In that episode, the patient was a chimera, which is caused when two early embryos fuse to produce one individual (this is also used as a lab technique in mice to produce gene knock-outs). In other words, different body areas, pretty much at random, will have different DNA. To my knowledge, it's unclear how often this actually occurs in normal humans.
You have to take into account that sequencing machines do not just spit out a pretty string of A, C, T, G. For the older sequencing method, the raw data from the sequencing machine consists of 4 intensity traces (one for each base), so you have to record 4 waves, which are then interpreted (sometimes imperfectly) by software to give you the sequence. The raw data does have to be stored and moved around for some period of time, and often needs to be stored for other analyses. This data is around 200 kilobytes for less than 1 kilobase of sequence. The newer methods collect data as a series of very high-resolution images (something like a black image with ~10 million colored spots), which take up TONS of space, and take substantial processing power to interpret and turn into nucleotide sequence. I don't have exact numbers though, since I haven't worked with them directly, only the preprocessed data (which is still several gigabytes for a gigabase of sequence, since it contains data on the quality/certainty of each base read and such)
nope, same 20 amino acids now as then, they were just able to identify a sequence that was 149 amino acids long.
however, you bring up a good point. I wonder if their experiment was designed to detect amino acids that no longer exist in modern animals. However, the fact that the same amino acids are shared across all living organisms known today (which diverged billions of years ago) makes it unlikely that there were different amino acids in animals 65 million years ago.
As noted, the correct statement is that DNA (of all known organisms) directly encodes exactly 20 different amino acids. There can be a few more, but they are not directly encoded, but added/modified later.
Also, I don't see the ambiguity. If someone found a new manuscript of Shakespeare's that consisted of 10,000 letters, would you complain that the English language only has 26 letters?
Erwin Shrodinger's "What is life?" is a fantastic collection of his ideas of the physical basis for life. He wrote this when the idea of a molecule was just coming into existence (referring to the genetic material as an "irregular crystal"), and inspired the first generation of molecular biologists.
It's a great example of the power of "back of the envelope" estimations, and a very interesting read.
It still isn't clear why you would need a mac, except for "more choice", by which you actually mean 1 more choice (OS X).
He could dual-boot 2 copies of windows or windows/linux on a non-mac machine, and still isolate his gaming OS from his work OS.
In one e-mail I received, the departing employee included the URLs for applying for unemployment compensation and other government programs, for our future benefit, as well as the addresses of low-cost international grocery stores in the area (not really sure why).
Top journals like Science and Nature have gotten much better with copyright, allowing authors to maintain copyright over their papers, and releasing content for free after some time (usually ~12 months). Also, personal subscriptions to the top journals (honestly, i don't know of anyone who reads through whole journals other than science, nature, and maybe 1 specialty journal) come down to $5 per issue. It tends to be the small specialists journals and publishers that get nasty with copyright. One of these publishers made us jump through hoops for permission to reprint a figure from an older review in a newer one. The best part is that we were publishing the new review with the same publisher!
Also, does anyone know if the current open access policy covers review papers? Those would be of most value to the average taxpayer I believe.
I don't know how it is in Israel, but when I was in high school here in the US, I just e-mailed a bunch of professors around the city who were doing interesting work, until I found one willing to take me on as a lab assistant, and I did research there for the rest of my time in high school. I worked for free for a while, but it eventually turned into a nice part-time job (as well as a great activity to put on college apps). My high school even had a program that got me credit for doing it, so that's something you may want to look into. With your strong background, you shouldn't have a hard time finding a lab willing to take you (scientists love cheap/free labor).
The vouchers are all dated, and expire ~90 days after they're sent. I figured I had plenty of time to buy a box after I got my coupon in March, and found that fact out the hard way when I was ready to buy the box last summer. I had to order another set of coupons to another address. It would be really stupid if the money was used up even if the coupon wasn't used. With our government, this is a distinct possibility.
Sorry, not true. There ARE mechanisms for creating new RNA not encoded in the DNA. Enzymes can shuffle around RNA sequence (as in RNA splicing), or change single nucleotides. Interestingly, the base changes occur most often in the nervous system of mammals. However, as mentioned, RNA doesn't stick around long enough to be responsible for memory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rna_editing
If you're at a university, undergrads often work just as well, and there are tons of them looking for work/study (cheap) or "independent study" (often free) jobs. Advertise and see what you get.
Yeah, stop talking about my girlfriend...
Ok, you're right about the math, but when it comes to their job, they're (usually) darn good.
Just make sure the pharmacist calculates your dosages:)
The article suggested the use of solar power for this process (though to be fair they also said natural gas) which could be a viable carbon-free option in desert environments rich in limestone.
Sure you've got ton's of data, but you need a theory to use it to solve real scientific problems.
For example, Craig Venter may have tons of genes that look like something that can make gasoline from grass, but you still need to test each one the old-fashioned way, with careful application of theory and experiment, to see if it works before you start using it.
What you say is correct to a point, but i don't understand the point you're trying to make.
As you correctly alluded, the local environment of atoms in the protein interior has a packing density resembling that of a salt crystal, BUT they lack the regular lattice structure that allows for constructive interference to occur between X-ray photons to produce detectable diffraction patterns. That repetitiveness is the essential component of a crystal!
There are crystals with low packing densities (solid water is less densely packed than liquid, and protein crystals can have huge holes in between protein molecules), but what they all have in common is a regular repeating lattice. So, in short, the protein interior is densely packed, but NOT crystalline.
