Origin of Life - A New Concept

Dear Mr. Ophiolite, I shouldn't have used the word 'defy' in this context (as is the convention). What actuallly I meant was that all of the ANABOLIC life processes result in an increased order. All the natural (spontaneous) events tend towards a decrease in order (increased entropy). But we must also understand that all the CATABOLIC processes result in a decreased order, which goes on well with the nature. BUT PLEASE CONSIDER THIS: IF NOT FOR THE LATER PROCESS THE FORMER PROCESS WOULD HAVE not BEEN POSSIBLE!! Negentropy follows entropy, which in turn follows negentropy so on and so forth. This is the reason plants need a continuous supply of sunlight and we need our food. This INPUT of energy drives the eternal life's cycle.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

No No confusion. It is all crystal clear. There are no breaks in the cycle.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

This is no more against the law of nature than water freezing.
In both cases, there is a simultaneous increase in surrounding entropy.

You need to review your biochem. All reactions, including anabolic, result in an increase in entropy. This is usually because the anabolic reaction must be driven by a simultaneous catabolic reaction, such as ATP -> ADP + Pi.


krishnagopal, I appreciate your enthusiasm, but you need to do some more work on the fundamental science. For example, you could maybe sit down and work out the thermodynamics of some (or all!) of the reaction steps in gluconeogenesis.

Looking forward to some intelligent discussion,
Pete

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Thank you very much for your interest. recall from your basic books that anabolic reactions are endergonic and they should result in a DECREASE in entropy (locally). It is another matter that S[universe] should invariably increase. You try to understand that these things occur in cycles and the ULTIMATE result must comply with the 1st law (law of conservation of energy and matter). THERE ARE no LOOSE ENDS.

my advise. when you read metabolism read holistically. Try to connect one thing to the other. Then you understand the grand cycle, connecting metabolism and energy transactions. I ahve written essays on metabolism and bioenergetics which are reviewed by senior professors. Glycolysis, cellular respiration, beta-oxidation are all catabolic; gluconeogenesis, photosynthesis, calvin cycle are anabolic. Read them SEPERATELY and again try to CONNECT them. Finish your reading only after the cycle is understood. Then you cannot miss the point.

 

Too basic. When you consider all reactants I believe that you will find that no anabolic process is actually endergonic.

Take gluconeogenesis from pyruvate, for example.
It's anabolic, because we take two pyruvates and build one glucose, right?
And it seems to be endergonic, because the free energy of glucose is greater than the free energy of the pyruvates, right?

But that's not the whole picture, is it?

Consider all the reactants and products in the pathway:
Reactants:
2 Pyruvate + 6 H2O + 4 ATP + 2 GTP + 2 NADH + 2 H+
Products:
Glucose + 4 ADP + 2 GDP + 6 Pi + 2 NAD+

Now, I'm not savvy enough to figure the Gibbs free energy (it depends on concentrations, I think?) but I note that the conversions of ATP to ADP+Pi and GTP to GDP+Pi are highly exergonic, so if you think that this complete reaction is endergonic, I'd be very interested in your calculations.


You can consider any step of any anabolic pathway, and as long as you consider all the reactants and products you'll always find that the reaction is exergonic.


If I'm mistaken, I would of course be glad to learn why.
Are any of your essays available online?

 

Very nice, indeed. That is the exact point I wanted to prove. all anabolic reactions ARE accompanied by a compensating exergonic reaction. INVARIABLY. So that the total entropy of the universe ALWAYS increases. I have taken photosynthesis as an example, but your example of gluconeogenesis is still better. By convention we are generally concerned only with the anabolic side of the reaction. But when we speak thermodynamics we have to consider both sides, to total up the final outcome of any reaction.

At the same time, needless to say, an exergonic goes 'alone', as it has already increaesd the entropy of the system.

 

Shall we go a bit further?

Energy is defined as capacity to do work, and work is defined as the ability to cause specific change. Thus metabolism effects a change in a cell. Cells may have to perform six different kinds of work for sustenance. 1. Synthetic work: this involves biosynthesis of polymers for growth, storage and other activities. 2. Mechanical work: this causes movement (like locomotion, ciliary movement, movement of chromosomes, cytoplasmic streaming etc). 3. Concentration/Electrical work: this causes movement of ions across the membrane against their concentration gradients thereby generating membrane potentials. This mode of work done by the cell is less conspicuous but it consumes about 2/3rd of the total energy. 4. Regulatory work: this work uses energy in cell-signaling mechanism to and fro between the external environment and the genome and to tailor cellular activities as per its need. 5. Thermal energy is also generated to keep the cells at optimum temperature. 6. Light energy is generated only in the rare phenomenon of bioluminescence. And ATP provides the energy.

