Among other things, it contains details on what amphiphiles might actually be present on Titan, a very nice set of diagrams explaining their proposed process, and proposals for lab experiments to verify whether the process is possible. I've had a soft spot for the vesicle-first theory of abiogenesis since I first heard of it, so I hope someone runs the experiments. But as far as I can tell, this is all theoretical so far.
rolph · 9h ago
amphiphillic vesicles are a stepping stone for persistent molecular forms.
essentially a reaction vessel, insulating the contents from the extravesicular mayhem.
jojobas · 7h ago
It's thought that life on Earth started with RNA mayhem, not with vessels to isolate from it.
andrewflnr · 6h ago
RNA world is mainstream, but a few scientists have proposed that something like cell membranes, such as these vesicles, came first and provided the environment for more complex chemistry.
evrimoztamur · 5h ago
Life exists at the boundaries of density changes.
It makes absolutely no sense that the code would precede the hardware, and the hardware needs shielding.
transmembrane proteins are complex hardware of their own…
bongodongobob · 4h ago
I think the idea is that if you have a nice bubbly froth and some proteins/RNA type thing end up inside and help reinforce the bubble wall through electrostatic forces you get a symbiotic relationship. The soup inside reinforces the bubbles around it.
dsign · 2h ago
And everything that we hold dear happens after that.
I don't object to this explanation of the world, but I reckon it's an uphill battle convincing people that all of the living natural world, and all of human history, their culture, their religions and their science and all the beliefs in-between had their origin in some electrostatic forces. I'm of the opinion that even well-informed people of science haven't had time to fully adjust their world-view during the handful of decades we have known this much.
igleria · 30m ago
Dunno about everyone else, but if that is the origin of everything that lives on this planet, I'd find relief. One less question in an ever increasing sea of questions is better than just an ever increasing sea of questions.
codesnik · 2h ago
but actual code preceded the hardware!
anonzzzies · 25m ago
indeed, people like Dijkstra wrote quire a bit of code on paper before the hardware to run that code existed.
ggm · 7h ago
I like the "vesicle first" theory because planar sheets of reaction can form perturbations, so getting from two surfaces mixing to complex shapes and enclosures feels plausible given any significant vibration or wave.
Once you have an enclosure you have potential for osmosis and other differentials across the boundary. It's not life Jim, but it's one hell of a building block/precursor.
polishdude20 · 5h ago
This is very similar to Nick Lane's theory of the origins of life.
Solaris by Stanislaw Lem on the topic of Ocean is Conscious.
metalman · 48m ago
This article is a wonderfull fever dream of genisis.Though it's starting point is mundane.
The whole vesicle theory is built on a physical/mechanical process ubiquitous in nature,that so far has no connection with life.
Wildly suggestive and so so close, but when you look at the actual way vesicles are made, and cell walls are made, they are not the same, but have the same properties, as it lkely that physics and chemistry only allow for tiny bubbles(cue track), to form in a limited number of ways, one is an accident, and the other a mystery.
Padriac · 3h ago
... or they might not.
dash2 · 4h ago
This feels very cynical, but what incentive does NASA have to do research showing alien life is not very likely in our solar system?
robbomacrae · 3h ago
Regardless of incentives I think this is some of the most important research they should be doing. As a species we need to get a better understanding of the probability of life on other planets and therefore a better understanding of fermi's paradox in case the dark forest theory is correct. So if NASA has an incentive to discover potential pathways for extraterrestrial life... great!
dash2 · 1h ago
The problem is that the incentive is biased against scepticism. So the process is more likely to find potential pathways but not notice obstacles or counter arguments.
jiggawatts · 3h ago
This is a point I keep making: every one of NASA’s Mars missions has very carefully excluded any scientific instrument that could conclusively eliminate the presence of life... and hence future missions to find life.
I.e.: they don’t carry high power microscopes because apparently there’s no room for one on a 900kg rover the size of a car.
someothherguyy · 3h ago
> they don’t carry high power microscopes because apparently there’s no room for one on a 900kg rover the size of a car
They do though:
"The WATSON (Wide Angle Topographic Sensor for Operations and eNgineering) is a reflight of the MAHLI (MArs Hand Lens Imager) that is a part of the Curiosity rover (Edgett et al., 2012). WATSON obtains full-color images from microscopic scales (∼13 μm/pixel) to infinity and is used for initial textural analysis of rock and regolith targets, as well as to assess potential proximity science targets and the safety of robotic arm activities (Edgett et al., 2012). The ACI (Autofocus Contextual Imager) is a fixed field, 10.1 μm/pixel resolution grayscale imager used to obtain best-focus and colocate laser spots with surface feature analyzed during SHERLOC spectroscopic investigations (Bhartia et al., 2021)."
