Complex organic molecules discovered in infant star system

Complex organic molecules discovered in infant star system
Artist impression of the protoplanetary disk surrounding the young star MWC 480. ALMA has detected the complex organic molecule methyl cyanide in the outer reaches of the disk in the region where comets are believed to form. This is another indication that complex organic chemistry, and potentially the conditions necessary for life, is universal. Credit: B. Saxton (NRAO/AUI/NSF)

For the first time, astronomers have detected the presence of complex organic molecules, the building blocks of life, in a protoplanetary disk surrounding a young star, suggesting once again that the conditions that spawned our Earth and Sun are not unique in the universe.

This discovery, made with the Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA), reveals that the surrounding the million-year-old star MWC 480 is brimming with methyl cyanide (CH3CN), a complex carbon-based molecule. Both this molecule and its simpler cousin hydrogen cyanide (HCN) were found in the cold outer reaches of the star's newly formed disk, in a region that astronomers believe is analogous to our own Kuiper Belt—the realm of icy planetesimals and comets beyond Neptune.

Scientists understand that comets retain a pristine record of the early chemistry of our solar system from the period of planet formation. As the planets evolved, it's believed that comets and asteroids from the outer solar system seeded the young Earth with water and , helping set the stage for life to eventually emerge.

"Studies of comets and asteroids show that the solar nebula that spawned our Sun and planets was rich in water and complex organic compounds," noted Karin Öberg, an astronomer with the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge, Mass., and lead author on a paper published in the journal Nature. "We now have evidence that this same chemistry exists elsewhere in the universe, in regions that could form solar systems not unlike our own." This is particularly intriguing, Öberg notes, since the molecules found in MWC 480 are also found in similar concentrations in our own solar system's comets.

The star MWC 480, which is about twice the mass of the Sun, is located approximately 455 light-years away in the Taurus star-forming region. Its surrounding disk is in the very early stages of development - having recently coalesced out of a cold, dark nebula of dust and gas. Studies with ALMA and other telescopes have yet to detect any obvious signs of in it, though higher resolution observations may reveal structures similar to HL Tau, which is of a similar age.

Astronomers have known that cold, dark are very efficient factories of —including a group of molecules known as cyanides. Cyanides, and most especially methyl cyanide, are important because they contain carbon-nitrogen bonds, which are essential for the formation of amino acids, the foundation of proteins.

It has been unclear, however, if these same complex organic molecules commonly form and survive in the energetic environment of a newly forming solar system, where shocks and radiation can easily break chemical bonds.

With ALMA's remarkable sensitivity, the astronomers now know that these molecules not only survive, but thrive.

Importantly, the molecules ALMA detected are much more abundant than would be found in interstellar clouds. According to the researchers, there's enough methyl cyanide around MWC 480 to fill all of Earth's oceans. This tells astronomers that protoplanetary disks are very efficient at forming complex organic molecules and that they are able to form them on a relatively fast timescale.

This rapid formation is essential to outpace the forces that would otherwise break the molecules apart. Also, these molecules were detected in a relatively serene part of the disk, roughly 4.5 to 15 billion kilometers from the central star. Though incredibly distant by our solar system's standards, in MWC 480's scaled-up dimensions, this would be squarely in the comet-forming zone.

As this solar system continues to evolve, astronomers speculate, it's likely that the organic molecules safely locked away in comets and other icy bodies will be ferried to environments that would be more nurturing for life.

"From the study of exoplanets, we know our isn't unique in having rocky planets and an abundance of water," concluded Öberg. "Now we know we're not unique in organic chemistry. Once more, we have learned that we're not special. From a life in the universe point of view, this is great news."


Explore further

Swarms of Pluto-size objects kick-up dust around adolescent Sun-like star

More information: "The Cometary Composition of a Protoplanetary Disk as Revealed by Complex Cyanides" by K.I. Öberg et al., to appear in the journal Nature on 9 April 2015. DOI: 10.1038/nature14276
Journal information: Nature

Citation: Complex organic molecules discovered in infant star system (2015, April 8) retrieved 20 June 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2015-04-complex-molecules-infant-star.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
6182 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Apr 08, 2015
How do they determine this from so far away? Amazing stuff. It's too late for me, but I hope one of my kids pursues a field of study in the sciences.

