[js1138]

Well, would slowing down amino acids and living cells be able to show us any further details? Would the changes not be more obvious if we could witness them at slower rates?

I don't think you have a clear idea of how this research is conducted. No one is likely to duplicate abiogenesis with a Miller type experiment. The insights needed to figure out how it could happen (not necessarily how it did happen) will come in bits and spurts, and most likely from work in unrelated areas. A lot of problems are being attacked simultaneously, many in the process of medical research.

There is a project like SETI online attempting to solve the problems of protein folding. This is medical research, but it might provide answers to how the first proteins evolved (Assuming they did, Andrew).

I rather doubt that any brute force research project will create life from scratch.

[AndrewC]

The insights needed to figure out how it could happen (not necessarily how it did happen) will come in bits and spurts, and most likely from work in unrelated areas.

We can "see" how a metal bar red hot at one end can be created from the energy in a homogeneously warm metal bar by videotaping the hot bar cooling down and then running the video backwards. Trouble is, that doesn't happen in real life.

[MacDorcha]

"I rather doubt that any brute force research project will create life from scratch."

This is being stated with respect, so please don't flame me.

The begining of life WAS "brute force research"

There was no control group, no white coats, nobody controling temperature. "Life" was a MASSIVE step from oblivion. As someone else showed earlier, there are "stages" of protein formations leading to DNA. But information from nothing?

It goes against my understanding as one who works with computers all day long. Something had to "bootstrap" it in. Brute force will show that.