There was a revealing article recently on ScienceDaily concerning a novel approach to determining how life originated. Up until now most scientists have been trying to chemically synthesize the organic compounds integral to the structures of life in hopes of determining how life might have originated through natural processes. To say the least this has been an abysmal failure. There is in fact no evidence that living organisms originated through unguided natural processes. One of the reasons it has been a failure is because scientists have attempted to reconstruct the chemical structures of life, while ignoring the fact that life at its core is an information processing system – something I have been pointing out for years. Now it seems that some scientists are finally coming to the same conclusion:
Now, a novel approach to the question of life’s origin, proposed by two Arizona State University scientists, attempts to dramatically redefine the problem. The researchers — Paul Davies, an ASU Regents’ Professor and director of the Beyond Center for Fundamental Concepts in Science, and Sara Walker, a NASA post-doctoral fellow at the Beyond Center — published their theory in the Dec. 12 issue of the Royal Society journal Interface.
In a nutshell, the authors shift attention from the “hardware” — the chemical basis of life — to the “software” — its information content. To use a computer analogy, chemistry explains the material substance of the machine, but it won’t function without a program and data. Davies and Walker suggest that the crucial distinction between non-life and life is the way that living organisms manage the information flowing through the system.
I for one applaud this change of strategy because at least it acknowledges the right problem. That being said, I am certain they will face the same frustrations those focused on the chemical origin of life have because information systems simply can’t originate apart from the intention of a mind.
Perhaps it will take a few more decades of failure for science to realize this obvious fact.
Give to the Salvation Army
Water is the universal solvent, it is the only substance on earth that is liquid at the temperatures we find on this planet. And recently it has been revealed that water is not merely a passive solvent in biological systems, but is capable of complex range of behaviours, and peculiar states which participate in living processes in both essential and fundamental ways.
The most obvious example reveals itself in the globular proteins of the cytoplasm. These proteins carry out functions by movement, and it has been a great mystery until now, how they utilize energy, from where the energy is supplied, how it is employed, and by what mechanisms.
It turns out the mechanisms are in the water.
When you look at the interior of the cell and determine that the exposed surfaces of the various membranes, and proteins, are almost exclusively hydrophillic surfaces, that is water loving surfaces. The interesting thing is that water structures itself on hydrophillic surfaces, and this results in two distinct regions, a crystalline negatively charged zone, and a non crystalline positively charged zone just beyond it. Together they form The Water Battery of living systems. It is now clear that the energy required by proteins to function, and most cellular mechanisms of action is supplied by the energy stored in the water itself.
There are two fundamental ways of effecting the size, and replenishing the water battery, and they both involve the utilization of ubiquitous environmental energies. The first is negative charge from the Oschman Earthing Principle, and the second is Infrared Radiant Energy from the environment. There is nothing more fundamental to life as these energy flows, and water. It is also highly likely that this was the essential incipient prebiotic condition. Mitochondrial negative charge energy output, being ancillary and supplemental to life processes, itself only aiding the regeneration of the water battery.
The globular proteins of the cytoplasm when at rest, are folded in such a way that the hydrophobic segments are buried deep inside, with only the hydrophilic peptides exposed to hydration. When one of these proteins unfolds, the hydrophobic sequences reach out into the positively charged non crystalline regions and complete the electric circuit who’s result is a clean fuel cell type of reaction. This provides electric current, and motion to the protein, to carry on its mechanical activities.
Cell death is associated with a ubiquity of unfolded proteins, which means the water has become utterly devoid of structure, and therefore energy, dead! Too many unfolded proteins can also be the cause of cell death by simply using up all the energy stored in the water battery. Its not entirely unlike short circuiting in the more familiar electric circuits we possess. The overstimulation of heat stress proteins are the most obvious example, of creating excess unfolded proteins and ultimately cell death.
Biochemistry is the integral behaviour of organic molecules and water. The aqueous environment accounts for the coherence and functioning of living systems, and without due consideration to the function and behaviour of water it makes no sense. An organic molecule without a properly functioning field of water has no life, and never will!
[...] The Programming of Life. [...]
Hey Robert. I agree, the elegant properties of matter and laws of physics and how they work together in harmony to sustain life is amazing and is not something to be expected from a lack of design.
and what has god (or some supernatural mind as your like to refer to) to do with all this? You missed the science here buddy. Isn’t it wonderful that science has the capacity to question itself, re-discover, re-examine, re-define and add to its knowledge rather that just relying on some old scripts as the foundation to life, the universe and everything else.
Betta,
I agree, it’s just if we can figure out how many degrees of free movement we actually have. We chose our ideas to become who we are, but thought is not billiard balls. We can go where we need to go.
thebigboog
Yes but we keep running into the same truths. Much less techy people have done far more with much less, and came to the same conclusions science is only now reaching. It is scary! Look up Spinoza, read his Ethics. He knew back in the mid 1600s that there was linear and non linear time! Even with the light of modern science most people have no idea!
and in more sad news
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121214/07565721387/uss-public-domain-class-2013.shtml?threaded=true
Thanks to corporate interests the U.S. plutocracy is not going to allow anything into the public domain this year either.