• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Genes larger Than Atoms

A

Ancient Herald

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 17, 2015
Messages
2,637
Reaction score
668
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Okay, so after i read that article on the mapping of the genome of the tardigrade today, it got me to thinking about the size of the genome in comparison to the atom. So i did some research and found out that the genome is larger than an atom since genomes are made from atoms.

Then i got to thinking about this video:



Which is a 55 minute long video of Michio Kaku talking about technology that can actually move atoms. And within this video, he says we can have a matter rearranger in about fifty years, which is a device which will rearrange atoms to form any material object a person can want.

This video shows that we already do have the technology to move an atom from one spot to another, but we can't make actual objects yet.

So, here's what I've ben thinking about.

This will have some incredible medical applications to it, and maybe even make new forms of life by rearranging the atoms to form new genes and chromosomes.

Just some thing to think about.

i will be thinking about this for a while.
 
Ancient Herald said:
Okay, so after i read that article on the mapping of the genome of the tardigrade today, it got me to thinking about the size of the genome in comparison to the atom. So i did some research and found out that the genome is larger than an atom since genomes are made from atoms.

Then i got to thinking about this video:



Which is a 55 minute long video of Michio Kaku talking about technology that can actually move atoms. And within this video, he says we can have a matter rearranger in about fifty years, which is a device which will rearrange atoms to form any material object a person can want.

This video shows that we already do have the technology to move an atom from one spot to another, but we can't make actual objects yet.

So, here's what I've ben thinking about.

This will have some incredible medical applications to it, and maybe even make new forms of life by rearranging the atoms to form new genes and chromosomes.

Just some thing to think about.

i will be thinking about this for a while.
Click to expand...


This is not feasible. To arrange a large number of atoms would require huge complexity. Much more so than is required to develop the various products via current means.
 
Paleocon said:
This is not feasible. To arrange a large number of atoms would require huge complexity. Much more so than is required to develop the various products via current means.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but you are wrong. Mr. kaku says it will be here in fifty years, and they already have the technology to move atoms, without arranging them into an object. The video itself shows that.

But go ahead, just repeat your ignorance

You really don't have very good reading comprehension do you?

It is very feasible.
 
Ancient Herald said:
Sorry, but you are wrong. Mr. kaku says it will be here in fifty years, and they already have the technology to move atoms, without arranging them into an object. The video itself shows that.

But go ahead, just repeat your ignorance

You really don't have very good reading comprehension do you?

It is very feasible.
Click to expand...

As pointless as it seems, I'll try to sift through the insults to engage the substance of your post here, since it has some substance.

What you seem to not understand is that there are a lot of atoms in even the smallest of things like genes. Like, a huge number of them. Arranging them one by one on a scale big enough to be useful is simply is far too complicated to be feasible. Even if they could do it, the effort put into a single operation would far exceed the effort required to do the same thing without mechanically constructing the object.
 
Paleocon said:
As pointless as it seems, I'll try to sift through the insults to engage the substance of your post here, since it has some substance.

What you seem to not understand is that there are a lot of atoms in even the smallest of things like genes. Like, a huge number of them. Arranging them one by one on a scale big enough to be useful is simply is far too complicated to be feasible. Even if they could do it, the effort put into a single operation would far exceed the effort required to do the same thing without mechanically constructing the object.
Click to expand...

Yes, and as I've repeated before...


We ALREADY HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY TO MOVE AN ATOM, A SINGLE ATOM FROM ONE SPOT TO ANOTHER. THEY CANNOT MAKE AN ENTIRE OBJECT YET.

THEY SHOW IT IN THE VIDEO.


And I am not insulting you, simply pointing out the flaws in your assertions.

The existence of that technology is hard proof and proves your assertions wrong.

Some people would deny it though that their hair was on fire if it were on fire.

Edit;

I am not asking people to watch the video this time, I simply posted it to show what iw as talking about.
 
Last edited:
Ancient Herald said:
Yes, and as I've repeated before...


We ALREADY HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY TO MOVE AN ATOM, A SINGLE ATOM FROM ONE SPOT TO ANOTHER. THEY CANNOT MAKE AN ENTIRE OBJECT YET.

THEY SHOW IT IN THE VIDEO.


And I am not insulting you, simply pointing out the flaws in your assertions.

The existence of that technology is hard proof and proves your assertions wrong.

Some people would deny it though that their hair was on fire if it were on fire.
Click to expand...

I don't know what you're not understanding. We have the technology to move an atom, we can't move ought to create a large object.
 
