The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Geezer's theory of reverse mutation.  (Read 3384 times)

Offline Geezer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8328
  • "Vive la résistance!"
    • View Profile
Geezer's theory of reverse mutation.
« on: 21/02/2012 03:00:31 »
Ahem! This is my theory.

Everyone seems to have this silly idea that genetic mutation is actually random. Wrong!

Obviously, there is some sort of pattern involved. Therefore, it's only a matter of time until we figure out what the pattern is.

When we do that, we will be able to run evolution in reverse!



 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: Geezer's theory of reverse mutation.
« Reply #1 on: 21/02/2012 16:33:35 »
Doesn't sound too far fetched to me Geezer.

You're probably right that there is a pattern. But to reverse it I doubt, in chaos theory you have what's called bifurcations. They come at certain 'places', in a evolvement of something ( a process 'splitting'), and though you can follow those bifurcations to an 'end' you can not play them backwards. They are random to their nature, although still following a 'constant', and so 'predictable' if looked over a larger assemble.
 

Offline RD

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8127
  • Thanked: 53 times
    • View Profile
Re: Geezer's theory of reverse mutation.
« Reply #2 on: 22/02/2012 03:22:17 »
There are repeating patterns: convergent evolution
 

Offline CliffordK

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6321
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • Site Moderator
    • View Profile
Re: Geezer's theory of reverse mutation.
« Reply #3 on: 24/02/2012 09:29:24 »
Uhhh-Ohhh

You're not suggesting a plan?

And, thus a design by some unknown 3rd party?
 

Offline damocles

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 756
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
Re: Geezer's theory of reverse mutation.
« Reply #4 on: 24/02/2012 20:02:20 »
 I have a theory about genetic mutation. It might even point to intelligent design! [:0]

If you check out a list of the nuclides (isotopes of the chemical elements), you will find that there is only one radioactive isotope among the lighter elements with a lifetime long enough to have survived from the earth's origin 4.5 Gyr ago to the present. (yes I mean 4.5 Gyr ago; I am not a "creationist").

The nucleus in question is the potassium K-40 isotope. Now K-40 has a half-life of 1.28 Gyr, and makes up about 1 part in ten thousand of all potassium. And potassium is a very abundantly present element on Earth, which plays a huge role in the functioning of living things -- it is taken through the cell walls and concentrated in the interior of cells.

So all the time we are playing a game of extremely long odds Russian roulette. On a rare occasion a potassium atom in one of our cells will fire a high energy electron bullet which will cause a bit of local damage to a few nearby chemical bonds which might set in train a chain of biochemical action that will modify genetic material.

Of course there are other possible sources of damage to genetic material, and the mainstream thinking is in terms of random replication errors in RNA/DNA synthesis that are usually corrected but occasionally not. But I really do wonder about radioactive potassium!
 

Offline CliffordK

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6321
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • Site Moderator
    • View Profile
Re: Geezer's theory of reverse mutation.
« Reply #5 on: 25/02/2012 10:33:07 »
Interesting.
So, every billion years we should have half as much radioactive potassium, and thus the rate of 40K decay would be decreasing.  Potassium is generally concentrated intracellularly. 

However,  there is a constant influx of 14C and 3H, so we don't have to rely on ancient origins of the the compounds.

14C that would be incorporated in DNA not only would release a beta particle, but it could spontaneously change to Nitrogen, which could cause errors with cellular transcription.  Likewise, 3H would decay into Helium, and also break the local bonds.  And, of course, fire off its beta particle.

However, I believe a significant number of errors occur just with transcription, and not radioactive decay.  It should be easy enough to simulate in culture.  In a rapidly dividing culture, the transcription errors would be related to the number of transcription cycles.  On the other hand, radioactive damage to a large extent would be related to the time elapsed,  so if one looked at doubling.  A transcription mediated error rate would expect the same number of errors after a certain number of doublings without regard to the doubling rate.  A radiation mediated error rate would be expect to have fewer errors in the faster replicating cells, and more errors in the slower replicating cells (more overall time).

