Last Universal Common Ancestor

7butfk.jpg


H4r H4rh H4RRRR! :laugh:
Kudos, Matt. While you get a D in creativity for copying another person’s work, you get an A for effort.
 
What do you think is the reason for life's homochirality?

What do you think about the anti-de Sitter/conformal field theory correspondence?

(Let the frantic googling begin)

I don't interact with liars and obsessive compulsives, Jank PhD, Esq.
 
What do you think about the anti-de Sitter/conformal field theory correspondence?

(Let the frantic googling begin)

I don't interact with liars and obsessive compulsives, Jank PhD, Esq.

Sorry. I understand that this science is not your area.

I hope you are not offended that I post some science on your threads from time to time, though. Feel free to insult me and attack me all you like. It clearly is something you feel a need to do.

I, however, like talking science. Even with people who clearly hate me. :)
 
They combined the two most excellently, didn't they? You weren't just entertained, you learned something! What a great show. And what a tragedy when Grant died, too. :(

Mythbusters was great but it lacked a core concept that would have made the show absolute perfection. They tended to attempt to prove or disprove based on a limited number of trials (usually one for any given condition). I always felt that they could do a great service if they showed a statistical approach to the tests. Help educate people in how science is really done, that sometimes one-off events are not representative.

Overall it was a great show that was entertaining if still a bit light on the technical stuff. But they did a great job for the regular audience.

I also read that Jamie and Adam did not particularly like each other (or at least weren't "friends" in any sense). It always amazes me that people who don't really get along can still work for a common goal and that show did it quite well.






Oh, I should also add a big apology for continuing to post on here. I realize I am a bad person and should be shunned, so I'll try to be unobtrusive. It's hard, though, when you are such a fractally horrible person as I clearly am.)
 
Sorry. I understand that this science is not your area.

I hope you are not offended that I post some science on your threads from time to time, though. Feel free to insult me and attack me all you like. It clearly is something you feel a need to do.

I, however, like talking science. Even with people who clearly hate me. :)
^^^
Once again Perry proves that he’s here to troll, not discuss science as he claims. Sad.
 
^^^
Once again Perry proves that he’s here to troll, not discuss science as he claims. Sad.

I am still hoping someone engages on the homochirality of life. It seems to be a really interesting aspect. The link between the living and non-living world. Our earliest ancestor's ancestor.

The concept of life as somehow special from the non-living fascinates me. Life is self-replicating but it self-replicates in much the same way crystals grow. Your DNA and RNA function precisely because they can COORDINATE with other chemicals based on size and orientation. That's how crystals grow. How they self-replicate. Sure it's more passive than active but the chemical concepts at the heart of it: adsorption and coordination are cool to consider.

When we look at the earliest common ancestor we are probably not looking at the earliest life.






Again, apologies since I am horrible, but I hope my words are not as horrible as me.
 
I don't interact with liars and obsessive compulsives,

I have a good friend who suffers from OCD. It's a hell of an illness. Best not to use it as a jokey foil in conversations. This guy is a great person but the OCD is a killer. I couldn't last a day living like that.

I always wonder when people throw around "diagnoses" like that why they never do it with cancer. Just put cancer in your sentence there and it suddenly becomes a whole different message.

(The chemistry of OCD is also quite interesting, but I get it that no one on here likes chemistry).






Requisite Apology Caveat: I don't mean to suggest your comment was ill advised or would be painful to someone who actually DOES suffer from OCD, just thought it was an interesting choice for your comment.
 
Last edited:
I am still hoping someone engages on the homochirality of life.
If they don’t you’ll just keep trolling the thread? Sounds like you.

What about homochirality? Without it life as we know it wouldn’t exist. As the saying goes, “No homochirality, no life”.

Stanley Miller’s classic 1953 experiment produced about a dozen naturally occurring amino acids both in left and right handed forms. Later experiments indicated that having both handed forms caused problems. For unknown reasons one hand dominated thus allowing self-replicating RNA.
 
I have a good friend who suffers from OCD. It's a hell of an illness.
Your “friend” should seek help. If you really cared, you’d take him. Maybe drop a box of matchsticks on the floorboards to keep him busy during the drive.
 
