Where did early life forms get their energy ?
93334
They were given the energy by the creator, or God...
483713
I wouldn't say that I'm anymore intelligent than someone else, but I did want to answer your question, so....\n\nYou are confusing the theory of evolution (diversification of species) with the theory of abiogenesis (life from natural compounds).  That's okay, many people confuse the two.\n\n1.  How did life get from soup to single-celled organisms?  From wikipedia, "J.B.S Haldane suggested that the earth's pre-biotic oceans - very different from their modern counterparts - would have formed a "hot dilute soup" in which organic compounds, the building blocks of life, could have formed.\nIn 1953, taking their cue from Oparin and Haldane, the chemists Stanley L. Miller and Harold C. Urey carried out an experiment on the "primeval soup". Within two weeks organic amino acids, the basic building blocks of life, had formed. While Miller and Urey did not actually create life; they demonstrated that a more complex molecule — the amino-acids — could emerge spontaneously from simpler chemicals, in the presence of an external energy source in an atmosphere largely devoid of oxygen (the experiment involved shooting a spark, representing lightning, into their flask of supposedly primitive earth-gases)."\n\n2.  How did the original cell eat and develop asexual reproduction?   You are putting the cart before the horse.  In order to get to the cell stage, self-replicating molecules had to exist first... i.e. reproduction & "nourishment"  was occurring well before the cell stage.  Also, what are you referring to with "nourishment"?  For a self-replicating molecule, nourishment would consist of other molecules that it could combine with to form more of itself.\n\n3.  In the "soup", how did primordial cells develop resistences?  Resistence to what?  I don't understand this question.  To the environment?  To viruses or bacteria?  You need to elaborate here, I'm sorry.  I think it ties into your next answer, but not sure.  Please read my answer to #4.\n\n4.  How did it evolve everything it needed if it wasn't in it's DNA?  Can you give an example?  Hmm.  I'm trying to understand how you are approaching this question.  Let's say you have 100 little cells, each a little different.  5 cells can withstand a higher water temperature than the others because of a mutation they have.  One day the temperature goes up and kills off the other 95 cells.  That only leaves the 5 with the mutation.  They scamper off and reproduce like crazy... the cell strain has just evolved a little.  Now repeat this a gazillion times with a dynamic interacting environment and there you go.
706797
TRUE\nFirst of all all living cells do not produce energy from glucose only,but also from fats and proteins(during starvation).\nAnd then,most of the energy released is lost as heat energy.The remaining energy is stored as ATP( which is like a 'battery').Just as a battery can be 'plugged on' to different objects to produce light(torch),sound(tape recorder),etc so also the ATP can also be used as and when required to provide energy for locomotion,to produce light(glow worm),electricity(ray fish) etc.
1097307
Cyanobacteria have the distinction of being the oldest known fossils, more than 3.5 billion years old, in fact! It may surprise you then to know that the cyanobacteria are still around; they are one of the largest and most important groups of bacteria on earth.\n\nMany Proterozoic oil deposits are attributed to the activity of cyanobacteria.The cyanobacteria have also been tremendously important in shaping the course of evolution and ecological change throughout earth's history. The oxygen atmosphere that we depend on was generated by numerous cyanobacteria during the Archaean and Proterozoic Eras. Before that time, the atmosphere had a very different chemistry, unsuitable for life as we know it today.\n\nThe other great contribution of the cyanobacteria is the origin of plants. The chloroplast with which plants make food for themselves is actually a cyanobacterium living within the plant's cells. Sometime in the late Proterozoic, or in the early Cambrian, cyanobacteria began to take up residence within certain eukaryote cells, making food for the eukaryote host in return for a home. This event is known as endosymbiosis, and is also the origin of the eukaryotic mitochondrion.\n\nSo, to put it in a nutshell, they are the oldest, they created the oxygen atmosphere and they allowed plants to feed themselves.  Amazing for such a small little thing.
354028
Charles Darwin proposed that the first proteins evolved from non-living matter. But how did this happen? Firstly, the earth was not the same today as it was 3 to 4 billion years ago when the first organic compounds where being formed. The early atmosphere was too hot for oxygen (O), nitrogen (N), and other elements to exist alone, as they do today. These elements combined to form methane (CH4), ammonia (NH3), water vapor (H2O), hydrogen sulfide (formula), hydrogen molecules (H2), etc. These where all, and thus the early atmosphere was called a 'reducing atmosphere'. Further, as there was no free oxygen to form an ozone (O3) layer to protect the earth from the harsh ultra-violet radiation (UV Rays) from the sun. Also, there where incredibly violent electrical storms, which where more violent than any which occur today. \n\nIn 1924 Alexander Oparin hypothesized that organic compounds where formed in the early earth when the high energy provided by UV Rays, and storms, caused different molecules to react, and create new organic compounds, such as Amino Acids DNA, and RNA.
59455
not quite sure what you are asking but:\n\nfirst form of energy was human power (brute force)\nthen came fire (heat energy)\nwind power for flour mills\nsteam power\nelectricity (then the different forms of generating it, coal first, gasoline, nuclear, wind, solar etc)
281770
Cells get most of their energy when they break down a glucose molecule in the mitochondrion. This results in the end production of 36 ATP, the energy currency of the cell.
1142498
No. Most life forms did not evolve from plants. Simple single-celled life was first, microscopic organisms at one point called protists and at another point moved into its own kingdom, bacteria. The first primitive multicellular animals preceeded plants by a few million years.
617550
Where do all plants get their energy?\n\nnutrients from the soil for plants in the ground, sunlight for plants with green leaves.
