What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
152 Comments
- radicaldementia, on 01/06/2009, -8/+145*facepalm* Whoever decided to put the word "telepathic" in this article needs to be given the grand tour of a meat grinder.
The basics of this article say that 2 similar DNA double helices are able to line up and loosely bind to each other without any help from other proteins. This is an important discovery, but it is not really "amazing" to the point of being magical. We already know that 2 complimentary single strands of DNA can pair up on their own, this is crucial in our own cells. Basically they just keep bumping into each other until 2 sections fit together, and then long stretches will suddenly zip together. Normally, proteins in our cells help the DNA lineup, but they can do it on their own.
It has been thought, though, that the chemical and electrical "markers" that make up the patterns are hidden by the molecule's phosphate backbone when the two strands pair up. These experiments show that this is not entirely true, and that there is a weak bleed-through effect that allows double-stranded helices to recognize similar patterns. In fact it may be the backbone itself that provides the markers. It seems, as one would expect, that this attraction is much weaker than the one between two single strands.
So, there is no telepathy involved here at all, in any shape or form, only molecular interactions. - psion01, on 01/06/2009, -3/+37Technically, telepathy is Greek for "affected at a distance", so ... yeah, it is a form of telepathy. Just not the mind-reading kind.
- Lucas123, on 01/06/2009, -9/+36I know what your thinking and I disagree.
- AdeleMor, on 01/06/2009, -4/+28does that necessarily translate to them being 'telepathic'? i hope so.
- garryw, on 01/06/2009, -1/+21I dont trust long carbon molecules, most are made cheaply in China.
- heyitsguay, on 01/06/2009, -6/+22A new study confirms that no, no it is not.
- forcedfx, on 01/06/2009, -1/+16Whatever you say Yoda.
- AndrewMoyer, on 01/06/2009, -1/+15Great explanation.
The title and summary are way too sensationalized. - nmezib, on 01/06/2009, -2/+15It's not... proteins do it all the time. It's crucial to forming their tertiary and quaternary structures hence giving them their functions.
Although it is interesting to see this occur in DNA (but to a much lesser and weaker extent). Never knew that happened. - nmezib, on 01/06/2009, -2/+14INTERNET GRAMMAR TUFF GUY
- Memnochxx, on 01/06/2009, -0/+11So me shouting across the room at someone?
- nmezib, on 01/06/2009, -3/+14umm..
rtfa.
and BEFORE you say what's possible and impossible... shut the ***** up. EVERYTHING in science is "impossible" before it's proven possible. Remember the theory of Natural Selection? Or Einstein's theory of relativity? Or black holes, dark matter, quarks, light bulbs, genetics, chemical evolution, etc. etc. etc? In fact, at one point it was though that PROTEINS were the transmitters of genetic information, not DNA. They had no idea was all that DNA was for. They thought that it was "impossible" for DNA to carry the genetic code... it only had four types of monomers. Proteins have 20!
Look where we are now. If you want to talk about being unscientific, focusing on outright statements that something is utterly impossible would be a FANTASTIC place to start. - apackofmonkeys, on 01/06/2009, -1/+11I'll see your Jedi mind trick and raise you a Force Lightning.
- archer104, on 01/06/2009, -1/+11I pretty much agree. But who is to say that science won't someday prove that telepathy is possible in some form? We sort of already have it with wireless communication. People shouldn't jump to conclusions by saying that this proves telepathy but they also shouldn't jump to conclusions by saying that telepathy is impossible. If you would have told someone two hundred years ago that we will soon be able to communicate instantly with people from China using handheld devices they would call you insane.
- Serphyas, on 01/06/2009, -9/+18*YOU'RE. AS IN "YOU ARE." MAKES SENSE, RIGHT?
- inactive, on 01/06/2009, -0/+9Yore
- DudeCantDraw, on 01/06/2009, -9/+17Buried. What an utter disgrace to scientific thought the writing of this article is.
- FXPooky, on 01/06/2009, -0/+8I think you took Assassin's Creed a little too seriously.
- TreatsTheBear, on 01/06/2009, -1/+9Fair enough, but technically, the guy that wrote it is still an idiot.
- Lucas123, on 01/06/2009, -1/+9Know. I deserved it. I no how too use contractions. Its my fault.
- DetpackJump, on 01/06/2009, -2/+10Thank you. I was wondering where my daily dose of stupid was going to come from.
- iEATcatFOOD, on 01/06/2009, -12/+19Is DNA telepathic? No.
Is it even --possible--? No.
Is it a stupid unscientific question to ask? Yes. - TreatsTheBear, on 01/06/2009, -2/+9No, it doesn't.
