Dear Dr. Joachim Pimiskern,

Dear Dr. Joan Pintea,

Thank you very much for your kind answers.

I am sorry, I would like to see different opinions and, may be, a discussion of this question. The matter is that, I am not a beginner in this problem and in related ones. I am the author of some reviews on this theme in Russian and in English. My aim is to know the views of other researchers and I hope to read their discussion. May be, I will present and my solution on this subject, but I would not wish to be in a hurry to make this.

Regards.

Dear Kenneth,

Unfortunately, calculations means almost nothing.

The result of calculations depends on the initial conditions, methods of calculations, approximations taken in the course of them and, what is the most important, on the desire of a calculator.

As for the initial conditions, they are determined by the principal hypothesis of the universe which is put by the author of calculations into the choosing of these initial conditions for his work.

Therefore, when discussing the results of calculations, the hypothesis of the universe should be discussed in the first place.

Therefore, I am sorry, all calculations mean nothing on the background of the undeniable fact of the availability of huge masses of different hydrocarbons, including CH4, on different celestial objects. I think, only desperate visionary could believe that the origin of the Titan's hydrocarbons is biogenic.

This is only one of the arguments against your opinion.

A number of them are considered in my paper that is written, unfortunately, in Russian (it is presented at ResearchGate).

Nevertheless, I am grateful to you for your participation in this discussion and I would be glad to see other your arguments in support of your statement.

Regards,

Victor.

PS. I think that the main condition for correct conclusions is the perfect logic.

Dear Kenneth,

I have one more guess.

Apparently, you did not read about our (together with Elena Kadyshevich) Life origination hydrate hypothesis.

Please, write me whether I guessed this time.

After that, I will answer to your last issue.

Can you look through one of our papers on life origination at ResearchGate?

May be, my answer will be excessive after that.

Yours truly,

Victor.

Dear Kenneth,

Of course, you can put thousands of questions. About what paper and about what ocean do you write?

I wrote about 20 papers on this subject. But nowhere I wrote that DNAs originated in the ocean.

I believe, you are an expert in physical chemistry and you are really interested in the problem of life origination.May be, it would be better if you could read at least one of our review papers on life origination. If any questions would be non-answered after this, I will answer them.

I think, you understand that nobody could publish these papers without answering to the principal questions, the more that our hypothesis is completely original in comparison with the available widely distributed point of view on this subject which is initiated by the Oparin's hypothesis. In addition, our hypothesis is supplied with a detailed thermodynamic consideration, is cofirmed with computer simulation, and different observations and experiments count in its favor. The same physico-chemical phenomenon is applied by us for explanation of the processes of life origination and mitosis and replication. On the basis of our theory, we proposed new approaches to the problems of optimal nutrition and life prolongation. As you, may be, know, Oparin's hypothesis is not justifiable. If it is unknown for you, you will know this after reading our papers. The most detailed our reviews are published in "Global Journal..." , "Life", Chapter 4 in the book "DNA Replication-Current Advances", and also in "Physics-Uspekhi", "Thermochimica Acta", "J. Thermal Anal. Calorim". All these papers are available at ResearchGate. In the Preface to the book "'DNA, Replication..." you could read the opinion of its scientific editor about our theory: this Preface is also available at ResearchGate.

Please, read even if one of the first three papers in my list and after that put the question to any one of them. I also advise you to look through our publications of 2013 where the results of computer simulation are given. I think, these results should be of great interest for any researcher interested in the problem of life origination.

And now, I wish you many successes,

Sincerely,

Victor O.

Dear Kenneth and all inquisitive participants of this discussion,

Please, accept several main references to the information on amino-acids and proteins from our concept of the "Life origination hydrate hypothesis" (LOH-Hypothesis) and "Mitosis and Replication Hydrate Hypothesis" (MRH-Hypothesis).

First, we give the following definition of the phenomenon of life and clarification of our principal opinion about the connection between the phenomenon of pure life and the phenomenon of protein deposition ("Global Journal", p. 27)

"Life is the phenomenon characterized by a combination of the natural chemical processes that lead to the extended self-reproduction of DNA molecules from generation to generation and by translation of all or almost all significant maternal features to the doughter.

This definition contains no mention on the protein production. We believe that just the transformations of DNAs should be considered as the proper life and the protein production is no more than the result of side processes that accompany them. Moreover, we believe that just the accumulation of protein within cells and on DNAs leads to deceleration in the cellular replication and to cellular senesce."

