with the law of large numbers ... as a casino gambler I can say I'm quite intimate with the "gambler's fallacy" ...

That answers the wrong question ... we don't care how small the probability is that a more complex amino acid forms in any given year ... having enough years the probability of this amino acid to form just once approaches certainty ... thus "once is enough" ...

Consider the "one in a trillion" mutation that allows the individual to double their successful reproduction ... in so many generations this mutation will come to dominate the gene pool ... just one mutation occurring just once ...

Remember ... time we have in abundance ...

That is only true when you are talking about one step in any pathway where the second step is not dependent on the first step in a complex way. I was trying to help you realize that the RATE of chance formation of any one amino acid becomes more predictable the more trials are involved. And I asked how one polypeptide formed in Andromeda galaxy would get to meet another polypeptide formed in Milky Way 10,000 years later?

But, yes, once is enough for any one chemical reaction product - say one molecule of Cytosine for example. Remember, each specific chemical reaction product is dependent on the environment simulated in the experiment.

Again I ask how you get wet, dry (even with condensing agents), acid, alkaline, hot and cold in the same place at the same time? Sure, any one unlikely product (e.g amino acids not detected in Miller-Urey type experiments) can occur once in a long time in a specific environment - that you are correct about. However, you are missing the RATE of production of each required amino acid as well as SELECTION of said amino acid in a soup containing mostly Formic acid molecules.

An illustration is why you cannot get a tomato plant when you plant a carrot seed. You might get a different type of carrot but you will not get a tomato plant.

A more relevant example is the predicted chemical reaction product proportions in any specific chemical reaction in any given environment. Sure, any one product (one molecule) could end up in the results - but the larger the number of molecules involved, the more predictable the results are.

The predictability of any chemical reaction is due to the law of large numbers.

One more example: Chemical evolutionists admit that their synthesis results are dependent on the absence of free Oxygen. Again, that is really because of the law of large numbers. Any one atom can avoid the Oxygen atom - but the large number of atoms involved make that impossible.

Later I will post on one specific set of chemical reactions - that required for Cytosine synthesis.

 

[Newtonian]

The beginnings of life does not have to be DNA surrounded by cellulose, etc. Research (I forget where) found that a viable form of "life" that can replicate is in the form of RNA surrounded and protected by lipids. Furthermore perhaps not all four, AGCT bases are necessary. Maybe (or maybe not) just two can work. Once a very simple system that can replicate arises, mutations and evolution will do the rest.

.

You forget the need for specific nucleic acid synthesis and the synthesis of sugars and the synthesis of fatty acids at the same place and time.

Guess why humans cannot restore life to a cell with too much loss of information lost due to entropy - or simply: the difference between a dead cell and a living cell. It is obviously easier to restore life to a dead cell than to create a dead cell from non-living matter.

Note that I was posting about amino acid synthesis (thread title). Would you like me to start a thread on nucleic acid synthesis?

 

[alang1216]

I am continuing my research in this forum section because in the thread "Does God exist" in the religion section too many other subjects are being discussed and few are addressing the need for different environments to produce different amino acids.

The lack of the chemical reaction product proportions in the famous Miller-Urey experiment is typical - thankfully not universal. Some of the details are found in tables 3-2, 3-3. 3-4 and 3-5 on pages 23-29 of:

https://www.krusch.com/books/evolution/Mystery_of_Lifes_Origin.pdf

Note that the most abundant chemical reaction product in the spark discharge experiments is formic acid not amino acids. And that most of the amino acids produced (exceptions: Glycine, Alanine and in lower proportion Aspartic Acid) are not found in proteins.

The reason for the predominance of formic acid is that these experiments are done in the presence of water with a theorized atmosphere of methane (CH4), ammonia (NH3) and hydrogen (H2) which produces hydrogen cyanide (HCN). Hydrolysis is the adding of water (H2O) to a molecule. In the case of HCN:

HCN + H2O yields formamide + H2O yields formic acid.