Apr 08, 2015
How do they determine this from so far away?
With spectra of their light, where some wavelengths are missing..

Apr 08, 2015
What's interesting is that life forming compounds are there even before any planets...

Apr 08, 2015
What's interesting is that life forming compounds are there even before any planets...


Now you just have to run the probability gambit. Remember organic compounds are not yet living.

Apr 08, 2015
What's interesting is that life forming compounds are there even before any planets...


Now you just have to run the probability gambit. Remember organic compounds are not yet living.

But they WILL be... Given the right environmentals, of course...

Apr 08, 2015
And circumstance of course. Circumstance of just the right timing and placing and mixture and such.

Apr 08, 2015
What's interesting is that life forming compounds are there even before any planets...


Now you just have to run the probability gambit. Remember organic compounds are not yet living.

But they WILL be... Given the right environmentals, of course...[/q

Which did happen here on earth, and undoubtedly it has happened elsewhere

Apr 08, 2015
@verkle well it all depends how far you want to go back in the chain of events. Don't forget that bilogists are split 3 ways on this; some say it's deterministic, some say it's chance while others say it's a mixture of both. If one believes in a divine process (I don't) then we wouldn't have control or be able to predict anyway. QM seems to suggest that we cannot bank on certianty and fundamentally appears to be 'random'. @Whydening Gyre is not claimimg anything any true/false but simply refers to chemicals that without which life, as we know it' would not even get a 'kick start'. Least, that's how I view it. (sorry Whydening Gyre if I have misinterpreted your word '...interesting...'). As the article suggests, if a SS is not unique then other properties may not be either.

Apr 09, 2015
The creation of life is a natural part of the planet formation process, it must be.

Apr 09, 2015
The term "organic molecule" used in this context is awkward and seems to need revision.

Apr 09, 2015
@verkle I think it's a bit daft to ask for 'proof' of something that is so far back. We can only use what knowledge we have about physics/chem reactions and by induction, that they are the same out there as they are here. Contemporary research/articles still debate on whether life is a result of deterministic or chance, there is NO PROOF to tip the balance one way or the other (yet). PS de Laplace suggested that with sufficient knowledge one could work backwards and determine what happened but then that implies all is deterministic and nothing is random. JC Maxwell implied otherwise. Such people have their reasons and the debate continues..but where does that leave a layman like me? 'PROOF' of anything can be relative and sometimes we can't even 'prove' what happened a couple of days ago (courts) or about Human/Neanderthal invasions let alone going back mil/bil of years. I recon we are doing the best we can with what we've got and the 'proof' you seek is a bonus.

Apr 09, 2015
Mimath,
No apologies necessary. I used "interesting" instead of "curiousity worthy of further investigation"...
One implication is that these precursing compounds are a deeply integral (symbiotic?) part of an entire planet. How they might interact with other adjacent molecules in the total collection of all the other compounds in a lump of stuff collected from a protoplanetary disc is, well, "worthy of further investigation"...:-)
Verkle,
I think its just a matter of time before we begin to understand the depth of all those interactions. It's a combination of all the compounds that makes life, not the actual compounds themselves... It's kind of an "add, spin, add, spin" process that ends up producing "patterns" that we have evolved to see and process..
And... Fine Structured Constant's comment are worthy of further contemplation...

Apr 09, 2015
@Mimath, FineStructure,Whydening: From Mimath224
"We can only use what knowledge we have about physics/chem reactions and by induction, that they are the same out there as they are here"
Since the reactions are the same we must also then conclude that life arising spontaneously from non-living elements is simply not going to happen.
Here are some of the most serious obstacles from physics, chemistry, statistics and information theory that need to be overcome:
1. For each random chemical / biological reaction, energy is required. The second law of thermodynamics rules out an infinite supply to fund those random reactions.
2. In biology the amino acid chains are made up of left-handed isomers only. The sugars consist of RH isomers only.
3. Statistically, the chances of anything useful forming randomly is vanishingly small.
4. Even when you have all the ingredients together, you still need to kick of the process of life in the right order.The dead does not rise.Period.


Apr 09, 2015
@FineStructure
If we speculate that all those "life-precursor" compounds out there in utterly VAST quanitites actually got together to form the life we see here in so many different forms, but haven't quite got round to figuring out how it happened - just wait a while...


You are of course ignoring that Pasteur has already shown that life only arises from life.

