Scientists almost created life in a lab?!

by abiather 26 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • abiather
    abiather

    The scientists at the Scripps Research Institute, California, have almost succeeded in CREATING the world's first living organism with artificial DNA!

     

    http://discovermagazine.com/2015/jan-feb/43-first-organism-with-artificial-dna

    http://www.scripps.edu/news/press/2014/20140507romesberg.html

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/07/living-organism-artificial-dna_n_5283095.html?ir=India

    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v509/n7500/full/nature13314.html

     

     

    For billions of years since its emergence on the planet, the entire history of life has been written with just four letters: sub-units of DNA labelled A, T, C and G. Now for the first time, scientists have added two foreign building blocks, bits of synthetic DNA manipulated in the lab, to a cell. By adding extra letters, scientists have coaxed living cells to store extra genetic information. This by itself does not `solve' or unlock the ultimate riddle of life. But it opens mind-boggling opportunities: they may present to us completely man-made cells in the near future, thus would prove beyond any doubt that AN ORGANIZER was needed for the emergence of life in the first place, just like these scientists are ORGANIZERS of the doctored life!

  • cantleave
  • cantleave
    cantleave
    It does  NOT prove that an organizer is required it just shows that life is what chemistry does,
  • prologos
    prologos

    Yeah, but it proves that Chemistry is a well organised Discipline, counting on well organized first natural laws, and we are piggybacking on events that worked so well without us for so long;

     perhaps to paraphrase I. Newton, "we are standing on the shoulders of a [hidden] giant"?

    Where would we stand without it?

  • cantleave
    cantleave

    Those natural laws are not a proof of intelligent design, out of chaos come order.  Here's an Interesting summary of some surprising research on oscillations.............

    http://news.wustl.edu/news/Pages/7112.aspx

    Police keep order. That’s why, for example, they issue tickets for “disturbing the peace.” Thus the only logical conclusion to Daley’s famous quote above — other than dismissing it as the result of his famously tangled tongue — is sometimes disorder spawns order.

    Sounds impossible, right?

    Wrong.

    According to a computational study conducted by a group of WUSTL physicists, one may create order by introducing disorder.

    While working on their model — a network of interconnected pendulums, or “oscillators” — the researchers noticed that when driven by ordered forces, the various pendulums behaved chaotically and swung out of sync like a group of intoxicated synchronized swimmers. This was unexpected — shouldn’t synchronized forces yield synchronized pendulums?

    But then came the real surprise: When they introduced disorder — forces were applied at random to each oscillator — the system became ordered and synchronized.

    “The thing that is counterintuitive is that when you introduce disorder into the system — when the (forces on the pendulums) act at random — the chaos that was present before disappears and there is order,” said Sebastian F. Brandt, a physics graduate student in Arts & Sciences and lead author of the study, which appeared in a recent edition of Physical Review Letters.

    Insights into other realms

    The physicists’ research is not only hard to grasp for nonphysicists, but also puzzling for physicists. As supervisor Ralf Wessel, Ph.D., associate professor of physics said, “Every physicist who hears this is surprised.”

    Research on the role of disorder in complex systems is quite new and not well understood. Wessel hopes that one day its theoretical understanding will be better than it is today.

    Nevertheless, the researchers believe the model could provide insights outside the realm of theoretical physics.

    Neurons, for example, have been modeled as interconnected, or “coupled,” oscillators because of the way they interact with one another. In the model, coupled oscillators can be imagined as being tethered to their nearest neighbor, thus influencing their movement.

    Neurons, on the other hand, may display repetitive electrical activity that can be influenced by the activity of neighboring neurons.

    Though it’s a bit of a stretch, admitted Babette K.M. Dellen, a doctoral candidate at the time of the research who has since earned a Ph.D., the study may help to solve previously unexplained observations.

    Dellen first noticed the disorder-order phenomenon while studying neurology. She set the project aside, and then Brandt joined the research group and became intrigued with the concept of disorder-induced synchronization and delved more deeply.

    Dellen explained that neurons can exhibit synchronous activity in response to a stimulus. To this point, she said, no one has come up with an adequate explanation.

    And Wessel said, “Here, what Dellen discovered, is that maybe the details of neurons are completely irrelevant. Maybe it is only a property of oscillators.”

    Oscillators like a child on a swing

    A vital similarity between the model system and neurons is that they are both “nonlinear” — meaning that there is not a linear, or straight-ahead, correlation between the applied force and displacement.

    In other words, the oscillators in the model may be likened to a child on a swing. Within a small range, the child will move in constant proportion to how hard you push — if you push twice as hard, the child will go twice as far.

    But nearly all complex systems in nature, like the physicists’ model, are nonlinear. Once the child gets to a certain height, pushing twice as hard will not make the child go twice as far.

    Neurons are composed of many elements and are typically nonlinear.

    “When you hear your favorite music twice as loud you don’t double the pleasure,” said Brandt, explaining how one aspect of the brain — hearing — is nonlinear.

    While other research has shown that disorder can create order, these studies often involved manipulating parameters within the systems such as changing pendulum length. The researchers said their work is novel because it involves changing externally applied forces.

    Thus, they believe, their findings might have potential in the real world, where it would be more difficult to change parameters within the system — neurons, for example — but relatively simple to apply an external force.

    “This is, of course, basic research,” Brandt said. “But what you can learn from this is that complex systems sometimes behave in a very unexpected way, completely opposite to your intuition or expectation.

    “It will be interesting to see if the mechanism that we have found can actually be put to some use.”


  • Viviane
    Viviane

    But it opens mind-boggling opportunities: they may present to us completely man-made cells in the near future, thus would prove beyond any doubt that AN ORGANIZER was needed for the emergence of life in the first place, just like these scientists are ORGANIZERS of the doctored life!

    Or, creationist, as usual, have it backwards.


    http://www.salon.com/2015/01/03/god_is_on_the_ropes_the_brilliant_new_science_that_has_creationists_and_the_christian_right_terrified/

  • OneEyedJoe
    OneEyedJoe
    thus would prove beyond any doubt that AN ORGANIZER was needed for the emergence of life in the first place,

    False.  This does not prove that life requires a sentient designer any more than the fact that humans can trigger an avalanche with explosives proves that avalanches require a sentient being to initiate them.  This is simply humans doing in a few years what it took evolution billions of years to do.  

  • KateWild
    KateWild

    I think this is evidence of a guided process. A higher power had to be guiding the chemistry. I don't believe the higher power cares about us in any way shape or form, he is just letting us get on with it.

    Kate xx

  • cantleave
    cantleave

    KateWild - A higher power had to be guiding the chemistry.

    HAD to be? That is a pretty bold assumption. Why does HAVE to be guided? 




  • KateWild
    KateWild
    Why does HAVE to be guided? - cantleave

    l-stereo isomers. Enantiomers that are required for life and occur in nature are all left handed. But in the lab a racemic mixture is formed unless it is guided by a catalyst. The soai reaction talks about an autocatalyst.

    This is enough evidence for me that the process is guided.

    LOL Angus, we have been here before, but I don't mind covering it again for newbies and lurkers hahaha.

    Kate xx

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit