Become a part of the TranceAddict community!Frequently Asked Questions - Please read this if you haven'tSearch the forums
TranceAddict Forums > Other > Political Discussion / Debate > Are virus's really nanobots?
Pages (2): « 1 [2]   Last Thread   Next Thread
Share
Author
Thread    Post A Reply
DJ Shibby
Amphoteric Superbase



Registered: Jul 2004
Location: Of Earthzen and the Therethen
Re: Are virus's really nanobots?

quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
Since viruses aren't really classified as alive, are they nanobots? Really, think about it for a second. Look at the virus...



Does that not look like a machine? Or a robot? Most definitions of life would make the virus "not alive". But if the definition of life is simply the ability to replicate, then technically, we humans will be able to create life. Nanotechnology has a specific goal of creating nano machines which are self-replicating. In that case, wouldn't we be creating life according to the definition that life is anything that can reproduce? I'm merely speculating, but I'm thinking viruses are from aliens or something. I mean really, if they are self-replicating machines, WTF made them in the first place? But before I even entertain that thought, I'm going to see what the evolution theory says about viruses genesis.


Viruses could very well be upgrade code created by the universe to modify more advanced incarnations of life (IE: us). Hence the DNA replacement schemata that they incorporate.

I think we incorrectly think of viruses as "bad" because of poor physiological side effects of their administration, which is ironic since we don't mind the nasty side effects of certain drugs since psychologically we assume they are having positive outcomes on our future.

Good shit.

PS: check out this gallery of snowflakes magnified millions of times. After seeing this, and these viruses, I get the feeling there is an algorithm in the universe building everything at lower levels of existence.

Enjoy: http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/dn16170-snowflakes/ (there are 13 images, hit next to scroll through them... 2,3,7,9,and 11 are especially interesting... it doesn't take a very imaginative mind at all to relate these non-lifeform creations to creations of life such as flower blossoms. The main thing they make me think of though... is viruses.).

Old Post Dec-29-2008 22:16  United States
Click Here to See the Profile for DJ Shibby Click here to Send DJ Shibby a Private Message Visit DJ Shibby's homepage! Add DJ Shibby to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
DJ Shibby
Amphoteric Superbase



Registered: Jul 2004
Location: Of Earthzen and the Therethen

quote:
Originally posted by Shakka
Maybe you're right. Perhaps I shall try out my newfound Kung Fu skillz.






Perhaps spiders are nanobots (macrobots?) too?


If you think that's bad, that's just the icing on the cake.

There are probably viruses that attack viruses. Also, there are so many "alien" formats of life like those pictures above that its bordering on infinite.

I think that our subconscious knows some of these details intimately; I think the hindu gods, for example, are projections of microscopic lifeforms such as waterbears, which have many arms and little hands with fingers.



These little buggers are like the backup module for life; they can survive *extreme* heat and cold, acids, even the vacuum of space. They shut down in harsh environments, such as a meteor destroying all life on earth, and re-emerge from miles under the earth even thousands of years after a cataclysmic event to repopulate life. With a job description this intense, they definitely need an extra 4 hands. They really are "gods".

Crazy.

Sometimes I wonder if some of the unknown radiations (nanoparticles designed just the right size for us, nutrinos, certain wavelengths, etc) and things in our cosmos are the administration of drugs to kill us (or grow us?) by some larger entity that we help compose. Similar to us administering pennicilin to kill a bacterial infection.

Last edited by DJ Shibby on Dec-29-2008 at 22:31

Old Post Dec-29-2008 22:20  United States
Click Here to See the Profile for DJ Shibby Click here to Send DJ Shibby a Private Message Visit DJ Shibby's homepage! Add DJ Shibby to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Shakka
Supreme tranceaddict



Registered: Feb 2003
Location:
Re: Re: Are virus's really nanobots?

quote:
Originally posted by DJ Shibby
PS: check out this gallery of snowflakes magnified millions of times. After seeing this, and these viruses, I get the feeling there is an algorithm in the universe building everything at lower levels of existence.


If you're not careful, you could spark up an intelligent design debate! Fibonacci!!

