It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Life sprouts with no spark?

page: 1

log in


posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 03:52 PM
Thought of this today. Any vegetable seed or grass seed can be dormant enough to be considered dead, or without life. The information FOR life is in these seeds, but what activates it? The seeds are buried, so the sun doesn't play any role in germination.

So, I'm thinking the moisture in the ground (the water) seeps into the seeds and brings the plant to life. Could it be the oxygen in the water?

Oops, forgot to add my point: We've always been told that either the sun or a lightning strike helped life to begin on this planet. Is this a scientific fact? Because, if seeds don't need the sun to begin life, why would anything else?

edit on 11/27/2012 by jiggerj because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 04:04 PM
It's not as simple as it might seem. Thsre are a combination of factors that work together to get the seed to start growing. Remeber that the seed is not really dead -- it just looks that way from the outside, and things may just be happening much more slowly on the inside.

This link should

•Seed germination: Germination of seeds is a complex physiological process triggered by imbibition of water after possible dormancy mechanisms have been released by appropriate triggers (see webpage "Seed Dormancy").Under favorable conditions rapid expansion growth of the embryo culminates in rupture of the covering layers and emergence of the radicle. Radicle emergence is considered as the completion of germination. The definition that a visible protrusion of radicle tip is the completion of germination is not only a definition issue of seed physiologists. This transition point is also characterized by the loss of dessication tolerance and this is a molecular checkpoint (in Arabidopsis regulated by ABI5), a developmental molecular switch from the germination program to the seedling program.

posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 04:06 PM
This may shed some light so to speak:

edit on 27-11-2012 by Isee1111 because: Other poster beat me to it....

posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 04:09 PM
The seeds have *snip* a Nucleic Acid.

Water, dirt, and rock don't.

*snip* Nucleic Acids are life.
edit on 27-11-2012 by PassiveObserver because:
changed DNA to Nucleic Acid

posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 04:13 PM

Originally posted by PassiveObserver
The seeds have DNA.

Water, dirt, and rock don't.

DNA is life.

Yes ^

Now the question put back to the OP...

How do you form DNA without trying to? I think the answer to this age old question lies somewhere near there.

Still I'm one of those weirdos who thinks spirit wanted to come here and that reality is being encoded on much deeper levels only popping up into 3d reality at the end..

Life as defined by the mainstream is organized dead particles.. A code or instructions or a map tells where things line up for life to take place, but how to make a map with no hands..

edit on 11/27/2012 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 04:16 PM
reply to post by davidchin

Thanks David and Isee. Fascinating stuff!

posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 04:21 PM
reply to post by PassiveObserver

There can be life without DNA. Based on our understanding of the process of life (definition varies) the DNA evolved from RNA and so on. RNA can support most of the functions of DNA.

There is also Peptide-Nucleic Acids (PNA) then Threose nucleic acid (TNA) and Glycol nucleic acid (GNA) or Amyloid nucleic acid (ANA). Life is very hard to pin point and this is only what we understand and speculate about it, there are more things on the heavens and Earth, than what we can dream of.

posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 04:51 PM
Look into Wilhelm Reich's experiments with bions. It seems primitive life (living energy, almost) arises from decaying + inorganic materials. If I remember correctly.

posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 06:31 PM
reply to post by Dustytoad

That's the problem. We're not god. We're not gods. We're no where near what we consider a god to be. So why do we think that if we cannot find the answer to something right now, that we must throw our hands up in the air and declare it all madness as we point our fingers to god because only he can make sense of it all for us.

"Look Look, I've invented Fire!"
"It's Magic - Burn him with it until he confesses to God!"

I agree with you that the 3D reality we perceive is simply the end result of many levels of reality far more complex. I don't think we need an ethereal spirit to achieve it though.

edit on 27-11-2012 by winofiend because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 11:40 PM
reply to post by winofiend

We're not god. We're not gods. We're no where near what we consider a god to be.

Speak for yourself, while I accept that I am not a God, I see that our basic design is to aspire to at least be semi gods (depending on whatever definition one accepts as god). In any case I prefer to think that I am part of a God, that we and all that exists is God itself, I do not require to understand the purpose of all but there is inescapable beauty and order in the chaos of our reality that can not be dismissed. The simple fact that life exists at all in a universe capable of supporting it, an to our understanding emerged of a randomness of chances is sufficient to create in me a awe and hope of a greater design, even if I accept and do not require it to be a personal design not even specially centered on humans.

the 3D reality we perceive is simply the end result of many levels of reality far more complex.

We perceive more than 3 dimensions, the forth being time and a proposition that the fifth is thought itself or at least emotions. I exist in space and time with a specific transient mindset.

I don't think we need an ethereal spirit to achieve it though.

I agree with that, ethereal spirits creates too much complexity to be compatible to the simplicity that prevails around us, however in my mind I see us (living beings, part of a possible God) as sensors, biological machines experiencing this reality. In this I can fully accept as a possibility the immortality of our experiences but not our individuality.
edit on 27-11-2012 by Panic2k11 because: (no reason given)

top topics


log in