They do not, because that's not high power microscope. I chose my words carefully.
10-13 μm per pixel is nowhere near good enough when a typical bacterium is 0.5 - 5.0 μm in size!
I remember the discussions around the mission plan for both Opportunity and Curiosity where NASA kept making "mumbly" noises about why they can't ship decent optics with these things.
Anything that would definitely eliminate (not just "potentially find") the presence of either life or water is never included. It's always omitted, for "reasons".
Water and life must forever remain possible things for the funding to keep flowing.
someothherguyy · 1h ago
> 10-13 μm per pixel is nowhere near good enough when a typical bacterium is 0.5 - 5.0 μm in size!
Individual bacteria are also generally not visible in optical microscopes without staining. If there was life on the surface of mars, you probably wouldn't need a microscope to see it. Just like you don't need a microscope to observe your bread it's moldy.
Water isn't an abstract possibility on Mars. It's a reality. They've found minerals that only form in water, they've found ice, they've observed erosion. We don't understand the hydrology of Mars but it isn't some kind of conspiracy. It's a laborious process, which they continue to chug away at.
Looking for life isn't the primary mission of Mars rovers. They're remote controlled geologists. The search for life really has nothing to do with funding for Mars missions. No one expects to find it.
Scarblac · 3h ago
What kind of instrument could conclusively eliminate presence of life?
keithwhor · 3h ago
One that goes boom.
lukan · 3h ago
Some bacteria survives hard radiation of deep space in stasis mode.
jiggawatts · 2h ago
Anything that can return a sample. Notice that Curiosity collects samples, but omits the sample return rocket.
A good enough microscope can easily tell the difference between life and non-life, especially in the presence of water. If it moves on its own, it is almost certainly alive!
Certain kinds of chromatographs can conclusively determine that no complex chemicals are present, the kind essential to life. I.e.: if only simple metal oxides and the like are present, then you have only a rock.
rsynnott · 39m ago
> Anything that can return a sample. Notice that Curiosity collects samples, but omits the sample return rocket.
NASA (and also the Soviet Union and ESA) have repeatedly designed Mars sample return missions, but have not done them for budgetary reasons; it would be tremendously difficult and expensive.
Here's the current one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA-ESA_Mars_Sample_Return - however, given that it was hitting funding problems even _before_ ol' minihands gutted NASA funding, it seems destined to become yet another NASA/ESA canceled program (there's a bit of a history of ambitious NASA/ESA collaborations which die when one side or the other pulls the budgetary plug; JWST was likely lucky to escape this fate, say).
This puts it in a particularly weird place, as the earth return section is already built and due to launch on an Ariane 6 in two years (it will then proceed, slowly, to Mars using an ion drive, and await the lander and Mars launcher, which will presumably never arrive because budgets).
someothherguyy · 55m ago
> A good enough microscope can easily tell the difference between life and non-life, especially in the presence of water.
" Inorganic precipitation processes are capable of producing a wide range of morphological outputs. This range includes shapes with both crystallographic and non-crystallographic symmetry elements. Among the latter, morphologies that mimic primitive living organisms are easily obtained under different physico-chemical conditions including those that are geochemically plausible. The application of this information to the problem of deciphering primitive life on the early Earth and Mars is discussed. It is concluded that morphology cannot be used unambiguously as a tool for primitive life detection. "
Erm, just no. I have an old book lying around about Viking, the first mission to the surface of Mars and written before it reached Mars. The book is full of the expectation that they will find life and are rather curious what kind of life. (And the book describes all the instruments and methology)
But no traces of life were found ever.
If there is life on Mars, it is hidden underground in vulcanic active areas and alike and no mission we can do today, could conclude with certainty that there is no life on Mars. But we have been looking real hard.
veqq · 3h ago
What's the name of the book?
lukan · 3h ago
Projekt Viking by Ernst Stuhlinger.
But in german and no idea if it was ever translated, but I assume similar books exist in english.
Among other things, it contains details on what amphiphiles might actually be present on Titan, a very nice set of diagrams explaining their proposed process, and proposals for lab experiments to verify whether the process is possible. I've had a soft spot for the vesicle-first theory of abiogenesis since I first heard of it, so I hope someone runs the experiments. But as far as I can tell, this is all theoretical so far.
