Quote:
Originally Posted by dollarsandcents
Just to nitpick, A (adenine) is complementary to T (thymine) and G (guanine) is complementary to C (cytosine).
|
What? I know that of course. How could I get that wrong? Embarassing
Quote:
Originally Posted by kayleigh.
no its not that, ive learned all that  , its what drives the body to actually work. what is there, that makes the body does what it does, its hard to explain, once i find the right words i will come back cos its crossing wires right now  |
Hm, it is quite hard to understand what you are asking.
Let's try something different. In nature, you can have evolution. Put a bit simply, it's something that happens when you have things which can replicate, can change (for better or worse) and compete for resources. Organisms are not the only things which can be said to evolve. As an example, fashion can evolve. The fashion ideas can replicate in that they can spread from person to person, they can change and give rise to modified or new ideas and there are only so many customers to buy them. Customers are a bit choosy, so some clothes made from certain ideas will sell better than others and vice versa. Some fashion ideas will die out while others live on and change into new ideas in the future.
The basic common scientific hypothesis for how life started is that early on, what would become life were molecules, nucleic acids like DNA and/or RNA, that were able to change like they do today by mutation. They could also replicate, but this required resources that they were competing for. Maybe they existed only in the tiniest cracks, the tiniest spaces where the chemical processes on which they were dependent on were protected enough for it to work. Quite possibly, replication in the early phase wasn't easy and would often yield mutated, broken copies. Mutation outside of replication could also be dangerous. However, on rare occasions one would change in a way that it improved or gained a new ability that overall made it a bit more succesful at replicating itself than the others - for example a chemical process included in getting resources was made more stable. The most successful would produce more copies and would more often pass those good qualities on to their offspring. Although you probably wouldn't consider them to be "alive" at the earliest stage, they were evolving - improving and gaining abilities over generations.
There could be different strategies, some could work together, some could perhaps utilize more aggressive tactics and destroy others, some could perhaps parasitize others. Let's not get swamped with details, though - the point is that when something like this starts evolving, you get a rise order and complexity. It's simply a matter of cause and consequence. Eventually, over countless generations, one of these proto-lineages evolved into us and a multitude of other organisms (okay, we got bits of viral/prokaryote DNA as well and there are horizontal gene transfer events in life's history and so on, but to keep it simple).
I don't think you're asking for an explanation on evolution or how life came around, but important from early on were certain chemical processes on which proto-life depended upon. Without such processes, they would not be able to replicate. As Erica wrote, your own life comes from your parents life which came from their parents life again. There's a "living" unbroken chain of these chemical processes going on in your ancestors down to the very earliest proto-life of your earliest ancestors. As Erica wrote, humans are not so much starts as they are continuations. If you wanna know where your "life processes" really started, you have to dig very deep indeed - back to life's start.
I hope that gives just a slight bit more insight!
edit :
Hah, skimming over it I see I've basically repeated some of the points already made and a point I myself tried to make in my first answer. Oh well, if this doesn't answer your question, perhaps it narrows it down a bit.
