Could RNA start life?

Dear Honorable members of the forumAs we know, still majority of evolutionists believe in an RNA world hypothesis. However, I have a problem in imbibing this theory. Nucleic acids are the information storage system of life. When there was no life, why did nature invent a storage system to store the information about sometning (Life) which was still not existent, and hence there was no information to store. Can we suppose the invention of a floppy disk, a CD or a pen drive before the invention of computer? Can we suppose the invention of bank before the invention of money? Similarly, when there was no lfe, there was no information about it, and hence no question to store it, and hence no question to invent an storage system to store it.regards to all
DayalanandEdited by Adminnemooseus, : Add blank lines.

Thank U. I admit that my thinking is somewhat biased towards seeking a purpose in life due to the spiritual background in which I am brought up. However, the difference between the animal trail in snow and RNA is that we have to derive information from the former and it is a passive information, but RNA is solely a copy, and an active copy of information, whether we derive or not, it will deliver its information to the protein synthesising machinery. It is an information highly specific and written in highly coded form. Yet, I have high regards for your message. Thanks and regards
Dayala

Many thanks
It depends on us to recognise purpose in chemicals. Someone can say that this message is alphabets, not a message. Some other can see a purpose in these alphabets. And even if life is not a purpose,it is of course a result. A beutiful result. This why we are looking up for the causes of these results. My sole purpose is to keep our minds open for alternative theories.regards. dayalaregards

Thanks for your comments. regards. dayala

We should not be that much reductionist. A molecule is a molecule. And it is yet to be decided that which point in chemical evolution should be looked upon as an interface between chemical evolution and biological evolution.
regards and thanks for the reply.

Many thanks for educating me and eliminating my doubts. However, I am unable to follow exactly your posting tips.
regards.

Yes, of course at that time, genotype-phenotype distinction was absent. 'How life originated' is such a complicated problem that we should be very cautious, question hundred times every answer before reaching any final answer. This is my sole purpose in raising these isssues. Your suggestions, however, have done great help to me.
Many thanks and regards.

Yes, of course at that time, genotype-phenotype distinction was absent. 'How life originated' is such a complicated problem that we should be very cautious, question hundred times every answer before reaching any final answer. This is my sole purpose in raising these isssues. Your suggestions, however, have done great help to me.
Many thanks and regards.

Great, I too believe in this school of thought, but simply on the basis of some reasoning and intution. I am craving to find some evidences in favor of this theory. I am looking for a suitable mentor and a suitable place to do it. regards.

Enzymes are merely required to speed up a reaction as most of the reacting molecules have energy levels much below the transition state. Is it not possible that in the primitive earth conditions, molecules were associated with higher energy levels so as to react easily without the help of an enzyme? Another possibility could be this- It is actually the three dimensional structure, the conformation of the enzyme (along with some functional groups present on it) that creates the enzymatic property of an enzyme. Is it not possible that when the substrate molecules got their shapes, their surrounding molecules acquired an anti-shape, formed some pseudo-enzyme and catalyzed the associated substrate in a manner a modern enzyme does. Later on, when amino acids were developed, those pseudo-enzymes worked as casts to mould amino acids into enzymes. This moulding could have passed through several trial and errors unless a particular sequence of amino acids came into being that fitted into that cast of pseudo-enzyme and thus, a true enzyme could have been formed. This is only a speculation, subject to serious criticism, as there are no proofs. regards

Thanks and regards

RNA does not results from combination of proteins and phosphorus.
It is sugar+phosphate+base.
And science has reached a stage where we are bound to think towards an anthropic universe.
regards