It's you who is not understanding, not me.
 
Ancient Herald said:
Okay, so after i read that article on the mapping of the genome of the tardigrade today, it got me to thinking about the size of the genome in comparison to the atom. So i did some research and found out that the genome is larger than an atom since genomes are made from atoms.

Then i got to thinking about this video:



Which is a 55 minute long video of Michio Kaku talking about technology that can actually move atoms. And within this video, he says we can have a matter rearranger in about fifty years, which is a device which will rearrange atoms to form any material object a person can want.

This video shows that we already do have the technology to move an atom from one spot to another, but we can't make actual objects yet.

So, here's what I've ben thinking about.

This will have some incredible medical applications to it, and maybe even make new forms of life by rearranging the atoms to form new genes and chromosomes.

Just some thing to think about.

i will be thinking about this for a while.
Click to expand...


A machine that makes dinner out of a powder? It sounds like deja vu. Make it so.
 
Moving an atom is cool but until you can move MANY swiftly and create and break the needed bonds it is just a novelty. Cool, though.
 
Ancient Herald said:
Sorry, but you are wrong. Mr. kaku says it will be here in fifty years, and they already have the technology to move atoms, without arranging them into an object. The video itself shows that.

But go ahead, just repeat your ignorance

You really don't have very good reading comprehension do you?

It is very feasible.
Click to expand...

It may be possible, but not necessarily practical. Assembling an object would require moving atoms together to form complex molecules in the proper pattern, and repeating the process a few trillion times. It might be far faster and cheaper to just build the damn thing.

We have the technology to clear winter roads in Minnesota with giant microwave emitters on trucks. Just drive over, whoosh, snow gone. But it's way cheaper to just shove it to the side of the road, because vaporizing ice requires a ton of energy.
 
Yeah, and they said the sound barrier could never be broken either.

yeesh.

I don't buy the dogma.
 
Paleocon said:
As pointless as it seems, I'll try to sift through the insults to engage the substance of your post here, since it has some substance.

What you seem to not understand is that there are a lot of atoms in even the smallest of things like genes. Like, a huge number of them. Arranging them one by one on a scale big enough to be useful is simply is far too complicated to be feasible. Even if they could do it, the effort put into a single operation would far exceed the effort required to do the same thing without mechanically constructing the object.
Click to expand...

Are you confusing complexity with size? Doing the same basic operation on a large number of atoms shouldn't be fundamentally more difficult that doing it to one. It'll just take longer. Of course taking longer to do something may add complexity of it's own but that's a somewhat different question.
 
Gaius46 said:
Are you confusing complexity with size? Doing the same basic operation on a large number of atoms shouldn't be fundamentally more difficult that doing it to one. It'll just take longer. Of course taking longer to do something may add complexity of it's own but that's a somewhat different question.
Click to expand...

You're right. I should have been more clear, it'd take an inordinate amount of time to assemble an object atom by atom.
 
Ancient Herald said:
Yeah, and they said the sound barrier could never be broken either.

yeesh.

I don't buy the dogma.
Click to expand...

What thread are you reading? Because it isn't this one.
 
Gaius46 said:
Are you confusing complexity with size? Doing the same basic operation on a large number of atoms shouldn't be fundamentally more difficult that doing it to one. It'll just take longer. Of course taking longer to do something may add complexity of it's own but that's a somewhat different question.
Click to expand...

If your machine can assemble a billion atoms per second you would die of old age before finishing a grain of sand.
 
Deuce said:
What thread are you reading? Because it isn't this one.
Click to expand...

It is you that haven't been reading this thread, nor did you even see the video.

And this is my own thread.

And i hate dogmatic nay saying.
 
Deuce said:
If your machine can assemble a billion atoms per second you would die of old age before finishing a grain of sand.
Click to expand...

Point taken. Honestly I didn't stop to consider just how long it would take. Still that isn't a problem of complexity - "just" scale.
 
Ancient Herald said:
It is you that haven't been reading this thread, nor did you even see the video.

And this is my own thread.

And i hate dogmatic nay saying.
Click to expand...

Dogmatic nay saying? Like I said, you're reading some other thread because that's not what I'm doing.
 
Gaius46 said:
Point taken. Honestly I didn't stop to consider just how long it would take. Still that isn't a problem of complexity - "just" scale.
Click to expand...

I think it is an issue of complexity. A device that can resolve and individually manipulate a billion separate atoms and keep track of them all is necessarily more complex than a machine that only manipulates one.

