Biological Computer Created at Stanford 89
sciencehabit writes "For the first time, synthetic biologists have created a genetic device that mimics one of the widgets on which all of modern electronics is based, the three-terminal transistor. Like standard electronic transistors, the new biological transistor is expected to work in many different biological circuit designs. This should make it easier for scientists to program cells to do everything from monitor pollutants and the progression of disease to turning on the output of medicines and biofuels."
Synthetic Biologists? (Score:4, Funny)
We have synthetic biologists now?!?! What happened to the real ones?
Reminds me of a quote.. "Synthetic scotch and synthetic commanders..." - Scotty
All your base pairs are belong to us. (Score:4, Funny)
Hahahhaha funny.
Re: (Score:1)
Hahahhaha funny.
Don't quit your day job. Sheesh... can I have a toke of that? Mybe it would be funny if I were stoned enough. Howecer, that lame "Hahahhaha funny" would spoil it no matter how much I'd smoked.
-1, vastly overrated.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
To those of us to understand the pun it's just too obvious to be funny.
Re: (Score:1)
Biological Computer? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
My wife and I have created 4 of those.
And they are regularly infected with virii!
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Biological Computer? (Score:4, Funny)
I've made up my mind. I'm going to create a computer virus strain called "virii" just to troll people like you.
Re:Biological Computer? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We need a series of browser plugin virii that will screw up apostrophes, change all plurals to pseudo-latin form and randomly leave out the harvard comma. It should also transpose all instances of loose and lose.
Re: (Score:1)
We need a series of browser plugin virii that will screw up apostrophes, change all plurals to pseudo-latin form and randomly leave out the harvard comma. It should also transpose all instances of loose and lose.
Who's side are you on? Their not going to like this.
Re: (Score:3)
We need a series of browser plugin virii that will screw up apostrophes, change all plurals to pseudo-latin form and randomly leave out the harvard comma. It should also transpose all instances of loose and lose.
I think the vast majority of computer users in this world already have that plugin.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, troll the educated and intelligent.
You never really left high school, did you?
Re: (Score:2)
Trolling people who are easy to troll is the whole point of trolling. Also, I love that the definition of enlightened is apparently "caring excessively much about proper pluralization".
Re: (Score:1)
Slashdot brings you yesterday's news (Score:2)
WAR! (Score:2)
Re:WAR! (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
low latency is often more important than network speed
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Travels instantly with respect to what reference frame? Infinity is not Lorentz invariant.
Re: (Score:2)
No information can move faster then the speed of light.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think that this depends on how you define information. ISTR that while data is available, calling it information is questionable. E,g,, you may measure somthing and measure it as, say, spinning up, and this will allow you to assert that whenever you opposite number performs the equivalent measurement it won't say spinning down...and that the time could be either before when you measured or after in some particular reference frame. But calling this a tranfer of information is a bit questionable. E.g.,
Re: (Score:1)
Simulated vs. Real results (Score:5, Informative)
The Stanford team then showed that they could line up multiple transcriptors to carry out logical functions, creating standard logical circuits called AND gates, OR gates, XOR gates, and so on, which combine signals according to certain rules. (A computer's processor is a vast assemblage of such gates.) They also showed that their novel biological circuit designs were adept at producing signals with large amplification and that they could be used to up the expression of a variety of genes, such as the production of fluorescent signals that made it simple to detect cells that were carrying out their programming.
I wonder exactly how they "assemble" the circuit and keep the components from diffusing or floating away, thus diassembling the circuit. What keeps the "circuit" of DNA strands in place?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Read TFA for the components of this circuit. The DNA part of the circuit is most likely integrated into the cellular genome, so is effectively stationary in the nucleus. The RNA polymerase component is probably the naturally occurring version of the protein that already exists in the cell. RNA polymerase randomly diffuses around in the nucleus, but there's not just one molecule of RNA polymerase around, there's loads of them, and they can all do the same job. With help from other proteins, they bind to sequ
This is not a computer (Score:1)
The summary has nothing to do with the headline. A transistor does not a computer make. To have anything worth talking about (as far as computers go), you would need to have a stupendous amount of these so-called "transistor"s interacting. This is no small leap- there is a significant amount of engineering work that goes into a processor even at higher levels of abstraction than gates.