The hydrolysis of HCN is largely ignored in peer reviewed journals discussing amino acid synthesis. Actually, hydrolysis stops many chemical reaction pathways involving HCN and on to proteins. In fact, popular reports deceive people into thinking water is required whereas water is really an enemy of amino acid synthesis and polymerization.

Thaxton et al note some of the many hydrolysis reactions that dead end pathways to amino acids on page 50. These include: [see the article for structure e.g. bonding type and shape]

1. HCN to Cyanogen (C2N2) +H2O yields cyanoformamide (C2H2N2O) + H2O yields ethanediamide (C2H4N2O2)

2. HCN to dicyanamide (C2N3) + H2O yields cyanourea (C2H3N3O) + H2O yields Biuret (C2H5N3O2 )

3. HCN to Cyanamide (CH2N2) + H2O yields Urea (CO(NH2)2 = CH4N2O = NH2CONH2)

4. HCN to Cyanamide (CH2N2) + H2O yields carbodiimide (RN=C=NR.) + H2O yields Urea

[Note: The carbodiimide dicyclohexylcarbodiimide (C13H22N2 ) is used in peptide synthesis,"]

5. HCN + H2O yields formamide (CH3NO) + H2O yields formic acid (HCOOH = CH₂O₂)

6. HCN + H2O yields formamidine (CH4N2 ) + H2O yields formic acid

7. HCN to Cyanoacetylene (C3HN) + H2O yields Cyanoacetaldehide (C3H3NO).

You all- feel free to post anything concerning amino acids synthesis or to respond concerning any chemical reaction I posted above.

This is way beyond my high school chemistry knowledge (and interest) but I will say that it would be a mistake to assume there was one single environment on the early Earth. Look at how many different ecological niches exist on the planet today, from mountain tops to deep ocean trenches, from arctic to tropical. You also need to factor in hydrothermal vents, caves and other subterranean environs. It would only require one environment of the many to produce the first life.

 

[esalla]

I am continuing my research in this forum section because in the thread "Does God exist" in the religion section too many other subjects are being discussed and few are addressing the need for different environments to produce different amino acids.

The lack of the chemical reaction product proportions in the famous Miller-Urey experiment is typical - thankfully not universal. Some of the details are found in tables 3-2, 3-3. 3-4 and 3-5 on pages 23-29 of:

https://www.krusch.com/books/evolution/Mystery_of_Lifes_Origin.pdf

Note that the most abundant chemical reaction product in the spark discharge experiments is formic acid not amino acids. And that most of the amino acids produced (exceptions: Glycine, Alanine and in lower proportion Aspartic Acid) are not found in proteins.

The reason for the predominance of formic acid is that these experiments are done in the presence of water with a theorized atmosphere of methane (CH4), ammonia (NH3) and hydrogen (H2) which produces hydrogen cyanide (HCN). Hydrolysis is the adding of water (H2O) to a molecule. In the case of HCN:

HCN + H2O yields formamide + H2O yields formic acid.

The hydrolysis of HCN is largely ignored in peer reviewed journals discussing amino acid synthesis. Actually, hydrolysis stops many chemical reaction pathways involving HCN and on to proteins. In fact, popular reports deceive people into thinking water is required whereas water is really an enemy of amino acid synthesis and polymerization.

Thaxton et al note some of the many hydrolysis reactions that dead end pathways to amino acids on page 50. These include: [see the article for structure e.g. bonding type and shape]

1. HCN to Cyanogen (C2N2) +H2O yields cyanoformamide (C2H2N2O) + H2O yields ethanediamide (C2H4N2O2)

2. HCN to dicyanamide (C2N3) + H2O yields cyanourea (C2H3N3O) + H2O yields Biuret (C2H5N3O2 )

3. HCN to Cyanamide (CH2N2) + H2O yields Urea (CO(NH2)2 = CH4N2O = NH2CONH2)

4. HCN to Cyanamide (CH2N2) + H2O yields carbodiimide (RN=C=NR.) + H2O yields Urea

[Note: The carbodiimide dicyclohexylcarbodiimide (C13H22N2 ) is used in peptide synthesis,"]

5. HCN + H2O yields formamide (CH3NO) + H2O yields formic acid (HCOOH = CH₂O₂)

6. HCN + H2O yields formamidine (CH4N2 ) + H2O yields formic acid

7. HCN to Cyanoacetylene (C3HN) + H2O yields Cyanoacetaldehide (C3H3NO).

You all- feel free to post anything concerning amino acids synthesis or to respond concerning any chemical reaction I posted above.

