synthetic biology
- From: TomS <TomS_member@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 8 Sep 2006 05:10:11 -0700
In last week's edition of "The Economist" magazine, there is a "Special Report:
Synthetic Biology". (The Economist, vol. 380 no. 8493, September 2, 2006,
pages 67, 68 & 70: "Life 2.0".)
Speaking of an extrapolation of "the growing efficiency of DNA synthesis",
"By the end of the decade ... if they continue to hold true ... the power to
synthesise a string of DNA the size of a human genome in a day."
"Dr. Venter reckons he will be able to synthesise a working bacterial genome
within two years. More complex genomes ... will take longer. But they, he
thinks, should be possible within a decade."
"Peter Carr of MIT and Farren Isaacs of Harvard Medical School ... intend to
recode E. coli completely, eliminating the redudant codons. ... if their new
bacterium is at least viable, it will have 43 codons that can be re-assigned
to other tasks."
Incidentally, the article notes:
Drew Andy, "As an engineer, he can recognize a kludge when he sees one.
And life, in his opinion, is a kludge."
--
---Tom S. <http://talkreason.org/articles/chickegg.cfm>
"... have a clear idea of what you should expect if your hypothesis is correct,
and what you should observe if your hypothesis is wrong ... If you cannot do
this, then this is an indicator that your hypothesis may be too vague."
RV Clarke & JE Eck: Crime Analysis for Problem Solvers - step 20
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: synthetic biology
- From: Desertphile
- Re: synthetic biology
- From: Tracy P. Hamilton
- Re: synthetic biology
- Prev by Date: Re: Double Standard, softy on SETI (was: Definition Challenge)
- Next by Date: Re: Australia cops it again - Peter Brock killed in a rally car
- Previous by thread: What evidence for macro-evolution?
- Next by thread: Re: synthetic biology
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading