Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

It's alive! Alive!

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 3
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 template Next
  • #31
    Originally posted by Provost Harrison


    Damn, now there's a field that sounds like it has become extremely interesting but was in extreme infancy when I was a student. Shows how quickly things move in the biosciences.
    I'm hoping it lasts out my Ph.D. at the moment. All the really big exciting stuff seems to be happening right now and soon its just going to be figuring out how the "units" of biology (proteins, genes, etc) can be assembled into custom built metabolic circuits for various tasks.
    Exult in your existence, because that very process has blundered unwittingly on its own negation. Only a small, local negation, to be sure: only one species, and only a minority of that species; but there lies hope. [...] Stand tall, Bipedal Ape. The shark may outswim you, the cheetah outrun you, the swift outfly you, the capuchin outclimb you, the elephant outpower you, the redwood outlast you. But you have the biggest gifts of all: the gift of understanding the ruthlessly cruel process that gave us all existence [and the] gift of revulsion against its implications.
    -Richard Dawkins

    Comment

    • #32
      If you could take carbon out of the air with an organism... and can burn the organism for fuel... then you have complete control over how much carbon is in the air. This is achieved by regulating how much of the organism is "active" vs "burned" at any given time.

      The main problem comes if/when the organisms mutate and start taking carbon out of other sources... like us.

      Comment

      • #33
        Originally posted by DinoDoc
        Cow farts are bad for the enviroment.
        Because teh methane is being released directly into teh atmosphere. Harvesting it and using it as a fuel is cleaner than burning coal or oil.
        THEY!!111 OMG WTF LOL LET DA NOMADS AND TEH S3D3NTARY PEOPLA BOTH MAEK BITER AXP3REINCES
        AND TEH GRAAT SINS OF THERE [DOCTRINAL] INOVATIONS BQU3ATH3D SMAL
        AND!!1!11!!! LOL JUST IN CAES A DISPUTANT CALS U 2 DISPUT3 ABOUT THEYRE CLAMES
        DO NOT THAN DISPUT3 ON THEM 3XCAPT BY WAY OF AN 3XTARNAL DISPUTA!!!!11!! WTF

        Comment

        • #34
          Originally posted by Aeson
          The main problem comes if/when the organisms mutate and start taking carbon out of other sources... like us.
          Synthetic biology isn't nanotechnology. Well, okay. It is. But only because all biology is basically based on molecular machines. But the "Grey Goo" scenario isn't particularly likely. Synthetic organisms aren't going to be as hardy as natural creatures. What would be the point? You're not building these creatures to survive billions of years of random evolutionary pressure, you're making them for a purpose.

          Aside for that, the metabolic differences between extracting carbon from the air to extracting carbon from complex organic compounds (ie, what you and I are built out of) is vast. You're just as likely to be eaten by photosynthetic bacteria or a houseplant.
          Exult in your existence, because that very process has blundered unwittingly on its own negation. Only a small, local negation, to be sure: only one species, and only a minority of that species; but there lies hope. [...] Stand tall, Bipedal Ape. The shark may outswim you, the cheetah outrun you, the swift outfly you, the capuchin outclimb you, the elephant outpower you, the redwood outlast you. But you have the biggest gifts of all: the gift of understanding the ruthlessly cruel process that gave us all existence [and the] gift of revulsion against its implications.
          -Richard Dawkins

          Comment

          • #35
            Originally posted by Aeson
            If you could take carbon out of the air with an organism... and can burn the organism for fuel...
            Such organisms are called "plants"

            The main problem comes if/when the organisms mutate and start taking carbon out of other sources... like us.
            Such organisms are called "Venus fly traps," or in this case "Venus human traps."

            Comment

            • #36
              I didn't say how likely I thought it was. (Since I really don't know.) Though if it did happen my bet would be on someone less than nice designing the problematic organisms... rather than natural evolution.

              Comment

              • #37
                Originally posted by Zkribbler
                Such organisms are called "plants"
                What you call them is irrelevent to the issue I was discussing.

                Comment

                • #38
                  I wonder what the Pentagon will do with this technology.

                  "I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration somehow you're not patriotic. We should stand up and say we are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration." - Hillary Clinton, 2003

                  Comment

                  • #39
                    Wasn't there a hullabaloo recently about the scientist researching creating artificial cell membranes? The so-called 'wet bag' technology?

                    Combine that with this...

                    This is an important step on the road to creating an artificial cell, and then I can finally have my Replicant Sex Slave, just like in 'Blade Runner'!!

                    Get crackin' scientists! Remember, we want the 'Pris' model, not the 'Roy Batty' model....
                    "Wait a minute..this isn''t FAUX dive, it's just a DIVE!"
                    "...Mangy dog staggering about, looking vainly for a place to die."
                    "sauna stories? There are no 'sauna stories'.. I mean.. sauna is sauna. You do by the laws of sauna." -P.

                    Comment

                    Previous 1 2 3 template Next
                    Working...
                    X