The great basic question of science on origin of life

Buzz Bloom

Gold Member
1,933
319
Biophase is spontaneously formed due to protein adsorption properties.
Hi Vladimir:

If I understand this correctly, you are saying that the biophase requires the pre-existance of proteins. Is this correct?

If so, are you also saying that the biophase preceded the (1) existence of RNA, (2) ribosomes, and (3) the mechanism that manufactures a protein based on the genetic code applied to a partiular RNA sequence?

Regards,
Buzz
 

Buzz Bloom

Gold Member
1,933
319
Do you understand the role of RNA in the dead membrane compartment investigated for decades?
Hi Vladimir:

I do not understand what this "role of RNA" refers to. Can you cite a paper that explains this? I also do not know what "the dead membrane compartment" is?

Regards,
Buzz
 
If I understand this correctly, you are saying that the biophase requires the pre-existance of proteins. Is this correct?
If so, are you also saying that the biophase preceded the (1) existence of RNA, (2) ribosomes, and (3) the mechanism that manufactures a protein based on the genetic code applied to a partiular RNA sequence?
Yes, Buzz. My idea: the biophase creates the physical conditions necessary for the origin of life. In other words, life (with RNA, ribosomes, etc) can only originates in cell-like conditions. Evolution is possible in the cell-like conditions too. No protocell, no life.

Literature on the "RNA World" or "DNA World" is large, but I can not accept them as a realistic model. It is needed firstly certain physical conditions for origin of life. They are available in the protocell only. Please see my paper for details:

Matveev V.V. 2016. Comparison of fundamental physical properties of the model cells (protocells) and the living cells reveals the need in protophysiology. International Journal of Astrobiology, Page 1-8.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1473550415000476
Stable URL: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S1473550415000476
Preview PDF with highlights: http://www.bioparadigma.spb.ru/files/Matveev-2016-Protophysiology.Preview.and.Highlights.pdf
 
Last edited:

Buzz Bloom

Gold Member
1,933
319
My idea: the biophase creates the physical conditions necessary for the origin of life. In other words, life (with RNA, ribosomes, etc) can only originates in cell-like conditions.
I understand that there are many proposed plausible scenarios regarding the sequence of events leading to the first living cells, and there is at the present time no evidence strong enough to gather a consensus about which scenario is the "right" one (if any). My understanding (admittedly limited) of the strong proposition that RNA preceded proteins is that there has been no plausible scenario proposed for how useful proteins came into existence without the aid of the genetic code, and without mutations of RNA variations that produced more useful proteins (in a non-cell environment) which would out reproduce RNA sequences that produced less useful proteins.

Would you please comment on this? Do you have a proposed mechanism about how useful proteins first came to exist?

Regards,
Buzz
 
Hi Buzz.
It is proved that first polypeptides can be formed from amino acids in the prebiotic conditions. Fox found out an interesting fact that the polycondensation of amino acids is defined by some rule: the sequence of amino acid residues is not totally random in a final polypeptide. Some physical law defines joining amino acids from a mixture of many amino acids. This Fox's discovery needs in experimental and theoretical investigation, but this discovery is forgotten.

The next step: The protein matrix of a protocell similar to Fox's microspheres can adsorb amino acids from the environment non-randomly again. We can discover a next rule, like the Fox's rule above-mentioned. The matrix may have properties of primitive ribosome. The adsorption properties of proteins are a black spot in biology. We need to move in this direction, however, the membrane style of thinking leads us to the other wrong side.
 

Buzz Bloom

Gold Member
1,933
319
The protein matrix of a protocell similar to Fox's microspheres can adsorb amino acids from the environment non-randomly again.
Hi Vladimir:

The Wikipedia summary of Sydney Fox's experiment says that proteins were never produced.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidney_W._Fox
One of the first experiments by Dr. Fox and Kaoru Harada that had to do with the formation of proteinoids was called Thermal Copolymerization of Amino Acids to a Product Resembling Protein. It was performed in February 1958.
The experiment did not prove that proteins were formed on primordial earth using primarily heat, but Fox and Kaoru Harada believed it suggested that if proteinoids could be synthesized using just heat and the amino acids formed from the Miller–Urey experiment, then more research could lead to an answer to how anabolic reactions, enzymatic proteins, and nucleic acids were first formed and in turn, how the earliest forms of life originated.​
AFAIK, proteinoids have never been demonstrated to have any useful enzymatic properties.
Also AFAIK no scenario has ever been proposed for how hypothetical proteinoids with enzymatic properties could improve by mutation. In contrast, RNA sequences do mutate when reproducing, and RNA ribozymes have been demonstrated to have enzymatic properties.
Regards,
Buzz
 

berkeman

Mentor
54,749
5,013
Thread closed for Moderation...

Edit -- after a Mentor discussion, this thread will remain closed. For those interested in this work, please continue the conversation via private messages. Thank you.
 
Last edited:

Physics Forums Values

We Value Quality
• Topics based on mainstream science
• Proper English grammar and spelling
We Value Civility
• Positive and compassionate attitudes
• Patience while debating
We Value Productivity
• Disciplined to remain on-topic
• Recognition of own weaknesses
• Solo and co-op problem solving

Hot Threads

Top