Slashdot Mirror
In that episode, the patient was a chimera, which is caused when two early embryos fuse to produce one individual (this is also used as a lab technique in mice to produce gene knock-outs). In other words, different body areas, pretty much at random, will have different DNA. To my knowledge, it's unclear how often this actually occurs in normal humans.
rates are pegged to rise no faster than inflation, so not really: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_United_States_postage_rates
You have to take into account that sequencing machines do not just spit out a pretty string of A, C, T, G. For the older sequencing method, the raw data from the sequencing machine consists of 4 intensity traces (one for each base), so you have to record 4 waves, which are then interpreted (sometimes imperfectly) by software to give you the sequence. The raw data does have to be stored and moved around for some period of time, and often needs to be stored for other analyses. This data is around 200 kilobytes for less than 1 kilobase of sequence. The newer methods collect data as a series of very high-resolution images (something like a black image with ~10 million colored spots), which take up TONS of space, and take substantial processing power to interpret and turn into nucleotide sequence. I don't have exact numbers though, since I haven't worked with them directly, only the preprocessed data (which is still several gigabytes for a gigabase of sequence, since it contains data on the quality/certainty of each base read and such)
nope, same 20 amino acids now as then, they were just able to identify a sequence that was 149 amino acids long. however, you bring up a good point. I wonder if their experiment was designed to detect amino acids that no longer exist in modern animals. However, the fact that the same amino acids are shared across all living organisms known today (which diverged billions of years ago) makes it unlikely that there were different amino acids in animals 65 million years ago.
As noted, the correct statement is that DNA (of all known organisms) directly encodes exactly 20 different amino acids. There can be a few more, but they are not directly encoded, but added/modified later.
Also, I don't see the ambiguity. If someone found a new manuscript of Shakespeare's that consisted of 10,000 letters, would you complain that the English language only has 26 letters?
It's a great example of the power of "back of the envelope" estimations, and a very interesting read.
No camera on my T61
It still isn't clear why you would need a mac, except for "more choice", by which you actually mean 1 more choice (OS X). He could dual-boot 2 copies of windows or windows/linux on a non-mac machine, and still isolate his gaming OS from his work OS.
It would actually be kinda cool if it would minimize your browser whenever you looked/walked away, and restore it when you look back.
The only thing I really want to see is how this thing is charged. How could that picture possibly be omitted?
In one e-mail I received, the departing employee included the URLs for applying for unemployment compensation and other government programs, for our future benefit, as well as the addresses of low-cost international grocery stores in the area (not really sure why).
I don't wear anything when I play with my Wii as it is.
Top journals like Science and Nature have gotten much better with copyright, allowing authors to maintain copyright over their papers, and releasing content for free after some time (usually ~12 months). Also, personal subscriptions to the top journals (honestly, i don't know of anyone who reads through whole journals other than science, nature, and maybe 1 specialty journal) come down to $5 per issue. It tends to be the small specialists journals and publishers that get nasty with copyright. One of these publishers made us jump through hoops for permission to reprint a figure from an older review in a newer one. The best part is that we were publishing the new review with the same publisher! Also, does anyone know if the current open access policy covers review papers? Those would be of most value to the average taxpayer I believe.
I don't know how it is in Israel, but when I was in high school here in the US, I just e-mailed a bunch of professors around the city who were doing interesting work, until I found one willing to take me on as a lab assistant, and I did research there for the rest of my time in high school. I worked for free for a while, but it eventually turned into a nice part-time job (as well as a great activity to put on college apps). My high school even had a program that got me credit for doing it, so that's something you may want to look into. With your strong background, you shouldn't have a hard time finding a lab willing to take you (scientists love cheap/free labor).
The vouchers are all dated, and expire ~90 days after they're sent. I figured I had plenty of time to buy a box after I got my coupon in March, and found that fact out the hard way when I was ready to buy the box last summer. I had to order another set of coupons to another address. It would be really stupid if the money was used up even if the coupon wasn't used. With our government, this is a distinct possibility.
The Solexa sequencing platform has been VERY useful (admittedly not so much for de novo sequencing), with a read length of ~30 or less.
Some of the higher priced ones (~$30) are worth it for a signal amplifier.
Sorry, not true. There ARE mechanisms for creating new RNA not encoded in the DNA. Enzymes can shuffle around RNA sequence (as in RNA splicing), or change single nucleotides. Interestingly, the base changes occur most often in the nervous system of mammals. However, as mentioned, RNA doesn't stick around long enough to be responsible for memory. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rna_editing
Puppies
If you're at a university, undergrads often work just as well, and there are tons of them looking for work/study (cheap) or "independent study" (often free) jobs. Advertise and see what you get.
More interestingly, what the hell was he doing with it all?
Selling it? Using it? Burning it to stay warm? Trying to rebuild HAL?
I bet he's just a klepto.
Yeah, stop talking about my girlfriend... Ok, you're right about the math, but when it comes to their job, they're (usually) darn good. Just make sure the pharmacist calculates your dosages :)
The article suggested the use of solar power for this process (though to be fair they also said natural gas) which could be a viable carbon-free option in desert environments rich in limestone.
For example, Craig Venter may have tons of genes that look like something that can make gasoline from grass, but you still need to test each one the old-fashioned way, with careful application of theory and experiment, to see if it works before you start using it.
Sidney Brenner (legendary Biologist and Nobel laureate) calls these methods "low-input, high-throughput, no-output biology." http://www.mc.vanderbilt.edu/reporter/index.html?ID=5027
What you say is correct to a point, but i don't understand the point you're trying to make. As you correctly alluded, the local environment of atoms in the protein interior has a packing density resembling that of a salt crystal, BUT they lack the regular lattice structure that allows for constructive interference to occur between X-ray photons to produce detectable diffraction patterns. That repetitiveness is the essential component of a crystal! There are crystals with low packing densities (solid water is less densely packed than liquid, and protein crystals can have huge holes in between protein molecules), but what they all have in common is a regular repeating lattice. So, in short, the protein interior is densely packed, but NOT crystalline.