Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

RNA compound and vitamin B3 found in samples from near-Earth asteroid

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 110 posts

Re: RNA compound and vitamin B3 found in samples from near-Earth asteroid

#31

Post by ianai »

mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote: post #28
aa-jv wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Reading this comment I couldn't help but remember the research showing extremophiles replacing phosphorous with arsenic in their DNA backbone. NASA held a big press conference and made a huge deal out of its potential implications for extraterrestrial life. It was later found that the data was inherently flawed(possibly even doctored? My memory fails me) due to arsenic contamination of samples. Retracted. Things like…

Nonetheless, the goal post to pass is the scientific process and journal article review. It’s not “someone made a mistake in a study once before so all science is ruled out” as this would tend toward. We’re not doing ourselves any good carrying around old bad behavior.

Re: RNA compound and vitamin B3 found in samples from near-Earth asteroid

#32

Post by eternalban »

FollowingTheDao wrote: post #7
schappim wrote: post #5

This has gotta add weight to the Panspermia hypothesis. Panspermia is a hypothesis that suggests life on Earth may have originated from microorganisms or organic matter that traveled through space, potentially from other planets or moons in our solar system or even from other star systems.

> Panspermia is a hypothesis that suggests life on Earth may have originated from microorganisms But where did the microorganisms on the asteroid come from?

If the creation (natural synthesis) of an organic molecule requires extraordinary conditions (some cosmic very rare & special place), AND, such stupendously rare precursors are catalysts of generation of more complex organic molecules (like RNA) in more common conditions (rare but equally distributed planets like Earth), then an ancient chance event somewhere out there is possibly the source of all potential DNA based life-forms via astroid seeding. The entire issue with DNA/RNA is how did these complex molecules naturally arise.

Re: RNA compound and vitamin B3 found in samples from near-Earth asteroid

#33

Post by permo-w »

aa-jv wrote: post #24
coldtea wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You better alert the scientists that they missed something, then! That's some serious business, they must be alerted to their failings immediately! Yes, unimaginable that scientists could have made a mistake that a layman could spot, or just said something to create good PR to their mission, even when it's inaccurate. They also never unwittingly or intentionally BS in their research papers, right? And only a collea…

[flagged]

if you want people to engage with you seriously, perhaps avoid such a condescending tone. ditching the sarcastic italics could be a good place to start

the way it currently reads is less like curiosity and more like “how dare you question the judgment of scientists”, as if questioning results isn’t the absolute bedrock of science in the first place

Re: RNA compound and vitamin B3 found in samples from near-Earth asteroid

#34

Post by fnordpiglet »

coldtea wrote: post #11

> “Since the Hayabusa2 spacecraft collected two samples directly from asteroid Ryugu and delivered them to Earth in sealed capsules, contamination can be ruled out.” I seriously doubt that it could be "ruled out" just like that. For one, the spacecraft (or the empty capsules) could have been pre-contaminated before their launch. Second, the capsules could have been contaminated after arrival even if they were "sealed…

While we are probably really good programmers, surprisingly enough these “scientists” seem to know how to do their job without our guidance:

https://earth-planets-space.springeropen.com/articles/10.118...

Re: RNA compound and vitamin B3 found in samples from near-Earth asteroid

#35

Post by stuff4ben »

haswell wrote: post #27
mromanuk wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

pseudo-panspermia, the blocks of life comes from space, but life emerges in a planet.

> the blocks of life comes from space, but life emerges in a planet. This is the theory of panspermia. No pseudo prefix required.

Not quite. Panspermia says that life exists on other planets and then somehow is distributed through space to other planets. The OP was just saying that the "building blocks" exist throughout space but life develops on planets.

Edit: The wikipedia article breaks it down sufficiently, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panspermia

Re: RNA compound and vitamin B3 found in samples from near-Earth asteroid

#36

Post by ianai »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #22

“Scientists have previously found nucleobases and vitamins in certain carbon-rich meteorites, but there was always the question of contamination by exposure to the Earth’s environment,” said lead study author Yasuhiro Oba, associate professor at Hokkaido University in Japan, in a statement. “Since the Hayabusa2 spacecraft collected two samples directly from asteroid Ryugu and delivered them to Earth in sealed capsule…

The thing I was hoping to see in the comments is discussion around the complexity of these compounds and thus how likely they are to form abiotic.

