Firstly, I believe that's Zeno, not Apollo
Sorry, just have to put pedant you. Zeno was the philosopher who phrased the paradox, it was achilles who never won the race.
This is a ridiculous argument. No one has ever claimed that proteins started making themselves.
I'll think you will find you have a lot of proteins in you, do you think god made them personally, no 'cos that is stupid. Do I think that they made themselves with amino acids floating round in solution? No, that's stupid
Ribsomes are very good at making proteins. I can draw you right now a e way in which a ribozyme could evolve into a ribosome, with an mRNA equivalent built in. RNA does all the catalysis in ribosomes (which are rRNA molecules with protein added)
If you make a random pool of RNAs some of them will be capable of binding to amino acids, kinda like tRNA. Now you can start making random proteins. A random pool of proteins tend to have some kind of function, there is no need for a 'perfect' enzyme to turn up by chance, it just needs to be capable of doing something better than the competition for natural selection.
You use of the terms racemic and chiral make me wonder about your level of knowledge here.
enzymes are only active when their 3d shapes are exactly as required
Nope. Enzymes can work pretty well with slightly altered shapes. Sometimes even better for a slightly different job or slightly different conditions cf. site directed mutagenesis, or DNA shuffling (directed evolution)
The minimum protein complement of a cell that could accurately self-replicate has been estimated at between 280 and 400 proteins. For the sake of discussion, let's use 280
Yes, in a cell. It's very unlikely life started out in a cell though. Stupid point.
Surely being a creationist you have heard of the RNA world right? The constituents of RNA turn up in the miller experiment, from there we get an RNA molecule, Thomas Cech showed in 1981 some RNA molecules can act as enzymes (so called rybozymes) at some stage one becomes a 'replicase' capable of replicating other RNA, at the same time tRNA and ribosomes evolve (all of the catalytic activities of the ribosome are carried out by RNA, which is highly conserved even between different kingdoms of the tree if life.) Now that there are ribosome an RNA-protein world develops and the short lived RNA molecules opt for the safety of double helical DNA and a proto cell is born.
Yes there are gaps, and we will quite likely never know how life started on earth but at least this shows a logical series of theoretically do-able steps (many of which have been observed in the lab) resulting in life as we see it and not falling back on "magic" or "miracles"
It's a bit of a leap from saying that all currently alive humans appear to be descended from a population of 2 000 individuals to saying there were only 2 000 of us left at that time.
Surely itâ(TM)s just as likely that one population of 2 000 superseded the rest of the humans about at the time
What's the 'C' all about CMMORPG? MMORPG is allready a horrid acronym, what does the 'C' stand for?
Just curious is all
Re:intracellular pathogens
on
Leprosy Genes
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Leprosy is a very old disease. It has undergone a very reductive evolution to the point that is utterly depentant on its human host to survive.
The genes that cause susceptibility in humans may be "plugging a gap" in the pathogen's range of biochemical reactions.
It seems possible the susceptibility genes do bestow some advantage to their owner until they are exposed to the bug, but if as it seems most people can live happily without the genes then a treatment might be abled to be made based on this .
But unfortunately it will have to go through a decade-long FDA approval process
Yes that is so companies don't market drugs tht don't kill people, I think that is probably a good thing
and of course be ridiculously expensive because of royalties
Because the company has spent the last 10 years and millions of dollars researching and developing the drug. If you don't let companies protect their investment in these therapies they will just stop bothering to research. In a wonderfull happy magical land of make believe people would make these things freely avaliable, but the world doesn;t work like that
They should make the inhabitants of the biosphere split into teams an complete a number of tricky challenges. The losing team could then vote one guy out of the biosphere
Then all they would have to do is sell the TV rights
There seems to be a bit of confusion caused by the terms diploid and triploid. These terms refer to the number of sets of chromosomes each cell of an organism carries. Diploid is like us with 2 sets triploid is predictably 3 sets. Having 3 sets of chroromsomes is no problem untill you have to half the chrosomme number in making gametes (sperms, egg, pollen etc) A triploid organism can't make viable gametes, so is sterile.
