|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 3911 days) Posts: 2657 From: A Better America Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Can we really create self replicators? | |||||||||||||||||||
Jazzns Member (Idle past 3911 days) Posts: 2657 From: A Better America Joined: |
Does anyone know if this is really true:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/217054.stm
bbc writes: German scientists have created artificial life in the laboratory. They have made molecules that are capable of copying themselves. Although several labs around the world have done the same, these molecules can evolve as well. And if so, what does this do to the abiogenesis objections by YECs? Or am I just horribly out of date?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
AdminNosy Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: |
Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Jazzns Member (Idle past 3911 days) Posts: 2657 From: A Better America Joined: |
Are there any folks out there who can confirm this at least?
Is this just a trivial thing that I shouldn't be excited about? Old news?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
These have been around for a while, as I recall. All creationists do is redefine what it means to be "alive" so that these examples don't really count.
You know, just as they redefine "species", and "evolution", and "theory" to their own purposes, etc...
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Maxwell's Demon Member (Idle past 6228 days) Posts: 59 From: Stockholm, Sweden Joined: |
That, or use the good ol' "This is only evidence that it takes intelligence to create life" argument.
"tellement loin de ce monde..."
|
|||||||||||||||||||
southerngurl Inactive Member |
quote: Guess you have to say it like that to make it sound bad... What are these "molecules" made of? What is their source of energy?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
AdminAsgara Administrator (Idle past 2302 days) Posts: 2073 From: The Universe Joined: |
Hi southerngurl, Welcome to EvC.
May I suggest some links that newcomers may find helpful?Most important is our Forum Guidelines. Assistance w/ Forum FormattingStyle Guides for EvC AdminAsgara Queen of the Universe Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
http://asgarasworld.bravepages.com-Change in Moderation? - Thread Reopen Requests -Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum -Introducing the new "Boot Camp" forum http://perditionsgate.bravepages.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
The BBC report isn't detailed enough to tell exactly what is going on, but a quick google search shows that this is the result of a project that is still continuing.
e.g. this article from March 2003
http://www.newscientist.com/hottopics/dna/... {Shortened display form of URL, to restore page width to normal - Adminnemooseus} (While looking for more I found this which deals with another aspectArtificial cells take shape | Nature) This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 12-10-2004 02:48 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Dr Jack Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: Member Rating: 8.7 |
Replicators have been made, yes. And viruses have been produced completely artificially. Although these things can replicate they're not normally considered 'life' - however, next year a group (who's name I forget but could probably track down) intends to create an artificial bacterium.
In all probability by the end of 2005 humans will have created their first completely artificial life.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Denesha Inactive Member |
Hi,
I think there is a long road to cover between these self-replicating molecules and living things. According to Kauffman's definition of life, there should be a notion of autonomous agent, which is not reached by artificial self-replicating molecules. This is not life.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
What is their source of energy? Just like living things, their source of energy is chemistry.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Loudmouth Inactive Member |
quote: Why should we go with Kauffman's definition? A self replicating molecule is exactly what the theory of abiogenesis predicts as the first life. Is not life a self replicating chemical reaction?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Denesha Inactive Member |
Loudmouth greatings,
As long as these molecule replications are randomized in a test tube without an own made membrane system whatever his composition, this will not be life.Stuart Kauffman's definition include a "Agent" notion. One agent : one genetic material
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Brad McFall Member (Idle past 5032 days) Posts: 3428 From: Ithaca,NY, USA Joined: |
With the links of PaulK aside,
e.g. this article from March 2003
http://www.newscientist.com/hottopics/dna/... {Shortened display form of URL, to restore page width to normal - Adminnemooseus} (While looking for more I found this which deals with another aspect Artificial cells take shape | Nature) I will guess that where the "agent" is not, there still may be synthetic capability. I think so because Cantor tried to seperated mixed types from IDEAL NUMBERS in his definition of ordertypes but Quine seems not to have appreciated Russell's possible understood inversion empirically of Boole's LOGIC between THE QUESTION and THE DATA.I thought quite clearly that Gould was mistaken to Assert, that D'Arcy Thompson made not a logical error but an empirical one but I would still have to agree with SJG that we dont care if mineralized sulfur is found in China or Peru that it is any different due to the DISTANCE no matter how streched between the collection localities. Mixed types being THE SAME in all directions seem ideally(in the transcendental sense) suited to the phenomenological thermodynamics' surround such that while Gould still had the correct questioning mode he found not the databasewarehouse necessary to assert any correct phenomenology of life where the proximate and ultimate or efficient and final causes represent ONLY Russell's equation OR NOT of descriptive and projective geometry. There may be an "agency" that links Eigen's view of RNA (touted in a discussion session at Cornell as indicative of replicative LIFE!!) and seemingly behind the recent German hype (which is incidentally different than PaulK's other link on US work, please notice) but nontheless it seems to me if this is to apply to death of life as well we should first, before generalizing, figure out if it not ionic bond strengths and not covalent ones that figure in the segement of this discussion are inDICative or noT. I know this is some what cryptic but I didnt feel like taking the time of trying to rethink it outside my own sense of understanding. Best Wishes, Brad. This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 12-09-2004 10:21 AM This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 12-10-2004 02:50 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Denesha Inactive Member |
Dear Brad,
I have a confidence for you. I've started to read this reply without checking the author, when reaching the third line, my brain send me message that it could be a fellow of Brad McFall who could have wrote it. It was true. I'll delight if you could find some time to elaborate a bit more as this subject actually interest me. No need to rush. I'm afraid but I can't say something else that I've not understood a single argument of your first shot. Don't think I'm criticizing you. I'm one of your supporter here owing that you have open my mind on some reflexions and let me know about the amazing work of Georgi Gladyshev, in the past months. Denesha.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024