/sci/ - Science & Math

>>968032This is as likely to happen as a tornado going through a junkyard and producing a functional 747.

Actually it's not. The most simple self replicating molecules are quite a lot more simple than a 747. The second point is I don't think you understand just how many junkyards are the equivalent of the size of the universe in proportion to the size of a primitive life form. The universe is big. REALLY REALLY BIG.

Also you're a troll.

OP is a troll, but there are idiots that think this. For those people I wish I had that device from the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy that you put someone in and it made them understand how big the universe is. Usually they came out a gibbering wreck iirc.

>>968032

I don't think you understand... uh. This is simple quantum mechanics. I will not explain it to you, because it is just too simple to waste my time on. This is shit I learned in uhh... 6th grade?

>>968047
If I am a troll, then you just took the bait. Responding seriously to a post, then calling the op a troll, is... somewhat an oxymoron, I think. Anyhow I appreciate your contribution.

Basically you are saying that this was a chance happening, but it's not so miraculous because the universe is so large, it's bound to happen at least once?

This isn't good enough. Molecules are not magical, but this is what you are implying. How do they reproduce if they are not living, how do you make something alive from something that is dead without bringing some creator into the equation? I won't settle for "God did it" and I won't settle for "It just happened", I need an explanation! Forgive me for taking frustration out on you, I have issues.

OP these issues are complex & you need to do some reading
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis

See what you can make of that & ask a better question.

>>968073Molecules are not magical,
>>968073How do they reproduce if they are not living

Life isn't magical. There is nothing special about living matter compared with dead matter. Asking how life comes from non-life is like asking how fire comes from something that isn't burning. The right chemicals are in the right place, add some energy, and the chemical reaction begins.

Is this helping?

>This is as likely to happen as a tornado going through a junkyard and producing a functional 747.
it is much more likely if the tornado is going through the junkyard for billions of years, and all the required parts are there, already preassembled.

>>968117
also, the plane doesn't requre any welding, the parts can snap into place like legos.

>>968117
Also helps if you're talking about a junkyard with >10^40 parts and a related number of tornadoes.

>>968073

You could just stop being a faggot and actually read a book on the subject instead of looking at popsci videos on youtube and whining on /sci/ that you don't get it.

>>968117
...and there are only a handful of different types of parts

Either nothing's magical, or everything is. That's a fmous quote from someone.

Just think for a second how small a single strand of basic RNA or DNA is.

Now think of how BIG all the oceans, rivers, seas and lakes are in the world.

now think how long it takes for a chemical process to occur in standard conditions. Like dissolving sugar in tea or something. Quick isn't it? How much of that do you think of that could occur in a year? A lot, right? How about 10 years? 100 years? 1000 years? 10000? 1000000? A million years?

I've seen conservative estimates that put the genesis of the first self replicating molecules at only a few hundered million years after the earth cooled and the oceans condensed.

i.e. It still took a fucklong time to get even the basics, but on a geological timescale, it was nothing.

>This is as likely to happen as a tornado going through a junkyard and producing a functional 747
This is a great example of a horrible comparison.

>>968163
It was originally used by some insane fundamentalist Christian. It's MEANT to be a horrible comparison.

>>968067
>implying someone learns quantum mechanics in 6th grade

>>968178
I think he was just using the word quantum to sound clever.

The real word he was looking for was "statistical" I think.

Life could've come from a different world on a comet [or the building blocks of life].
Lightning could have zapped some molecules and changed they're molecular structure and such.
But the most accepted is the random bunching together of aminos, which eventually made life. By chance.

>>968178implying someone learns quantum mechanics in 6th grade

Implying some of us weren't lonely misanthropic creatures in 6th grade whose only friends were Lawrence Krauss and Stephen Hawking.

:(

:( :(

troll thread is bad

0/10die pls

yeah. Someone which was there from forever decided to create something from nothing is much more credible. Religion is here from like 10k years. Science from few centuries. We'll find the answer to your question in less than 10k years. If we don't get exctincted before that.

>>968032
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjOqWkV1_tk

Watch.

It's 10 minutes long, and is one of the many ways that abiogenesis could have happened.

Remember, it took MILLIONS of years in an ocean covering the ENTIRE EARTH. Lots of crazy shit can go down in that amount of time.

>>968267
Thanks, man. That was exactly what I was looking for.

Main reason I think you're a troll because someone posted almost exactly this earlier today in a thread I was in.

>>968267
I thought it was billions? Or at least a billion + a million or two.

>>968787
Well I wasn't there.

>>968032

well obviously we don't know, but if you 'd like some much deeper insights into this subject than you'll be finding on /sci/ i'd recommend "the origins of order" by stuart kuaffman.

one of my favorite books.

>>968799
I mean, I understand your confusion, I just think that it's hard to grasp the general idea behind biogenesis.

>>968032

From what we have (not) seen so far the odds do look low. But if it didn't happen we wouldn't be here to think about it.