AI-generated image (ChatGPT 5.6 Sol)
Cosmic dust analogue seen through a microscope created by experiment by Linda Losurdo.
Creationist objections to abiogenesis often smuggle in the long-discredited idea of vitalism: the belief that living matter contains some special ingredient or “vital force” absent from non-living matter. This appears to lie behind the familiar creationist refrain that “life cannot come from non-life”, as though “life” were a substance that must be added to matter by a supernatural agent.
The word “life”, however, is rarely defined in this argument. Scientists can devise operational definitions for particular purposes, but life is not a single substance possessed by some molecules and absent from others. It is a collection of properties displayed by sufficiently organised chemical systems. By leaving the term undefined, creationists turn their assertion into a slogan that can neither be tested nor falsified.
The distinction between organic and inorganic chemistry is useful, but partly conventional and historical. Organic chemistry deals broadly with carbon compounds, although some carbon-containing substances—including carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide and carbonates—are traditionally classified as inorganic. There is no fundamental physical boundary between the two categories: both obey precisely the same laws of physics, chemistry and quantum mechanics.
Carbon’s extraordinary chemical versatility follows from its atomic structure. A carbon atom has six protons and six electrons, four of which are valence electrons in its outer shell. Its small size and ability to form strong covalent bonds with itself and with elements such as hydrogen, oxygen and nitrogen allow it to form stable chains, rings, branches and extensive molecular networks. Depending on how it is bonded, carbon can adopt tetrahedral, trigonal-planar or linear arrangements and can form single, double or triple bonds. All this follows from quantum chemistry; no vital spark, magical ingredient or special rule is required.
None of that proves that the origin of life was inevitable, and science does not yet possess a complete account of every stage of abiogenesis. What it does show is that there is no known chemical or physical barrier preventing non-living chemistry from becoming progressively more complex. Under suitable conditions, chemical systems can acquire such properties as compartmentalisation, catalysis and molecular replication. Once populations of replicating systems existed with heritable variation, natural selection could favour those that survived longer, reproduced more reliably and used available resources more efficiently.
One important question is where the organic raw materials involved in this prebiotic chemistry came from. Some could have formed on the early Earth, but organic compounds are also widespread throughout the Solar System and interstellar space. They have been detected in comets and asteroids and regularly occur in meteorites. Earth may therefore have received substantial quantities of organic material from several extraterrestrial sources. This raises another scientific question: what natural chemical and physical processes produced and modified that material in space?
Linda Losurdo, a PhD candidate in materials and plasma physics in the School of Physics at the University of Sydney, Australia, has investigated part of that question with her supervisor, Professor David McKenzie. They recreated some of the energetic, near-vacuum conditions associated with stars and other astrophysical environments inside glass tubes. After evacuating the tubes, they introduced nitrogen, carbon dioxide and acetylene and subjected the mixture to an electrical potential of about 10,000 volts for approximately an hour, producing a plasma known as a glow discharge.
The energy broke apart molecules and allowed their constituent atoms and molecular fragments to recombine, producing a thin deposit of carbonaceous dust on silicon chips inside the tubes. The resulting material consisted of amorphous organic networks containing carbon, hydrogen, oxygen and nitrogen—the four elements commonly abbreviated to CHON. Its infrared spectral features resembled those associated with carbonaceous cosmic dust found in interstellar space, comets, asteroids and meteorites.
The experiment did not produce life, nor did it begin exclusively with inorganic chemicals, since acetylene is already an organic molecule. That was not its purpose. Its significance lies in showing how naturally occurring energy sources can transform simple gaseous precursors into much more complex carbonaceous material under plausible space-like conditions.
The researchers also compared dust produced under different degrees of ion bombardment and subsequently heated to different temperatures. By analysing its infrared spectra, they found that the chemical signatures of ion bombardment could be distinguished from those produced by later thermal annealing. These spectral “fingerprints” could eventually help astronomers reconstruct the environments and processes that shaped carbonaceous dust and material recovered from asteroids such as Bennu and Ryugu. Losurdo and McKenzie published their findings on 30 January 2026 in the American Astronomical Society’s journal, The Astrophysical Journal.
Whenever laboratory experiments demonstrate that one of the chemical steps relevant to abiogenesis can occur naturally, creationists commonly fall back on another prepared response. Having challenged scientists to make “life in a test tube”, they claim that any successful experiment would prove that intelligence was necessary because intelligent scientists conducted it. This is a transparent bait-and-switch: the experiments do not claim to reproduce the entire origin of life, and the intelligence used to construct the apparatus is not used to assemble the resulting molecules atom by atom.
Scientists establish controlled conditions that reproduce particular features of a natural environment and then observe what ordinary chemistry does within them. In this experiment, the electrical discharge represented energetic processes that occur naturally in astrophysical plasmas. Losurdo and McKenzie did not decide which atoms should bond together or direct them into predetermined structures. The molecules broke apart and recombined according to their physical and chemical properties. Recreating lightning in a laboratory does not prove that thunderstorms require an intelligent electrician; neither does recreating cosmic chemistry prove that stars require a supernatural chemist.