Old Post Dec-29-2008 23:23  United States
Click Here to See the Profile for Shakka Click here to Send Shakka a Private Message Add Shakka to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
pkcRAISTLIN
arbiter's chief minion



Registered: Jul 2002
Location:
Re: Are virus's really nanobots?

quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
Does that not look like a machine?


most organisms look like machines at some level.

quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
Or a robot?


lol. robots treated with drugs? how do you think that might work?

quote:
Originally posted by Krypton

Most definitions of life would make the virus "not alive". But if the definition of life is simply the ability to replicate, then technically, we humans will be able to create life. Nanotechnology has a specific goal of creating nano machines which are self-replicating. In that case, wouldn't we be creating life according to the definition that life is anything that can reproduce?


i think all of that is rather irrelevant when compared to your alien invasion 'speculation':

quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
I'm merely speculating, but I'm thinking viruses are from aliens or something.


don't get me wrong, i like a good scifi story as much as the next guy, but as no geneticist thinks viruses are really tiny robots created by aliens, im just doubtful you've suddenly stumbled onto something


___________________

Old Post Dec-30-2008 07:25  Australia
Click Here to See the Profile for pkcRAISTLIN Click here to Send pkcRAISTLIN a Private Message Add pkcRAISTLIN to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
DJ Shibby
Amphoteric Superbase



Registered: Jul 2004
Location: Of Earthzen and the Therethen
Re: Re: Are virus's really nanobots?

quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
most organisms are machines at every level.


fixed.

Old Post Dec-30-2008 07:34  United States
Click Here to See the Profile for DJ Shibby Click here to Send DJ Shibby a Private Message Visit DJ Shibby's homepage! Add DJ Shibby to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Vmedvil
tranceaddict in training



