It occurred to me, just the other day, that I hadn't written any text on viruses; despite the idea that I had a while ago. But today I shall go into it, and hopefully this will help you ponder on some new ideas for the future. =]
Creepy smiley. Alright, let's get started. As many people know, viruses primarily consist of protein (in the form of a capsule containing genetic information), and the genetic information that it carries (whether it be single- or double-stranded DNA or RNA). This is the absolute basic structure of a virus, neglecting all of the other components that comprise it, such as the tail, and so forth (I'm not writing the anatomy for a virus). This being said, viruses are know to be strictly parasitic and relying solely on bacteriophages for replication of their genetic information (process: infect bacteriophage with genetic information, replicated in bacteriophage ---> creates more virus, and can either burst [known as virulent] or remain in host for replication and ejection without lyse [known as temperate]). What happens when a virus cannot infect and replicate its genetic materials? Well, it cannot further "reproduce" to form more viruses. Remember, viruses are not considered living organisms, but they rely on living organisms for replication. Now, you may be wondering, to what end am I spewing all of this information for? Well, viral genetic information is different from genetic information that a specific organism is comprised of. Imagine comparing a human's DNA with a virus'. Since both were not of the same origin, you can assume (most of the time) that there will be a significant difference between the two. In fact, some genetic material transferred by viruses is in the form of short-lived RNA which is reverse transcribed into DNA (AIDS does this), further adding to the point I am trying to make; In most cases, viral DNA is not the same as the DNA you were born with. There is a way to fix this, although it may seem impossible now, given the technologies we currently have and this type of procedure may lead to the extinction of our species if used improperly, which is through a type of therapy that targets the removal of this foreign DNA. As you know, DNA undergoes mitosis which is supervised by many proteins that which eventually leads to the formation of identical daughter cells. What we want to focus on, is the activities in the S-phase of Interphase (notably the period that deals with the replication of DNA). DNA replication is practically due to DNA polymerase, which matches nucleotides based on the original strand that acts as a template for the new strand DNA polymerase is trying to replicate. That being said, we now have two strands which are practically identical in genetic sequencing; there are rarely ever any mistakes when replicating DNA aside from mutations, which are rare without external stimuli. Now what if we were to create, or modify, a protein that "proofreads" DNA, more than it does now, such that DNA that does not sync with genes/exons from the original DNA that we are comprised of are destroyed, it would be a step closer towards getting rid of viruses. To do so, here is one of my theories: a protein is formed via translation of mRNA, so if we understand how DNA polymerase functions then we can form an "artificial DNA polymerase" to experiment with to see if we can selectively change its behavior. This newly formed polymerase will proofread the entire strand to see if it is complimentary to one of the 23 chromosomes found in a person's genome, removing nucloeotides that do not match the template and replacing them with what is suppose to be there. In my mind, I see it as a knotted rope. You glide your hand (the new DNA polymerase) along the rope until you reach a knot, then you un-knot the rope and continue. Similarly, this will decrease (if even possible) the rate of mutations, possibly reducing the risk of serious conditions such as mutations of exons which are used to code for proteins. If not possible to create the new protein, then maybe a therapy that has the 23 chromosome pairs on file and targets cells with mutations, and signals them for apoptosis to reduce mitosis of these particular chromosomes. But then we would reach the problem where if viral DNA like HIV were to enter the nucleus, but not be a part of the original genome would pose a problem since the therapy would also target these cells. However, if we were to differentiate between polyploidy (or extra chromosomes that are not suppose to be there), then the therapy could possibly "delete" these strands of DNA such that it reflects the original genome of 23 pairs of chromosomes.
But a decrease in mutations also means that persons will be genetically stagnant. There will be less of a chance for natural selection to take hold through mutations, so if a certain disease affects one, it may affect all of use which may wipe us out. That would be a downside to this plan, but another is if the polymerase attacks mitochonrial DNA. Mitochondrial DNA is inherited maternally, and replicated via binary fission; but it still has its own separate DNA. If the therapy/polymerase attack these, then it would affect cells by decreasing the amount of energy produced through cellular respiration, and eventually lead to the death of the cell. So theoretically, this therapy will know the "basic genome of normal cells within a person." With that, it will be able to isolate the genetic information by viruses and hopefully help people live normal lives. Sorry, I am really tired right now and don't feel like writing anymore even though I was suppose to further explain my thoughts, and link it to how it would affect cancer but I believe that will have to wait until another time. But until next time, have fun thinking!
-JuzoInspired
Monday, August 26, 2013
Friday, August 23, 2013
Magnetic Force.
New Blog \(^.^)/
Well based on my reaction above, I highly doubt anyone will take this blog seriously; granted they take the time to read it, let alone find it. I chose to write in here for two reasons: one, I need a vice from all the studying I have been doing; and two, I haven't written in here for a while so I will jot down some of the things I have thought about since my last posting. For starters, let us look into the idea of a better methods on getting into space. I am no "rocket scientist," nor do I believe I will ever be able to achieve the mathematical skills that individuals in the fields of Astronomy and Physics because I will spend my time studying medicine, and frankly, I hate math. Aside from that, the current method used to get into space is by using "rocket fuel" to propel the rocket along the rotation of Earth in an upward trajectory to escape the gravitational forces exerted on the rocket (uses less fuel, rather than purposely fighting against air resistance and blah blah). I know I simplified it a ton, and I may be wrong, but this is just a general overview to propose what I am thinking/what is being developed currently.