You are also brushing aside the analysis done by Hoyle and Wickramasinghe that showed how impossible it is that life can arise spontaneously from non-living materials.

Consider the common-sense we've gained from life itself: No one has ever observed something that had just died ever rise again into life. We know from 6k years of observations that once it's dead it stays dead.

So by what magic that refutes the laws of science we've discovered do you wish that somehow, somewhere in the universe life is going to arise from the dead?

Such thinking just doesn't gel. It's highly contradictory.

Apr 09, 2015
Baruch
Since the reactions are the same we must also then conclude that life arising spontaneously from non-living elements is simply not going to happen.

You speak as if it is a process that occurs overnight.
Here are some of the most serious obstacles from physics, chemistry, statistics and information theory that need to be overcome:
1. For each random chemical / biological reaction, energy is required. The second law of thermodynamics rules out an infinite supply to fund those random reactions.

You are forgetting that energy is ALSO released by those reactions (almost) equal to the energy taken.
2. In biology the amino acid chains are made up of left-handed isomers only. The sugars consist of RH isomers only.

Ever hear the saying "opposites attract?

(cont.)

Apr 09, 2015
to continue;

3. Statistically, the chances of anything useful forming randomly is vanishingly small.

when looking at a compound individually, not as a collective of a much larger set.
4. Even when you have all the ingredients together, you still need to kick of the process of life in the right order.

What do you think all that heat, magnetism and electricity is all about? Statistically, there is so much of it out in our Universe, you could almost say it couldn't NOT happen...
The dead does not rise. Period.

Nothing is ever really dead (at atomic or even molecular level), just MOSTLY dead (thereby completing the '2nd Law of Thermodynamics" circle).


Apr 10, 2015
Man is unique in that it is created in the image and likeness of God, which induces strong envy and hatred of the father of lies.

Researchers can find organic molecules everywhere in cosmic space, but must unswer what is the connection with life? In fact nothing can self assemble by itself from its bilding blocks. It is needed an idea, design and technology for the use of energy and matter in specific way and quantity developed by the intellect by which to achieve this goal.

When we consider all living organisms on earth understand God's attention to detail and the love with which He created them.

Apr 10, 2015
Man is unique in that it is created in the image and likeness of God

Looking at the state of humanity (physically and psychologically) throughout the ages: That is one FUGLY god you believe in. Switching to bowing and scraping before Satan would be quite a move upward.

Apr 10, 2015
By the way how could archeologies not to find to this days even one whole preserved sceleton of something than is supposed to be primordial human like fictional neandertals for example. They have only compilation of bones belonging to different animals of diferentr ages, which is assembled in the some sculpture workshop to resemble something similar to their perceptions of prehistoric man. We have the whole sceletons of many other species, but not of prehistoric man. It is strage at first sight. But if some man knows the psychological attitudes in scientific communities and yeast which its representatives receive in universities, many answers become clear. But the history of science is full of examples of serious misconceptions that have always been supported by the majority. Whether because the convenience or because the stupidity the result is th esame - darkness in mind.

Apr 10, 2015
By the way how could archeologies not to find to this days even one whole preserved sceleton of something than is supposed to be primordial human like fictional neandertals for example. They have only compilation of bones belonging to different animals of diferentr ages, which is assembled in the some sculpture workshop to resemble something similar to their perceptions of prehistoric man. We have the whole sceletons of many other species, but not of prehistoric man. It is strage at first sight. But if some man knows the psychological attitudes in scientific communities and yeast which its representatives receive in universities, many answers become clear. But the history of science is full of examples of serious misconceptions that have always been supported by the majority. Whether because the convenience or because the stupidity the result is th esame - darkness in mind.

Sorry, Viko, but do you even have the first clue how un-informed this statement sounds?

Apr 10, 2015
Xenu put it there for us.

I got the info from John Revolta.

Apr 10, 2015
Xenu put it there for us.

I got the info from John Revolta.
Snort ptui. Why do you insist on spitting all over these threads?
Man is unique in that it is created in the image and likeness of God, which induces strong envy and hatred of the father of lies
Hmmm... the first thing we will notice about jesus is that he is always portrayed as a caucasian. But the book tells us that he was a sephardic jew. Sephardic jews have black curly hair and beards.

Jesus would have looked more like this.
https://www.youtu...fFrh99k8

-Your religion begins with a lie and continues along those lines.