Registered: Aug 2014
Location: USA

Synthetic Viral Synthesis
Step I:Custom Oligonucleotide Synthesis
Materials
•Commerical Nucleic Acid Synthesizer
•Solution of the four DNA phosphoramidite monomers (bases)
•All the 5’-hydroxyl groups must be blocked with a DMT group for all four bases
•All phosphorus linkages must be blocked with a cyanoethyl group.
•Blocking solutions
•Reaction chamber and a type of solid support such as controlled pore glass
•The solid support should be prepared with the desired first base already attached via an ester
linkage at the 3’-hydroxyl end.
•Dichloroacetic acid or trichloroacetic acid
•Tetrazole
•Acetic anhydride and N-methylimidazole
•Dilute iodine in a water/pyridine/tetrahydrofuran solution
•Concentrated ammonia hydroxide.
•Materials for one desalting method
Process
Step A: De-blocking
The first base, which is attached to the solid support, is at first inactive because all the active sites
have been blocked or protected. To add the next base, the DMT group protecting the 5'-hydroxyl
group must be removed. This is done by adding a base, either dichloroacetic acid (DCA) or
trichloroacetic acid in dichloromethane (DCM), to the reaction column. The 5’-hydroxyl group is now the only reactive group on the base monomer. This ensures that the
addition of the next base will only bind to that site. The reaction column is then washed to remove
any extra acid and by-products.
Step B: Base Condensation
The next base monomer cannot be added until it has been activated. This is achieved by adding
tetrazole to the base. Tetrazole cleaves off one of the groups protecting the phosphorus linkage.
This base is then added to the reaction column. The active 5’-hydroxyl group of the preceeding
base and the newly activated phosphorus bind to loosely join the two bases together. This forms
an unstable phosphite linkage. The reaction column is then washed to remove any extra
tetrazole, unbound base and by-products.
Step C: Capping
When the activated base is added to the reaction column some does not bind to the active 5’-
hydroxyl site of the previous base. If this group is left unreacted in a step it is possible for it to
react in later additions of different bases. This would result in an oligonucleotide with a deletion.
To prevent this from occurring, the unbound, active 5’-hydroxyl group is capped with a protective
group which subsequently prohibits that strand from growing again. This is done by adding acetic
anhydride and N-methylimidazole to the reaction column. These compounds only react with the
5’-hydroxyl group. The base is capped by undergoing acetylation. The reaction column is then
washed to remove any extra acetic anhydride or N-methylimidazole.
Step D: Oxidation
In step 2 the next desired base was added to the previous base, which resulted in a unstable
phosphite linkage. To stabalize this linkage a solution of dilute iodine in water, pyridine, and
tetrahydrofuran is added to the reaction column. The unstable phosphite linkage is oxidized to
form a much more stable phosphate linkage.
Repeat as need based on length desired between 1 and 10,000 times.
Final Product: DNA Chains from 1 to 10,000 base pairs in length.
Step II:Molecular Cloning: Polymerase Chain Reaction(PCR)
Materials
-Thermal Cycler
-Taq polymerase
-Generated DNA Fragments
Process
A. Denaturation - the DNA is heated usually to 95C to render it single-stranded
B. Annealing - the two primers bind the appropriate complementary strand; the temperature for
this step varies depending on the of size of the primer and its homology to the target DNA
C. Primer Extension - DNA polymerase extends the primer by its polymerase activity; this is
done at a temperature optimal for the particular polymerase that is used; currently the most
popular enzyme for this step is Taq polymerase, the DNA polymerase from the thermophilic
("heat-loving) bacteria Thermus aquaticus; the extension is performed at 72C. These steps are
repeated from 28-35 times. Since the reaction is essentially exponential and since each cycle is
about 5 minutes, a large quantity of DNA can be produced for analysis in as little as several
hours.
Final Product: Exponential DNA cloning
Step III:Mass Ligation Reaction
Materials
•Two or more fragments of DNA that have either blunt or compatible cohesive ("sticky") ends.
•A buffer which contains ATP. The buffer is usually provided or prepared as a 10X concentrate
which, after dilution, yields an ATP concentration of roughly 0.25 to 1 mM. Most restriction
enzyme buffers will work if supplemented with ATP.
•T4 DNA ligase. A typical reaction for inserting a fragment into a plasmid vector (subcloning)
would utilize about 0.01 (sticky ends) to 1 (blunt ends) units of ligase.
Process
The optimal incubation temperature for T4 DNA ligase is 16C and when very high efficiency
ligation is desired (e.g. making libraries) this temperature is recommended. However, ligase is
active at a broad range of temperatures, and for routine purposes such as subcloning,
convenience often dictates incubation time and temperature - ligations performed at 4C overnight
or at room temperature for 30 minutes to a couple of hours usually work well.
Final Product: Every possible recombination
Step IV:Activation and Reproduction:Plasmid Vector
(sub-cloning)
Materials
-Anything with ribosomes
-NotI Ligase
Process
Same as step III
Final Product: Viral Vector

Old Post Aug-13-2014 07:18  United States
Click Here to See the Profile for Vmedvil Click here to Send Vmedvil a Private Message Add Vmedvil to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
edshyrest
tranceaddict in training



Registered: Jan 2024
Location: london

Viruses do resemble machines in their structure and function, but they're not considered nanobots. They are biological entities that evolved naturally, and their ability to replicate is reliant on infecting a host cell. The origins of viruses are still a subject of scientific study, with theories suggesting they may have evolved from plasmids (small DNA molecules) or cellular organisms. While they challenge our traditional definitions of life, they don't fit the criteria of artificial machines or products of alien origin. Their study offers valuable insights into molecular biology and the evolution of life.

Old Post Jan-28-2024 08:39  United Kingdom
Click Here to See the Profile for edshyrest Click here to Send edshyrest a Private Message Add edshyrest to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message

TranceAddict Forums > Other > Political Discussion / Debate > Are virus's really nanobots?
Post New Thread    Post A Reply

Pages (2): « 1 [2]  
Last Thread   Next Thread
Click here to listen to the sample!Pause playbackName That Tune! [2010] [1]

Click here to listen to the sample!Pause playbackHi-Gate - "Pitchin'" [2003]

Show Printable Version | Subscribe to this Thread
Forum Jump:

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:45.

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
[IMG] code is ON
 
Search this Thread:

 
Contact Us - return to tranceaddict

Powered by: Trance Music & vBulletin Forums
Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Privacy Statement / DMCA
Support TA!