can anyone give me the scientific explanation for the origin of life in laymen's terms?

Answer 1

Okay, I'll give it a go.

Theory #1: Panspermia (or the delivery of biological compounds to earth from space) by cometary impact. Supposedly, a comet hit the earth a VERY long time ago and left behind some biomolecules. Sounds a bit like a fairy tale, I know. BUT! A research group from the UK took stuff that one finds in comets, loaded said stuff into a bazooka, and fired the thing at a concrete pad. When they analyzed the smudge left behind, lo and behold, they found the building blocks of proteins and sugars, so this is not as farfetched as it might initially sound.

Theory #2: Abiogenesis. This theory postulates that molecules you could find in abundance on earth billions of years ago (ammonia, methane, hydrogen sulfide, water, possibly carbon monoxide, etc., but notably not oxygen) can react in the presence of sunlight (very slow) or lightning (a good deal faster) to generate the building blocks of biological molecules like proteins, DNA, fats, sugars, and so on. This was shown by Miller and Urey to be at least plausible (google their names for particulars).

Either theory #1, or theory #2, or some combination of both is postulated to have led to the presence of simple biological molecules on earth. Now that we have building blocks, we have to build things with them, and these are also reactions that can take place in water with the input of some sort of energy (sun, lightning, heat, etc.). Once we have successfully built some larger molecules, we're interested in the molecules that can make copies of themselves without needing an entire cell to accomplish it. There are such molecules in existence even today. Prions, for example, are proteins that can make copies of themselves. A particular sort of prion is what causes Mad Cow disease.

So, if we have molecules that are capable of making copies of themselves, imagine how much more efficient it would be to have them help each other out. It would be even more efficient if these self-replicating, helpful molecules could be held together in a packet to keep them from being jostled apart in the middle of the process. So, you put a simple membrane around them to keep them together. And voila, you have the beginnings of a cell. There's a lot of ifs and supposes and maybes in there, but remember. As far as the origin of life is concerned, that which makes the most copies of itself wins the race. A conglomeration of simple biomolecules banding together to make more and larger biomolecules is the winning horse, in this case.

From there, it's a matter of cooperation and specialization. Certain kinds of biomolecules are better at making copies of things, while other kinds of biomolecules are good at taking organic molecules and converting them to sources of energy. Still other biomolecules are good at turning processes on and off so that this replication effort is run more efficiently. If you take these specialized systems and bind them together in little membrane pockets, the processes become yet more efficient, and you've got the beginnings of internal cell structures.

See how it works? Improvement by slow degrees until we get all the way up to complicated organisms like humans. That's the very much abridged version of the current prevailing scientific theories.

Answer 2

From the research i've executed, it seems to me that the concept of the large Bang as a stand-on my own theory (by which I mean, the primary and only motive) is lacking, but taken right into a bigger context, it becomes rather more probabilistically probably. Have a read on alternate or persevered universe theories. You may also in finding something fascinating. However yes, it is still an field of debate and we still recognize little or no in regards to the first nanoseconds of the universe (though the whole lot after is better understood). Anyway, the intent is due to the fact religion actively discourages questioning, and by means of proxy discourages capabilities and finding out. Considering the fact that religion is static (books like the Bible can in no way change - they're what they're), faith must be static as good, and the only method to make people consider in Bronze age myths from hundreds of thousands of years ago is to keep them from obtaining state-of-the-art advantage. Do you keep in mind what the "normal sin" of Christianity is? It was once Eve, consuming from the Tree of talents. The try and achieve abilities is the biggest sin. Due to the fact the extra ignorant devout folks remain, the simpler they are to control.

Answer 3

There are many current theories about the origin of life. This is called the question of 'abiogenesis'.

First, note that this is separate from the topic of evolution. Some abiogenesis theories use the same processes (specifically natural selection) that we see at work in evolution, and others use completely different processes.

The 'primordial soup' idea is that the basic organic building blocks for life existed in the early history of the earth about 4 billion years ago, when there was no oxygen. (Oxygen is actually toxic to this kind of organic molecules.) Given the right energy sources (the sun, and/or thermal energy from the volcanic earth), these formed self-replicating molecules, such as strands of RNA, which later let to the much more stable DNA molecule, proto-viruses (basically DNA enclosed in a protein coating), isolated into replicating droplets, end eventually very primitive cells.