Life is not composed of any chemical mixture of proteins or amino acids simply because the proteins and amino acids are formed and directed by the DNA code. That said any researcher or scientist trying to form proteins without the code that creates the protein is like a rocket scientist creating a rocket with no fuel source or operate a standard computer with no OS

 

[esalla]

The beginnings of life does not have to be DNA surrounded by cellulose, etc. Research (I forget where) found that a viable form of "life" that can replicate is in the form of RNA surrounded and protected by lipids. Furthermore perhaps not all four, AGCT bases are necessary. Maybe (or maybe not) just two can work. Once a very simple system that can replicate arises, mutations and evolution will do the rest.

.

There is no example in either nature or science where code writes itself. You forget a lot it seems

 

[alang1216]

The beginnings of life does not have to be DNA surrounded by cellulose, etc. Research (I forget where) found that a viable form of "life" that can replicate is in the form of RNA surrounded and protected by lipids. Furthermore perhaps not all four, AGCT bases are necessary. Maybe (or maybe not) just two can work. Once a very simple system that can replicate arises, mutations and evolution will do the rest.

.

There is no example in either nature or science where code writes itself. You forget a lot it seems

Yet atoms and molecules can, under the right conditions, assemble themselves into a very specific order. They are called crystals.

 

[esalla]

The beginnings of life does not have to be DNA surrounded by cellulose, etc. Research (I forget where) found that a viable form of "life" that can replicate is in the form of RNA surrounded and protected by lipids. Furthermore perhaps not all four, AGCT bases are necessary. Maybe (or maybe not) just two can work. Once a very simple system that can replicate arises, mutations and evolution will do the rest.

.

There is no example in either nature or science where code writes itself. You forget a lot it seems

Yet atoms and molecules can, under the right conditions, assemble themselves into a very specific order. They are called crystals.

Actually what DNA does is to rearrange the natural electrical bonding of atoms so that the atoms do specific jobs at different times. See DNA is a code that not only arranges but changes and morphs the arrangement constantly, predictably and according to a time based plan. In nature the electrical bonds between atoms do not change and they could remain stable for billions of years. Funny how little PHD's like you refuse to admit that I kicked all of your collective asses

Play on

 

[Hollie]

I think you forgot the law of large numbers ...

I'm very familiar with the law of large numbers ... as a casino gambler I can say I'm quite intimate with the "gambler's fallacy" ...

That answers the wrong question ... we don't care how small the probability is that a more complex amino acid forms in any given year ... having enough years the probability of this amino acid to form just once approaches certainty ... thus "once is enough" ...

Consider the "one in a trillion" mutation that allows the individual to double their successful reproduction ... in so many generations this mutation will come to dominate the gene pool ... just one mutation occurring just once ...

Remember ... time we have in abundance ...

That is only true when you are talking about one step in any pathway where the second step is not dependent on the first step in a complex way. I was trying to help you realize that the RATE of chance formation of any one amino acid becomes more predictable the more trials are involved. And I asked how one polypeptide formed in Andromeda galaxy would get to meet another polypeptide formed in Milky Way 10,000 years later?

But, yes, once is enough for any one chemical reaction product - say one molecule of Cytosine for example. Remember, each specific chemical reaction product is dependent on the environment simulated in the experiment.

