ATP is the energy currency of all living things. It is required to provide energy in a directed and controlled manner to do useful work in the cell, such as for moving material across membranes or around the cell, enzyme actions and for DNA replication, synthesis of materials required for life, among other things. How did the first protocell survive considering that it could not produce ATP, nor did it have the enzymes required to direct energy to do useful work. Energy without enzymes is destructive, not useful. I don't ever see these key issues raised in these origin of life explanations - why is that?
Yeah it was. In the 1950’s. Do some research maybe cause these people have way better things to do than answer your comment which you could’ve answered yourself in 5 minutes. Or was it a rhetorical question?
@@poetheprogrammer2945 i can anwser u, some enzymes that are already present in the cell or in the droplet can make chain reactions that end up making the membrane bigger and replicate. At some time during history this led to the evolution of rna and so the first cells
@@mikimiki1634 The formation of RNA as an unguided or random occurrence, that is without the genetic instructions found in DNA specifying its creation by the machinery of the cell, is not statistically possible, not even in the realm of statistical probability if you had ideal conditions for one hundred trillion years. The chance occurrence of RNA is a fairytale told by malevolent parents to their frightened children. It is not taken seriously by anyone who has the faintest idea of the mechanics involved in building the first chain of amino acids required for the most simple protein.
One biochemical aspect that's just not mentioned in this deceptive debate is the continuous increase in the number of vesicles in a system capable of self-reproduction which has to be commensurate with a regeneration mechanism for continued production of the entrapped enzymes and DNA/RNA templates. Otherwise, the daughter vesicles contain decreasing numbers of entrapped molecules and so become non-functional after only a few generations. Thus, replication inside the vesicles must be coupled not only to the synthesis of new membrane constituents via enzyme/protein expression, but also to the self-copying of the template molecules if a primitive level of systems autonomy is to be achieved within a model protocell. This seems to however be an impossible task to achieve as we don't have a continued source of supply and " waste disposal" ..... this hypothesis is therefore nothing more than which thinking hand has no scientific proof to back it. As a matter of fact science disproves it as stated above. Why is this serious setback omitted? Of course, we know why. Ideology takes over science.
Wow, this was a fantastic video!
How do you not have more views?
Thank you :)
Thanks for the wonderful video, Protocells are a fascinating topic
Great! I didn’t understand all the terminology, but your generous explanations were helpful.
Various fatty acids can form abiotically: we know that because we have found them in meteorites. And mixtures of fatty acids can form vesicles.
ATP is the energy currency of all living things. It is required to provide energy in a directed and controlled manner to do useful work in the cell, such as for moving material across membranes or around the cell, enzyme actions and for DNA replication, synthesis of materials required for life, among other things. How did the first protocell survive considering that it could not produce ATP, nor did it have the enzymes required to direct energy to do useful work. Energy without enzymes is destructive, not useful. I don't ever see these key issues raised in these origin of life explanations - why is that?
Hey. Where can I find the original "protocells division and growth" microscope video?
How will the organnels interact with each other
You make vedeo for me
👍👍👍
So is this able to be demonstrated in a lab?
Yeah it was. In the 1950’s. Do some research maybe cause these people have way better things to do than answer your comment which you could’ve answered yourself in 5 minutes. Or was it a rhetorical question?
"model the origin of life" lol
So where did the first information come from to produce the first cell?
They won’t answer this one.
@@grantr1556 Because no one has an answer backed by evidence at this time
at 3:32 she basically said life came from life, evolution is dead
@@poetheprogrammer2945 i can anwser u, some enzymes that are already present in the cell or in the droplet can make chain reactions that end up making the membrane bigger and replicate. At some time during history this led to the evolution of rna and so the first cells
@@mikimiki1634
The formation of RNA as an unguided or random occurrence, that is without the genetic instructions found in DNA specifying its creation by the machinery of the cell, is not statistically possible, not even in the realm of statistical probability if you had ideal conditions for one hundred trillion years. The chance occurrence of RNA is a fairytale told by malevolent parents to their frightened children. It is not taken seriously by anyone who has the faintest idea of the mechanics involved in building the first chain of amino acids required for the most simple protein.
3:32
kinda defeats the whole purpose doesn't it, you're basically saying polymers came from polymers , life came from life
what a fkn joke
Creationist?
@@mikimiki1634 Likely
We've found various fatty acids in meteorites, so we know they can form abiotically. And mixtures of fatty acids can spontaneously form vesicles.
Polymers come from various ions in water (from acidic impurities) forming fatty acids with carbon from rocks, if you were wondering.
One biochemical aspect that's just not mentioned in this deceptive debate is
the continuous increase in the number of vesicles in a system capable of self-reproduction which has to be commensurate with a regeneration mechanism for continued production of the entrapped enzymes and DNA/RNA templates. Otherwise, the daughter vesicles contain decreasing numbers of entrapped molecules and so become non-functional after only a few generations. Thus, replication inside the vesicles must be coupled not only to the synthesis of new membrane constituents via enzyme/protein expression, but also to the self-copying of the template molecules if a primitive level of systems autonomy is to be achieved within a model protocell. This seems to however be an impossible task to achieve as we don't have a continued source of supply and " waste disposal" ..... this hypothesis is therefore nothing more than which thinking hand has no scientific proof to back it. As a matter of fact science disproves it as stated above. Why is this serious setback omitted? Of course, we know why. Ideology takes over science.