 

Offline damocles

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 756
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
Re: Geezer's theory of reverse mutation.
« Reply #6 on: 25/02/2012 12:57:22 »
Background radiation in the normal environment is about 40% uranium series 20% thorium series from natural widespread abundance in rocks, and 40% potassium. Other sources exist, but are minor -- rubidium, platinum, samarium, etc. There is now only about 8% of the potassium-40 that formed the original earth left. The decay product is mostly calcium. The remaining 10% is the argon-40 that makes up nearly 1% of our atmosphere, and that argon is one of the clearest indicators of the age of the earth. But H-3 and C-14 radiation are not even on the radar of background radiation -- minute amounts. The C-14 that is produced is largely incorporated into plants, but some goes directly into the oceans, and there is a large proportion of plant material that does not become part of the food chain.

On the other hand I have little doubt that random chemical transcription errors are more important -- not because i have any direct grounds for that belief, but because it is the received wisdom from the experts in this field. Most of what I know about it is from a lecture by Macfarlane Burnett that I was fortunate enough to attend a few decades ago.

I still do wonder, though! Chemical errors would tend to favour particular changes; radioactive decay particles would throw the dice rather more randomly, not really distinguishing between any chemical bonds they might encounter and break.

Just checked wikipedia and found the following in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Background_radiation

Quote
Radiation inside the human body
Some of the essential elements that make up the human body, mainly potassium and carbon, have radioactive isotopes that add significantly to our background radiation dose. An average human contains about 30 milligrams of potassium-40 (40K) and about 10 nanograms (10−8 g) of carbon-14 (14C), which has a decay half-life of 5,730 years. Excluding internal contamination by external radioactive material, the largest component of internal radiation exposure from biologically functional components of the human body is from potassium-40. The decay of about 4,000 nuclei of 40K per second[20] makes potassium the largest source of radiation in terms of number of decaying atoms. The energy of beta particles produced by 40K is also about 10 times more powerful than the beta particles from 14C decay. 14C is present in the human body at a level of 3700 Bq with a biological half-life of 40 days.[21] There are about 1,200 beta particles per second produced by the decay of 14C. However, a 14C atom is in the genetic information of about half the cells, while potassium is not a component of DNA. The decay of a 14C atom inside DNA in one person happens about 50 times per second, changing a carbon atom to one of nitrogen.[22]
« Last Edit: 25/02/2012 13:15:56 by damocles »
 

Offline Nizzle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 964
  • Thanked: 1 times
  • Extropian by choice!
    • View Profile
    • Carnivorous Plants
Re: Geezer's theory of reverse mutation.
« Reply #7 on: 06/03/2012 09:03:24 »
You're all missing the most abundant source of "mutation" that exists :)
Sexual reproduction!

Life's diversity boomed super-duper-massively when the first meiosis processes started appearing on earth.
In the pachytene stage of Prophase I there is chromosomal crossover which is very random, and quite difficult to reverse with some kind of simulation software program, sorry!
 

Offline pandey_23ajay

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 72
    • View Profile
Re: Geezer's theory of reverse mutation.
« Reply #8 on: 09/03/2012 18:31:17 »
I don't think, genetic mutation is regular process but evolution may be regular and that too depends on need for adaptation to environment, environment keeps on changing so is evolution.since nature is not regular so evolution can't be.
please read my hypothesis on process of evolution and comment.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: Geezer's theory of reverse mutation.
« Reply #9 on: 30/03/2012 22:03:44 »
Good point Nizzle :)

There's seems to be a lot of different possibilities for change, outside and inside of a human. But we're upping those probabilities constantly it seems, making mutations ever more probable as we pollute.
 

Offline greeniemax

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 76
    • View Profile
Re: Geezer's theory of reverse mutation.
« Reply #10 on: 01/04/2012 12:26:37 »
If there is a pattern then every planet that has ability to support life, i.e. Water would have human if it has passed 4 Billion years.

There are lots of random things that happen like meteorite that slammed into the earth millions of years ago, if it hadn't than we would probably still have Dinosaurs roaming around, note "would probably" means random.

We do not know what could have happened, thus we assume its random and as till now we don't have any proof of any pattern we think and understand it as random.
 

Offline Don_1

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6890
  • Thanked: 7 times
  • A stupid comment for every occasion.
    • View Profile
    • Knight Light Haulage
Re: Geezer's theory of reverse mutation.
« Reply #11 on: 04/04/2012 10:49:51 »

.......... we will be able to run evolution in reverse!


It has already been done; and the result is typing this post even now.
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: Geezer's theory of reverse mutation.
« Reply #11 on: 04/04/2012 10:49:51 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums