If there's a "surface coating" which when damaged, causes the "inside" to "grow" again, how does the coating repair itself, to stop the "inside" from growing beyond the original surface?
I read about this recently and found it fascinating - specifically related to tree height, but alludes to other implications.
Whether or not the substrate is biological, I would think that you'd still have to worry about ensuring your program is encoded in such a way that the part of it that turns it off can't be damaged without disabling the program as a whole.
I disagree with this logic, as one could apply it to any theoretical biologic feature. The fact that random-walking evolutionary processes haven't stumbled upon a more optimal solution has nothing to do with whether such a solution exists or is easy to find.
And the organism's genetic line can persist with that mutant gene indefinitely, building onto it until it becomes a useful feature.
(This isn't so true in especially small organisms, where an extra gene here and there might blow their size or resource budget. This is one of several things constraining the evolution of mitochondria, for example.)
Where's all this energy coming from?
Sorry perhaps this is not what you meant to write.
For anyone who wants an unmangled understanding of photosynthesis please consult Wikipedia or other text of your choice.
However my original poorly explained thought stands there needs to be an extra component that will be consumed like ATP or H2O...
Of course this is development is different, but it's still not scalable in any way. If your material isn't alive it won't last long, the catalysts always decompose or degenerate fast.
That reaction also consumes water. So, would you need to regularly mist the material with a spray bottle to keep the self-healing going?
The reactions in chloroplasts , according to Wikipedia at least, is much more complex. It seems that it's a multi-purpose process that eventually results in glucose.
I'm happily not a biologist.
> The material the researchers used, a gel matrix composed of a polymer made from aminopropyl methacrylamide (APMA) and glucose, an enzyme called glucose oxidase, and the chloroplasts, becomes stronger as it incorporates the carbon.
It'd be a very inefficient and slow way to "clean the air. The materials still need to be invested with whatever energy (e.g. glucose) is going to be consumed by the process, and once it finishes you're stuck with some hardened inert lumps which may not be cheaply recycle-able.
Pound of cure, ounce of prevention -- the cheapest and easiest way to clean the air is top stop putting schmutz in it.
That said, if you're really interested in using biotech to pull carbon out of the air, probably the best approach involves reusing existing plant or algae species. and simply harvesting them to bury in such a way that they won't be uncovered for a couple hundred million years.
After all, they're far more robust, feature-packed, and battle-tested than any grey-goo we can make for ourselves in the near future.
As a bonus, you're helping out a future civilization by seeding their oil reserves. Talk about paying it forward...
It’s conceivable a process could be created that pulls carbon from the atmosphere more efficiently while not hsving to deal with all the other mess biological live entails.
It’s also possible you’re right, this isn’t possible, and biological life is the best we’ve got.
Not that you'd have to build skyscrapers with the material, but just to put this idea in some sort of perspective.
It would be nice to find a way to bump that up a couple orders of magnitude without actually pulling that much oil/equivalent out of the ground, since there literally isn't enough there.
* 5.5 million tonnes of limestone
* 8,000 tonnes of granite
* 500,000 tonnes of mortar
mass of limestone in great pyramid of giza
= 5.5 * 1e8 kg of limestone
= 5.5 * 1e8 kg / (2500 kg / m^3)
= 2.2 * 1e5 m^3
edit: when i try to estimate by geometry from the pyramid dimensions, instead of by density, i end up with about 2,000 great pyramids of giza, but that's without trying to understand what the volume of a pyramid actually is, because i am not clever enough to do that.
Pass 2: distroy this plants releasing co2 again in the air to obtain chloroplasts from the upper half of the creature. Set free again the co2 saved in roots. (Alternatively pick only leaves from the spinach).
Pass 3: use this chloroplasts to recover a part of the co2 released in the pass 2
Pass 4: ... D'oh!
The next question is how much CO2 will be released during the manufacturing process for these catalysts.
Excuse the drive-by one-liner. Hard to resist.
Mechanical stress, I wonder if such materials would serve well as coating atop an office floor to reduce the indoor co2. Every step that gets taken would activate the process. Probably won't make as much of a difference as a decent AC unit though.
I'm not a physicist though, would be glad to be proven wrong.
It does sound very much like a "solar freaking roadways" type effort though.
Fancy polymer made of delicious sugar!!!...
... against lichens and bacteria from the badass planet earth!!!.
Guess who of both will release chemicals, distroy their opponent and feed on their guts after being trained for millions of years in extreme survival (colonizing lava fields and sun scorched areas)?
I always thought that the limit of cyber/ai if eco-friendly survival, self-repair to an extent and reproduction was factored in would be homosapiens.exe
I laugh yellow~ when people dream of robotics.. when I see an annoying mosquito, I look at how thin all this is and yet it lives, flies, perceive the world quite a bit ...
To an extent I think the future will just be the same old past except we'll now understand nature a bit more. I hope so.
E.g. a compound eye with the angular resolution of your current eyes would be about the size of your head.
Edit: nope, even bigger:
>To see with a resolution comparable to our simple eyes, humans would require very large compound eyes, around 11 metres (36 ft) in radius.
Or a difference between Jesse Pinkman and Walter White.
I guess we don't need to stretch this joke too far.
It only works if you can sell your [bad re]creation to an audience.
There are enormous areas of research built around adapting the already-existing self-assemblers to make new things.