Asteroid Ryugu Has All of the Main Ingredients For Life (newscientist.com) 32
Samples from the asteroid Ryugu contain all five nucleobases -- the key building blocks of DNA and RNA. "This strengthens the idea that asteroids may have brought the ingredients for the first living organisms to Earth long ago," reports New Scientist. From the report: Japan's Hayabusa 2 spacecraft visited Ryugu in 2018, where it shot two projectiles -- one small and one large -- into the surface of the asteroid and collected the resulting debris. It arrived back at Earth with the samples in 2020 and researchers have been analyzing these in detail ever since. Yasuhiro Oba at Hokkaido University in Japan and his colleagues examined two samples, one from the asteroid's surface and one comprised of subsurface materials excavated by the projectiles. In both, the team found all five primary nucleobases, which are the compounds that make up the nucleic acids DNA and RNA when combined with sugars and phosphoric acid.
This isn't the first time that nucleobases have been found in asteroid samples: they have been seen in meteorites, too, and in samples from the asteroid Bennu. The researchers did find different abundances of the various nucleobases among the various samples, though, which hints that these compounds might be useful for tracing asteroids and meteorites back to the parent bodies that they broke off from in the distant past, as well as understanding the evolution of those parent bodies over time. The findings have been published in the journal Nature Astronomy.
This isn't the first time that nucleobases have been found in asteroid samples: they have been seen in meteorites, too, and in samples from the asteroid Bennu. The researchers did find different abundances of the various nucleobases among the various samples, though, which hints that these compounds might be useful for tracing asteroids and meteorites back to the parent bodies that they broke off from in the distant past, as well as understanding the evolution of those parent bodies over time. The findings have been published in the journal Nature Astronomy.
Interesting, but (Score:1)
Do you know where else those substances are found in abundance? Earth.
Is there any reason to suppose they weren't formed here, by the same or similar processes by which they ended up on the asteroids?
Re:Interesting, but (Score:5, Insightful)
You seem not to understand how science works. There can be multiple theories worth considering.
"Is there any reason to suppose they weren't formed here, by the same or similar processes by which they ended up on the asteroids?"
To suppose? What do you mean by suppose? Assume? Yes there is a reason not to assume. Theorize? No, there is no reason not to theorize, so how do you test that theory?
Do you oppose scientists trying to advance knowledge?
Re:Interesting, but (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Interesting, but (Score:5, Insightful)
and being abundant everywhere it is not too hot for them to be destroyed.
Like the gravitationally heated (see: melted) ball of rock and iron that became the Earth?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
However, you now know they're all over the rocks.
It's well established that they will survive reentry.
The Earth was undeniably sterilized.
Could they have also independently re-formed on the surface of the planet? Evidence suggests yes.... But ultimately, that doesn't change the fact that there was a *constant* stream of the shit coming in from space.
Re: (Score:2)
To suppose? What do you mean by suppose? Assume? Yes there is a reason not to assume. Theorize? No, there is no reason not to theorize, so how do you test that theory?
Well, to start with, you need to create a new universe from scratch. From there, it's just a matter of waiting around for a few billion years to see the results.
Re: (Score:1)
It was me. I licked them all. They're mine now.
Re: (Score:3)
More likely is some kind of situation where they were abundant on most or all space rocks, and the Earth was sterilized during formation, and re-seeded after it cooled.
Re: (Score:2)
Wouldn't pretty much everywhere in the universe undergo the same initial formation, though? Saying 'life came from SPACE!' just pushes the origin to somewhere we can't really test or even pinpoint.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
2) It's not saying life came from space. What we call life almost certainly originated here. The building blocks of it likely came from space.
3) I'd argue an attempt at trying to pinpoint the origin of life, given the breadth of knowledge we currently have, is unscientific.
Any planet of sufficient mass would be totally sterilized in its formation. Space rocks wouldn't be. If
Re: (Score:1)
Does this trolling make you feel better about getting owned by me?
If so- carry on. I can handle the impotent rage of your inferiority complex. If it doesn't- quit wasting both of our time.
Re: (Score:2)
It's transparent. It just makes you look sad.
That [sic] is yours, not mine. If you look at the post you're erroneously quoting, you'll see it's not incorrect at all.
You also keep using the word "we" as if there were someone else here as pathetically maladjusted as you. There really isn't. You're in a class of your own.
Your daddy must have done some seriously fucked up shit to you as a kid to give you the inferiority co
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I've noticed there is a very strong... current in here of people making pretty bad arguments for the nucleobases having a Terran origin. I get the feeling that there's an unspoken foundation to it. Is it religious?
Interesting observation, but the conclusion... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, their assumption that a sterile planetary body will not spontaneously develop this chemistry is not a really solid null hypothesis, especially given the number of demonstrations that amino acids fall out of proto-Earth conditions.
Re: (Score:2)
Ultimately, whether truly native, or re-seeded after sterilizing formation seems pretty moot to me.
Re:Interesting observation, but the conclusion... (Score:4, Interesting)
Studies have reasonably argued that anything up to microbial life (nevermind nucleobases) can survive reentry with ease.
Even midi-chlorians? (Score:1)
Or chloromidians? Was there any mention of chlorine on it?
In the absence of chlorine, would flouromidians form? Would flouromidian-based life have any unusual properties?
Or whatever it is that tricorders detect?
Or souls? Did it make a detour through our solar system to pick up a few souls for later use?
Or.... (Score:2)
Every rocky body in the solar system has these same elements.
So? (Score:2)
What's so special about the asteroid having these that earth could not also have had them?
Re: (Score:2)
What is special about asteroids having them, is that it means the chemistry did not specifically need to reform from scratch after the Earth cooled, it would have been re-seeded from space.
That doesn't mean the chemistry didn't also re-establish here, but it means it was almost guaranteed to externally.
nonsense (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Granted, those that believe the 7 days of creation were the same as 7 of our current 24hr days are nuts, but Genesis can fit into our current scientific understanding of creation, which is kinda amazing.
1. creates light and separates it from darkness
-- The sun formed. Proto-earth, and maybe the collision that resulted in the moon and set the world to spinning.
2. creates sky/firmament to separate the waters and establish the atmosphere
-- Earth cools, etc..
3. dry land and vegetation
-- building blocks for life
Re: (Score:2)
Dumb question maybe (Score:2)
"This strengthens the idea that asteroids may have brought the ingredients for the first living organisms to Earth long ago"
Does it?
Is there a vast difference between "some nucleotides developed here on primitive earth" vs "some nucleotides developed on (random asteroid X) and crashed to earth"?
Do these have to be exclusive?
How is 'it came from space rock' intrinsically more plausible than 'it ALSO came from space rock'?
If nucleotides are ubiquitous enough to show up on "random rock in space" all that reall