From: admin@127.0.0.1   
      
   On Sat, 7 Feb 2026 11:27:46 -0600   
   RonO  wrote:   
      
   > On 2/6/2026 11:34 PM, MarkE wrote:   
   > > The following seems to be a significant challenge for the naturalistic   
   > > origin of life. Thoughts?   
   > >   
   > > PROCESS   
   > >   
   > > OoL assumes a progression from simple inorganic chemicals to a   
   > > population of protocells and then on to the first population of free-   
   > > living cells (pre-LUCA).   
   > >   
   > > Protocells provide encapsulation, replication and heritable variation,   
   > > but are not "alive" in that they require feedstock supplies from the   
   > > environment. The feedstock dependence tapers from protocells to pre-LUCA.   
   > >   
   > > ENVIRONMENT   
   > >   
   > > This process of chemical evolution and then Darwinian evolution requires   
   > > the environment to supply nucleotides, lipids, sugars, amino acids,   
   > > polyphosphates, metal ions, etc, in certain concentrations, with   
   > > substantial homochirality, etc.   
   >   
   > Who makes this claim?  We do not know what the first self replicators   
   > required.  Things like nucleotides are required by the RNA world   
   > scenario, but that likely came after the first self replicators existed.   
   >   To get everything started the first self replicators would not just   
   > replicate themselves, but do things like make nucleotides in order to   
   > facilitate their self replication.  My guess is that nucleotides evolved   
   > to do what they still do today.  They are a highly useful energy coin   
   > for the cell.  They store chemical energy and transfer the chemical   
   > energy.  Polymers of nucleotides likely evolved to store nucleotides   
   > inside the cells and keep them from diffusing out of the cells.   
   >   
   > Lipids may have been among the first simple self replicators.   
   > Conglomerations of lipids can have enzymatic activity that makes more   
   > lipid, so the enzymatic lipid structures would get bigger and be able to   
   > split.  Lipids could evolve other enzymatic functions as they self   
   > replicated, different lipids could be made etc.   
   >   
   > Chirality would be set by the self replicators.  The enzymatic functions   
   > of the self replicators would likely work for one chiral form or the   
   > other.  Just like many enzymes do today.   
   >   
   > >   
   > > The environment must also provide sufficient temperature stability, pH,   
   > > mechanical agitation, structure (e.g. niche separation), wet/dry   
   > > cycling, feedstock recycling, waste removal, etc.   
   > >   
   > > LINEAGE   
   > >   
   > > OoL assumes countless locations working in parallel as described,   
   > > possibly with localised cross-pollination. However, there must be an   
   > > unbroken lineage (or lineages) to from start to finish. Which implies   
   > > the persistence and stability of the environmental requirements described.   
   >   
   > There would be no such thing as an unbroken lineage during the origin of   
   > life on earth.  There is nothing keeping any lineage from joining with   
   > another, splitting and or joining with others.  There would be no   
   > genetic code, no genome early life was likely a mess of self replicating   
   > molecules.  Once a shell or membrane formed multiple replicators could   
   > join together as proto cells.  They could start assisting each other in   
   > replication.  There would be no cell lineages until you evolve a genome   
   > for the RNA world where you need to maintain the complementary sequence   
   > for the functional RNAs, and even after that there is no reason that RNA   
   > based cells could not fuse and split off new lineages.  Horizontal   
   > transfer of genetic material occurs today.   
   >   
      
   There maybe countless systems that sort of worked but got outcompeted; if   
   they ain't around now (or some remnant from the LUCA), then we don't know   
   about it - as in the "Adam & Eve" discussion, only the surviving ones erm   
   survived. Yet here we are. And Goddidit is never a scientific answer.   
   >   
   > > TIME   
   > >   
   > > How long would this lineage need? One million years? One thousand years?   
   > > 100 million years?   
   >   
   Who knows? but in Earthly terms it didn't take long (for geological values   
   of long).   
      
   > It isn't just one lineage.  The number of lineages at any one time would   
   > be dependent on what environment the self replicators needed to replicate.   
   >   
   > So the number of lineages vying to develop the RNA world and future   
   > genetic code would be dependent on what environment that those self   
   > replicators existed in.   
   >   
   > There could have been trillions of them around a relatively stable hot   
   > spring at any one time.   
   >   
   > >   
   > > PROBLEM   
   > >   
   > > What geological situation on the early Earth could provide the   
   > > continuous, stable environment required for the duration needed? Even as   
   > > little as one thousand years is long for a suitable system of geothermal   
   > > ponds that is *uninterrupted* by any sterilisation/reset events.   
   > >   
   > > Polymers such as RNA break down over hours to decades depending on   
   > > environment. Freezing or drying may extend lifetimes but also pause   
   > > evolution. In any case, when active, continuous replication is required   
   > > for renewal before decomposition.   
   > >   
   > > 1,000 years from chemicals to cells seems impossibly short. And 100,000   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)