how was first living organism created

"himanshu" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

can anyone tell me how was first livng organism created.

No.

Frank

Maybe these exerpts will help...

"About four billion years ago, Earth was sufficiently at rest, and sufficiently in its present form,
to be a habitable world. Within no more than half a billion years thereafter, it would appear,
simple life had come into existence. For the remaining 3.5 billion years (three fourths of its total
existence) Earth has been, as far as we can tell, continuously inhabited by a variety of living
orgainisms.

How was life first formed?

The only possible scientific conclusion (one that does not involve supernatural action, of which we
have no evidence whatsoever) is that random combinations of simple molecules that existed in
Earth's atmosphere and oceans built up more complicated and still more complicated molecules.
Eventually, molecules formed that were sufficiently complicated to possess the properties we
associate with life.

This is not something we can observe directly, either here on Earth, where we are spearated from the
event by billions of years of time, or on other worlds, since the nearest habitable world must be
separted from us by many light years of space. Nevertheless, we can obtain indirect evidence.

To begin with, we must determine what the simple molecules that existed on the primordial Earth
must have been. That they were the molecules that make up the ices, scientists now generally agree.
There is some dispute on the exact combination, though. There is some dispute on the exact
combination, though. Water was certainly present, as were molecules containing nitrogen and others
containing carbon.

On Jupiter and other worlds of the solar system, carbon and nitrogen are each present in combination
with hydrogen - methane and ammonia, respectively. On Venus and Mars, carbon is present in
cobination with oxygen (carbon dioxide), while nitrogen atoms exist in pairs as nitrogen molecules.

There are some scientists who think the primordial atmosphere of Earth was ammonia, methane, and
water vapor, with ammonia dissolving in large quantities in the ocean. Others think the primordial
atmosphere of Earth was ammoinia, methane, and water vapor (Atmosphere I) at the outset, this being
converted by natural processes, not involving life, to carbon dioxide, nitrogen and water vapor
(Atmosphere II).

The choice between atmospheres is not a crucial one. In either atmosphere, the atoms of hydrogen,
carbon, nitrogen, and oxygen (which make up 99 percent of the atoms of soft tissure in any organism)
are to be found. The atoms that make up the remainder of the tissues, including the atoms that make
the hard tissures hard, were to be found in solutions in the primordial ocean.

Given the simple molecuels (whichever they are), what process would be required to build up more
complicated molecules from them? Simple collisions and random interchange of atoms would not be
enoguh. In gerneral, the conversion of simplere molecules into more complicated ones is an energy-
consuming change. In other words, energy, would have to be supplied to the system to make the
change possible.

The primordial Earth, however, had numerous sources of energy available. There was the heat of
volcanic action, or the electrical energy of the lightning bolt, and it is quite probable that, at
the beginning, the Earth was a more violent place than it is now, with more volcanic eruptions and
many more thunderstorms.

Then, too, there was the enregy of radioactivity, and, at the start, radioactive intensitites were
greater than now because, in the billions of years that have passed sinse the Earth was formed, an
appreciable fraction of the original supply of radioactive atoms has broken down."

My wrist is sore maybe Ill write more later...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>>from (without permission):
>>>
>>>The Exploding Suns The Secrets of the Supernovas Page 207-209 Isaac Asimov

Justin

PSCan anybody tell me the proper way to refer to someones work...

jussy <[email hidden]> wrote or quoted:

Quoted message said:

The only possible scientific conclusion (one that does not involve supernatural action, of which
we have no evidence whatsoever) is that random combinations of simple molecules that existed in
Earth's atmosphere and oceans built up more complicated and still more complicated molecules.
Eventually, molecules formed that were sufficiently complicated to possess the properties we
associate with life.

That is most certainly not the only possible scientific conclusion - it is an incredibly unlikely
story - like the apocryphal 747 in the junkyard.

*Much* more likely is that self-organising processes were involved.

Nor need large, complex molecules be involved in the process - simple, atomic units could have been
the basis of an evolutionary process - without combining into large molecules - by instead sticking
together in crystalline configurations.
--
__________
|im |yler timtyler.orgtimtyler.orgOpen ↗ [email hidden] Remove lock to reply.

Sorry, I had to quit typing because my hand was getting soar. The paragraphs I posted were *not
meant to arrive at any conclusion*, I actually quit typing when he was arriving at some reasonable
conceptions. The paragraphs I posted were mere explorations of some ideas scientist had/have. I
encourage you to find the book at your local library or whatnot.

Mr. Asimov actually proceeds to find cosmic radiation as the only reasonable source for creating an
environment that encourages the creation of elementary traits of life, theoretically of course.
He explains the cyclic occurrences possible, and needed, by dwelling into theories on our
magnetic field and how they are involved with cosmic radiation, seemingly the most viable source
of energy for the building of the simple molecules needed to create the basis of life we
perceive today.

I would ask that Tim Tyler try to illustrate his ideas with more information. In my opinion,
his/your post was slightly confusing and empty at best.

Justin McKenzie

Tim Tyler <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

jussy <[email hidden]> wrote or quoted:

Quoted message said:

The only possible scientific conclusion (one that does not involve supernatural action, of which
we have no evidence whatsoever) is that random combinations of simple molecules that existed in
Earth's atmosphere and oceans built up more complicated and still more complicated molecules.
Eventually, molecules formed that were sufficiently complicated to possess the properties we
associate with life.

That is most certainly not the only possible scientific conclusion - it is an incredibly unlikely
story - like the apocryphal 747 in the junkyard.

*Much* more likely is that self-organising processes were involved.

Nor need large, complex molecules be involved in the process - simple, atomic units could have
been the basis of an evolutionary process - without combining into large molecules - by instead
sticking together in crystalline configurations.

Tim Tyler <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

That is most certainly not the only possible scientific conclusion - it is an incredibly unlikely
story - like the apocryphal 747 in the junkyard.

Given a large enough number of junkyards and a great enough length of time, the presence of a 747 in
one of them is almost inevitable.

Ann Morgan <[email hidden]> wrote or quoted:

Quoted message said:

Tim Tyler <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

That is most certainly not the only possible scientific conclusion - it is an incredibly unlikely
story - like the apocryphal 747 in the junkyard.

Given a large enough number of junkyards and a great enough length of time, the presence of a 747
in one of them is almost inevitable.

Maybe - but if there are other - more probable - approaches to construction, then there's no need to
invoke the "junkyard hurricane" in the first place.

After all, if you find yourself looking at a 747 the chances of it having been built by a hurricane
in a junkyard are negligible.
--
__________
|im |yler timtyler.orgtimtyler.orgOpen ↗ [email hidden] Remove lock to reply.