 

Dear Pete, my essays are not available on-line. Anyway a person of your understanding may not need my essays, which cover only basic concepts for students.

 

OK, thanks anyway.

 

Consider human neurons also: The energy is supplied continuously in the form glucose. Though some amount of this energy is utilized to move the molecular motors to generate and propagate signals and to perform some baisc cellular functions, majority of energy entering the neuron is used to generate membrane potentials.

This is clearly documented in the following passage - “the major portion of the energy requirement of nerve – about 70% - is the portion used to maintain polarization of membrane by the action of Na+-K+ ATPase. …nerve has a resting heat while inactive, an initial heat during the action potential, and a recovery heat that follows activity…. the recovery heat after a single impulse is about 30 times the initial heat”(Ref: Review of Medical Physiology, William Ganong, 21st edition, Page 60).

 

There are no rebuttals! But I carry on regardless, until I make my First point.

The above first paragraph indicates that, the energy that entered the cell (or an organism) is either stored in or is spent in doing work and some is lost as heat. But the majority of energy (2/3rd) is used to maintain a DISEQUILIBRIUM status at the cell membrane. The second paragraph (of human neuron) proves that the majority (70%) is used to activate Na+-K+ ATPase. This generates ionic gradient, the purpose of which is the production of membrane potentials (& Action Potentials, if necessary). In other words: The energy which entered the cell leaves the cell (after some being stored) by ultimately generating ELECTRICAL potentials across the membrane (which is then converted to heat).

The function of this disequilibrium is three fold: 1. it maintains homeostasis (like high intracellular K+ and low Na+, and other ionic concentrations) to prevent the cell from either bursting or shrinking and to facilitate optimum concentrations. 2. It generates membrane potentials which enable them to perform such actions like phagocytosis, locomotion, Feed-Fight-Fright-Flight response (adaptive irritability). 3. The generated membrane potentials create awareness of its surroundings.

Without the above three functions a cell cannot survive for any length of time. Nor do ANYOTHER organelle of the cell performs these functions. Again, In other words: The metabolism of a cell is SERVING (or assisting) the membarnes to do this work. The genome and the genes have an important regulatory and supervisory function to ensue correct functioning of this work (apart from reproductory function). But the ULTIMATE PURPOSE of all the cellular activity performed by various organelles is to UPHOLD these three functions. And this work IS done at the membrane level only. Thus, I conclude with the following statement.

AWARENESS IS THE RESULT OF RELENTLESS FIRING OF ELECTRICAL POTENTIALS ACROSS THE MEMBRANE.

 

Is it that bad!?

 

Primitive in this sense means some species that is left differentiated than another one from the common ancestor they shared. Life chimps are more primitive than humans as chips are less different from that common ancestor than a human is.

 

Not getting the edgeways of this discussion. Does this imply that there was no evolution of species from the less-complicated to the more-complicated organisms? Is not the human being ultimate product of biological evolution.

 

Simple answer: No, humans are not the ultimate product of evolution.

Did you get a furlow for the holidays? Congratulations!

 

Then in that case human beings should appear primitive when the new (more advanced) species emerge. Then what is the row on the term "primitive".

 

What Skeptical said. The word "primitive" is ambiguous and misleading in this context. But I think that's minor point of semantics (hardly a "row").

Humans are not in any sense "the ultimate product of biological evolution." Yes, humans appear primitive compared to other organisms (real and potential).

I doubt that human biology is the most complex, advanced, or elegant biology in existence.

I doubt that the human genome is the most complex, advanced, or elegant genome.

I doubt that humans are the most complex, advanced (except in a few specific contexts), or elegant organisms.

I'm not sure that the measures of "more advanced" and "less advanced" can be objectively applied to organisms at all.

 

Whay are you unwilling to post the link to your website here, Krishnagopal? I'm not sure I want to send you an email in order to get to see the website. You can either post it here, or send it to me in a PM through this Forum.

 

Can you guy give him a chance, to express himself some more .Otherwise
it seams like some people in the forum do not allow any other ideas.

 

Hi Pete - to beleive in extraterrestrial "life" is a strong scientific debate; to beleive in extraterrestrial "intelligent life" is a movie fantasy; to beleive in extraterrestrial "warring and hostile life" is merely a horror movie. We can only say confidently that there is extraterrestrial life out there in all probability - but by no means we can conjecture the extent of development at present (may be in future yes, but not near future). Regarding the "more-or-less advanced" it can be replaced with "more complex organism".