Looking at vitamin b3, it seems very simple.

My take away is more that the chemistry of life as we know it is pretty prevalent and probably forms readily under many circumstances. I am not shocked this wasn’t an actual DNA strand. Even if someone left some DNA out on an asteroid over enough time I expect it would deteriorate. The universe just bombards stuff without an atmosphere too much for naked DNA to survive in those conditions.

This is basically the biggest success I could rationally hope for from this probe. Great work for those scientists and I am so amazed!

Re: RNA compound and vitamin B3 found in samples from near-Earth asteroid

#37

Post by roywiggins »

coldtea wrote: post #11

> “Since the Hayabusa2 spacecraft collected two samples directly from asteroid Ryugu and delivered them to Earth in sealed capsules, contamination can be ruled out.” I seriously doubt that it could be "ruled out" just like that. For one, the spacecraft (or the empty capsules) could have been pre-contaminated before their launch. Second, the capsules could have been contaminated after arrival even if they were "sealed…

It would be a little weird for it to be contaminated with only uracil. Sure, if they found full RNA strands you'd start to think contamination was more likely, but what are the odds it was contaminated but with only uracil, especially considering how far they've gone to prevent contamination?

Re: RNA compound and vitamin B3 found in samples from near-Earth asteroid

#38

Post by Cardinal7167 »

coldtea wrote: post #11

> “Since the Hayabusa2 spacecraft collected two samples directly from asteroid Ryugu and delivered them to Earth in sealed capsules, contamination can be ruled out.” I seriously doubt that it could be "ruled out" just like that. For one, the spacecraft (or the empty capsules) could have been pre-contaminated before their launch. Second, the capsules could have been contaminated after arrival even if they were "sealed…

> For one, the spacecraft (or the empty capsules) could have been pre-contaminated before their launch.

I had a really interesting discussion with someone who oversaw decontamination protocols and preparations for various satellites, including the JWST. The protocols they use to prep satellites for these types of missions are beyond stringent, and the chemicals they use are exotic as all hell.

All this to say, contamination is absolutely possible, but there is so much insane behind the scenes work to control for it that it shouldn’t be thought of as something they might “just forget” or casually missed.

Re: RNA compound and vitamin B3 found in samples from near-Earth asteroid

#39

Post by ianai »

sandworm101 wrote: post #21
Aachen wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that the opposite? It's an alternative explanation, but I'm not sure if this is evidence against panspermia either.

Its isn't evidence against, but it is evidence that panspermia is less necessary than previously thought. Should we detect life out there somewhere, the fact that these compounds are more universal decreased the likelihood that that detected life is related to us through panspermia. The fact that life in two places uses RNA no longer means that it must be directly related to the RNA/DNA-based life on earth.

Way too early in the science needed to characterize as evidence for or against panspermia or much else. We need much much more work like this.

Re: RNA compound and vitamin B3 found in samples from near-Earth asteroid

#40

Post by mtlmtlmtlmtl »

ianai wrote: post #31
mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reading this comment I couldn't help but remember the research showing extremophiles replacing phosphorous with arsenic in their DNA backbone. NASA held a big press conference and made a huge deal out of its potential implications for extraterrestrial life. It was later found that the data was inherently flawed(possibly even doctored? My memory fails me) due to arsenic contamination of samples. Retracted. Things like…

Nonetheless, the goal post to pass is the scientific process and journal article review. It’s not “someone made a mistake in a study once before so all science is ruled out” as this would tend toward. We’re not doing ourselves any good carrying around old bad behavior.

If you read my comment as implying all science is ruled out due to one example, that's very much a you problem. I said or implied no such thing.

I also didn't take a stance on this research. I've yet to read the paper, and I don't read "science journalism" like TFA. But it's not like the findings are earth shattering given previous research. Therefore I lean towards optimism.

I am simply saying that scepticism is warranted even if a paper is peer-reviewed and published in Nature. The "scientific process" doesn't magically end at peer review. The process goes on, and it pretty much never ends.

Post reply on HN