4 ms·

DNA as storage, and now DNA as logic gates. But is there any benefit for using DNA for anything non biology related? For instance, one would think works for us

by steeve 14y ago

DNA as storage, and now DNA as logic gates. But is there any benefit for using DNA for anything non biology related? For instance, one would think works for using atoms themselves as storage would yield a far superior logical/physical size ratio.

Drakim 14y ago
I'm guessing that by piggybacking on biology, we can use a lot of preexisting abilities of the living for our organic computers, such as self-repairing.
ajuc 14y ago
I don't know if this will ever be possible, I hope it will be: You engineer some harmless bacteria to start glowing if it encounters cancerous cell. You take pill with such bacteria, then you look at your poop. If it glows - you go to doctor. If no - you take such pill half a year later. Most cancers can be cured if detected so early.
- jfarmer 14y ago
  http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101006/full/467650a.html http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101006/full/467650a.html "For now, most members of the do-it-yourself, or DIY, biology community are hobbyists, rigging up cheap equipment and tackling projects that — although not exactly pushing the boundaries of molecular biology — are creative proof of the hacker principle. Meredith Patterson, a computer programmer based in San Francisco, California, whom some call the 'doyenne of DIYbio', made glow-in-the-dark yogurt by engineering the bacteria within to produce a fluorescent protein. Others hope to learn more about themselves: a group called DIYgenomics has banded together to analyse their genomes, and even conduct and participate in small clinical trials. For those who aspire to change the world, improving biofuel development is a popular draw. And several groups are focused on making standard instruments — such as PCR machines, which amplify segments of DNA — cheaper and easier to use outside the confines of a laboratory, ultimately promising to make DIYbio more accessible."
epistasis 14y ago
Using DNA is using "atoms" themselves for storage. DNA is about 50 atoms/bit, and nature has given us machinery for replicating this data and even some types of error correction. And the linear structure and base-pairing action of DNA gives us the capability to perform data retrieval physically. I will be surprised if anybody can come up with a nanotechnology scheme that comes even close to matching DNA's density in the next few decades. Look at the difficulties of even reading DNA, we can stick it through a nanopore, but it's not a trivial task to read off the various shapes of molecules as they poke through. Can you come up with a linear structure that is as stable but also allows for easier readout? If you start with DNA, but then add various modifications, how are you going to read out those modifications to the bases, and how are you going to replicate and copy that data? I'm sure that it will happen that we eventually best DNA's density when it comes to storing information in covalent bonds, but our nanotechnology isn't even close to being able to come up with something like that now. Reusing biology's inventions are our only hope for the near future.
lutusp 14y ago
> For instance, one would think works for using atoms themselves as storage would yield a far superior logical/physical size ratio. Yes, except that quantum effects make most single atoms an unreliable storage medium. Less so for DNA which, by its size, is less susceptible to quantum effects.

by steeve 14y ago

Drakim 14y ago

I'm guessing that by piggybacking on biology, we can use a lot of preexisting abilities of the living for our organic computers, such as self-repairing.

ajuc 14y ago

I don't know if this will ever be possible, I hope it will be: You engineer some harmless bacteria to start glowing if it encounters cancerous cell. You take pill with such bacteria, then you look at your poop. If it glows - you go to doctor. If no - you take such pill half a year later. Most cancers can be cured if detected so early.

jfarmer 14y ago
http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101006/full/467650a.html http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101006/full/467650a.html "For now, most members of the do-it-yourself, or DIY, biology community are hobbyists, rigging up cheap equipment and tackling projects that — although not exactly pushing the boundaries of molecular biology — are creative proof of the hacker principle. Meredith Patterson, a computer programmer based in San Francisco, California, whom some call the 'doyenne of DIYbio', made glow-in-the-dark yogurt by engineering the bacteria within to produce a fluorescent protein. Others hope to learn more about themselves: a group called DIYgenomics has banded together to analyse their genomes, and even conduct and participate in small clinical trials. For those who aspire to change the world, improving biofuel development is a popular draw. And several groups are focused on making standard instruments — such as PCR machines, which amplify segments of DNA — cheaper and easier to use outside the confines of a laboratory, ultimately promising to make DIYbio more accessible."

epistasis 14y ago

Using DNA is using "atoms" themselves for storage. DNA is about 50 atoms/bit, and nature has given us machinery for replicating this data and even some types of error correction. And the linear structure and base-pairing action of DNA gives us the capability to perform data retrieval physically. I will be surprised if anybody can come up with a nanotechnology scheme that comes even close to matching DNA's density in the next few decades. Look at the difficulties of even reading DNA, we can stick it through a nanopore, but it's not a trivial task to read off the various shapes of molecules as they poke through. Can you come up with a linear structure that is as stable but also allows for easier readout? If you start with DNA, but then add various modifications, how are you going to read out those modifications to the bases, and how are you going to replicate and copy that data? I'm sure that it will happen that we eventually best DNA's density when it comes to storing information in covalent bonds, but our nanotechnology isn't even close to being able to come up with something like that now. Reusing biology's inventions are our only hope for the near future.

lutusp 14y ago

> For instance, one would think works for using atoms themselves as storage would yield a far superior logical/physical size ratio. Yes, except that quantum effects make most single atoms an unreliable storage medium. Less so for DNA which, by its size, is less susceptible to quantum effects.