The following text in the paper is also related to the process of protein formation in cellular protoplasm and on DNAs.

As for formation of amino-acids and proteins, it is impossible to give all our texts because they are in different papers and are rather volumetric; for example, in the paper pubnlished in the "Global journal..." the related information takes several pages.

Therefore, I can give some references only.

(1) Chapter 4 in the book "DNA Replication...": p 95 and pages before and after it.

(2) Paper in the journal "Life": pp 140 and147.

(3) Paper in "Global Journal...": pp 14, 15-16 (intermediate paragraph), 16, 17, 23-24 (intermediate paragraph), 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, and Fig. 3c.

I also recommend you to read conclusive p. 32, in spite of the fact that it contains no mention about either proteins or amino-acids.

(4) Paper in "Physics-Uspekhy": pp 179-180 (facultatively, 175-176).

Frankly speaking, I believe that it will do each inquisitive researcher no harm to read, at least, the summary review in the "Global Journa...l" entirely..

All papers cited above are available at ResearchGate.

Thank you for your interest.

Victor.

Dear Kenneth

You wrtite: "... peptide or nucleotide bonds, both of which require the input of energy and the loss of water'". It is one of the wrong beliefs: read our paper titled "Thermodynamics of formation of nitrogen bases and d-ribose..." in Thermochim acta 441 (2006) 69-78; other our papers also contain thermodynamic calculations but this paper was the first one.

In 1976, no thermodynamic calculations were possible because the thermodynamic functions for N-bases and riboses were unknown. As for the loss of water, the reactions between niters and CH4 are highly exothermic: this is the unique pair of the substances which is capable of giving any N-basis and ribose and all them together.

It is one of our discoveries.

The time goes and scatters the wrong beliefs of the past!

Science is always on-the-move.

Dear Kenneth,

The actual situation is as follows.

In the beginning, N-bases, riboses, nucleosides, nucleotides, and different DNAs were repeatedly produced within different underground and underseabed localizations of the CH4-hydrate structure. Soup, amino acids, peptides, and cells formed in each localization. The DNAs thus formed were dispersed over the Earth. Thus, everything began. The three-dimensional simulation shows a good agreement between the purine-pyrimidine hydrogen-bond lengths within the hydrate structure and within DNA crystals and between the ribose-N-base molecular-bond lengths within the hydrate structure and within DNA crystals. The thermodynamics confirms the possibility of DNA formation from CH4, nitrate, and phosphate with no external energy. The sizes of the hydrate-structure large cavities are equal to the sizes of N-bases, and the sizes of the hydrate-structure small cavities are equal to the sizes of ribose and phosphate groups. The reactions between hydrocarbons and niters are discovered in 1888 (Konovalov’s reaction). Under conditions of CH4-hydrate existence, they should proceed very slowly and, thus, their thermodynamic front can be provided. Formation of hydrate structures in the highly-concentrated substrate/water systems where the substrate represents organic amides follows from physicochemical experiments.

The autoclave experiments for confirmation of formation of DNA precursors are waiting for their enthusiasts and sponsors. Unfortunately, the expected reactions are, apparently, very slow under the conditions of methane-hydrate occurrence.

Dear Kenneth,

OK! Really, the questions on the primordial atmosphere composition, Earth near-surface layer composition, isotopic composition, etc., including the methane hydrate abiogenic or biogenic origin, exist. The fact is that the answers on these problematic questions are different, and are frequently rather unconditional or based on questionable grounds. Unfortunately, I have no possibility to consider in detail these questions. I can only say the following. We actively analyze them and have our own views directed to their solution. For example, we performed studies aimed at grounded understanding of the methane-hydrate origin (the corresponding paper in Russian is available at ResearchGate), Solar System formation, mechanism of the stellar processes and the effect of the Solar activity on the Earth present, past and prospective fortune, etc. We have a number of publications in these fields, and they are available at ResearchGate. Therefore, our works in the field of life origin are made not from scratch (meanwhile, I work for decades in the field of kinetics, thermodynamics, and mechanisms of the processes at the surface/gas boundary and performed many original works in this field).

As for our views on the problem of life origination, our knowledges in different fields are used for their formulation.

I advice you once more to read our paper in the “Global Journal”; I hope, you will there find answers to a major portion of your questions.

Best regards,

Victor.

