Whether Or Not Prebiotic Soup Was Ever Needed/Existed For Origin of Life

7/30/2019 Whether Or Not Prebiotic Soup Was Ever Needed/Existed For Origin of Life

1/6

Whether Or Not Prebiotic Soup Was

Ever Needed/Existed For Origin of Life

Summary: For most of modern theories of Origin of Life, Prebiotic Soup is the

starting point and much of the research is focused on this point. However till date

not an iota of evidence has been detected in support of existence of Prebiotic Soup

at any time in the history of Earth. It is concluded that Prebiotic Soup was neither

needed nor existed for Origin of Life on Earth.

Darwin suggested that life could have begun in a warm little pond with all sorts of

ammonia and phosphoric salts, light, heat, electricity present that a protein was

formed ready to undergo still more complex changes. At the present day suchmatter would be instantly devoured or absorbed which would not have been the

case before living creatures were formed.

This gave rise to Primordial Soup Theory which suggests that life began in a pond

or ocean as a result of the chemicals from the atmosphere and some form of

energy to make amino acids; the building blocks of proteins, which would then

evolve into all the species. This is supposed to happen at least 3.8 billion to 3.55

billion years ago.

This involves kaleidoscopic or random permutation and combination of chemicals

with eventual selection and accumulation of useful permutations and

combinations of chemicals so as to eventually give rise to origin as well as

evolution of life.

Alexander Oparin in 1924 suggested the idea of Prebiotic Soup and today this is

the starting point for most of modern theories of Origin of Life. Around the same

time J.B.S. Haldane suggested that Earths Prebiotic oceans are different fromtodays oceans would have formed a hot dilute soup in which organic

compounds could have formed. The underlying hypothesis held by Oparin and

Haldane was that conditions on the primeval Earth favored chemical reactions

that synthesized organic compounds from inorganic precursors. Arguing along the

same line it has been speculated that once upon a time there existed organic


2/6

matter on Earth in sufficient concentration that its spontaneous, kaleidoscopic

random interactions ultimately led to Origin of Life. The principal difficulty with

this line of thinking is lack of specificity of organic chemical reactions. This is quite

unlike chemistry of life i.e. Biochemistry.

Biochemist Robert Shapiro has summarized the "primordial soup" theory of

Oparin and Haldane in its "mature form" as follows

1.The early Earth had a chemically reducing atmosphere.2.This atmosphere, exposed to energy in various forms, produced simple

organic compounds ("monomers").

3.These compounds accumulated in a "soup", which may have beenconcentrated at various locations (shorelines, oceanic vents etc.).

4.By further transformation, more complex organic polymers and ultimatelylife developed in the soup.

While steps 1-3 have been basically observed experimentally, step 4 has been

criticized as simplistic - a stage of "then magic happens".

However even existence of chemically reducing atmosphere of Early earth has

been doubted by geochemists. To quote:

But is the prebiotic soup theory a reasonable explanation for the emergence of life?

Contemporary geoscientists tend to doubt that the primitive atmosphere had the highly reducing

composition used by Miller in 1953.http://www.sciencemag.org/content/300/5620/745.fullEven need for step 3 is doubtful since Biological systems show extraordinary

capacity to operate under very-very low concentrations of essential chemicals

coupled with ability to concentrate essential chemicals as per the requirements of

particular Biological Systems.

Since 1924, much work has been done to gather evidence in support of Primordial

Soup Theory but till date not an iota of evidence has been discovered supporting

Prebiotic Soup hypothesis or existence of Prebiotic Soup.

What has generally been overlooked by scientific community till date is the fact

that Biochemistry or Chemistry of life is unique and distinctive to living state. It is

totally devoid of randomness. Rather, Biological Systems in order to keep
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/300/5620/745.fullhttp://www.sciencemag.org/content/300/5620/745.full


3/6

existence cant permit random chemical reactions. Some of the salient features of

Biochemistry are:

(I) Specificity, accuracy and precision of reactions unlike organicchemistry in which a large number of side reactions invariably occurduring any organic reaction leading to formation of side products, in

biochemistry reactions are highly specific, precise and accurate without

any side reactions and free from side products. This is essential to avoid

chaos in animate matter.

(II) In biochemistry, all reactions take place under conditions of existenceof given organism or conditions of its internal milieu which are often

quite different from conditions in which similar inorganic and organic

reactions proceed. Rationally speaking biochemical reactions must haveoriginated under the conditions in which relevant organisms are usually

found. Because of vast variation in habitat of organisms, the same

potentiality is realized through differently structured enzymes effective

under different conditions. Therefore, for evolution of Biochemistry,

environment has never been an absolute constraint.