Again I ask how you get wet, dry (even with condensing agents), acid, alkaline, hot and cold in the same place at the same time? Sure, any one unlikely product (e.g amino acids not detected in Miller-Urey type experiments) can occur once in a long time in a specific environment - that you are correct about. However, you are missing the RATE of production of each required amino acid as well as SELECTION of said amino acid in a soup containing mostly Formic acid molecules.

An illustration is why you cannot get a tomato plant when you plant a carrot seed. You might get a different type of carrot but you will not get a tomato plant.

A more relevant example is the predicted chemical reaction product proportions in any specific chemical reaction in any given environment. Sure, any one product (one molecule) could end up in the results - but the larger the number of molecules involved, the more predictable the results are.

The predictability of any chemical reaction is due to the law of large numbers.

One more example: Chemical evolutionists admit that their synthesis results are dependent on the absence of free Oxygen. Again, that is really because of the law of large numbers. Any one atom can avoid the Oxygen atom - but the large number of atoms involved make that impossible.

Later I will post on one specific set of chemical reactions - that required for Cytosine synthesis.

The continuing problem faced by the supernatural creationists is that their religious literature ignores the very basic reality that there would be incalculable numbers of biochemical interactions occurring simultaneously over the course of billions of years.

The real question becomes why would the gods make biological life so complex when supernatural creation has no need for such complexity?

Have the gods played a cruel joke on supernatural creationists?

 

[Hollie]

The beginnings of life does not have to be DNA surrounded by cellulose, etc. Research (I forget where) found that a viable form of "life" that can replicate is in the form of RNA surrounded and protected by lipids. Furthermore perhaps not all four, AGCT bases are necessary. Maybe (or maybe not) just two can work. Once a very simple system that can replicate arises, mutations and evolution will do the rest.

.

There is no example in either nature or science where code writes itself. You forget a lot it seems

Yet atoms and molecules can, under the right conditions, assemble themselves into a very specific order. They are called crystals.

Actually what DNA does is to rearrange the natural electrical bonding of atoms so that the atoms do specific jobs at different times. See DNA is a code that not only arranges but changes and morphs the arrangement constantly, predictably and according to a time based plan. In nature the electrical bonds between atoms do not change and they could remain stable for billions of years. Funny how little PHD's like you refuse to admit that I kicked all of your collective asses

Play on

Actually, DNA clearly does not change and morph the arrangement constantly, predictably and according to a time based plan. External factors cause DNA to change and morph (mutations), in unpredictable ways.

 

[esalla]

I think you forgot the law of large numbers ...

I'm very familiar with the law of large numbers ... as a casino gambler I can say I'm quite intimate with the "gambler's fallacy" ...

That answers the wrong question ... we don't care how small the probability is that a more complex amino acid forms in any given year ... having enough years the probability of this amino acid to form just once approaches certainty ... thus "once is enough" ...

Consider the "one in a trillion" mutation that allows the individual to double their successful reproduction ... in so many generations this mutation will come to dominate the gene pool ... just one mutation occurring just once ...

Remember ... time we have in abundance ...

That is only true when you are talking about one step in any pathway where the second step is not dependent on the first step in a complex way. I was trying to help you realize that the RATE of chance formation of any one amino acid becomes more predictable the more trials are involved. And I asked how one polypeptide formed in Andromeda galaxy would get to meet another polypeptide formed in Milky Way 10,000 years later?

But, yes, once is enough for any one chemical reaction product - say one molecule of Cytosine for example. Remember, each specific chemical reaction product is dependent on the environment simulated in the experiment.

Again I ask how you get wet, dry (even with condensing agents), acid, alkaline, hot and cold in the same place at the same time? Sure, any one unlikely product (e.g amino acids not detected in Miller-Urey type experiments) can occur once in a long time in a specific environment - that you are correct about. However, you are missing the RATE of production of each required amino acid as well as SELECTION of said amino acid in a soup containing mostly Formic acid molecules.

An illustration is why you cannot get a tomato plant when you plant a carrot seed. You might get a different type of carrot but you will not get a tomato plant.