This is like saying that someone's made a car, when all they really did was make a gear or something. It's just sensationali
Re:This is not a computer (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The biggest question is whether they can feed a signal back into a circuit, a flip-flop. A secondary question is reliability, whether you can use the same circuit repeatedly without it self-destructing. Once you've got that (and assuming their signals propagate as well as they think), then you have no problem building a
Re: (Score:2)
The other summary posted, http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3595685&cid=43312417 [slashdot.org], says they have created "standard logical circuits". That summary doesn't mention NOR gates, but it does mention OR gates, and I'm making the leap that they have an inverter.
So wikipedia says you can make a flip flop with NANDs or NORs.
Where is the flaw in my logic (no pun intended) that they likely (my inverter leap) have enough parts to make a flip flop?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The comment was just quoting from the same article. (Though I admit I didn't check that at the time.)
Re:This is not a computer (Score:5, Insightful)
A transistor is a computer. It just computes exactly one function on exactly one set of inputs. It's a simple finite state machine.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Correction: an abacus with a human operator is a calculator. Without the human an abacus does nothing.
There's a "guns don't kill people" joke in here somewhere, I just know it...
Re: (Score:2)
There in no requirement on the power source to call something a computer.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't get it - is that the setup, or the punchline?
Re: (Score:2)
yes, an abacus is a manual power computer.
But a transistor isn't a computer any more then one bead from an abacus is a computer.
An Abacus is a series of registers, not a computer (Score:2)
:>)
The human operator of the abacus is the executor of the machine code: it's the human that:
-- reads the value of a register (by looking at it)
-- stores a numeric value in a register (by sliding beads)
-- performs the carry when overflow occurs by carriage returning the beads in one row and moving an extra bead in the next (above or below depending on
An Abacus is a series of registers, not a computer (Score:2)
The human operator of the abacus is the executor of the machine code: it's the human that:
-- reads the value of a register (by looking at it)
-- stores a numeric value in a register (by sliding beads)
-- performs the carry when overflow occurs by carriage returning the beads in one row and moving an extra bead in the next (above or below depending on y
Re: (Score:3)
If someone is going to argue that something is untrue, and there is an understood interpretation of words that makes it true, they are being obstinate. Such semantics should only be argued when someone is holding 2 mutually exclusive definitions at once.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A transistor is a computer. It just computes exactly one function on exactly one set of inputs. It's a simple finite state machine.
So transistor is a finite state machine is a computer. Well I've got a jar of pennies where each one is a finite state machine and therefore each one is a computer. Or else maybe they should start teaching more engineering and less computer science.
Re: (Score:1)
A penny can have more than one state, but a finite count of them. A transistor can have one state unless you add a method to change it, such as a sine wave generator or another transistor. Then it is a transistor + input generator make a computer. The penny has itself and a small image (signal) that make it a computer.
You're confusing transistor with flop-flop or flash cell or something which is slightly more than just a transistor. Which by the way, a transistor does not have a finite number of states. Transistors are analog devices with continuously infinite number of states. It just happens that digital computers use them in arrangements of multiple transistors where we generally only use 2 states.
Re: (Score:3)
" Transistors are analog devices with continuously infinite number of states."
You could have just said you don't know how a transistor works. I mean, sure that sentence conveyed the same information, but is seems like a round about way to show off your ignorance.
Re: This is not a computer (Score:1)
Try using google my friend.
Re: (Score:2)
No it isn't. ..compute.
It's like saying one of your cells is you. i.e. stupid.
A computer need to
A transistor does not use a set of instructions.
Good point, but a dozen can run vmware (Score:4, Informative)
I suspect you'd agree that any processor capable of running Windows is a computer. Therefore, any machine that can run a hypervisor, which in turn runs Windows, is a computer. You probably know where I'm headed - Turing machines. Any Turing machine can emulate a Core processor, and is therefore a computer. Wolfram's Turing machine requires only a few gates, so these researchers can probably build a biological Wolfram Turing computer today.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The core functionality of a simple PIC micro is a few thousand transistors. IO is several thousand more. If they already have gates with six transistors or so each, combining a dozen gates into modules and a dozen modules into a simple CPU is not a huge leap. It's not a computer, yet, but it's a couple of incremental steps away.
monitor pollutants (Score:1)
" program cells to do everything from monitor pollutants ..."
I don't want them to pollute my monitors!
This will change the terminology (Score:3)
Synthetic Biologists (Score:2)