• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Producing life from non living matter

Kirran

Kirran

ॐ
Premium Member
McBell

McBell

Unbound
FearGod said:
If that makes sense to you, but to me God has no figure and we know nothing about what is God's nature.
I'm talking about the creator of the universe, names has no value to my understanding.
Click to expand...
Interesting how you make so many claims about a god you admit you know nothing about.
Makes it rather difficult to take anything you say about this god you claim no one can know anything about seriously.
 
FearGod

FearGod

Freedom Of Mind
Kirran said:
Well it's using non-living components derived from living organisms. What would you describe as from scratch?
Click to expand...

There was a recipient living cell, replacing some components doesn't mean that we created life,
if we can then why not to give life to the dead?
 
McBell

McBell

Unbound
FearGod said:
There was a recipient living cell, replacing some components doesn't mean that we created life,
if we can then why not to give life to the dead?
Click to expand...
there is a difference between creating life and reanimating the dead.
Interesting that you do not know this.
 
sayak83

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
FearGod said:
If life wasn't a product done by a creator, then what prevents us from creating it
the same way as it has been done by the unconscious nature.

This challenge was offered by God thousands years ago, as to create living creatures, can we?
Click to expand...
We already have. It replicates, though very slowly, but it does replicate by using energy from surroundings. Made entirely artificially.
A recursive vesicle-based model protocell with a primitive model cell cycle : Nature Communications
. While we have previously described a giant vesicle (GV)-based model protocell in which amplification of DNA was linked to self-reproduction, the ability of a protocell to recursively self-proliferate for multiple generations has not been demonstrated. Here we show that newborn daughter GVs can be restored to the status of their parental GVs by pH-induced vesicular fusion of daughter GVs with conveyer GVs filled with depleted substrates. We describe a primitive model cell cycle comprising four discrete phases (ingestion, replication, maturity and division), each of which is selectively activated by a specific external stimulus. The production of recursive self-proliferating model protocells represents a step towards eventual production of model protocells that are able to mimic evolution.

ncomms9352-f1.jpg


(a) Membrane lipids consisting of vesicular membrane of self-reproductive GV. Cationic membrane lipid V, amphiphilic catalyst C and phospholipids (POPC and POPG) (right). The membrane lipid V and electrolyte molecule E are generated through the hydrolysis of the membrane lipid precursor V*. (b) The production of cationic membrane lipid V from its precursor V*. The cationic membrane V is produced together with the electrolyte E at an active site comprised of amplified DNA and amphiphilic catalyst C in the giant vesicular membrane. The proposed structure of the active site, comprised of amplified DNA, cationic membrane lipid V and amphiphilic catalyst C, for production of membrane lipids is shown in the bottom. (c) pH lowering induced adhesion and fusion between the target GV and the conveyer GV. The surface charge of the target GV changes to cationic due to the protonation of the POPC as well as the increase of the cationic membrane lipid V from its precursor, and the target GV adheres to the conveyer GV with a negative surface charge at pH=3. These two types of GVs fuse, and the transport of dNTP from the conveyer GV to the target GV proceeds.

----—-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your challenge has been met now what?

I anticipate that you will now change the goalposts and redefine life. Correct?

Here is the Britannica definition I am using


life, living matter and, as such, matter that shows certain attributes that include responsiveness, growth, metabolism, energy transformation, and reproduction
 
Last edited:
Rational Agnostic

Rational Agnostic

Well-Known Member
FearGod said:
If life wasn't a product done by a creator, then what prevents us from creating it
the same way as it has been done by the unconscious nature.

This challenge was offered by God thousands years ago, as to create living creatures, can we?
Click to expand...

We may eventually, but if we do, the organism will be very simple as natural selection cannot act substantially in a human lifetime.
 
FearGod

FearGod

Freedom Of Mind
Mestemia said:
No, it isn't.
A rock is not dead.
Why?
Because in order to be dead, it had to have been alive.
Rocks are never alive.
Therefore, rocks can never be dead.
Click to expand...

Dead are also used for the non living matter, it works either way.
a living that becomes dead by lacking life or it's original dead because it lacks life.

This definition presupposed that air, a medium composed of ten chemical species: nitrogen (N2) 78%, oxygen (O2) 21%, as well as argon (Ar), neon (Ne), helium (He), methane (CH4), krypton (Kr), hydrogen (H2), nitrous oxide (N2O), and xenon (Xe), in smaller percentages, is an example of ‘dead matter’, but that these ten atoms and molecules become living matter or, in other words, ‘alive’ when inhaled, which is a nonsensical postulate.
Non-living matter - Hmolpedia
 
McBell

McBell

Unbound
FearGod said:
Dead are also used for the non living matter, it works either way.
a living that becomes dead by lacking life or it's original dead because it lacks life.

This definition presupposed that air, a medium composed of ten chemical species: nitrogen (N2) 78%, oxygen (O2) 21%, as well as argon (Ar), neon (Ne), helium (He), methane (CH4), krypton (Kr), hydrogen (H2), nitrous oxide (N2O), and xenon (Xe), in smaller percentages, is an example of ‘dead matter’, but that these ten atoms and molecules become living matter or, in other words, ‘alive’ when inhaled, which is a nonsensical postulate.
Non-living matter - Hmolpedia
Click to expand...
Your ability to conflate definitions is admiral.
However, it is also dishonest.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top