3 ms·

That is fucking awesome. It's depressing to consider the fact that it would probably get downvoted on the science subreddit.

jacquesm 17y ago
Second that. Picture of the year as far as I'm concerned. Simply unbelievable. What a time to be alive. So, now that we can 'see' the 3D arrangement in a manner of speaking is there any way we could feed known protein structure in to neural networks by imaging them in quantity and take some of the sting out of protein folding by identifying likely candidate ways to do the folding ? Or is that too big of a leap ?
- yread 17y ago
  I think there would be major issues getting folded protein to 5K. Plus proteins "live" in 300K and the oscillations are probably very important for the function (perhaps even more than a single arbitrary structure you would get from a picture like this).
  - timr 17y ago
    Yes to all of the above. Not to mention that we've long been able to visualize protein molecular structure using X-rays and NMR. This probably isn't very useful to anything related to proteins.
    - deleted 17y ago
      [deleted]
      - deleted 17y ago
        [deleted]
        deleted 17y ago
        [deleted]
        deleted 17y ago
        [deleted]
        deleted 17y ago
        [deleted]
        deleted 17y ago
        [deleted]
        deleted 17y ago
        [deleted]
        deleted 17y ago
        [deleted]
        deleted 17y ago
        [deleted]
        deleted 17y ago
        [deleted]
        deleted 17y ago
        [deleted]
- sho 17y ago
  What a time to be alive. What he said. This is amazing.
- bd 17y ago
  XFEL is probably going to be a better way to look at biological macromolecules (though I'm not sure if the resolution would be high enough to see atom-sized details). It's a kind of the opposite approach: instead of slowly collecting information from extremely static scene they will blast the sample with very powerful X-ray laser, taking snapshot before shattering it to pieces. http://www.xfel.eu/en/research-examples/structure-of-biomolecules/ http://www.xfel.eu/en/research-examples/structure-of-biomole...
- hughprime 17y ago
  Regardless of what the headline says about "3D", this only works on flattish molecules. Using it to study a protein would be like a blind man determining the structure of a truckload of candy floss using a chopstick.
- flipbrad 17y ago
  we've had 3D atomic level detail for molecules - especially horrendously more complex ones than this - for a long, long long time. NMR and X-Ray crystallography in all its guises are the two main candidates here. NMR even gives you that info in real time, and (if you so desire) in more realistic conditions (vital to learn about folding and activity). Not to piss on a parade, but I don't see this as major breakthrough. It's a technical achievement with an established technology, of primary benefit to material scientists and nanotechnologists, both of whom already have imaging techniques at this level, but lack easy, cheap and instant ones, and face most of their hurdles at the design and synthesis side, not imaging/proof of construct From a biochemist's point of view, if it was anywhere near real-time, THAT would be awesome.
dsil 17y ago
Don't be depressed, it's the top link on science reddit. Though, sadly, the top comment is grammar correction :/
- apotheon 17y ago
  Funny -- last time I checked the science subreddit (just before I unsubscribed), the front page was entirely flooded with ridiculous sensationalism that had little or nothing to do with actual science, while some actually science-focused articles I was watching on the new submissions page were getting downvoted to about -1 or -2 then ignored. I guess the fact this book comes with pictures probably gives it an edge there.

jacquesm 17y ago

Second that. Picture of the year as far as I'm concerned. Simply unbelievable. What a time to be alive. So, now that we can 'see' the 3D arrangement in a manner of speaking is there any way we could feed known protein structure in to neural networks by imaging them in quantity and take some of the sting out of protein folding by identifying likely candidate ways to do the folding ? Or is that too big of a leap ?

yread 17y ago
I think there would be major issues getting folded protein to 5K. Plus proteins "live" in 300K and the oscillations are probably very important for the function (perhaps even more than a single arbitrary structure you would get from a picture like this).
- timr 17y ago
  Yes to all of the above. Not to mention that we've long been able to visualize protein molecular structure using X-rays and NMR. This probably isn't very useful to anything related to proteins.
  - deleted 17y ago
    [deleted]
    - deleted 17y ago
      [deleted]
      - deleted 17y ago
        [deleted]
        deleted 17y ago
        [deleted]
        deleted 17y ago
        [deleted]
        deleted 17y ago
        [deleted]
      - deleted 17y ago
        [deleted]
      - deleted 17y ago
        [deleted]
      - deleted 17y ago
        [deleted]
      - deleted 17y ago
        [deleted]
      - deleted 17y ago
        [deleted]
sho 17y ago
What a time to be alive. What he said. This is amazing.
bd 17y ago
XFEL is probably going to be a better way to look at biological macromolecules (though I'm not sure if the resolution would be high enough to see atom-sized details). It's a kind of the opposite approach: instead of slowly collecting information from extremely static scene they will blast the sample with very powerful X-ray laser, taking snapshot before shattering it to pieces. http://www.xfel.eu/en/research-examples/structure-of-biomolecules/ http://www.xfel.eu/en/research-examples/structure-of-biomole...
hughprime 17y ago
Regardless of what the headline says about "3D", this only works on flattish molecules. Using it to study a protein would be like a blind man determining the structure of a truckload of candy floss using a chopstick.
flipbrad 17y ago
we've had 3D atomic level detail for molecules - especially horrendously more complex ones than this - for a long, long long time. NMR and X-Ray crystallography in all its guises are the two main candidates here. NMR even gives you that info in real time, and (if you so desire) in more realistic conditions (vital to learn about folding and activity). Not to piss on a parade, but I don't see this as major breakthrough. It's a technical achievement with an established technology, of primary benefit to material scientists and nanotechnologists, both of whom already have imaging techniques at this level, but lack easy, cheap and instant ones, and face most of their hurdles at the design and synthesis side, not imaging/proof of construct From a biochemist's point of view, if it was anywhere near real-time, THAT would be awesome.

dsil 17y ago

Don't be depressed, it's the top link on science reddit. Though, sadly, the top comment is grammar correction :/

apotheon 17y ago
Funny -- last time I checked the science subreddit (just before I unsubscribed), the front page was entirely flooded with ridiculous sensationalism that had little or nothing to do with actual science, while some actually science-focused articles I was watching on the new submissions page were getting downvoted to about -1 or -2 then ignored. I guess the fact this book comes with pictures probably gives it an edge there.