Apr 10, 2015
We have the whole sceletons of many other species, but not of prehistoric man
And similarly, you xians are encouraged to perpetuate lies in defense of your religion.

Dozens of complete skeletons have been found. Here is one:
http://en.citizen...m08z.jpg

Apr 10, 2015
Okay I want all of you religious folk to give me Absolute Truth.

Start now. Do not forget to provide scientific references, not the words or opinions of others.

Apr 10, 2015
Okay I want all of you religious folk to give me Absolute Truth.

Start now. Do not forget to provide scientific references, not the words or opinions of others.

Technically, gkam, those ARE the words or opinions of others...
And therein lies the rub...

Apr 10, 2015
@viko -
We have the whole sceletons of many other species, but not of prehistoric man.
And we who visit this forum have a reasonable expectation that reasoned discussion can take place; but not, unfortunately with you.

Since you are, quite clearly, insane.

Insane is such a strong word... How bout - "pixilated"?
:-)

Apr 11, 2015
Hi Mimath,

You can go back in some supposed chain of events as far as you want to. ... Point is that none of this has ever been observed. ...


And yet if it hadn't once happen, life wouldn't have started and we wouldn't be here. Nothing "speculative" about that. Such deduction is rightly part of real science.

Apr 11, 2015
@viko. Er...just out of interest where do you place yourself, Can't know frequentist or Don't know Bayesian?

Apr 12, 2015
@FineStructureConstant

When a person has no arguments in its favor but is too proud to admit that it is wrong and very disrespectful to the person with different opinion, usualy started personal attacks which indicates weakness in his character and in fact admit capitulation. It is simple.

Maybe you will give an example for a complex physical system that was self assembled so you do not use words emptied of content. You have a chance to make a breakthrough in science and eventually win the Nobel Prize. Although these days is strongly devalued still is a some criterion for contribution to the scientific community.

Apr 12, 2015
"Sorry, Viko, but do you even have the first clue how un-informed this statement sounds?"

It is interesting do date all bones of such compilation that resembling the fictional human ansestor separately to check that all is natural.

Apr 12, 2015
@viko
'...of something than is supposed to be primordial human like fictional neandertals for example. They have only compilation of bones belonging to different animals of diferentr ages...'

If I remember correctly in 1860's in France adult and infant skeletons were unearthed during some construction program and yet others found in the middle east (can't remember where though perhaps FineStructureConstant may have more info)

Apr 12, 2015
And circumstance of course. Circumstance of just the right timing and placing and mixture and such.
Given millions of star systems, it's a statistical certainty.

@FineStructure, nice analysis.

Apr 12, 2015
Here are some of the most serious obstacles from physics, chemistry, statistics and information theory that need to be overcome:
1. For each random chemical / biological reaction, energy is required. The second law of thermodynamics rules out an infinite supply to fund those random reactions.
The Sun. Maybe you forgot.

2. In biology the amino acid chains are made up of left-handed isomers only. The sugars consist of RH isomers only.
Ummm, dextrose. Maybe you forgot that too.

3. Statistically, the chances of anything useful forming randomly is vanishingly small.
Ummm, no. On an individual reaction basis, the chances of anything useful forming is vanishingly small; on a statistical basis, however, it's a certainty. See Urey et alii.

4. Even when you have all the ingredients together, you still need to kick of the process of life in the right order.
Which is, as pointed out, a statistical certainty.

Apr 12, 2015
@Baruch:
You are of course ignoring that Pasteur has already shown that life only arises from life.

He showed nothing of the kind.

Link and quote if you claim differently. Good luck with that.

@antialias:
Man is unique in that it is created in the image and likeness of God
Looking at the state of humanity (physically and psychologically) throughout the ages: That is one FUGLY god you believe in. Switching to bowing and scraping before Satan would be quite a move upward.
Not to mention, jealousy, one of the ugliest human emotions, is explicitly attributed to this supposed icon of goodness in the Ten Commandments. I have a great deal of trouble calling a "jealous god" anything but evil.

Apr 12, 2015
@viko -
Maybe you will give an example for a complex physical system that was self assembled
- I can't; and I don't think anybody else has, either.
Actually, quiche. :D

You can make a quiche with Bisquick where you mix all the ingredients together, put it in a pie tin, and it comes out with a crust and a filling. Trivial but only one example is needed to disprove the assertion.