(III) Biochemistry is deterministic. Deterministic character of chemistry oflife is well exhibited by its properties such as specificity of

intermolecular interactions, chemo selectivity, homochirality, stereo-specificity of biological molecules. Even the subsequent course of events

has been essentially deterministic with a strong propensity to

stabilization, fixation, preservation and propagation of useful past and

present innovations. Biochemistry may have its roots in stochastic

inanimate interaction of matter and energy but stochastic organic

chemical reactions cant account for specificity of reactions seen in

biochemistry. Unfolding or evolution of biochemistry requires a

surprising lack of side reactions (Smith and Morowitz). How this

extraordinary specificity of chemical reactions is achieved in the absence

of genes giving rise to catalytic polymers with three dimensional

substrate pockets is still a matter of conjecture and contemplation.


4/6

So the key questions which we must address ourselves keeping in view

homochirality of biological molecules are:

(i) Why homochirality is so essential that it is a deterministic trait inentire biosphere or operates as a matter of law. Does it imply some

constraints of molecular intelligence?

(ii) How this deterministic homochirality was obtained and sustained,may be from a stochastic beginning and in a stochastic world? The

answer to this might be simulation and induction, directed by utility.

All the experimental evidence gathered so far to bridge the gap between

inanimate matter and animate matter belong to the realm of stochastic chemistry

and the reaction products are devoid of life like intelligent molecular activity. This

statement is applicable to both, abiotic monomer synthesis as well as abioticpolymer synthesis.

Time line of origin of life shows that it must have taken at least 200 Ma after

formation of earth crust and oceans for life to appear. Life might have begun in the

form of fossilized Cyanobacteria in Stomatolites which are known to occur as early as

3.85 Ga. Any theory of origin of life should be able to explain time involved in its

origin. Therefore various experiments demonstrating synthesis of monomers over a

very short period of time fail to explain as to why the time involved in origin of life

was of the ~ 200 Ma. Hence, by whatever mechanisms life originated, it must have

been very slow and cumulative over a period of time. Therefore the vast amount of

experimental evidence only lends credibility to our belief in abiogenesis and that one

day it shall be possible to provide detailed explanation of origin of life from

inanimate matter but the accumulated evidence is otherwise not sufficient to

explain phenomenon of origin of life. Considering the enormous time involved,

processes leading to origin of life must be time dependent, extremely lengthy,

cumulative, complex and intricate which at the same time are relatively stable,

capable of fixation, preservation and propagation so that advances made are

cumulative ultimately leading to origin of life. The process of origin of life should

have proceeded through accumulation of a series of small discrete steps giving

semblance of gradualism and continuity. Easy switching between inanimate behavior

and life like activity should have been widely rampant in very-very early stages of

origin of life. Vast distribution of life on earth shows that constraints like U.V.


5/6

Radiation, Toxic effects of atmospheric oxygen against origin of life are just

scientific fictions, since a large number of forms that could exist have evolved only

after successfully meeting those constraints. Hence, these constraints, even

though may be valid are not absolute or non-negotiable. Origin of life must

involve origin of ways and means to circumvent and negotiate these constraints

or to tolerate these constraints.

Therefore, life like activity began on earth at any point of time in its history when

earth was capable of supporting or inducing life like activity due to some

unknown cause-effect sequences. All kinds of life like activity began independent

of each other wherever a source of energy, little moisture and relevant chemical

elements were available even if in very-very minute amounts. Considering

ubiquity of life on earth, environmental conditions could not have been a majordeterrent. Rather they influenced type of life and life like activity to which every

other type of life and life like activity has a relationship of adaptation and

adaptability or harmony. Therefore, all life forms originated in such a way that

they were ab initio adapted to conditions of their existence. Time and place has

played a more significant role in determining type of life like activity and type of

life through yet unknown cause-effect sequences. This is in conformity with time

dependent increase in complexity of life on earth as per fossil records and place

dependent biodiversity. Even Darwin observed that biodiversity on GalapagosIslands varied according to some geographical rule.

Summarizing all above, for Origin of Life neither Prebiotic Soup was ever needed

nor could have ever existed. This is in conformity with all the experimental

evidence gathered till date.

Author: Dr Mahesh C. Jain is a practicing medical doctor and has written the

book Encounter of Science with Philosophy A synthetic view. The book begins

with first chapter devoted to scientifically valid concept of God and then explainscosmic phenomena right from origin of nature and universe up to origin of life

and evolution of man. The book includes several chapters devoted to auxiliary

concepts and social sciences as corollaries to the concept of God. This is the only

book which deals with origin of nature and universe from null. Twenty-ninth

chapter of the book deals with the subject matter of Origin of Life.


6/6

http://www.sciencengod.com

http://www.sciencengod.com/buynow.php

T
http://www.sciencengod.com/http://www.sciencengod.com/http://www.sciencengod.com/http://www.sciencengod.com/

Documents

Whether Or Not Prebiotic Soup Was Ever Needed/Existed For Origin of Life