So could changing ones thinking, behavior, or environment also change which genes are expressed?
Yes. That is the interesting bit about DNA methylation. Lots of 'transient' things can change the structure of DNA. If you think about it a bit, it makes sense. The 'Central Dogma' (which for years has been barking up the wrong tree) states that DNA makes RNA which makes Protein and DNA loops back and makes itself. While certainly true, it is too coarse of an approximation to be really useful. DNA changes in response to the environment (the topic here), RNA amplifies and interferes with pretty darn near everything, the environment can directly act on germ cell lines (again, via DNA methylation).
So yes, thinking (which at the molecular level requires at the very least RNA and protein production) can, through methylation and other mechanisms, control gene expression both in the organism and in progeny.
Nature has had several billion years to mess around with this. It's fantastically complex
No, what we're really waiting for is a decent battery. To get all of the functionality that we want in a watch sized object AND have it last more than 6 hours is beyond the pale at present.
To keep the power budget down, we're making too many compromises.
Careful throwing numbers around. We have absolutely no idea how accurate that figure is. Could well be 'Bollywood Accounting', could be something made up by a bureaucrat flunky. Could even be real.
It does presage an era where there are potentially a large number of groups, both government and private, with the capability of launching commercially and strategically significant payloads into LEO or geosynchronous orbit.
Further, not everything landing at an airport is as large or as robust as a commercial jet aircraft. A light plane could easily be severely damaged by a small UAV. Likely, no - I've been in small planes hit by birds - we've survived but it's not a given.
UAVs have no business anywhere in a controlled airspace unless they are under control of a qualified operator AND other pilots know it's in the air. Now, that doesn't answer the question whether somebody should (or shouldn't) be allowed to play with their Phantom II in the neighborhood park. Those things, with the operator using a modicum of common sense, are pretty safe. The problem is the phrase 'modicum of common sense'. We all know that some random jackass is going to lose control of the thing, turn a poodle into poodle-chops or knock a Vespa into oncoming traffic.
While the cretins in/b/ might think it funny, the rest of the planet might take offense at that sort of behavior. Hence, regulation.
Guns are an externality. If 5% of the population is walking around with a concealed weapon, the muggers and stranglers won't know that I don't have one and I'll enjoy the deterrent despite not contributing anything.
UAVs are potentially an externality because they can do physical damage anonymously for the cost of the UAV.
They were actually mobile kitchens, and, given the rather poor nutritional status of the Iraqi military, it is not unreasonable to assume they represented WMDs.
You know, we could regard this as the act of war it is.
FTFA:
We didn't go to war with North Korea when they murdered American soldiers in the 1970s with axes. We didn't go to war with North Korea when they fired missiles over our allies. We didn't go to war with North Korea when one of their ships torpedoed an alliance partner and killed some of their sailors. You're going to tell me we're now going to go to war because a Sony exec described Angelina Jolie as a diva? It's not happening.
The proper response to this will be left as an exercise for the reader.
It's supposed to look like a Bluefin Tuna (according to TF video). So, I guess it's designed to make Asian sailors chase it around the harbor thinking they've latched onto a sushi dinner.
I think it looks like a giant, uncoordinated catfish.
Tasman sea (where it is going first) still has 'cyclones' I believe.
It's supposed to be able to deal with a 100+ year storm (185 km / hr winds IIRC). Not that I want to sitting on untold tons of explosives and and things that spark when they break in a hurricane / cyclone, but that's just me.
And the difference between a ship and a barge is a bit pedantic here. It's going to fit under the category of 'restricted mobility vessel' which means that , if you are captaining another ship, you have to give this monster right of way.
Of course, you would be perfectly insane to try to play chicken with it, no matter what you are piloting.
Well,technically it's a ship, I think. A quick search did not answer the question as to whether it is self powered. If it is, it's a ship (certainly not a 'cargo' ship). If it isn't it is a barge according to maritime right-of-way rules.
It's friggin large whatever you want to call it.
Funny, Shell is going to spent $20 BILLION or so on this thing for a 25 year lifespan (and perhaps another 25 with a whole lot of refurb). That's a lot of solar panels, insulation, wind mills and hell, even a nuclear plant or two.....
What I wonder is how long it will be before some mega rich person(s) decides to build a semi-permanent offshore city, not so much a rig, more a case of a huge boat that is actually anchored to the ground and you take boats TO it. There'd be loads of technical hurdles, but given the sheer size of such a construction, the issues of waves would be lesser, more so if it is designed properly to deal with them. (not to mention the use of large-scale wave guides similar in design to metamaterials, which is being tested on some oil rigs last I remember)
No idjit. It's in Alaska. Now, if you ask most Alaskans, we'd rather Alaska be part of Canada (except for the guns). We are patiently awaiting an invasion of stealth snowmobiles.
More like ten or twenty million years. We need some more global warming, much more plant matter growth (think algae mats meters deep for millions of years), then significant tectonic activity in just the right way.
Slashdot Mirror
So could changing ones thinking, behavior, or environment also change which genes are expressed?
Yes. That is the interesting bit about DNA methylation. Lots of 'transient' things can change the structure of DNA. If you think about it a bit, it makes sense. The 'Central Dogma' (which for years has been barking up the wrong tree) states that DNA makes RNA which makes Protein and DNA loops back and makes itself. While certainly true, it is too coarse of an approximation to be really useful. DNA changes in response to the environment (the topic here), RNA amplifies and interferes with pretty darn near everything, the environment can directly act on germ cell lines (again, via DNA methylation).
So yes, thinking (which at the molecular level requires at the very least RNA and protein production) can, through methylation and other mechanisms, control gene expression both in the organism and in progeny.