Apr 12, 2015
@FineStructureConstant

Researchers are found many completed skeletons of animals, but none of the hypothetical prehistoric man. Very strange. There are skeletons of dinosaurs in almost full completion, which according to the theory precede human, but we do not have such of prehistoric man. Only from monkeys that always been monkeys.

"Are we to take your statements as "fact" or "different opinion"? - if the first, it's plain wrong, if the second, it should be labelled as such."

You do not have to believe me, but it is desirable to consider the contradictions in the imposed theories and check for yourself the facts with attention to details.

Apr 12, 2015
Amusingly, discovery of complex organic molecules around nascent solar systems tends to support Wickramasinghe and Hoyle's panspermia conjecture.

As far as self-assembly goes, there are numerous ongoing experiments that use self-assembling polymer nanogels, for example this one: http://onlinelibr...abstract which describes tunable polymer gels and the mechanisms used to tune them for different desired characteristics. That's not just self-assembly, it's controllable self-assembly. Claiming nothing self-assembles is just silliness.

Added on edit: Sorry, viko, I put you on ignore long ago and have no intention of reviewing that decision ever. You might as well not bother. We're here to talk about science, not mythology.

Apr 12, 2015
Just a quick further comment on Pasteur: he showed that life doesn't spontaneously arise from rotten meat or garbage cans. He didn't categorically prove that life can't spontaneously arise, which is what Baruch claimed. So, Baruch, I expect you to show where Pasteur categorically proved life cannot spontaneously arise, which since he didn't know much chemistry is impossible. Like I said, good luck with that.

Apr 12, 2015
Methyl Cyanide, lol good luck forming life with that. This is such a silly article, the only thing making it organic is the methyl within it. But good luck getting it to do anything in the next forever.

Apr 12, 2015
@ viko
Maybe you will give an example for a complex physical system
Why would he bother? You dropped a lie about 'no complete prehistoric skeletons' and I gave you a few of many examples.

But you ignored it, like any religionist who ignores what he doesn't like. And you will continue to repeat that lie whenever you see fit, won't you?

Apr 12, 2015
It is interesting do date all bones of such compilation that resembling the fictional human [ancestor] separately to check that all is natural.
Listen to this nonsense. A group of bones are found in situ, and you want every single bone dated to make sure those evil scientists aren't trying to pull a fast one? Really, we've come just a little ways from Cardiff Giant, haven't we? What makes you think that scientists wouldn't just fake all of the dating results? That would be your next line of defense, I suppose. But aren't you among the YEC bunch who rejects radiocarbon dating in the first place, since it contradicts the 6000 year age of Earth? I'm surprised to see you strike out on this path.
.
.

Apr 12, 2015
Maybe you will give an example for a complex physical system that was self assembled
You can make a quiche with Bisquick where you mix all the ingredients together, put it in a pie tin, and it comes out with a crust and a filling. Trivial but only one example is needed to disprove the assertion.
Actually, you can also put meteoric amino acids in a chamber and subject it to a prompt overpressure of 10-15,000 atmospheres, mimicking a comet strike, and come out with peptides synthesized on the other end. A PhD named Jennifer Blank showed this back in 2012, those results being released at the American Chemical Society meeting that year. Maybe that and a serendipitous lightning strike in the right tide pool at the right time is what it takes, and we just haven't struck on exactly the right combination to match the trillions of chances nature needed for abiogenesis. It's disingenuous to assert it's not possible just because we haven't chanced upon the exact solution yet.

Apr 12, 2015
The 'building blocks of life', is an utterly facile cliché designed to appeal to the non thinking masses who think the Universe is like Star Trek. Not long ago, amino acids were the 'building blocks of life', now simple molecules with CN bonds are the 'building blocks of life' why? because they are the building blocks of amino acids which are the 'building blocks of life'. If we follow this logic then atomic hydrogen which is not rare in the Universe, is in fact also the 'building blocks of life' because it is the building blocks of C and N which are the building blocks of CN molecules which are the building blocks of of amino acids which are the building blocks that DNA uses to build stuff. I suppose that H can be similarly traced to being the building blocks for RNA and DNA as well. Holy moly batman, the Universe is chock a block with the building blocks of life. Why stop there, the Universe is full of the building blocks of iPhones too. Enough with 'the building blocks of life.