Among the forces of nature that exist, gravitational force is one of the weakest. One of the stronger forces is actually electromagnetic forces, which account for many of the interactions that we perceive to be everyday occurrences; One of the better examples being friction. When you slide a box across the floor, the friction can be thought of the interaction between the electromagnetic forces between the two objects (floor and box), which inhibits the movement of the object. This got me into thinking about a different method of transportation via magnetic or electrical forces, both of which are capable of inducing a push-pull mechanism based on their polarity. [Right now I will apologize if a lot of what I write doesn't make sense, I am currently writing this half-asleep] Assuming that we can make a magnetic body capable of orbiting Earth without being attracted towards it (If it were attracted, it would result in a huge object plummeting towards Earth's surface due to the attraction), We may be able to utilize the magnetic pull created between the interaction from the rocket to the magnetic. Of course this would require a higher elevation for the rocket such that the magnetic pull from the rocket is greater than the pull that is exerted by Earth, and there needs to be a method to overcome the gravitational acceleration exerted on the rocket. There may be a way to do this. Assuming that this situation takes into account that the pull of the rocket due to the magnet does not entirely result with the displacement of the magnet from its original position, which would affect the magnetic force between the magnet and Earth (strengthening it since force increases as distance between the two objects decreases), an increase in the polarity of the magnet as a function of distance may work. Beginning as an object not polarized, the rocket remains at rest since no outside forces are working on the system aside from gravitational force. Now, when the rocket is polarized and the magnetic force creates a pull on the rocket in an upward direction, the net forces working on the system (Newton's 2nd law) now are gravitational force as weight, and the magnetic force upward due to the attraction to the magnet. When the gravitational force is overcome (assuming all other forces are negligible), the rocket will begin to accelerate upward since the gravitational force on an object decreases with altitude due to the decrease in gravitational acceleration. This alone will not lead to the propulsion of the rocket into space, since the rocket will be moving rather slowly. That is why I suggested the magnetic polarity of the rocket increases as a function of altitude. As gravitational acceleration towards Earth decreases with altitude, the increase in the polarity of the magnet on the rocket increases the attraction between the magnet in space and the rocket, thus moving the rocket upward faster. Approaching the magnet, the magnet on the rocket increases in magnitude creating a stronger force between the two objects which creates a velocity larger in magnitude. Just as the rocket is about to collide into the magnet, we can shut off the magnet which will decrease the attraction between the rocket and the magnet, as well as providing the rocket with a a velocity which is large in magnitude. Try and experiment it with a large, strong magnet and a smaller magnet, and see what happens between the two as the distance decreases. You will find that the magnet speeds up exponentially due to the increase in the magnetic pull as the distance becomes smaller and smaller (this is as a function of the inverse fraction of the original radius squared). Now we also need to assume that the rocket does not become magnetized since it is made of metal, and magnets tend to polarize metallic objects. If it is possible, then this would be an alternative to using chemical fuels to propel rockets from the surface of Earth (which is where the bulk of rocket fuel is used). Since the rocket is now in space, it needs constant force applied in order to move forward due to the rocket's collision with particles in space or it will stop. But I'm too tired to write down the ideas I had for that since I am tired and want to write about something else.
Last thing I'll write for tonight is the formulation of a renewable energy source. Right now, there are solar panels that convert electromagnetic radiation from the sun, which is converted by solar cells into a form of energy which can be used as electricity. We also have hydroelectric systems, which include the wheel which converts the push of water molecules in a river into energy, and the energy from waves into a form of energy we can use. Then there is also wind turbines that use the energy from wind to spin the turbines, which act similarly to the wheel in the river, to convert wind energy into mechanical energy that we can use. Lastly is nuclear energy, but I don't want to write about since it would take too long and I am tired. My idea is that we can use a form of renewable energy the mirrors the Kreb's cycle/Electron transport chain, in that energy is input to yield more energy output. Think of it like a ball starting at the top of the machine, and as it rolls down, its force is transferred from the ball to collide with a button that compresses a spring (there is a "trap door" near the button, with a spring that compresses when the force due to gravity overcomes the upward force of the spring, which allows the ball to go down so that it can begin the cycle again). The potential energy within the spring can be converted into mechanical energy, and part of it can used to begin the cycle again by moving the ball to the top of the machine again via a conveyor belt. For one that mirrors the electron transport, it is much like the same mechanism, but there is more than one, and the ball rotates the wheel. Just one of my thoughts. Too tired to write, logging off.