There are *many* different versions of this, ranging from the work of Oparin in the 1930's, to the famous Miller-Urey experiment in the 1950's, the work of Jean Oró in the 1960's, the "RNA World" hypothesis of Walter Gilbert in the 1980's, right up to Sol Spiegelman's experiments showing that an RNA molecule with as little as 220 nucleotides can respond to natural selection.

Answer 4

From the examine I certainly have performed, evidently to me that the belief of the huge Bang as a stand-on my own concept (via which I propose, the 1st and in straightforward terms reason) is lacking, yet taken right into a greater physically powerful context, it turns into plenty greater probabilistically possibly. Have a study on substitute or persevered universe theories. you may locate some thing exciting. yet sure, it continues to be a community of dialogue and we nevertheless understand little or no concerning to the 1st nanoseconds of the universe (nonetheless each thing after is greater effective understood). besides, the clarification is with the help of the fact faith actively discourages thinking, and via proxy discourages understanding and gaining understanding of. via fact faith is static (books like the Bible can not at all substitute - they're what they're), faith must be static besides, and the only thank you to make human beings have self assurance in Bronze age myths from 1000's of years in the past is to maintain them from procuring present day understanding. Do you remember what the "unique sin" of Christianity is? It became into Eve, eating from the Tree of understanding. The attempt to income understanding is the biggest sin. via fact the greater ignorant religious human beings proceed to be, the better they're to regulate.

Answer 5

The scientific explanation:

Molecules in the primordial goo combined randomly over millions of years, becoming more and more complex over time. The process went from comparatively simple amino acids to more complex proteins and eventually to the highly-complex DNA. DNA undergoes a chemical reaction which duplicates itself, and over time the proteins used the DNA and built up simple life around it.

Answer 6

Well, there is no agreed upon explanation for the origin of life.

Answer 7

It goes that there was one single celled organism that over time changed and evloved into the vast array of creature we have today. There really is no explination of where that first organism came from, and I don't think we will ever know.

Answer 8

god is the only simple explanation and there is a saying in science that the most simple answer is usually the right one

Answer 9

According to Einstein - "Its all Relative"
< switch to Serious mode > All the rest is Theory , Faith or Biology
IF "choice" = "Theory"
(1) THEN [ Hydrogen + Carbon + Oxygen + Nitrogen ]
(2) ZAP {Ionising Radiation }
(3) EQUALS L I F E (in all its Glory)

Notes to preparation of successful Biology Experiments based on this Method
-- Repeat Steps (1) through (2) till presence of Life is detected.
-- Choice of Ionizing Radiation may make detection of Viable Life Difficult
-- Adjust choice and repeat
-- ITTERATIONS of Several Millennia are suggested for beginers

IF "choice" = "Faith"
(1) THEN [Mystery ---- ]
(2) ZAP {Godlike Intervention }
(3)EQUALS L I F E (in all its Glory)

Notes to preparation of successful Biology Experiments based on this Method
-- Step(1) requires prior completion of coursework in Theology 1001 or accredited Prior Learning (e.g. Ascended Master Cert . or Course Work at Sartori University )
-- Choice of Deity may make experimental conditions Difficult -
Containment devices or Uncertainty Limiters might not function as expected - Location and Mind of chosen Deity is described by Theorists in this area to be Greater than value "F" on the INEFFABLE Scale.
Spontaneous Outbreaks of Connundrums and Koans have been observed
CAUTION - Choice of Deity from Sub class {NORSE} has been shown to be dangerous. Refer to HAMMERFALL incident
-- Adjust choice and repeat
-- ITTERATIONS of Several Millennia are suggested for beginers

IF "choice" = "Biology"
(1)THEN [Object + Object]
(2) ZAP {L O V E }
(3)EQUALS L I F E (in all its Glory)

Notes to preparation of successful Biology Experiments based on this Method
-- Step(1) Gender choice and compatibility tests suggested Prior to attempting Step (2)
-- Variations in Orchestration have been reported by careful observers
-- Adjust choice and repeat
-- ITTERATIONS of Several Millennia are suggested for beginers
although absolute beginners have been able to complete (1) (2) and (3) in less than Two semesters
Opponents of this technique point to potential hazards - Experiment can go Critical - note selection involved for Step (1)
Also Experiment started by first exponents of this method (See method (Faith) above have shown alarming Self replicating potential . Ref. Adam Godson and his co experimenter Eve Outofside at Eden Polytech.
Theorists suggest a step prior to (1) might need to be explored to make a viable explaination

Answer 10

God made everything.