If they don’t you’ll just keep trolling the thread? Sounds like you.

I didn't realize talking science germane to the conversation was "Trolling". Interesting.

What about homochirality? Without it life as we know it wouldn’t exist.

Not necessarily. Chirality is a preference but racemic mixtures exist. Why do you think life wouldn't exist without homochirality?

Stanley Miller’s classic 1953 experiment produced about a dozen naturally occurring amino acids both in left and right handed forms. Later experiments indicated that having both handed forms caused problems. For unknown reasons one hand dominated thus allowing self-replicating RNA.

Why would RNA fail with racemic mixtures? I'm genuinely curious? Especially since what came before LUCA may very well have been "RNA World". No DNA needed.
 
I didn't realize talking science germane to the conversation was "Trolling".
It’s not. The fact you can’t see the difference, Perry, is what really interests me.

Another member of this forum was a professional psychologist but soon developed mental illness severe enough to prevent him from working. Like you, he claims one thing but displays behavior contrary to his education and profession. In his case, his mental illness explains the contradiction. While I’ve postulated possible reasons to explain the difference between your claims compared to your behavior, it’s still an unknown. The easiest and most common explanation is that you are lying. Sure, you may have been a chemistry major, but I’m not seeing the behavior of a professional chemist. Since you refuse to explain yourself, I can only go indirectly by through observation of your interaction with others.

Ergo, please keep posting. :thup:

Why do you think life wouldn't exist without homochirality?
Because a journal I trust more than you says so. https://www.chemistryworld.com/features/the-origin-of-homochirality/9073.article
 
It’s not. The fact you can’t see the difference, Perry, is what really interests me.

Another member of this forum was a professional psychologist but soon developed mental illness severe enough to prevent him from working. Like you, he claims one thing but displays behavior contrary to his education and profession. In his case, his mental illness explains the contradiction. While I’ve postulated possible reasons to explain the difference between your claims compared to your behavior, it’s still an unknown. The easiest and most common explanation is that you are lying. Sure, you may have been a chemistry major, but I’m not seeing the behavior of a professional chemist. Since you refuse to explain yourself, I can only go indirectly by through observation of your interaction with others.

Ergo, please keep posting. :thup:

Thanks. I am clearly quite interesting to you. You will be sadly disappointed as I'm not a very interesting person. I was never a chem major. I just read.

I will continue to post because I like science quite a bit.

I'm still interested in you claim that chirality is necessary for life.

Origins of life are really interesting to discuss.
 
Genesis has two different creation stories, like the Hebrew authors couldn't make up their minds.

Nature Is a Crime Against Humanity


"Let there be light" could only have been addressed to Lucifer, whose name means "bringer of light." So one of the many ways to interpret the narrative, independently of the clerics' self-serving preaching, is that Nature is Satan's realm.

Backing that up is the fact that the Garden of Eden was God's realm. After Adam and Eve were cast out from it, Lucifer cackled, "Now you are in my world."
 
Thanks. I am clearly quite interesting to you. You will be sadly disappointed as I'm not a very interesting person.
All Abbie Normals hold an interest for me to a degree. Mainly to puzzle them out. Most become boring once figured out since most people are within the normal range, but simply venting their life’s issues upon innocent people.
 
All Abbie Normals hold an interest for me to a degree. Mainly to puzzle them out. Most become boring once figured out since most people are within the normal range, but simply venting their life’s issues upon innocent people.

Do you have any interest in things like the origin of life?
 
The Bible Would Have Been Rejected by Any Publishers Who Looked for Logical Consistency


That is within the Garden of Eden; it doesn't say anything about the rest of the world. Notice that when Cain was sent away, he visited cities that must have been there far longer than when his parents were created.
 
The Bible Would Have Been Rejected by Any Publishers Who Looked for Logical Consistency


That is within the Garden of Eden; it doesn't say anything about the rest of the world. Notice that when Cain was sent away, he visited cities that must have been there far longer than when his parents were created.

Be careful. This is a science thread and some folks get really upset if you pull it over into religion. I messed up that way earlier.

Now I stick to the topic at hand related to the origins of life and one of our first common ancestors.
 
Back
Top