Re: Bringing the issue back - why is UV so bad - facts please.


<TomHendricks474@xxxxxx> wrote in message news:e779vu$12c3$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Recently someone in their OOL related post, casually said how dangerous
UV was. It's an old chestnut of wisdom that everyone seems to know by rote.

I responded with this question - how is it dangerous other than
pyrimidine dimers? And there was silence.

How about it group. The bio community has generally accepted the
danger of UV on the origin, but nobody seems to know why?

Let's try again - why, other than pyrimidine dimers, is UV
dangerous, or preventive of the origin of life, or aspects of it,
or chemicals used in it - or any other direction you want to
talk about. Perhaps there is some web pages that are relevant
that you might site too.

UV radiation is sufficiently energetic to disrupt just about any
biochemical order. For example, it can disrupt methane and ammonia
to produce amino acids. And it can disrupt amino acids to produce
methane and ammonia. Here is a paper claiming that even as far out
as Europa, solar UV would quickly destroy any amino acids exposed at
the surface.
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2006/pdf/2006.pdf

It is important to realize that pyrimidine dimers are the kinds of
damage that result IN SPITE OF the ozone layer. If we didn't have
that protection, dimers would be just the tip of the iceberg.

As you continue to research this topic, be sure to pay attention
to the differences in the effects of short- vs relatively
long-wavelength uv radiation.


.