There always going to be unanswered questions, the key is stating arguments, not questions.
Is a virus alive?
- Thread starter Vkothii
- Start date
- Status
There always going to be unanswered questions, the key is stating arguments, not questions.
Well, as far as some list, here's what the "threaded forum system" has come up with (so far, ...yawn):
Viral genomes are something that (is or can):
- survive quite a large amount of time in inert form
- are organized as they are because they've evolved
- carry key proteins within themselves
- persist, reproduce, and possess functional structures. (Which persist due to their ability to co-opt a host cell.)
- contain their own transcriptases which are notoriously prone to error. (This gives them a mutability advantage.)
- made of a multitude of complex interacting moving parts
- evolve much the same way everything else does
"... the set of all things that are capable of persistence, via metabolism and reproduction of material that is required to maintain their structure, and also represent that structure (again as structure). The structures are actively maintained and this requires energy.
The chemicals involved are from a specific set - amino acids for example, but also a host of organic chemicals and organometallic compounds. Lipids, amphoteric compounds, variously polar organic chemicals; it's a large list, but not an open one.
The structures are functional. A characteristic of living organisms is that they separate energy-carrying substances and electric charge - compartmentalisation is important, and separation involves membranes, which are porous.
Some of the openings function as active channels, that pump ions against a gradient, using stored energy.
This is possible (the active creation of an energy potential) because of the structures and the way they function and are under the control of the cell. Regulatory mechanisms are important. "Lifeforms" regulate the flow of free energy in the environment."
Viral "lifeforms" don't respire, or regulate energy, they harness, or use it by presenting their genome to a metabolising cell,
"...enzymes function because of their physical structure.
Chemical rules apply and are mandatory based upon the environment in which they take place. The definition of random is important to the question of whether or not viruses are alive." But why?
Random.
What do most people understand a random process or "chance" as? Randomness, in its true form is chaos - unpredictability.
Chance isn't chaotic - it's probabilistic - predictable. It has a certain expectation or uncertainty, right?
Viral genomes are something that (is or can):
- survive quite a large amount of time in inert form
- are organized as they are because they've evolved
- carry key proteins within themselves
- persist, reproduce, and possess functional structures. (Which persist due to their ability to co-opt a host cell.)
- contain their own transcriptases which are notoriously prone to error. (This gives them a mutability advantage.)
- made of a multitude of complex interacting moving parts
- evolve much the same way everything else does
"... the set of all things that are capable of persistence, via metabolism and reproduction of material that is required to maintain their structure, and also represent that structure (again as structure). The structures are actively maintained and this requires energy.
The chemicals involved are from a specific set - amino acids for example, but also a host of organic chemicals and organometallic compounds. Lipids, amphoteric compounds, variously polar organic chemicals; it's a large list, but not an open one.
The structures are functional. A characteristic of living organisms is that they separate energy-carrying substances and electric charge - compartmentalisation is important, and separation involves membranes, which are porous.
Some of the openings function as active channels, that pump ions against a gradient, using stored energy.
This is possible (the active creation of an energy potential) because of the structures and the way they function and are under the control of the cell. Regulatory mechanisms are important. "Lifeforms" regulate the flow of free energy in the environment."
Viral "lifeforms" don't respire, or regulate energy, they harness, or use it by presenting their genome to a metabolising cell,
"...enzymes function because of their physical structure.
Chemical rules apply and are mandatory based upon the environment in which they take place. The definition of random is important to the question of whether or not viruses are alive." But why?
Random.
What do most people understand a random process or "chance" as? Randomness, in its true form is chaos - unpredictability.
Chance isn't chaotic - it's probabilistic - predictable. It has a certain expectation or uncertainty, right?
Don't forget what we've all learned about feminine hygiene.
I call shenanigans. :bugeye:
Are you saying that virus particles do these things outside of cells? If so, please provide references because I think you're talking rubbish.
Viri don't necessarily have a lipid membrane (but some do). They don't respire (pump ions, or transport charge or pyrophosphate around), in general.
But the mimivirus family appears to have more to it than most other kinds we know about, and maintains more structure and function than those "ordinary" types.
I talk rubbish if I feel like talking rubbish, dude.
Just like you and every other loudmouth.
But the mimivirus family appears to have more to it than most other kinds we know about, and maintains more structure and function than those "ordinary" types.
I talk rubbish if I feel like talking rubbish, dude.
Just like you and every other loudmouth.
Hipparchia
Registered Senior Member
Vkothii,
you failed to answer any of my four questions in a meaningful way.
You have failed answer anyone's questions in a meaningful way.
It has become evident that your time-wasting, smug, deliberately provocative, and lacking anything of value by way of contribution to this forum. Since you show no sign of leaving I shall rectify the problem for myself by placing you on ignore.
Since your sole objective appears to be to elicit just this kind of response from others I do hope you will relish my own reaction and perhaps share it with the other kindergarten children.
you failed to answer any of my four questions in a meaningful way.
You have failed answer anyone's questions in a meaningful way.
It has become evident that your time-wasting, smug, deliberately provocative, and lacking anything of value by way of contribution to this forum. Since you show no sign of leaving I shall rectify the problem for myself by placing you on ignore.
Since your sole objective appears to be to elicit just this kind of response from others I do hope you will relish my own reaction and perhaps share it with the other kindergarten children.
For some reason when I think of the word smug, I think of a man who curls over and shoves his face into his own butt and then inhales any gaseous anal emission, savoring the flavor of how delusionally great he thinks he is.
Don't worry I like you, I won't put you on ignore, no matter how much you ignore me, so when ever you want to talk about your self-confidence problem I'm open.
I think this thread is not alive, never was.
Last edited:
- Status