A more relevant example is the predicted chemical reaction product proportions in any specific chemical reaction in any given environment. Sure, any one product (one molecule) could end up in the results - but the larger the number of molecules involved, the more predictable the results are.

The predictability of any chemical reaction is due to the law of large numbers.

One more example: Chemical evolutionists admit that their synthesis results are dependent on the absence of free Oxygen. Again, that is really because of the law of large numbers. Any one atom can avoid the Oxygen atom - but the large number of atoms involved make that impossible.

Later I will post on one specific set of chemical reactions - that required for Cytosine synthesis.

The continuing problem faced by the supernatural creationists is that their religious literature ignores the very basic reality that there would be incalculable numbers of biochemical interactions occurring simultaneously over the course of billions of years.

The real question becomes why would the gods make illogical life so complex when supernatural creation has no need for such complexity?

Have the gods played a cruel joke on supernatural creationists?

There are no chemical reactions that are time based and that do different things with the same elements at different times like DNA does. You should also examine the fact that the same collection of elements can create an infinite and massively different assortment of life, yet non DNA based collections of elements always arrange in EXACTLY the same way. DNA also produces consciousness which can achieve further changes to the atoms such as leaving the solar system in the search for home. So keep shaking up your elements trying to from the most complicated code in the known universe. Really it's astounding how my atoms can be so bright and yours so dim, and all from the same stuff

 

[esalla]

The beginnings of life does not have to be DNA surrounded by cellulose, etc. Research (I forget where) found that a viable form of "life" that can replicate is in the form of RNA surrounded and protected by lipids. Furthermore perhaps not all four, AGCT bases are necessary. Maybe (or maybe not) just two can work. Once a very simple system that can replicate arises, mutations and evolution will do the rest.

.

There is no example in either nature or science where code writes itself. You forget a lot it seems

Yet atoms and molecules can, under the right conditions, assemble themselves into a very specific order. They are called crystals.

Actually what DNA does is to rearrange the natural electrical bonding of atoms so that the atoms do specific jobs at different times. See DNA is a code that not only arranges but changes and morphs the arrangement constantly, predictably and according to a time based plan. In nature the electrical bonds between atoms do not change and they could remain stable for billions of years. Funny how little PHD's like you refuse to admit that I kicked all of your collective asses

Play on

Actually, DNA clearly does not change and morph the arrangement constantly, predictably and according to a time based plan. External factors cause DNA to change and morph (mutations), in unpredictable ways.

Sure it does, you have heard of sperm and eggs, turning into embryos, then infants, then kids, then adults with no brain like you

You are my Doctoral toy for the day

Bill Gates dropped out doofy

 

[Likkmee]

Once you don't figure it all out CH2O is the end game.

 

[Hollie]

The beginnings of life does not have to be DNA surrounded by cellulose, etc. Research (I forget where) found that a viable form of "life" that can replicate is in the form of RNA surrounded and protected by lipids. Furthermore perhaps not all four, AGCT bases are necessary. Maybe (or maybe not) just two can work. Once a very simple system that can replicate arises, mutations and evolution will do the rest.

.

There is no example in either nature or science where code writes itself. You forget a lot it seems

Yet atoms and molecules can, under the right conditions, assemble themselves into a very specific order. They are called crystals.

Actually what DNA does is to rearrange the natural electrical bonding of atoms so that the atoms do specific jobs at different times. See DNA is a code that not only arranges but changes and morphs the arrangement constantly, predictably and according to a time based plan. In nature the electrical bonds between atoms do not change and they could remain stable for billions of years. Funny how little PHD's like you refuse to admit that I kicked all of your collective asses

Play on

Actually, DNA clearly does not change and morph the arrangement constantly, predictably and according to a time based plan. External factors cause DNA to change and morph (mutations), in unpredictable ways.

Sure it does, you have heard of sperm and eggs, turning into embryos, then infants, then kids, then adults with no brain like you

You are my Doctoral toy for the day

I can see you're angry so don't let the fact of DNA mutations utterly contradict your earlier, false claim.