746523
As other posters have remarked, life is formed from non-living matter all the time. However, I think you are asking how the first life formed. But it's important to understand that the first life wasn't formed by "biological processes" - because there was no biology at that point. The processes were purely chemical.\n\nThe answer to how life formed, though, is: we don't really know, yet. However we do have some good ideas.\n\nOne of the above posters referred to an experiment - it's actually known as the Miller-Urey experiment. Miller discovered that he could generate small amounts of amino acids - which are the basic building blocks of life - by passing an electric current through a mix of gases which represented the composition of the atmosphere billions of years ago. \n\nNow, there's a big gap between these amino acids and the first cell, which is where creationists will try to mislead you by saying that a cell is too complex to have formed on its own. But, of course, no-one is saying  cell did form straight away. There's probably a gap of millions of years between the amino acids and the first cell .This is where the most active research is going on - scientists now think that before DNA formed, life depended on a simpler structure called RNA, so they refer to this period as the RNA world. It's a very interesting area of research.\n\nThe other way creationists try to mislead you is by dishonestly claiming that scientists believe in "spontaneous generation", which was disproved hundreds of years ago. In fact, one has nothing to do with the other - spontaneous generation was the idea that fully-grown creatures like mice spontaneously formed from piles of grain. Of course this idea isn't accepted by anyone today, and is a long way from the detailed ideas about the formation of amino acids and cells that scientists are really working on.
898093
The basics on the origin of life:\nPhospholipids formed into micelles, or little circles.  They were arranged such that the polar head groups were facing into aqueous solution and the polar lipid tail groups were facing in toward the other polar lipid group:\nH---T  T---H into a sphere.  Inside these closed environments, it was possible for certain reactions to take place.  The reactions eventually needed to be self-replicating; that is, they needed to react to form something to pass the information for the reaction down to another micelle.  Eventually, the micelles evolved into actual cells.  Alberts "Molecular Biology of the Gene" has a great explanation of this process.\nThere so far hasn't been an experiment to create life- that process took millions of years naturally.  However, Stanley Miller did an experiment that showed that organic molecules, such as nucleic acids, amino acids, etc. could be formed from basic molecules under the conditions present in early Earth.  This experiment was incredibly reproducible- many people tried it, changing around different variables, trying to disprove it, but it kept working.  That's an incredible testament.
93
Some evidence of photosynthesis was found on rocks in Greenland dating from 3.7 billion years ago. Danish researchers reached that conclusion analyzing the relative abundance of uranium and thorium in some rocks, and the high abundance of uranium in those suggests that there was oxygen present. Their conclusion was that microorganisms like present day cyanobacteria were converting sunlight to chemical energy through oxygen-producing photosynthesis.
800051
microchondria convert food to energy\nI think chloroplasts use the sun to create food which can be converted to energy. You can look it up on google.com.
261613
Prior to there being any life, all the carbon on Earth was in the form of simple molecules that form without living things. Amino acids, single nucleotides, a few sugars. \n\nImagine if one took all the living things in the world, and all the formerly living things that are now coal, gas and oil, and broke them down into those simple original molecules. Now dissolve all that into the oceans.\n\nWhat you would have is a weak broth. Weak, but very nutritious. If a single modern bacteria was released in this broth, it would easily take over the Earth. \n\nEven a much simpler form of life than a modern bacteria would be able to multiply in the primordial soup. One could see competition between these lifeforms, minimal at first, escalate into war once most of the nutrients were used up. Evolution would then favor the development of more complexity.
442449
Cells use this energy for their metabolism/ life processes. the life processes include:\nGrowth\nReproduction\nRespiration\nSynthesis\nTransport\nExcretion\nHomeostasis\nNutrition\n\nATP (the molecule in which cells store energy-- specifically, it's found in the bonds), or Adenosine Tri Phosphate, is used for all of these processes. I'm not sure about what you mean, "Two main things"-- but of those proccesses listed above, the "two main" ones would probably be Homeostasis (maintaining a stable internal environment) and Synthesis...
83045
"Evolutionary chains" go a long way towards explaining the development of life, including human life, from simpler organisms, but we haven't gotten very far yet in explaining how the mutation and reproduction systems that natural selection requires  got started in the first place.  Some researchers, and by that I mean mainstream ones who fully accept evolution as the fundamental organizing theory of biology, have tried to work around this problem by postulating that the original lifeforms didn't evolve on Earth at all.  However, while this changes the debate somewhat, by allowing far greater timelines for life to evolve, it still begs the question:  OK, if life evolved somewhere else first, how did it get started *there*?  I think we are much better served by looking at whether life could have evolved here, under the conditions of the primitive earth as we know them.
1075116
Structures resembling remarkably preserved bacterial and cyanobacterial microfossils from ~3,465-million-year-old Apex cherts of the Warrawoona Group in Western Australia currently provide the oldest morphological evidence for life on Earth and have been taken to support an early beginning for oxygen-producing photosynthesis. Eleven species of filamentous prokaryote, distinguished by shape and geometry, have been put forward as meeting the criteria required of authentic Archaean microfossils, and contrast with other microfossils dismissed as either unreliable or unreproducible. These structures are nearly a billion years older than putative cyanobacterial biomarkers, genomic arguments for cyanobacteria, and oxygenic atmosphere and any comparable diverse suite of microfossils. Here we report new research on the type and re-collected material, involving mapping, optical and electron microscopy, digital image analysis, micro-Raman spectroscopy and other geochemical techniques. We reinterpret the purported microfossil-like structure as secondary artefacts formed from amorphous graphite within multiple generations of metalliferous hydrothermal vein chert and volcanic glass. Although there is no support for primary biological morphology, a Fischer-Tropsch-type synthesis of carbon compounds and carbon isotopic fractionation is inferred for one of the oldest known hydrothermal systems on Earth.