-JI
Well based on my reaction above, I highly doubt anyone will take this blog seriously; granted they take the time to read it, let alone find it. I chose to write in here for two reasons: one, I need a vice from all the studying I have been doing; and two, I haven't written in here for a while so I will jot down some of the things I have thought about since my last posting. For starters, let us look into the idea of a better methods on getting into space. I am no "rocket scientist," nor do I believe I will ever be able to achieve the mathematical skills that individuals in the fields of Astronomy and Physics because I will spend my time studying medicine, and frankly, I hate math. Aside from that, the current method used to get into space is by using "rocket fuel" to propel the rocket along the rotation of Earth in an upward trajectory to escape the gravitational forces exerted on the rocket (uses less fuel, rather than purposely fighting against air resistance and blah blah). I know I simplified it a ton, and I may be wrong, but this is just a general overview to propose what I am thinking/what is being developed currently.
Among the forces of nature that exist, gravitational force is one of the weakest. One of the stronger forces is actually electromagnetic forces, which account for many of the interactions that we perceive to be everyday occurrences; One of the better examples being friction. When you slide a box across the floor, the friction can be thought of the interaction between the electromagnetic forces between the two objects (floor and box), which inhibits the movement of the object. This got me into thinking about a different method of transportation via magnetic or electrical forces, both of which are capable of inducing a push-pull mechanism based on their polarity. [Right now I will apologize if a lot of what I write doesn't make sense, I am currently writing this half-asleep] Assuming that we can make a magnetic body capable of orbiting Earth without being attracted towards it (If it were attracted, it would result in a huge object plummeting towards Earth's surface due to the attraction), We may be able to utilize the magnetic pull created between the interaction from the rocket to the magnetic. Of course this would require a higher elevation for the rocket such that the magnetic pull from the rocket is greater than the pull that is exerted by Earth, and there needs to be a method to overcome the gravitational acceleration exerted on the rocket. There may be a way to do this. Assuming that this situation takes into account that the pull of the rocket due to the magnet does not entirely result with the displacement of the magnet from its original position, which would affect the magnetic force between the magnet and Earth (strengthening it since force increases as distance between the two objects decreases), an increase in the polarity of the magnet as a function of distance may work. Beginning as an object not polarized, the rocket remains at rest since no outside forces are working on the system aside from gravitational force. Now, when the rocket is polarized and the magnetic force creates a pull on the rocket in an upward direction, the net forces working on the system (Newton's 2nd law) now are gravitational force as weight, and the magnetic force upward due to the attraction to the magnet. When the gravitational force is overcome (assuming all other forces are negligible), the rocket will begin to accelerate upward since the gravitational force on an object decreases with altitude due to the decrease in gravitational acceleration. This alone will not lead to the propulsion of the rocket into space, since the rocket will be moving rather slowly. That is why I suggested the magnetic polarity of the rocket increases as a function of altitude. As gravitational acceleration towards Earth decreases with altitude, the increase in the polarity of the magnet on the rocket increases the attraction between the magnet in space and the rocket, thus moving the rocket upward faster. Approaching the magnet, the magnet on the rocket increases in magnitude creating a stronger force between the two objects which creates a velocity larger in magnitude. Just as the rocket is about to collide into the magnet, we can shut off the magnet which will decrease the attraction between the rocket and the magnet, as well as providing the rocket with a a velocity which is large in magnitude. Try and experiment it with a large, strong magnet and a smaller magnet, and see what happens between the two as the distance decreases. You will find that the magnet speeds up exponentially due to the increase in the magnetic pull as the distance becomes smaller and smaller (this is as a function of the inverse fraction of the original radius squared). Now we also need to assume that the rocket does not become magnetized since it is made of metal, and magnets tend to polarize metallic objects. If it is possible, then this would be an alternative to using chemical fuels to propel rockets from the surface of Earth (which is where the bulk of rocket fuel is used). Since the rocket is now in space, it needs constant force applied in order to move forward due to the rocket's collision with particles in space or it will stop. But I'm too tired to write down the ideas I had for that since I am tired and want to write about something else.
Last thing I'll write for tonight is the formulation of a renewable energy source. Right now, there are solar panels that convert electromagnetic radiation from the sun, which is converted by solar cells into a form of energy which can be used as electricity. We also have hydroelectric systems, which include the wheel which converts the push of water molecules in a river into energy, and the energy from waves into a form of energy we can use. Then there is also wind turbines that use the energy from wind to spin the turbines, which act similarly to the wheel in the river, to convert wind energy into mechanical energy that we can use. Lastly is nuclear energy, but I don't want to write about since it would take too long and I am tired. My idea is that we can use a form of renewable energy the mirrors the Kreb's cycle/Electron transport chain, in that energy is input to yield more energy output. Think of it like a ball starting at the top of the machine, and as it rolls down, its force is transferred from the ball to collide with a button that compresses a spring (there is a "trap door" near the button, with a spring that compresses when the force due to gravity overcomes the upward force of the spring, which allows the ball to go down so that it can begin the cycle again). The potential energy within the spring can be converted into mechanical energy, and part of it can used to begin the cycle again by moving the ball to the top of the machine again via a conveyor belt. For one that mirrors the electron transport, it is much like the same mechanism, but there is more than one, and the ball rotates the wheel. Just one of my thoughts. Too tired to write, logging off.
-JI
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)