OK. Thanks. I actually did get that from the article but didn't think of it as that far out. It probably reflects my biologically naivety rather than scientific imagination, but it hadn't occurred to me that we wouldn't find life with different chemistries than our own.
I think that extremophiles are wonderful. Although not extreme in the standard sense but related, two years ago there was a report of a bacterium discovered in a mine shaft in South Africa two miles beneath the earth's surface. It lives on the chemical energy stored by the effects of background nuclear reactions. Not only that, it is the only known life form that is completely independent of other forms of life. That is, its genome is sufficient to encode processes that sustain life. See, for example Discover<http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2008/10/10/deep-in-a-goldmine-an-ecosystem-of-one/>. (I imagine its DNA, however, was of standard construction.) * -- Russ * On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 9:21 PM, ERIC P. CHARLES <[email protected]> wrote: > Following Glen, Roger, and James, and also wondering why Nick is being a > pill.... > > I believe the report is of interest for showing an organism that uses > arsenic in interesting ways, but it gets its magical-shininess (i.e. Science > worthiness) for showing an organism that does not use phosphorous. We have > never found a life form that could do the "life" thing without phosphorous. It > is almost (almost) like finding an organism that uses silicon instead of > carbon. > > Oh, and then there is the potential for practical application... like > cleaning up arsenic, which is a common pollutant coming out of mines. But > anything like that is a long way off. > > Eric > > > On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 08:03 PM, *Roger Critchlow <[email protected]>* wrote: > > > > On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 4:39 PM, glen e. p. ropella > <[email protected]<#12caac56911a12f4_12caaae425d9fa66_> > > wrote: >> >> >> [*] FWIW, I find it odd for you to ask, of this particular article, "why >> is this important?" Of all the obscure, mumbo-jumbo journal articles >> out there (our discussion of PoMo aside ;-), it seems blatantly obvious >> to me that the substitution of As for P in DNA is important, even if we >> don't know what the implications are. I am woefully ignorant of the >> literature, though. Is it fairly common to find and report substitutes >> for DNA components? >> >> No, it's not common, it's never been reported before, all DNA and RNA in > life as we have known it up until today has been based on phospho-esters. > > -- rec -- > > ============================================================ > > FRIAM Applied > Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's > College > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps athttp://www.friam.org > > Eric Charles > > Professional Student and > Assistant Professor of Psychology > Penn State University > Altoona, PA 16601 > > > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org >
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
