How Can Chemistry Become Biology?

[I_Hate_Infinity]

How did life start?
Here's what I know roughly;
~ Big Bang: energy condensed to form nuclei, which formed atoms of Hydrogen;
~ Stellar furnaces: clouds of Hydrogen collapsed under gravity to form the first stars;
~ Super Nova: stars fuse Hydrogen into Helium and dying stars create heavier elements and propel them through space in a massive explosion;
~ Solar System: the Sun ignites and the planets form from 2nd/3rd generation stellar matter;
~ Asteroids: bring water and basic amino acids to early Earth (fundamental molecules for life)
~ Enviroment: volcanic erruptions, ferocious tides, intense lightning and acidic waters...

So I get the story before genesis, atoms and molecules forming from the cosmic soup post Big Bang... And I get after genesis, Darwins evolution of organisms to survive, thrive and multiply... What about genesis itself?

What happened to change chain's of molecules into a living creature that conforms to biology's standard requirements for live: movement, respiration, sensitivity, growth, reproduction, excretion and nutrition.

I presume an Amoeba follows instinct to guide it through life but how did atoms, chained into molecules, "learn" to form DNA for example, or become aware of it's surroundings?

What is science's best guess? Can you refer me to literature/media that could help me understand?

IHI

[I_Hate_Infinity]

I think I agree with OG's comments and must stand down from the podium to respectfully acknowledge that there is no evidence for life outside of our planet, regardless of the apparent abundance of comets carrying organic molecules in our solar system. The odd make more sense if we say intelligence is improbable in out Universe purely because we have only one source that it happened, and as such an improbable event in a galaxy of many stars and planets, in a Universe of many galaxies, the chances such an improbable event such as intelligence occurring, seems digestible...

@Jim360 - Your example of the lottery scenario seems to be to only bolster my argument. If the odds of getting the full set of numbers is 10^57 to 1, and only one ticket was bought for the draw and won, you conclude it an immensely unlikely occurrence. If though, as is the case, millions of tickets were bought for the draw, its much more likely that one will win.

And I have dragged you into speculative philosophical theory here but the laws of chance is a numbers game, the maths is undeniable. I respect without proof I may only ever be able to speculate, but the slow pace of space exploration dragging on the heels of governments who want to fight wars and bail out banks so executives offshore accounts remain open, I must try to advance my understanding of what COULD be.

I'm purely amazed by the minuscule tolerance levels of the constants to allow chemistry to become biology. No anthropic principle, the fact that any life can emerge is a wonderful thing irrespective of the emergence of intelligence and its peculiar, the chance creation of our hospitable Universe.

@LG - you're right about one thing. The fact I'm amazed by this improbable event, means I must accept that improbable means possible... However unlikely, it remains possible ;)

[LazyGun]

@IHI I think I am offended :) I write several detailed answers, then O_G comes along, recaps one of the points - and it is O_G that has convinced you? :)

[Old_Geezer]

It's the way I tell em.

[jim360]

To clarify the lottery, I was merely taking the last eight sets of Lotto draws (6 balls from 49) and working out the odds for those particular sets to occur in a sequence. No-one needs to win (indeed twice in the last month no-one has). The point is that the last 48 numbers, whatever they were, had a ridiculously low probability of occurring, but did. Not only that, of course, but there is only one such lottery machine running that we know of. You don't need several machines to counter this low chance, becuase there is nothing special about this sequence. This is I think the fallacy in the argument for a Multiverse, because it assumes that there is something special about the Universe we are in. So no, it doesn't bolster your argument, because I wasn't speculating on the chances of winning,. merely the chances of drawing that sequence of 48 balls.

Incidently, the odds of winning the Lottery are usually given as 13,983,815 to 1 against, i.e about 14 million possible six-ball outcomes. I've multiplied this number by itself eight times

[LazyGun]

I would echo Jims comments re the Multiverse.

Right, what next, IHI? :)