This is typical bad science reporting where any new, as yet poorly understood phenomena is immediately slapped with some supernatural label and scientists are "amazed," "confused," "dumbfounded" etc...
Just because we don't know how something works yet doesn't mean we should automatically attribute it to telepathy or some other totally unproven phenomena. - absurdist, on 01/06/2009, -0/+7"There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy" - Shakespeare
- pak314, on 01/06/2009, -1/+8Sounds like spooky action at a distance.
- xaos12, on 01/06/2009, -0/+7the cake is a lie
- Syric, on 01/06/2009, -1/+8So basically, DNA molecules tend to clump together with similar DNA molecules. Even when they weren't that close together to begin with.
The mysterious part is that they do so without help from certain proteins which were previously thought to be necessary for DNA to behave like this. Apparently, the proteins aren't necessary and DNA molecules can clump together a little bit on their own, without help. It's not that spectacular IMO.
Every time scientists are remotely unsure of an explanation for something, sensationalist media like this one trump it up as "amazed", "baffled", "completely at a loss for words", when really it's more like "Hm, that's a little weird.", usually followed by "oh, I see". - inactive, on 01/06/2009, -3/+10Midichlorians ?
- inactive, on 01/06/2009, -0/+7"well its long been theorized that DNA, at some quantum level could contain memories or ancestral traits."
By you. - GiggleStick, on 01/06/2009, -1/+8He simply left out the word 'is'.
I know what your thinking IS and I disagree. - nmezib, on 01/06/2009, -1/+7RANDOM PARTICLE INTERACTIONS? WHAT RUBBISH!! I BET YOU ALSO BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION, DON'T YOU?!
In all seriousness, yes, the title was a bit sensationalized. If they went with a more scientific intro, 75% of the internets would have glazed over and clicked the next link. - takamalak, on 01/06/2009, -0/+6Reminds me of Frank Herbert's ideas in Dune, where the Bene Gesserit could access their genetic memories all the way down their female lines.
- inactive, on 01/06/2009, -0/+6Girl DNA detects yours from a distance and flees.
- TreatsTheBear, on 01/06/2009, -5/+11Buried as crap.
- nmezib, on 01/06/2009, -0/+5Fender Telecaster:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecaster
See, I can post unrelated topics too. - RobotBuddha, on 01/06/2009, -1/+6The second I saw that I heard the echo of a new version of "quantum" spouted by new agers.
- Jarasmen, on 01/06/2009, -2/+7@afx1: I believe it's because his comment is mostly off-topic and might be considered inflammatory.
- bag2p, on 01/06/2009, -1/+6I think you said it for all of us my friend.
- diggdiggerid, on 01/06/2009, -0/+5more like telemeric
- Snoogs, on 01/06/2009, -0/+5I think you mean, on porpoise.
- diggduggDOOM, on 01/06/2009, -3/+8I suggest an end to all questions-as-headlines - especially when the answer is no.
Does Obama plan to blow up the Moon?
Is it possible that Preparation H can cure cancer?
Are sensationalist headlines improving the news? - plaguepony, on 01/06/2009, -4/+9No
- Scottamus, on 01/06/2009, -0/+5I'm thinking you are smart.
- darkism, on 01/06/2009, -3/+8NO ONE CARES, NO MATTER HOW LOUD YOU SHOUT.
- uptwolait, on 01/06/2009, -0/+4Reminds me of those little silver globs coming together in Terminator 2.
- inactive, on 01/06/2009, -1/+5Actually, it's a sugar-phosphate backbone.
- iEATcatFOOD, on 01/06/2009, -2/+6"Tetra nucleotide hypothesis."
It didn't involve magic, and niether did DNA being the genetic material.
Thats the key difference. - garryw, on 01/06/2009, -1/+5The wave function collapse is not a mystery, it's just not easy to describe with our existing terminology.
- NZN444, on 01/06/2009, -3/+7Whats with all the "Your/ You're" fanatics on Digg?
Since when is the internets about good grammatical skillz?
Oh no...I didnt go they're.
Yes...I dun did it now.
Kiss my Your... and by your I mean arse... as in your an arse. - mutantchicken14, on 01/06/2009, -2/+6It's not telepathy, it's Hydrogen Bonding. Molecules tend to assume forms that give them the lowest energy possible, and with DNA, maximizing the ATGC base-pairings will give the lowest energy. As for the "at a distance" part, molecules move very fast in solution which is why complementary DNA strands are able to bind so well to each other so quickly. This isn't new.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 158 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is