Apr 12, 2015
Maybe you will give an example for a complex physical system that was self assembled
Actually, you can also put meteoric amino acids in a chamber and subject it to a prompt overpressure of 10-15,000 atmospheres, mimicking a comet strike, and come out with peptides synthesized on the other end.
I heard about this but had forgotten it. Good example! Urey et al (which I have already cited) is another, and much older, example.

Maybe that and a serendipitous lightning strike in the right tide pool at the right time is what it takes, and we just haven't struck on exactly the right combination to match the trillions of chances nature needed for abiogenesis. It's disingenuous to assert it's not possible just because we haven't chanced upon the exact solution yet.
Agreed. The fact we've gotten as far as we have toward synthesizing life is quite remarkable, actually, and it's an excellent reason to continue trying. After all, it could have failed long before now.

Apr 12, 2015
The 'building blocks of life', is an utterly facile cliché designed to appeal to the non thinking masses who think the Universe is like Star Trek.
Some blocks are big, some are little. Some blocks are made of other blocks. That's the nature of chemistry.

We've synthesized quite a few of them from non-living materials and processes, and we haven't found any we can't do that with yet.

I'm fine with "building blocks of life." And if it's a cliche, it's because it's true, like all cliches are (otherwise, they wouldn't be cliches).

What's your beef? Religious?

Apr 12, 2015
someone11235813 uttered
Why stop there, the Universe is full of the building blocks of iPhones too. Enough with 'the building blocks of life
Indeed & more complex arrangements are easily formed eg DNA bases, easiest is Guanine from Formamide re early earth's atmosphere & subsequently other DNA bases too.

What this goes to show, is all life we have observed thus far made from the most common components found scattered all over.

Underlying point, we observe process of 'self-assembly' & diversity CONSTANTLY, ie Its Chemistry & subject to rules (physics) ie bonding, Activation energy, thus permutations

Question arises then

"If one wanted to arrive at the essential truth of the nature of existence & in terms of if there were a supreme being (which we could contact), how would one determine that being's attributes?"

I'd start with putting all claims of men in the basket of "prove it" because its clear humans do craft unprovable claims gaining Authority...

cont

Apr 13, 2015
A person without a religion is like a fish without a bicycle.

Apr 13, 2015
Without the yeast of speculation, and imagination, and "what if", science would have got precisely nowhere, beyond tabulation of measurements and observations.

On a historical note: This is what Babylonian science was like. Measuring and tabulation is an exact science. One can argue that what we do in science is 'inexact'.

E.g. if the Babylonians had counted the number of grains in one silo they could not determine how many were in two such silos without counting the grains in the other one. Current science would just multiply by two and consider the possible variation as an acceptable source of error

It is easy to argue that 'our' way of doing science is a lot more powerfull with a rather small tradeoff in inexactitude (which can even be made arbitrarily small by repeated measurement). Most notably it gives us the power to make predictions.

Apr 13, 2015
Agreed. The fact we've gotten as far as we have toward synthesizing life is quite remarkable, actually, and it's an excellent reason to continue trying. After all, it could have failed long before now.

The notion that 'organic' doesn't equate to 'life' has already been mentioned ('organic molecule' just means "contains at least one carbon atom" - nothing more)

At this point we can also not exclude the other possibility: that life could be sustained without carbon atoms (i.e. based on 'inorganic' molecules)...so I think the "building blocks of life" idea is potentially an overly restrictive view.

Apr 13, 2015
Not so: no measurement will ever be exact, be it with a ruler or micrometer or whatever

I was talking in terms of Babylonian science (which is limited to counting stuff and writing down the results). They were also very much in the "deterministic universe" camp. Once you get to quantum mechanics shenannigans things look different.
(Small niggle: The problem with inexactitude due to using a ruler is not a problem of the ruler. It is the problem of defining something like 'length'. I.e. the source of the problem is not the measurement, but the mental process that poses 'length' as an absolute property of... anything).

The point here is to see that predictive power without measuring every occurrence (e.g. by positing that one hydrogen atom is interchangeable with any other) introduces potential error.
This does NOT mean that making hypotheses/theories is impossible, as we are well able to put an upper limit of how large such errors may be.

