Posted: Jan 11, 2012 1:55 pm
rainbow wrote:Rumraket wrote:rainbow wrote:Thanks, Rumraket.
After a short glance at the paper it appears to be purely theoretical, and no actual chemistry was carried out.
Now if they could construct such a viable core, and measure adaptation and Darwinian evolution - then we'd really have something.
Yes, the paper is on conceptual mathematical treatment, the details of which is unfortunately a bit out of my league. The authors seem to be trying to work out why previously tested autocatalytic sets didn't seem capable of evolution, in order to find out on that basis, what could evolve.
I like the biology-direct publisher alot because you can see the discussion with the reviewer, where different points are reflected back and forth and you get a better understanding of the contents.
It is refreshingly critical of the failures of prior abiogenesis experimentation.
That's how science works. Failed hypotheses are discarded and new ones are tested.
