Timeline for What are the "minimum requirements" for a single cell?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 9, 2023 at 8:46 | comment | added | user6552 | "so please don't attack the source" Too late. What you will never find at any creationist website are the "minimal requirements for an intelligence/consciousness", because all such known, scientifically demonstrated minds require... you guessed it, brains, cells, DNA and other parts that ID claims require intelligence, which require cells, etc. ID is a circular fallacy and/or relies totally on faith in minds without parts humans need to be intelligent. Furthermore, ID goes backwards from science; simple to complex, and is thus doomed to fail to answer any life or universe-origins questions. | |
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:48 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://biology.stackexchange.com/ with https://biology.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Nov 5, 2015 at 23:30 | vote | accept | Yehosef | ||
| May 27, 2015 at 21:53 | comment | added | Yehosef | looks like from the discussion below that there are some differences in the definition of a "cell" - but it seems there is more consensus than disagreement. | |
| May 27, 2015 at 21:45 | comment | added | Yehosef | I specifically didn't mention the minimum requirements of "life" to avoid these discussions. I think the concept of a cell is pretty universal and fundamental aspect of all life today. The fact that some people can choose a definition of less sophisticated structures that have characteristics of life is irrelevant for this question. If you want to make a "cell" (which I think is pretty well defined) - what's involved? | |
| May 27, 2015 at 16:30 | comment | added | Roland | I don't think this question makes much sense. Just because many cells living today satisfy that list of "requirements", that doesn't mean it's the only way to arrive at self-reproducing entities. If you define life as self-reproduction, then any molecule that catalyses its own synthesis is "alive". Beyond self-replication, the requirements gets pretty arbitrary. If you for some reason list a lipid membrane as "required", then yes you need some lipids. Otherwise not. | |
| May 26, 2015 at 23:21 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackBiology/status/603340190103515136 | ||
| May 25, 2015 at 11:00 | answer | added | alec_djinn | timeline score: 1 | |
| May 25, 2015 at 7:49 | answer | added | Demietra95 | timeline score: -1 | |
| May 25, 2015 at 4:40 | comment | added | WYSIWYG | The website is called creation.com; how ironical :P | |
| May 24, 2015 at 23:22 | comment | added | Yehosef | @alec_djinn - could add you comments as an answer so I could upvote them? | |
| May 24, 2015 at 23:03 | comment | added | alec_djinn | So to make cells from scratch you would need: amphiphilic molecules to form a membrane, a decent mix of simple molecules (sugars, nucleic acids, peptides) that serve as reactant and building blocks for more complex things, some simple catalyzer (metals, minerals, pepetides, aptamers, etc..) to run the reactions, enough energy to maintain lots of reactions running and keep them far from the equilibrium. Of course, lots of time... | |
| May 24, 2015 at 22:57 | comment | added | alec_djinn | An even more minimalistic approach would use a single molecule to do the enzymatic job while storing evolvable informations. In this case RNA alone has been proposed as substitute for proteins and DNA in a very minimal cell. In theory also DNA alone could do the same. However the minimal tasks needed to be done: maintain the self (to be compartimentalized), to grow (to have a flux of molecule not in equilibrium), to divide, to maintain the information stably enough to be useful for the next generation and at the same time prone too mutability to evolve. | |
| May 24, 2015 at 22:21 | history | asked | Yehosef | CC BY-SA 3.0 |