The Origins of Life
A mineralogist believes he's discovered how life's early building blocks connected four billion years ago
- By Helen Fields
- Photographs by Amanda Lucidon
- Smithsonian magazine, October 2010, Subscribe
A hilly green campus in Washington, D.C. houses two departments of the Carnegie Institution for Science: the Geophysical Laboratory and the quaintly named Department of Terrestrial Magnetism. When the institution was founded, in 1902, measuring the earth’s magnetic field was a pressing scientific need for makers of nautical maps. Now, the people who work here—people like Bob Hazen—have more fundamental concerns. Hazen and his colleagues are using the institution’s “pressure bombs”—breadbox-size metal cylinders that squeeze and heat minerals to the insanely high temperatures and pressures found inside the earth—to decipher nothing less than the origins of life.
Hazen, a mineralogist, is investigating how the first organic chemicals—the kind found in living things—formed and then found each other nearly four billion years ago. He began this research in 1996, about two decades after scientists discovered hydrothermal vents—cracks in the deep ocean floor where water is heated to hundreds of degrees Fahrenheit by molten rock. The vents fuel strange underwater ecosystems inhabited by giant worms, blind shrimp and sulfur-eating bacteria. Hazen and his colleagues believed the complex, high-pressure vent environment—with rich mineral deposits and fissures spewing hot water into cold—might be where life began.
Hazen realized he could use the pressure bomb to test this theory. The device (technically known as an “internally heated, gas media pressure vessel”) is like a super-high-powered kitchen pressure cooker, producing temperatures exceeding 1,800 degrees and pressures up to 10,000 times that of the atmosphere at sea level. (If something were to go wrong, the ensuing explosion could take out a good part of the lab building; the operator runs the pressure bomb from behind an armored barrier.)
In his first experiment with the device, Hazen encased a few milligrams of water, an organic chemical called pyruvate and a powder that produces carbon dioxide all in a tiny capsule made of gold (which does not react with the chemicals inside) that he had welded himself. He put three capsules into the pressure bomb at 480 degrees and 2,000 atmospheres. And then he went to lunch. When he took the capsules out two hours later, the contents had turned into tens of thousands of different compounds. In later experiments, he combined nitrogen, ammonia and other molecules plausibly present on the early earth. In these experiments, Hazen and his colleagues created all sorts of organic molecules, including amino acids and sugars—the stuff of life.
Hazen’s experiments marked a turning point. Before them, origins-of-life research had been guided by a scenario scripted in 1871 by Charles Darwin himself: “But if (and oh! what a big if!) we could conceive in some warm little pond, with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, light, heat, electricity, etc., present, that a proteine compound was chemically formed ready to undergo still more complex changes....”
In 1952, Stanley Miller, a graduate student in chemistry at the University of Chicago, attempted to create Darwin’s dream. Miller set up a container holding water (representing the early ocean) connected by glass tubes to one containing ammonia, methane and hydrogen—a mixture scientists of the day thought approximated the early atmosphere. A flame heated the water, sending vapor upward. In the atmosphere flask, electric sparks simulated lightning. The experiment was such a long shot that Miller’s adviser, Harold Urey, thought it a waste of time. But over the next few days, the water turned deep red. Miller had created a broth of amino acids.
Forty-four years later, Bob Hazen’s pressure bomb experiments would show that not just lightning storms but also hydrothermal vents potentially could have sparked life. His work soon led him to a more surprising conclusion: the basic molecules of life, it turns out, are able to form in all sorts of places: near hydrothermal vents, volcanoes, even on meteorites. Cracking open space rocks, astrobiologists have discovered amino acids, compounds similar to sugars and fatty acids, and nucleobases found in RNA and DNA. So it’s even possible that some of the first building blocks of life on earth came from outer space.
Hazen’s findings came at an auspicious time. “A few years before, we would have been laughed out of the origins-of-life community,” he says. But NASA, then starting up its astrobiology program, was looking for evidence that life could have evolved in odd environments—such as on other planets or their moons. “NASA [wanted] justification for going to Europa, to Titan, to Ganymede, to Callisto, to Mars,” says Hazen. If life does exist there, it’s likely to be under the surface, in warm, high-pressure environments.
Back on earth, Hazen says that by 2000 he had concluded that “making the basic building blocks of life is easy.” A harder question: How did the right building blocks get incorporated? Amino acids come in multiple forms, but only some are used by living things to form proteins. How did they find each other?
Subscribe now for more of Smithsonian's coverage on history, science and nature.









Comments (16)
He is stupid
Posted by on November 1,2012 | 06:29 PM
To understand origin of life, the first thing that needs to be understood is, which of the properties of matter can possibly account for inanimate to animate transformation. Last Universal Common Ancestor has been held to be the common ancestor of all the organisms that are known to exist on Earth. However, it is not correct and therefore ruled out. http://sciencengod.com/blog/whether-or-not-last-universal-common-ancestor-is-even-probable/ http://www.sciencengod.com http://sciencengod.com/buynow.php
Posted by Dr Mahesh C. Jain on October 9,2012 | 10:49 PM
Hazen gives good lectures, I heard him here in Uppsala at his Linné lecture.
Creationists shouldn't comment on science:
@ MPK:
Pyruvate is C3H3O3 [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyruvic_acid ].
@ Hans Hollis, MPK:
We have testable evidence for chemical to biological evolution.
Bottom up, both AMP/ATP and lipid protocell membranes form spontaneously. Top-down we now know that the earliest gene families handled ATP. Hence ATP sits at a nested sets of traits or a tested phylogeny.
