Why does the dust come to life

Forums: Philosophy
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Cosmology tells us a lot about non-living matter, how it started and how it got to be the way it is today. And I think most people would agree that piles of carbon, phosphorus and calcium, like the dust at our feet, are simply 'dead' matter. Then we have Biological Evolution which describes how living organisms (which are made out of dead matter) develop once they get going. Ultimately resulting in thinking men, of which we ourselves are pretty convincing proof.

But if Cosmology and Evolution are right, and they seem to be, then at some point right in the middle there, about 4billion years ago on Earth, we must conclude that the previously 'dead' matter somehow acquired the properties of life sufficient to start biological evolution, and to ultimately become self-aware.

I'm posting this thread in the philosophy section because the subject I want to explore isn't about 'how' life began. It's about the deeper implications of realizing that the dust of this Universe, with no more assistance than simply being what it is, produces life and thought.

How does it make you feel knowing that the 'dust' from the ashes of ancient stars can do this? Does it change your view of the Universe to know this?

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 3 • Views: 2,035 • Replies: 51

No top replies

I once asked a microbiologist the same question, he laughed and told me he'd be rich if he knew. I often wonder what that one spark was. But, likely it was a series of reactions leading to a culminated effect.

0 Replies

As I understood the biggest mystery is how multi celled organisms came to be. I think they have a fair, yet rough, understanding on how very basic and simple life comes into existence.

0 Replies

We are amazed to find intelligence and life in the universe because we are "intelligent" and "alive." It's narciscism if you ask me.

0 Replies

bm (and I agree with JL -- usually a safe bet!)

0 Replies

JLNobody wrote:

We are amazed to find intelligence and life in the universe because we are "intelligent" and "alive." It's narciscism if you ask me.

That is only logical if you are an atheist. And I don't think it's narcissistic to be amazed and maybe gloat a little had you found unrefutable evidence that those bible thumpers were wrong all along.

0 Replies

JLNobody wrote:

We are amazed to find intelligence and life in the universe because we are "intelligent" and "alive." It's narciscism if you ask me.

Suppose we are not amazed. Suppose we simply observe that this happens and we wonder if it tells us something about the Universe which we are otherwise overlooking because we are too busy trying to figure out just how it happens.

0 Replies

Coolwhip wrote:

As I understood the biggest mystery is how multi celled organisms came to be. I think they have a fair, yet rough, understanding on how very basic and simple life comes into existence.

I think there are lots of mysteries still to be had. I'm not sure which one is the 'biggest'.

But the transition from atoms to amoeba's seems like an interesting one.

0 Replies

Wasn't this explained in Genesis?

0 Replies

Miller wrote:

Wasn't this explained in Genesis?

No. It wasn't. Any more than it was explained by the ancient tribes of south america or new guinea in their mythologies.

All mythologies deal with this subject, but science is the perspective I'm starting with this time. Science doesn't typically ask questions like this. Science is more into 'how' things happen. But the 'how' that science reveals sets a stage from which we can speculate on broader implications.

0 Replies

Genesis:

Adam was formed from the dust of the earth when ruah Adonai, the breath of life ( the breath from God), transformed the dust into a living soul.

Source of name of Adam:
www.blashon.com

"I'm sure many people have noticed the connection between the words adom, adam אדם - man, dam דם blood and adama אדמה - soil / ground. Klein writes that they are indeed related, and provides the following development.

The first, most basic word is dam. Klein writes that it is "one of the few biradical nouns in Hebrew." (We've also seen delet and keshet among others.)

From dam we get adom - according to Klein meaning "the color of blood".

Adama (ground, soil, earth, land) derives from adom - originally meaning "the red arable ground".

Lastly, adam, Klein writes, properly means "the one formed from adama אדמה, the ground." He points out there is a similar development in Latin, where homo (man, source of "human") is related to humus (ground) - the source of exhume (to take out of the ground) and humble (lowly, "on the ground").

From adom, we get such words as odem אודם - lipstick, maadim מאדים - Mars (the red planet) and the nation of Edom."

0 Replies

Wow, what an unrelated post Miller. A fine way of dragging religion into this thread.

0 Replies

Rosborne,

As I understand it (via Fritjof Capra) Prigogine has demonstrated the spontaneous emergence of "structure" in thermochemical systems far from equilibrium. Extrapolating from this (using a combination of models from mandelbrot sets and catastrophe theory) the structures we call "life" are "merely" more complex structures of the same basic nature (dissipative structures)
In other words there is a progression of spontaneous structures which can naturally emerge from chaotic systems (like the patterns in snowflakes), with "life" as we know it as perhaps the most complex yet known.

Okay, so this leaves open the possible role of a supernatural agent "tweaking the strange attractors (as the theologian Polkinghorne might have it), but a "creator" is now scientifically superfluous.

0 Replies

Coolwhip wrote:

Wow, what an unrelated post Miller. A fine way of dragging religion into this thread.

The basis of all life is the SOUL. Cool

0 Replies

Spontaneous generation?

This is the first principle students learn in MICROBIOLOGY class.
As you will recall, spontaneous generation was disproved by KOCH, a long time ago.

There is no SPONTANEOUS GENERATION... Cool

0 Replies

Miller wrote:

The basis of all life is the SOUL.

The emoticon means you're joking, right?

0 Replies

Miller, can you prescribe for yourself a much needed pill? Razz

0 Replies

Miller,

Koch and Pasteur predate Prigogine by at least 80 years.

http://www.mountainman.com.au/chaos_02.htm

0 Replies

I recall reading about 2 decades ago, an article stating that a mathematician had calculated the likelihood of an amino acid molecule to be spontaneously formed as 1 in 1(whatever the name is for a number with 100 zero's after it). Amino Acids are a very basic building block of life. We all know life is much more complex than an amino acid.

That said, I think there many mysteries :

-How did dust become life
-What was the first food for the single cell organism (remember, we and most organisms eat other organisms...usually dead of course)
-How did the original life form reproduce itself (ie it had to have a reproductive structure inbuilt when it first came to life)
How did a single cell organism become multiple celled organism
How did cell specialisation in multicell organisms first start
And if survival of the fittest ruled...how did diversity occur
How did animals take the air and become birds
How did 'brains' develop

0 Replies

Re: Why does the dust come to life

rosborne979 wrote:

Cosmology tells us a lot about non-living matter, how it started and how it got to be the way it is today. And I think most people would agree that piles of carbon, phosphorus and calcium, like the dust at our feet, are simply 'dead' matter. Then we have Biological Evolution which describes how living organisms (which are made out of dead matter) develop once they get going. Ultimately resulting in thinking men, of which we ourselves are pretty convincing proof.

But if Cosmology and Evolution are right, and they seem to be, then at some point right in the middle there, about 4billion years ago on Earth, we must conclude that the previously 'dead' matter somehow acquired the properties of life sufficient to start biological evolution, and to ultimately become self-aware.

I'm posting this thread in the philosophy section because the subject I want to explore isn't about 'how' life began. It's about the deeper implications of realizing that the dust of this Universe, with no more assistance than simply being what it is, produces life and thought.

How does it make you feel knowing that the 'dust' from the ashes of ancient stars can do this? Does it change your view of the Universe to know this?

LOL, Nice try Ros! Laughing

"How does it make you feel knowing that the dust from the stars can do this?" while speaking of: "we must conclude that the previously 'dead' matter somehow acquired the properties of life sufficient to start biological evolution, and to ultimately become self-aware."

The origin of life has never been scientifically-proven. You know that! :wink:

With no "proof' - it's gotta be 'poof' - right?

0 Replies

Why does the dust come to life

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know