Dear Kenneth,

Thank you for your interest. I am by no means against questions; moreover, I am very glad to think about questions when they stimulate thinking or when I feel that they are directed to understanding some things or to a definite criticism, but not represent questions for questions or questions without clear aim or with a latent aim. It is possible to put one head-on question and it is possible to put 10 questions around and near a subject. In addition, the papers of any author represent just the answers to questions. Meanwhile, each author of a paper has, I believe, a right to wait that his correspondent takes care of not only his own time to read a paper by his partner but his partner time as well.

However, all this is a sentimental talk and it does not bear a relation to both of us, because our discussion is, mercifully, concrete and clear.

Permit me, please, somewhat scavenge your question and uncover the cabbage stalk. The Stanley Miller's experiments gave hope in the time of their start 70-80 years ago but had no scientific ground and, therefore, had no real successes. Unfortunately, I can’t construct even living amoeba either at paper or in computer. I am only capable to search minimum kinds of minerals which are thermodynamically necessary and sufficient for this aim and the most convenient bed to do it. I made indeed even more than that, namely, I found a maternity hospital to do it. Any amino-acid can be synthesized from NO3- and CH4 and from the S admixtures that are always and everywhere, and if S is absent in any CH4-hydrate localization, it occurs in another one. Owing to low rates of the processes under low temperatures around 290 K, when hydrates exist, all thermodynamically possible intermediate substances should exist in the soup, and just the thermodynamics will establish them at the points that correspond to the sequence of the N-bases. It is shown in our papers that just the thermodynamics chooses the N-bases. For example, we showed that just the thermodynamics gives preference to guanine against xanthine. Meanwhile, all this is written in our papers.

Of course, all this is only hypothesis, but this hypothesis is grounded much better than a number of the so-called theories.

Yes, chondrites contain some simple amino acids, but this fact by no means says about their biogenic origin. The point is that the simple amino acids are among the first products that should be thermodynamically pioneering in oxidation of hydrocarbons, such as methane or ethane.

By the way, our hypothesis relates in the same degree to the Earth and to any other celestial body. We believe that we presented the unique way for living matter formation.

I hope that I answered to your question.

And I will be glad to answer any other your questions, but I ask you to put them clearly and one by one but not by packets, and, please, don’t ignore the information that is already available in our papers.

And the last. Allow me, in my turn, to put one question to you.

Do you know any other living-matter origination hypothesis that is grounded better than the LOH-hypothesis?

I am waiting from you.

Sincerely,

Victor.

Kenneth,

You are an expert in questions about life origination, there are no doubts; but I did not see your answer to unique my question. Are you as successful in the answers on ozone holes as in the questions on life origination?

As for the joker, I heard analogous joke where ozone hole so pleasant for you was instead of wall; similar joke is widespread very much. Meanwhile, dogs bay but caravans go. Researchers like you and me study the ozone holes and living matter origination and some of them believe in the possibilities of the human intellect.

Dear Kenneth,

I didn’t look for you and thus didn’t lose you. This is you who had found me and who had lost me. This is not I who undertook this infinite correspondence. This is you who undertook it. I carried it patiently and in a rather courteous form in spite of your push. This is you who afford the damaging words provoked by nothing. What for to put questions, if you are sure that you know in advance everything and that the answers of your partner are wrong? Meanwhile, you put a great mass of the questions answered in my review papers and didn't even have the decency to read one of them. The art of a scientist consists not in the skill to put as many questions to a partner as possible but in the skill to put questions to Nature, to obtain its answers, and to transmit them to the community members. I looked through some of your papers. It is my opinion that my partnership would be more useful for you than your partnership for me. Remain within your walls stuck with dung together with the jokers familiar to you who, as you wrote me, are experienced in this job. Good bye, I just have no time for you.

Dear Ioan Pintea,

I am really glad that you are interested in the problem of living matter origination. It is, apparently, one of two most difficult natural-science problems of the Solar System, which, nevertheless, can be solved and, I believe, will be solved ultimately in 10-20 years. Each interested and well-educated person may take a part in its practical solution. The second problem is the Solar System origination (see the list of Ostrovskii V.E. or Kadyshevich E.A. at ResearchGate, the PFO-CFO Hypothesis of Solar System Formation).

After this introduction, I will answer to your question.

It is possible to collect the underground and underseabed CH4-hydrate and to analyze it. However, to search the DNA-precursors there, niter should be there, and, to find the DNAs or living cells there, phosphates are also necessary.