The RNA world is that bottleneck environment, and you have to go to Szostak et al for that. We also now know that RNA selfreplicators can get long enough spontaneously, and that they interact well with self-replicating protocell membranes. The trick is to put the pieces together - they are working on it.
More generally, astrobiology has gone from coming up with new pathways to try to reject those who doesn't work. Among those that will remain will be the one taken in our case.
Posted by Torbjörn Larsson, OM on February 24,2012 | 10:57 AM
Wow this is a really cool project. I might be able to try it out and use it for my science project. Thanks whoever the creator is :)
Posted by Kayla on October 5,2011 | 08:25 PM
Thomas Gold's "Deep Hot Biosphere" discussed the possibilty of life originating under the surface of the earth back in the 1980's.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Deep_Hot_Biosphere#Origins_of_petroleum
There are compelling reasons why this should be. If "life" originated by a lucky chance out of random combinations of organic chemicals, then it would be most likely to originate in a region where the chemical reactions were at their peak density and peak reaction rate: at high pressures and temperatures that naturally occur under the surface.
Posted by john b on November 16,2010 | 05:39 PM
Wow, this is my next science project. Thanks Smithsonian
Posted by Q on October 23,2010 | 06:03 PM
I think I am a sane, well educated person. However, I have had some psychic ability that I don't understand and usually try to avoid. One of the recurring messages I have been getting for years is "The answer is in the rocks." Maybe this article explains that message.
Posted by Gwen Hays on October 20,2010 | 12:47 PM
Great article. How could people not find this kind of topic utterly fascinating?
Posted by Bob on October 13,2010 | 05:48 PM
I have subscribed to Smithsonian magazine for some 25 years and often enjoy the articles presented. Before There Was Life in the October 2010 issue is a rare exception. The idea that life somehow arose around hydrothermal vents was dismissed by Stanley Miller himself. In an interview appearing in Astrobiology Magazine on the 50th anniversary of Miller’s original experiment and subsequent paper, Miller stated ”the conditions of such ocean venting decomposes rather than enhances prebiotic chemistry.”
Chemist Jeffrey L. Bada of the University of California, (as reported in the New York Times) added: “This is probably the most unlikely area for the origin of life to occur”.
As a side note, Stanley Miller’s obituary appeared in The New York Times on May 23, 2007. In part, it stated “Despite the brilliant beginning, neither he nor others were able to take the next step, that of providing a plausible mechanism by which these chemicals could have been assembled into living cells or macromolecules, DNA and proteins – on which cells depend.” Mr. Hazen has only shown that amino acids can be formed under certain conditions, something that is already widely known. He, too, has failed to provide a plausible mechanism by which these chemicals could have been assembled into living cells.
Sincerely,
Hans Hollis
Posted by Hans Hollis on October 12,2010 | 02:43 PM
Thanks to scientists who continue to explore new ways of looking at how life could have started we have a more complete idea of what could have happened here on Earth about 4 billion years ago. Let's go to mars, drill down and find out if life is still there. Just a suggestion.
Posted by Bob Wiersma on October 8,2010 | 04:28 PM
This is shallow science for such a bold title. "I do wish that creationists would actually know the science they decry...The only thing organic chemical means is that it has carbon in it." Wrong, elitist Vel, Pyruvate, as a compound, has no carbon in its structure. Soup in is still soup out. Maybe there’s something useful still to come, but for now, this column describes nothing more than expensive alchemy.
Posted by MPK on October 7,2010 | 10:24 PM
I do wish that creationists would actually know the science they decry and realize that organic chemicals aren't only those that are made by life. We known how to make organic chemicals from inorganic. They are made that way in nature. We have done so since around 1832 when Wohler synthesized urea from inorganic chemicals. The only thing organic chemical means is that it has carbon in it.
Posted by vel on September 29,2010 | 12:46 PM
@Rick Powell: The article states that we've been able to synthesize amino acids (basic organic compounds) from ammonia, methane and hydrogen (inorganic elements) in early-earth-like conditions since the 1960s. To quote, "Hazen says that by 2000 he had concluded that 'making the basic building blocks of life is easy.'" Once you've mastered synthesizing organic compounds, you move on to the next question. "How did the right building blocks get incorporated? Amino acids come in multiple forms, but only some are used by living things to form proteins. How did they find each other?"
You may also be interested in this article: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18623-did-midwife-molecule-assemble-first-life-on-earth.html
Posted by Marie Torborg on September 29,2010 | 09:53 AM
The writing was as great as the story. Darwin would be proud. Rock on!
Posted by Tom Stohlgren on September 21,2010 | 11:13 PM
The title "The Origins of Life" is completely misleading, unfortunately a common trait for the Smithsonian magazine these days. Let's see, we take existing organic compounds, heat and pressurize them, and behold - more complex organic compounds! Then we hype it up to get some readers. Where would the organic compounds have come from? How would we get from non-organic to organic? Now those are just some of the initial questions that would have to be seriously addressed, before you should ever include the word "origins" in the title. I feel cheated and want five minutes of my life back, please.
Posted by Rick Powell on September 19,2010 | 02:32 PM
This material is way beyond my idea as to how different material was developed. It is great that some so gifted could put these ideas together and then print a script that someone like me could at least begin to rethink how life and everything developed.
As a pastor the greative God did it, but for me the Great God put the system, the program, and events to make it happen together and now we have the miracles that life is all about.
Thanks for help me take another step in understanding.
Posted by Deane R. Williams on September 18,2010 | 04:08 PM