From Cosmic Dust to Prebiotic Chemistry. What the experiment demonstratedHow Losurdo and McKenzie conducted the experiment, and what their results may reveal about the history of carbonaceous cosmic dust, is explained in a University of Sydney news item:
Linda Losurdo and Professor David McKenzie recreated selected features of carbon-rich astrophysical environments inside evacuated glass tubes. A mixture of nitrogen, carbon dioxide and acetylene was exposed to an electrical potential of about 10,000 volts, producing an energetic plasma.
The energy broke apart the gaseous molecules, allowing their atoms and molecular fragments to recombine into more complex structures. These accumulated on silicon chips as an amorphous carbonaceous dust containing carbon, hydrogen, oxygen and nitrogen—the elements collectively abbreviated to CHON.
By comparing the infrared spectra of samples produced under different conditions, the researchers were also able to distinguish changes caused by ion bombardment from those caused by subsequent heating, or annealing. Such spectral fingerprints could help scientists reconstruct the histories of carbonaceous dust found in space, meteorites, comets and asteroids.
What the experiment did not demonstrate
- It did not create life.
- It did not reproduce the complete process of abiogenesis.
- It did not show that life must inevitably arise whenever organic material is present.
- It did not begin entirely with inorganic substances: acetylene is itself an organic molecule.
- It did not prove that extraterrestrial material was the sole source of organic compounds on the early Earth.
Its importance is more specific: it demonstrated how naturally occurring physical processes can transform relatively simple gaseous precursors into complex, carbon-rich material under plausible space-like conditions. No external agent had to arrange the resulting atoms or specify the structures they formed.
One possible route from stars to life
- Formation around stars: Carbon-rich molecules and dust form in environments such as the outer envelopes of ageing stars and material ejected by supernovae.
- Processing in space: Ultraviolet radiation, energetic ions, electrons and changes in temperature break bonds and create new ones, gradually altering the chemical composition and structure of the dust.
- Incorporation into planetary systems: Some of this material becomes part of the molecular clouds and protoplanetary discs from which new stars, planets, asteroids and comets form.
- Delivery to the early Earth: Meteorites, micrometeorites, comets and interplanetary dust particles bring extraterrestrial organic material to the planet’s surface.
- Further chemistry on Earth: Water, minerals, volcanic heat, sunlight, electrical discharges and chemical energy gradients modify and concentrate both terrestrial and extraterrestrial organic compounds.
- Increasing chemical organisation: Some chemical systems may develop catalytic activity, compartments, energy-processing reactions and imperfect molecular replication.
- Natural selection begins: Once systems can reproduce with heritable variation, those that persist and reproduce more successfully become more numerous. Chemical evolution can then develop into Darwinian evolution.
Abiogenesis almost certainly involved a network of interacting processes rather than one miraculous leap from simple chemicals to a modern cell. Cosmic dust could have supplied some of the ingredients, while conditions on the early Earth provided further opportunities for those ingredients to react, accumulate and become increasingly organised.
This student made cosmic dust in her lab. What she found could help us understand how life started on Earth
Study reverse-engineers stellar chemical cocktail of fundamental molecules using infrared 'fingerprints'.
A Sydney PhD student has recreated a tiny piece of the Universe inside a bottle in her laboratory, producing cosmic dust from scratch. The results shed new light on how the chemical building blocks of life may have formed long before Earth existed.
Linda Losurdo, a PhD candidate in materials and plasma physics in the School of Physics, has used a simple mix of gases – nitrogen, carbon dioxide and acetylene – to mimic the harsh and dynamic environments around stars and supernova remnants.
By subjecting these gases to intense electrical energy, she generated carbon-rich “cosmic dust” similar to the material found drifting between stars and embedded in comets, asteroids and meteorites.
Her results are published in The Astrophysical Journal of the American Astronomical Society.
The dust she created contains a complex cocktail of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen and nitrogen – known collectively as CHON molecules – which are central to many organic substances essential for life.
We no longer have to wait for an asteroid or comet to come to Earth to understand their histories. You can build analogue environments in the laboratory and reverse engineer their structure using the infrared fingerprints. This can give us huge insight into how ‘carbonaceous cosmic dust’ can form in the plasma puffed out by giant, old stars or in cosmic nurseries where stars are being born and distribute these fascinating molecules that could be vital for life. It’s like we have recreated a little bit of the Universe in a bottle in our lab.
Ms. Linda R. Losurdo, lead author
School of Physics,
UNiversity of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Cosmic dust is known to form in extreme astrophysical environments, where molecules are constantly bombarded by ions and electrons. Scientists can identify this dust in space because it emits a distinctive infrared signal – a molecular fingerprint that reveals its chemical structure.
The dust produced in Ms Losurdo’s experiments showed the same tell-tale infrared signatures, confirming the laboratory process closely mirrors what happens in space.
Building blocks of life
Cosmic dust analogue on a chip. The cocktail of chemicals was collected on a microchip.Photo: Fiona Wolf.
One of the enduring questions in science is how life began on Earth. Researchers are still debating whether the earliest organic molecules formed locally on our young planet, arrived later aboard comets and meteorites, or were delivered during the earliest stages of solar system formation – or some combination of all three.