Apr 13, 2015
@antialias_physorg although I do agree that OB maths is much like you say, sometimes similar to ancient Egyptian, they did apparently, indulge in linear and other equations. (ref. J. Friberg). Not intend to affect your post, just my little imput that's all, Ha!

Apr 13, 2015
Mimath224 offered
@antialias_physorg although I do agree that OB maths is much like you say, sometimes similar to ancient Egyptian, they did apparently, indulge in linear and other equations. (ref. J. Friberg). Not intend to affect your post, just my little imput that's all, Ha!
Indeed, I recall watching a tv documentary on Australian ABC showing the Babylonians could count to 1023 with 10 digits and knuckles thus exploiting binary as 2^10-1 = 1023.

So if they could have extended that to more joints per finger and continued the understanding of binary in terms of base 2 or maybe even base 4 with immense increase in dexterity per finger & independent, the world could have been very different.

Why you may ask did they have the need to use fingers in binary to count to 1023, well for the most officious requirements of the age, land tax - ugh !

Not sure however, how accurate the doco was or was it tailend of an odd lucid dream subsequent to supplement dosing ;-)

Apr 13, 2015
Ren82 proves he doesnt understand chemistry with this ignorance[q/]I still think that organic molecules on which are based more complex biological formations are quite fragile and do not tolerate high temperatures, pressures or ultraviolet radiation Thinking without training is sheer idiocy & especially so since u have shown ZERO education in advanced chemistry or physics or even basic probability & statistics, u haven't obviously been exposed to laboratory experiments & analysis methodologies :-(

Ren82 asked
What happens if there is high temperature and pressure in the impact zone?
Go to uni & get an education in material processing as a start to shockwave combustion chemistry please !

Ren82 claimed with immense ignorance of essential combustion chemistry
Under such conditions you can synthesize diamonds but not organic molecules
Ren82 implies he is some sort of self-styled teacher
Try again with some more realistic example
Get Education PLS !

Apr 13, 2015
On reflection I advise Ren82 of his education deficiencies when he claims
Under such conditions you can synthesize diamonds but not organic molecules
Wrong. Such naive question proves overhwlemingly u have NO education in even basic physics of chemical combustion.

When there is an 'impact event' there is a shockwave of many types depending on energy, materials, specific heat, density, particulate velocities etc !!!!

Then when you can appreciate some complexity in those situations you realise there is NO determinism, there are layers of shockwaves where stable molecules border shockwave horizons and thus can survive and based AGAIN upon hysteresis re "Activation Energy" then you can see easily, if you have worked through thermodynamic problems, that complex organic molecules are produced easily & do survive diverse striations through those shockwave horizons.

This is advanced branch of the study of pyrotechnics, I'm sorry you blurt claims without education !

Apr 13, 2015
@ren82
Sry dialog box skipped necessary bb code.

Ren82 proves he doesn't understand chemistry with this ignorance
I still think that organic molecules on which are based more complex biological formations are quite fragile and do not tolerate high temperatures, pressures or ultraviolet radiation
Guessing without training is uttter IDIOCY & especially so since u show ZERO education in advanced chemistry or physics or even basic probability & statistics, u haven't obviously been exposed to laboratory experiments & analysis methodologies :-(

Ren82,
TRY to understand, there are immense VERY complex chemistries of BASIC interactions, universe seems SET to "self-assemble" & so often ie ALL the time !

Think about your impotent creator you claim set rules - for primitive superstitious people only !

A creator doesn't NEED to DO things for a human WHIM, he/she/it would logically craft universe & basic rules of physics -> chemistry to self-assemble at the very START !

Apr 14, 2015
Ren82 claimed
As usual from you a lot of emotions and little specifics and meaning
Observing your idle claims without benefit of an education is your emotional problem, been specific with you many times.

Self assembly occurs ALL the time, the RULES are BUILT-IN, 100% reliable + a probabilistic factor.

Eg. H2 & O2 combine to form H2O which has a probabilistic pK one side of which is pH, this is an equilibrium re H+ & OH- & always acts the same, there is no need for any god to step in & fiddle with Physics to make anything particular happen - evidence shows self assembly (chemistry) happens all the time & at complexities we are starting to understand

Same (chemical bonding) rules apply to generating DNA bases, ie Formamide -> Guanine etc & others follow, again self assembled & "Activation Energy" etc

Sadly you have zero training & negligible understanding of chemistry & in conjunction with probability & statistics to make much sense of it, taking years !

cont

Apr 14, 2015
Ren82 claimed
It is boring for a person to read a bunch of meaningless tirades
Which particular tirade, my informing you of technical aspects you STILL cannot understand which most high school students are tutored in ?