Not all Bananas are triploid though, we reproduce triploid ones because not bothering with reproduction they are more vigorous in there growth and wont make seeds. Seedless watermelons are triploid and there are even (engineered) triploid carp, used to clear weed from lakes etc but denied the chance to reproduce and start a population
Thats E. coli for a start and there aren't different species( E. coli is a species unto itself), there are different strains. The ones in the study will probably be K12 a lab strain that is harmless to humans.
Actually E. coli is allready used alot for growing up proteins/genes in biotech. As an example Humulin is a drug made by expressing the human insulin gene inside E. coli cells
I think this is just some bullshit the industry exec invented
Well I'll give him the benefiet of the doubt. I doubt however that a real copy of The Two Towers was actually in the DVD cover. It would be just as easy to sell a copy of FOTR or anything else then make sure they are selling their wares somewhere different the next day as to avoid irate customers.
Actually it's quite common. Mating may play a part in stuff like this but there is at least as much "naked DNA" geting picked up from dead cells.
When they did the genome for H. Influenzae they found a number of genes that almost definately came from another organism (bacteria can pick up any gene, not just Bacterial DNA) The other bacterial genomes finished since seem to tell a similair story
Also passing on a discrete functional gene isn't all that rare, mobile genetic elements called transposons and intergrons can move out of the bug's chromosome and insert somewhere else, if one of these has an antibiotic resistance gene it will have a pretty huge selectional advantage, so will prosper.
An an event like this is rare (one study attempted to do it under "real world" conditions and didn't detect it once in 10^13 possibe cells) but only has to happen once to spread.
Ummm,
Viruses aren't generally considered alive untill they infect something. When the virus isn't infecting a cell it's just a protein coat with some nucleic acid inside. It doesn't need to "do" anything, so is it alive in the air?
As far as the scientist's comments, I'm not sure that we can apply our terrestial bound understanding of biology to other worlds:
Sure on earth the creation of life probably involved large amounts of liquid water, but that's not to say all life will be like earth life.
Perhaps life on venus started as self replicating clouds of gas, or any number of other things
Slashdot Mirror
Firstly, I believe that's Zeno, not Apollo Sorry, just have to put pedant you. Zeno was the philosopher who phrased the paradox, it was achilles who never won the race.
related bad taste joke: What does DNA stand for The National Dyslexics Association
This is a ridiculous argument. No one has ever claimed that proteins started making themselves. I'll think you will find you have a lot of proteins in you, do you think god made them personally, no 'cos that is stupid. Do I think that they made themselves with amino acids floating round in solution? No, that's stupid Ribsomes are very good at making proteins. I can draw you right now a e way in which a ribozyme could evolve into a ribosome, with an mRNA equivalent built in. RNA does all the catalysis in ribosomes (which are rRNA molecules with protein added) If you make a random pool of RNAs some of them will be capable of binding to amino acids, kinda like tRNA. Now you can start making random proteins. A random pool of proteins tend to have some kind of function, there is no need for a 'perfect' enzyme to turn up by chance, it just needs to be capable of doing something better than the competition for natural selection. You use of the terms racemic and chiral make me wonder about your level of knowledge here.
Nope. Enzymes can work pretty well with slightly altered shapes. Sometimes even better for a slightly different job or slightly different conditions cf. site directed mutagenesis, or DNA shuffling (directed evolution)
The minimum protein complement of a cell that could accurately self-replicate has been estimated at between 280 and 400 proteins. For the sake of discussion, let's use 280
Yes, in a cell. It's very unlikely life started out in a cell though. Stupid point.
Surely being a creationist you have heard of the RNA world right? The constituents of RNA turn up in the miller experiment, from there we get an RNA molecule, Thomas Cech showed in 1981 some RNA molecules can act as enzymes (so called rybozymes) at some stage one becomes a 'replicase' capable of replicating other RNA, at the same time tRNA and ribosomes evolve (all of the catalytic activities of the ribosome are carried out by RNA, which is highly conserved even between different kingdoms of the tree if life.) Now that there are ribosome an RNA-protein world develops and the short lived RNA molecules opt for the safety of double helical DNA and a proto cell is born.
