On Thu, 8 Sep 2005 19:14:32 +0200, "><\(\(\(\(\(@>" <***@cualquiera.com>
wrote:
Lugar en el que se asumen todos los conocimientos acerca de la evolución
y los muchos datos que se tienen acerca del origen de la vida, tal y como se ha
demostrado repetidamente sin que tú, en tu manifiesta hijaputez e ignorancia,
dejes de repetir las mismas sandeces.
Lugar cuyos autores y avalistas asumen todos y cada uno de los
conocimientos científicos que se tienen y ofrecen un premio que motive la
investigación acerca del origen de la vida, sobre el que se sabe mucho más de lo
que analfabestias pertenecientes a sectas de indeseables vociferan en su
absoluta ignorancia.
Vete a mentirle a tu padre y a hacer crosputeos majaderos a las listas
de distribución de tu secta, mamarracho.
============================================================
http://www.us.net/life/
"The Origin-of-Life Prize" ® (hereafter called "the Prize") will be awarded for
proposing a highly plausible mechanism for the spontaneous rise of genetic
instructions in nature sufficient to give rise to life. To win, the explanation
must be consistent with empirical biochemical, kinetic, and thermodynamic
concepts as further delineated herein, and be published in a well-respected,
peer-reviewed science journal(s).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.us.net/life/rul_purp.htm
"The Origin-of-Life Prize" ® is being offered to stimulate research into chaos,
complexity, information, probability, self-organization, and artificial
life/intelligence theories as they relate directly to biochemical and molecular
biological reality. The Foundation wishes to encourage the pursuit of
natural-process explanations and mechanisms of initial "gene" emergence within
nature. The subject of interest is the genesis of primordial functional
information itself rather than its physico-chemical matrix of retention and
transmission. Bioinformation fits into the category of "prescriptive
information" ("instruction," rather than mere probabilistic combinatorics [Abel,
2000]). By what mechanisms do stochastic ensembles acquire
instructive/integrative potential? In other words, what are the processes
whereby random biopolymeric sequences self-organize into indirect, functional
code?
Central questions of interest relate to the definition and nature of "genetic
instructions" and "biomessage." Is genetic recipe adequately represented and
described by "mutual entropy" (shared, correlative uncertainty between
transmitter and receiver)? At what point and by what processes do "biofunction"
and "biosystem" enter into the chemical evolution of bioinformation?
What is a reasonable, empirically-accountable definition of "minimal life"?
How does nature's genetic programming achieve such long sequences of highly
functional decision-node selections?
Genes are linear, digital, quaternary decision-node strings. Nucleotide
selections represent four-way algorithmic switch-settings. These switch-settings
are covalently-bound into primary structure. The string's specific sequence
precedes secondary and tertiary folding. Folding results from forces such as
hydrogen bonding, charge attractions/repulsions, and hydrophobicity. These
forces are much weaker than the covalent binding that has already determined
sequence. Folding space is primarily constrained by this pre-existing nucleotide
sequencing. Ultimately, the algorithmic programming instantiated into the
nucleotide-selection sequence determines biofunction.
The problem is that *NATURAL SELECTION* works only at the phenotypic level, not
at the genetic level. Neither physicochemical forces nor environmental selection
choose the next nucleotide to be added to the biopolymer. *MUTATIONS* occur at
the genetic level. But ENVIRONMENTAL SELECTION occurs at the folding
(functional) level, after-the-fact of already strongly set sequence, and
after-the-fact of already established algorithmic function of the folded
biopolymer.
By what mechanism did prebiological nature set its initial algorithmic
switch-settings to program the first few (RNA?) genes?
How was RNA folding function anticipated when covalently-bound primary structure
was forming?
Suppose a self-replicative ribozymal folding complex occurred spontaneously and
secondarily out of sequence space. How did this self-replicative folding complex
evolve into a metabolically functional folding complex without loss of the
self-replicative folding function complex? What was the bridge between two
completely unrelated folding patterns, particularly if the covalent sequences
were so closely homologous?
How did so many biochemical pathways get integrated into one coherent, unified,
and sophisticated metabolic process?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.us.net/life/rul_clar.htm
Clarification of what the Foundation is looking for
We are primarily interested in how certain sequences of monomers acquired
functional significance. The Prize offer is designed to stimulate focused
research on the origin of initial genetic instructions themselves. So much of
life origin work centers around biochemical factors. But biopolymers catalyzed
by clay surfaces, for example, do not necessarily contain any functional
(prescriptive) information. How does a complex sequence of codons arise in
nature which finds phenotypic usefulness only after translation into a
completely different language (AA sequence)? How did natural process produce so
indirectly the hundreds of needed three-dimensional protein catalysts for life
to begin?
[...]
The Foundation welcomes theoretical models of a more direct primordial
instruction system (one that might have preceded codon transcription and
translation) provided the model provides explanation of continuous transition
(abiding by the "continuity principle") to current prokaryotic and eukaryotic
empirical life.
Inanimate stepping stones of abiotic evolution are essential components to any
natural process theory of the *MOLECULAR EVOLUTION* of life. Full reign must be
given to the exploration of spontaneously forming complexity and to
self-ordering inanimate systems. But reductionistic attempts to provide models
of life development must not sacrifice the very emergent property of "life" that
biology seeks to explain. Coacervates, micelles, vesicles, and various
primordial quasimembrane models, for example, may resemble membrane equivalents
and merit considerable ongoing research, but should not be confused with the
active transport membranes of the simplest known free-living organisms.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.us.net/life/rul_crit.htm
Major issues
Applicants must provide
A. a well-conceived, detailed hypothetical mechanism explaining how the rise of
genetic instructions sufficient to give rise to life as defined in "Definitions"
below might have occurred in Nature by natural processes, and an
B. empirical correlation to the real world of biochemistry and molecular biology
- not just mathematical or computer models - of how the prescriptive information
characteristic of all known living organisms might have arisen.
The mechanism must address four topics:
The simplest known genome's apparent anticipation and directing of future events
toward biological ends, both metabolic and structural;
The ability of the genome to convey instructions, deliver orders, and actually
produce the needed biological end-products;
The indirectness of recipe-like biological "linguistic" message code - the gap
between genotypic prescriptive information (instruction) and phenotypic
expression. *HOW DID THE FIRST GENETIC INSTRUCTION ARISE IN ITS CODED FORMAT
PRIOR TO PHENOTYPIC REALIZATION OF PROGENY FROM WHICH THE ENVIRONMENT COULD
SELECT?* If a protobiont's genetic code and phenotype were one and the same,
how did such a simple system self-organize to meet the nine minimum conditions
of "life" enumerated below under "Definitions"? How did stellar energy, the four
known forces of physics (strong and weak nuclear forces, electromagnetic force,
and gravity), and natural processes produce initial prescriptive information
(instruction/recipe) using direct or indirect code?
The bizarre concentration of singlehanded optical isomers (homochirality of
enantiomers) in living things - how did a relatively pure population of
left-handed amino acids or right-handed sugars arise out of a chemical
environment wherein reactions ordinarily give rise to roughly equal numbers of
both right- and left-handed optical isomers?
============================================================
-------------------------------------------------------------
Iruxabi Pagoa
***@telefonika.net
-----------------------------
F. Darwin, ed., The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin.
New York, D. Appleton & Co., 1905.
There seems to be no more design in the variability
of organic beings, and in the action of natural
selection, than in the course which the wind blows.
(Charles Darwin)