Between about 3.5 and 4.56 billion years ago, Earth was bombarded by meteorites, micrometeorites and interplanetary dust particles originating from asteroids and comets. These objects are thought to have delivered vast amounts of organic material to the planet’s surface. Yet the origins of that material remain mysterious.
Covalently bonded carbon and hydrogen in comet and asteroid material are believed to have formed in the outer envelopes of stars, in high-energy events like supernovae, and in interstellar environments. What we’re trying to understand are the specific chemical pathways and conditions that incorporate all of the CHON elements into the complex organic structures we see in cosmic dust and meteorites.
Ms. Linda R. Losurdo.
How they did it
In the experiment, the team, consisting of Ms Losurdo and her supervisor Professor David McKenzie, used a vacuum pump to evacuate air from glass tubes, recreating the near-empty conditions of space. Nitrogen, carbon dioxide and acetylene were then introduced. The gas mixture was exposed to around 10,000 volts of electrical potential for about an hour, creating a type of plasma known as a glow discharge.
Cosmic dust gas mixture: Linda Losurdo mixed basic gases in a tube and subject them to electric bombardment to create cosmic dust analogues at the University of Sydney plasma physics laboratory.
Under this intense energy, molecules broke apart and recombined into new, more complex structures. These compounds eventually settled as a thin layer of dust on silicon chips placed inside the tubes.
The collected dust at times looks like glittering collections of cosmic material.
Professor David McKenzie, co-author on the paper, said the work will allow scientists to probe conditions that are otherwise impossible to study directly.Cosmic dust analogue seen through a microscope created by experiment by Linda Losurdo.
By making cosmic dust in the lab, we can explore the intensity of ion impacts and temperatures involved when dust forms in space. That’s important if you want to understand the environments inside cosmic dust clouds, where life-relevant chemistry is thought to be happening. This also helps us interpret what a meteorite or asteroid fragment has been through over its lifetime. Its chemical signature holds a record of its journey, and experiments like this help us learn how to read that record.
Professor David McKenzie, co-author
School of Physics,
UNiversity of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Beyond insights into the origins of life, the researchers aim to build a comprehensive database of infrared fingerprints from lab-made cosmic dust. Astronomers could then use this library to identify promising regions of space – in stellar nurseries or the remnants of dead stars – and work backwards to understand the processes shaping them.
By recreating cosmic chemistry on Earth, the research opens a new window onto deep stellar processes – and the ancient steps that may have helped make life on Earth possible.
Ms Losurdo won the best presentation for this research at the international Annual Meeting of the Meteoritical Society late last year.
PhD candidate Linda Losurdo (left) and her supervisor Professor David McKenzie.Photo: Fiona Wolf/The University of Sydney
Publication:
Losurdo and McKenzie have not created life, nor do they claim to have solved abiogenesis. What they have done is demonstrate another entirely natural route by which relatively simple chemical precursors can be transformed into complex, carbon-rich material under conditions resembling those found in space. Their work also provides a practical way to read the infrared signatures left by ion bombardment and heating, helping scientists to reconstruct the history of material found in meteorites, comets and asteroids.
This is how science approaches unanswered questions. It divides them into manageable parts, devises experiments to test possible mechanisms and then modifies its explanations in the light of the results. Every successful experiment adds another piece to the emerging picture, while every failure helps to eliminate an inadequate hypothesis. No claim of supernatural intervention can offer anything comparable because “a god did it” provides neither a mechanism to investigate nor a prediction to test.
The creationist response that an intelligently designed experiment proves the need for an intelligent designer merely confuses the investigation of a process with the cause of that process. Scientists also reproduce volcanic eruptions, ocean currents and lightning in laboratories, but no one imagines that volcanoes, tides and thunderstorms must therefore be operated by laboratory technicians. The researchers supplied conditions already known to occur naturally; physics and chemistry produced the resulting material without guidance.
Nor does the absence of a complete account of abiogenesis create evidence for a supernatural alternative. An unanswered scientific question is evidence only that more research is needed. Filling the remaining gaps with magic explains nothing, particularly when every gap examined so far has yielded to natural processes rather than supernatural ones.
Long before Earth existed, stars and interstellar plasmas were already manufacturing and processing complex carbonaceous material. Some of it eventually became incorporated into asteroids, comets and planets, supplying young worlds with ingredients from which still more complex chemistry could develop. The Universe did not need to wait for a magician to invent organic chemistry: carbon had been getting on perfectly well without one for billions of years.
Advertisement
Amazon
Amazon
Amazon
Amazon
Amazon
Amazon
Amazon
Amazon
Amazon
Amazon
Amazon
Amazon
All titles available in paperback, hardcover, ebook for Kindle and audio format.
Prices correct at time of publication. for current prices.
No comments :
Post a Comment
Obscene, threatening or obnoxious messages, preaching, abuse and spam will be removed, as will anything by known Internet trolls and stalkers, by known sock-puppet accounts and anything not connected with the post,
A claim made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Remember: your opinion is not an established fact unless corroborated.