Yes there are gaps, and we will quite likely never know how life started on earth but at least this shows a logical series of theoretically do-able steps (many of which have been observed in the lab) resulting in life as we see it and not falling back on "magic" or "miracles"
I think everyone has told you how that post was.
But if anyone is looking for conversions thenthis link should help out
It's a bit of a leap from saying that all currently alive humans appear to be descended from a population of 2 000 individuals to saying there were only 2 000 of us left at that time.
Surely itâ(TM)s just as likely that one population of 2 000 superseded the rest of the humans about at the time
What's the 'C' all about CMMORPG? MMORPG is allready a horrid acronym, what does the 'C' stand for?
Just curious is all
Leprosy is a very old disease. It has undergone a very reductive evolution to the point that is utterly depentant on its human host to survive.
The genes that cause susceptibility in humans may be "plugging a gap" in the pathogen's range of biochemical reactions.
It seems possible the susceptibility genes do bestow some advantage to their owner until they are exposed to the bug, but if as it seems most people can live happily without the genes then a treatment might be abled to be made based on this .
If you don't let companies protect their investment in these therapies they will just stop bothering to research. In a wonderfull happy magical land of make believe people would make these things freely avaliable, but the world doesn;t work like that
They should make the inhabitants of the biosphere split into teams an complete a number of tricky challenges. The losing team could then vote one guy out of the biosphere Then all they would have to do is sell the TV rights
There seems to be a bit of confusion caused by the terms diploid and triploid.
These terms refer to the number of sets of chromosomes each cell of an organism carries. Diploid is like us with 2 sets triploid is predictably 3 sets. Having 3 sets of chroromsomes is no problem untill you have to half the chrosomme number in making gametes (sperms, egg, pollen etc) A triploid organism can't make viable gametes, so is sterile.
Not all Bananas are triploid though, we reproduce triploid ones because not bothering with reproduction they are more vigorous in there growth and wont make seeds. Seedless watermelons are triploid and there are even (engineered) triploid carp, used to clear weed from lakes etc but denied the chance to reproduce and start a population
The ones in the study will probably be K12 a lab strain that is harmless to humans.
Actually E. coli is allready used alot for growing up proteins/genes in biotech. As an example Humulin is a drug made by expressing the human insulin gene inside E. coli cells
I doubt however that a real copy of The Two Towers was actually in the DVD cover. It would be just as easy to sell a copy of FOTR or anything else then make sure they are selling their wares somewhere different the next day as to avoid irate customers.
Pretty cool scam really
or even better:
:"Corperation"
Big black on white title
followed pictures of people straining under the opressive yoke of Microsoft
Then "Co-operation" followed by happy smiley linux users and a large computer animated tux looking as if he's a belly full of cod.
Actually it's quite common. Mating may play a part in stuff like this but there is at least as much "naked DNA" geting picked up from dead cells.
When they did the genome for H. Influenzae they found a number of genes that almost definately came from another organism (bacteria can pick up any gene, not just Bacterial DNA) The other bacterial genomes finished since seem to tell a similair story
Also passing on a discrete functional gene isn't all that rare, mobile genetic elements called transposons and intergrons can move out of the bug's chromosome and insert somewhere else, if one of these has an antibiotic resistance gene it will have a pretty huge selectional advantage, so will prosper.
An an event like this is rare (one study attempted to do it under "real world" conditions and didn't detect it once in 10^13 possibe cells) but only has to happen once to spread.
Ummm, Viruses aren't generally considered alive untill they infect something. When the virus isn't infecting a cell it's just a protein coat with some nucleic acid inside. It doesn't need to "do" anything, so is it alive in the air? As far as the scientist's comments, I'm not sure that we can apply our terrestial bound understanding of biology to other worlds: Sure on earth the creation of life probably involved large amounts of liquid water, but that's not to say all life will be like earth life. Perhaps life on venus started as self replicating clouds of gas, or any number of other things