Indeed, there are cases, when prokaryotes were identified under seabed under the water layer up to about 5000 m and underseabed ground layer of 400m. These data are available and are referred in our papers (for example, Conclusions in Ostrovskii V.E., Kadyshevich E.A., Physics-Uspekhi (Adv. Phys. Sci.), 50 (2007) 175-196, Ostrovskii, V.E., Kadyshevich E.A., Global J. Sci. Frontier Res. (A), Phys. & Space Sci., 12 (6) (2012) 1-36, etc.). In these papers, there are also other observational data that count in favor of the LOH-hypothesis.

The fact is that, CH4-hydrate is solid crystalline substance which is abundant under seabed and under ground at corresponding temperatures and CH4 pressure. Just the thermodynamics determines the conditions of the CH4-hydrate existence. If you house CH4 and water into an autoclave, thermostat the system at a definite temperature around 280 K, and increase the CH4 pressure, the CH4 hydrate will be formed spontaneously at a definite temperature. The equilibrium values of the temperature and pressure are tabulated and are available. If niter is also housed within the autoclave, this is the principal way to create living matter or, at least, DNA-precursors. But these processes are rather slow.

Best regards,

Victor

If I were to hazard a guess, I suspect that the greatest periods of the production

of Methane would follow the greatest periods of the Reduction of Carbon

Dioxide from thousands of parts per million to around 400 parts per million.

The Carboniferous Period Produced Lots of Coal ,and reduced the CO2 in the

Atmosphere, thus storing Coal in a form of Carbon that is available to become

methane by adding Hydrogen ( from water ? ).

Perhaps periods of High oxygen content in the atmosphere is also a period of

excess production of methane, and reduction of CO2.

Dear Kenneth,

I hope, you permit me to answer this question. I studied this problem. It is important for me. I even wrote a paper about this. One my friend, who is a professor of two universities in USA and in Europe for more than ten years, wrote to me even that it is my best paper. It was in 2011, and it was not the last my paper. I can't say that I agree with him. I hope, I proved that this reaction is interaction with H2. This reaction proceeded deep within the Earth's crust. This paper is at ResearchGate but it is written, unfortunately, in Russian only. Meanwhile, I think, you know that CH4 is at Titan and at more remote celestial objects.

Best regards.

Victor

Trees, warmer climate, and rainfall work of CO2 to produce and release Oxygen.

The Carbon then becomes available to be used by the trees to make trees.

When the trees die, they decay, but the decay process involves micro-organisms

which release methane.

I worked on building a freeway across old landfills, and the first thing we did was

install a gas barrier system ( vertical glop wall cement-bentonite mix) around the

perimeter, with a gas collection and venting system inside the glop wall. Then we

loaded the land fill with 20 feet of soil to compress the land fill so it would compress

about 4 feet downward. For about three years the turbines were spinning

on the vent pipes, but after that they slowed down and eventually stopped.

When we accidentally opened up the landfill, and brought things up, they were in

pristine condition, truck tires, fan belts, trees, pallets of flat stacked card board boxes etc.

What we figured is that the things in the landfill well above the water table do

not decompose, but the things right at the surface of the water table had moisture,

so the micro-organisms could eat the wet stuff, and produce methane.

When we compressed the landfill downward by four feet, new materials were

now getting wet, and the landfill produced a lot of methane for about three years,

then for the next several years the methane production decreased until the turbines stopped turning at all.

A similar process is used in sewage treatment plants where they flow the sewer water over corrugated plastic covered with algae . The process involves maximizing the wet surface area to maximize the microbial cleaning process. Let the microbes

clean the water for you.

So back to the original question, warmer wetter climates with lots of vegetation

provide more food source for the micro-organisms to eat, thus producing more methane. The reduction of CO2 would be associated with more vegetation,

creating more vegetation, and more oxygen, and leaving more O2 and less

CO2.

Studying the shape of the leaves that are preserved as carbonized fossils, tells

you about the climate. Wet climates have leaves with drip tips, that facilitate

getting rid of excess moisture off the leaves which keeps the mold at bay.

The CO2 reduction would infer more methane production by association.

Of course there is that other association where reduction of CO2 means reduction

in global temperatures, which means glaciers begin in mountains, and high latitudes, and by inference...... methane hydrates form and trapped under the

permafrost.

Seems more like a climate pendulum that pauses for a long time either at the

far colder end, or at the far warmer end.

6 C at the far colder lower limit, and 26 C at the far warmer upper limit, with the norm oscillating between 13 C and about 22 C.

If there is also an A-biotic process for the production of Methane, you

should be able to reproduce that process in a laboratory, or other man made

process just as we facilitate the clean up of sewer water using anaerobic, and

aerobic decomposition in conjunction with various microbes.