It makes absolutely no sense that the code would precede the hardware, and the hardware needs shielding.
I don't object to this explanation of the world, but I reckon it's an uphill battle convincing people that all of the living natural world, and all of human history, their culture, their religions and their science and all the beliefs in-between had their origin in some electrostatic forces. I'm of the opinion that even well-informed people of science haven't had time to fully adjust their world-view during the handful of decades we have known this much.
Once you have an enclosure you have potential for osmosis and other differentials across the boundary. It's not life Jim, but it's one hell of a building block/precursor.
Solaris by Stanislaw Lem on the topic of Ocean is Conscious.
I.e.: they don’t carry high power microscopes because apparently there’s no room for one on a 900kg rover the size of a car.
They do though:
"The WATSON (Wide Angle Topographic Sensor for Operations and eNgineering) is a reflight of the MAHLI (MArs Hand Lens Imager) that is a part of the Curiosity rover (Edgett et al., 2012). WATSON obtains full-color images from microscopic scales (∼13 μm/pixel) to infinity and is used for initial textural analysis of rock and regolith targets, as well as to assess potential proximity science targets and the safety of robotic arm activities (Edgett et al., 2012). The ACI (Autofocus Contextual Imager) is a fixed field, 10.1 μm/pixel resolution grayscale imager used to obtain best-focus and colocate laser spots with surface feature analyzed during SHERLOC spectroscopic investigations (Bhartia et al., 2021)."
From: https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2022EA00...
See also:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perseverance_(rover)#Instrumen...
https://science.nasa.gov/mission/mars-2020-perseverance/scie...
10-13 μm per pixel is nowhere near good enough when a typical bacterium is 0.5 - 5.0 μm in size!
I remember the discussions around the mission plan for both Opportunity and Curiosity where NASA kept making "mumbly" noises about why they can't ship decent optics with these things.
Anything that would definitely eliminate (not just "potentially find") the presence of either life or water is never included. It's always omitted, for "reasons".
Water and life must forever remain possible things for the funding to keep flowing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thrombolite
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stromatolite
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spongiostromata
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oncolite
Water isn't an abstract possibility on Mars. It's a reality. They've found minerals that only form in water, they've found ice, they've observed erosion. We don't understand the hydrology of Mars but it isn't some kind of conspiracy. It's a laborious process, which they continue to chug away at.
Looking for life isn't the primary mission of Mars rovers. They're remote controlled geologists. The search for life really has nothing to do with funding for Mars missions. No one expects to find it.
A good enough microscope can easily tell the difference between life and non-life, especially in the presence of water. If it moves on its own, it is almost certainly alive!
Certain kinds of chromatographs can conclusively determine that no complex chemicals are present, the kind essential to life. I.e.: if only simple metal oxides and the like are present, then you have only a rock.
NASA (and also the Soviet Union and ESA) have repeatedly designed Mars sample return missions, but have not done them for budgetary reasons; it would be tremendously difficult and expensive.
Here's the current one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA-ESA_Mars_Sample_Return - however, given that it was hitting funding problems even _before_ ol' minihands gutted NASA funding, it seems destined to become yet another NASA/ESA canceled program (there's a bit of a history of ambitious NASA/ESA collaborations which die when one side or the other pulls the budgetary plug; JWST was likely lucky to escape this fate, say).
This puts it in a particularly weird place, as the earth return section is already built and due to launch on an Ariane 6 in two years (it will then proceed, slowly, to Mars using an ion drive, and await the lander and Mars launcher, which will presumably never arrive because budgets).
They are still arguing over this one three decades later: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allan_Hills_84001
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abg7905
" Inorganic precipitation processes are capable of producing a wide range of morphological outputs. This range includes shapes with both crystallographic and non-crystallographic symmetry elements. Among the latter, morphologies that mimic primitive living organisms are easily obtained under different physico-chemical conditions including those that are geochemically plausible. The application of this information to the problem of deciphering primitive life on the early Earth and Mars is discussed. It is concluded that morphology cannot be used unambiguously as a tool for primitive life detection. "
https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/conference-proceedings-of...
But no traces of life were found ever.
If there is life on Mars, it is hidden underground in vulcanic active areas and alike and no mission we can do today, could conclude with certainty that there is no life on Mars. But we have been looking real hard.
But in german and no idea if it was ever translated, but I assume similar books exist in english.