Nature has had several billion years to mess around with this. It's fantastically complex
Maybe you should move to China and work for Foxconn. Them perhaps someone would care about you.
No, what we're really waiting for is a decent battery. To get all of the functionality that we want in a watch sized object AND have it last more than 6 hours is beyond the pale at present.
To keep the power budget down, we're making too many compromises.
Careful throwing numbers around. We have absolutely no idea how accurate that figure is. Could well be 'Bollywood Accounting', could be something made up by a bureaucrat flunky. Could even be real.
It does presage an era where there are potentially a large number of groups, both government and private, with the capability of launching commercially and strategically significant payloads into LEO or geosynchronous orbit.
(Raises pinky.)
Further, not everything landing at an airport is as large or as robust as a commercial jet aircraft. A light plane could easily be severely damaged by a small UAV. Likely, no - I've been in small planes hit by birds - we've survived but it's not a given.
UAVs have no business anywhere in a controlled airspace unless they are under control of a qualified operator AND other pilots know it's in the air. Now, that doesn't answer the question whether somebody should (or shouldn't) be allowed to play with their Phantom II in the neighborhood park. Those things, with the operator using a modicum of common sense, are pretty safe. The problem is the phrase 'modicum of common sense'. We all know that some random jackass is going to lose control of the thing, turn a poodle into poodle-chops or knock a Vespa into oncoming traffic.
While the cretins in /b/ might think it funny, the rest of the planet might take offense at that sort of behavior. Hence, regulation.
This is why it's hard to have nice things.
Guns are an externality. If 5% of the population is walking around with a concealed weapon, the muggers and stranglers won't know that I don't have one and I'll enjoy the deterrent despite not contributing anything.
UAVs are potentially an externality because they can do physical damage anonymously for the cost of the UAV.
One of these objects is not like the others ....
They were actually mobile kitchens, and, given the rather poor nutritional status of the Iraqi military, it is not unreasonable to assume they represented WMDs.
Japan HAS a military. Or at least a navy.
History. It's an interesting concept.
Passports are easy. Just microwave the thing. Fries the chip but looks normal. "I don't know why it doesn't work,officer."
You know, we could regard this as the act of war it is.
FTFA:
We didn't go to war with North Korea when they murdered American soldiers in the 1970s with axes. We didn't go to war with North Korea when they fired missiles over our allies. We didn't go to war with North Korea when one of their ships torpedoed an alliance partner and killed some of their sailors. You're going to tell me we're now going to go to war because a Sony exec described Angelina Jolie as a diva? It's not happening.
The proper response to this will be left as an exercise for the reader.
It's supposed to look like a Bluefin Tuna (according to TF video). So, I guess it's designed to make Asian sailors chase it around the harbor thinking they've latched onto a sushi dinner.
I think it looks like a giant, uncoordinated catfish.
Man, talk about being an arm-chair general.....
I guess when you're in the basement, everything looks like a bomb shelter.
Dunno. A fully loaded LNG carrier (or processor) vs. a pile of rocks. Something you might want to see on a YouTube video. From a distance.
USA! USA! USA!
Besides, out Three Letter Agency knows more about us than your Three Letter Agency!
How do you like them Apples?
And the controllers who somehow managed to land the rocket on the OTHER side of the planet.
I'm sure 'ol Elon is worried about this particular scenario.
what could go wrong with a fire nozzle like that attached to a natural gas well?
Here you just might have an earth shattering 'kaboom'.
Tasman sea (where it is going first) still has 'cyclones' I believe.
It's supposed to be able to deal with a 100+ year storm (185 km / hr winds IIRC). Not that I want to sitting on untold tons of explosives and and things that spark when they break in a hurricane / cyclone, but that's just me.
And the difference between a ship and a barge is a bit pedantic here. It's going to fit under the category of 'restricted mobility vessel' which means that , if you are captaining another ship, you have to give this monster right of way.
Of course, you would be perfectly insane to try to play chicken with it, no matter what you are piloting.
Well,technically it's a ship, I think. A quick search did not answer the question as to whether it is self powered. If it is, it's a ship (certainly not a 'cargo' ship). If it isn't it is a barge according to maritime right-of-way rules.
It's friggin large whatever you want to call it.
Funny, Shell is going to spent $20 BILLION or so on this thing for a 25 year lifespan (and perhaps another 25 with a whole lot of refurb). That's a lot of solar panels, insulation, wind mills and hell, even a nuclear plant or two.....
What I wonder is how long it will be before some mega rich person(s) decides to build a semi-permanent offshore city, not so much a rig, more a case of a huge boat that is actually anchored to the ground and you take boats TO it.
There'd be loads of technical hurdles, but given the sheer size of such a construction, the issues of waves would be lesser, more so if it is designed properly to deal with them. (not to mention the use of large-scale wave guides similar in design to metamaterials, which is being tested on some oil rigs last I remember)
Somebody even wrote up a technical manual about this.
Oh stop with the physics already. What do you think this is, a technology site?
You really had to go and say that, didn't you?
Why was this modded down? It's the truth. Oh mods, cover the truth with your mod points. Yay.
When I was your age, we knew that you started out at -1 as an AC. And we liked it.
Kids these days.
No idjit. It's in Alaska. Now, if you ask most Alaskans, we'd rather Alaska be part of Canada (except for the guns). We are patiently awaiting an invasion of stealth snowmobiles.
Please.
More like ten or twenty million years. We need some more global warming, much more plant matter growth (think algae mats meters deep for millions of years), then significant tectonic activity in just the right way.
So definitely renewable. But time lines matter.