OR

questions I ask you about the deity you imply "did things" to bring all life into existence, with all the inherent brutality of nature which is:-

1. Biochemistry, based on chemistry, based on physics
2. Energy exchange, ie in Nature "Eat & be Eaten", obviously happens ALL the time.

Nothing in the clear direct observations of Nature - chemistry & physics is consistent with a claimed LOVING god that favours humans over all other life yet PUNISHES all life because of the setup in a garden of ONE girl allowed to be manipulated by a devil which your god KNEW would happen.

How is that dream like idea possibly valid, logic is flawed & PROVES your god is a devil ?

The boring part is your immense blind emotional attachment to that notion !

cont

Apr 14, 2015
Ren82 claimed
Just explain briefly as an expert of organic chemistry which complex organic molecules can expect to be synthesized in considered conditions
I never claimed to be an expert in organic chemistry.

I've ALREADY shown you essential building blocks of all life's DNA/RNA (Guanine, Cytosine, Adenine, Thymine, Uracil) are easily generated always from N2, O2, H2 & C, all it takes is presence, activation energy etc.

Have you NEVER generated Hydrogen from say sodium hydroxide and aluminium, collected it in a balloon, burned it or into a flask and lit it - to see water vapour condense ?

If you can possibly accept that the building blocks of which all life is made and that starts with water are easily and routinely generated again and again, Eg lightning into water & soil etc - Then tell us Ren82, just where this self-assembly HAS to STOP so your god can at some point decide to use those components and HAS to step in to finish them off to make life ?

cont

Apr 14, 2015
Ren82 claimed
You can repeat a hundred times in the morning, noon and the night that complex physical systems are self organized and self assembled by random events without idea, design and technology and to live in this fictional reality
Really ?

Are you claiming H2 & O2 do NOT self-assemble into H2O ie that your god did it only once at the beginning as per Moses's claims or your god HAS to do it each & every time we burn H2 so its that god by virtue of rules of bonding, activation energy that does it ALL the time each time we separate & re-combine these ?

Ren82, what do you think happens each time hydrogen is combined with oxygen to produce water - do you claim this is NOT self assembly Eg from rules set down long ago & its an illusion of some sort ?

Can you make the same claim with ANY Evidence for the DNA/RNA bases ?

Is it therefore only "fictional reality" & they don't happen ?

Why do you expect me to answer questions but you cannot answer mine ?

cont

Apr 14, 2015
Ren82 claimed
I can assure you that there is no sense in this, but if you like i can not help you
No.
You cannot assure me there is no sense to self-assembly !

It happens all the time, all chemistry is based upon it, whether observed in Nature as shown re water & others, salt dissolves in water, minerals in water have solubility constants, mineral chemical combinations, iron oxides etc etc

How can you possibly assure anyone there is NO sense in all immense PROOF of self assembly ?

The problem you have Ren82, is you make uneducated claims and CANNOT appreciate the immense emotional hurdle you have that all Moses did was make an unsupportable claim which gave him Authority & Status. Humans are adept at manipulating others for power, wealth & influence !

So Ren82, start with water, and self assembly of DNA/RNA bases, you MUST see this happens.

Where does that self-assembly stop so those bases SHOULD not combine into patterns and a god HAS to step in & do it ?

Apr 14, 2015
@Ren82
Your absence of an education in Physics & Chemistry hasnt helped you understand complexity, so start with this, please read about Formamide a self-assembled molecule which can go on to produce Guanine the details are here along with the references. You can DO this in your lab if you wanted to !!!

http://en.wikiped...ormamide

AND then look down the page see this:-

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formamide#RNA_base_creation

Clearly, unequivocally, definitively self-assembly happens easily, often and makes a component for us.

The rest are obviously combinations & immense permutations - it is NOT random, the rules of bonding are NOT random, they are very precise indeed, it is the permutations offered in conjunction with the principle of Activation Energy which creates stable compounds depending on their environment.

ie. Natural Selection.

Also NOT random one bit, complex extensions of rules of self-assembly.

Determinism (a god) is over, probabilism is king !

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more