Although you don't really need to individually identify and position every atom, I suppose. A "stage one" setup could just mash atoms together to form many types of molecules, and then you can shove molecules together in fairly large groups, especially if the object you are creating is a simple one. (Like a block of steel)

However, anything organic is going to have an incredibly complex structure, and manipulating something like DNA in this fashion is going to require incredible precision.
 
Deuce said:
I think it is an issue of complexity. A device that can resolve and individually manipulate a billion separate atoms and keep track of them all is necessarily more complex than a machine that only manipulates one.

Although you don't really need to individually identify and position every atom, I suppose. A "stage one" setup could just mash atoms together to form many types of molecules, and then you can shove molecules together in fairly large groups, especially if the object you are creating is a simple one. (Like a block of steel)

However, anything organic is going to have an incredibly complex structure, and manipulating something like DNA in this fashion is going to require incredible precision.
Click to expand...

Thanks. You make a good deal of sense. Maybe I'm being overly optimistic
 
Ancient Herald said:
Sorry, but you are wrong. Mr. kaku says it will be here in fifty years, and they already have the technology to move atoms, without arranging them into an object. The video itself shows that.

But go ahead, just repeat your ignorance

You really don't have very good reading comprehension do you?

It is very feasible.
Click to expand...

Don't get too far into this line of thinking. For instance, I have a friend who is a professor of physics at a major university and he thinks Kaku is a quack. He may or may not be. The ability to rearrange elements could be possible in the future or not. But you shouldn't assume that a celebrity physicist is any better at predicting the future than any other. You stated he was wrong. I would say that he could be wrong but it is not particularly likely.
 
BrewerBob said:
Moving an atom is cool but until you can move MANY swiftly and create and break the needed bonds it is just a novelty. Cool, though.
Click to expand...

Moving atoms is nothing at all. The air has moving nitrogen, oxygen and other elements that move all the time. I haven't seen the video but I think the subject is transforming elements.
 
fmw said:
Don't get too far into this line of thinking. For instance, I have a friend who is a professor of physics at a major university and he thinks Kaku is a quack. He may or may not be. The ability to rearrange elements could be possible in the future or not. But you shouldn't assume that a celebrity physicist is any better at predicting the future than any other. You stated he was wrong. I would say that he could be wrong but it is not particularly likely.
Click to expand...

I know he isn't perfect, but he is good, and it is not the strength of his personality, it is the claims that i can check out.

i also don't like people who automatically dismiss claims because of personality conflict or ego either.

The video I posted is not just about him either.

You really should look at it. It has some very interesting stuff about nano technology that is on the horizon, and to dismiss it out of hand is, well, just a reflection of one's own bigotries and prejudices.

I won't dismiss something completely out of hand until I can do the research. Nor will i lsiten to crticism based on ego or personality conflict.

It is the information that I am after.
 
Ancient Herald said:
I know he isn't perfect, but he is good, and it is not the strength of his personality, it is the claims that i can check out.

i also don't like people who automatically dismiss claims because of personality conflict or ego either.

The video I posted is not just about him either.

You really should look at it. It has some very interesting stuff about nano technology that is on the horizon, and to dismiss it out of hand is, well, just a reflection of one's own bigotries and prejudices.

I won't dismiss something completely out of hand until I can do the research. Nor will i lsiten to crticism based on ego or personality conflict.

It is the information that I am after.
Click to expand...

Well, since you only recently have seemed to discover that atoms are smaller than genomes, you seem to vastly underestimate the complexity of moving atoms to make stuff. Specifically, stuff is made from molecules, not just atoms, and combining those atoms to make molecules isn't real easy all the time, especially if they are complex organic molecules.
 
Ancient Herald said:
Okay, so after i read that article on the mapping of the genome of the tardigrade today, it got me to thinking about the size of the genome in comparison to the atom. So i did some research and found out that the genome is larger than an atom since genomes are made from atoms.

Then i got to thinking about this video:



Which is a 55 minute long video of Michio Kaku talking about technology that can actually move atoms. And within this video, he says we can have a matter rearranger in about fifty years, which is a device which will rearrange atoms to form any material object a person can want.

This video shows that we already do have the technology to move an atom from one spot to another, but we can't make actual objects yet.

So, here's what I've ben thinking about.

This will have some incredible medical applications to it, and maybe even make new forms of life by rearranging the atoms to form new genes and chromosomes.

Just some thing to think about.

i will be thinking about this for a while.
Click to expand...



I have to ask how old you are
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom