Originally posted by kozmo
My understanding of this organizsm - if you can call it that - is that it is responsive only in people whose pH is within a specific range.
Actually, the human body only operates within a very narrow pH range of about 7.3-7.4 and if it moves farther than a few tenths of a point from that,
the human will die. The information you have seems not very reliable. People's pH balance changes with what they eat and what they're drinking and
what they're doing, so at ANY given time, everyone has been through that hypothetical pH range.
Above and below that range, it is not capable of surviving, reassembling or replicating. However, given the nature of this 'thing" it posses
the ability to evolve, so I would have to assume that eventually it will find a way to increase it's survival range.
You may also have an unreliable source about nanotech. There are a lot of blogs around by people who are working in the nanotechnology field, and you
can get a sense of what's real and what isn't by reading what they're doing.
This one, for instance, takes on Michael Cricton's "Prey" -- a book that seems to be the basis of a LOT of really bad theorizing about nanotech on
Keep in mind, in the field of nano-tech they are combining synthetic and natural materials with things like RNA, DNA and other proteins that
exhibit specific behavioral characteristics. In other words, you could look at alot of these things as being "Cyborgs" of sorts.
On a nano scale, combining synthetic and natural materials with RNA/DNA isn't possible. In fact, it's not even possible on a large scale. Living
tissue does not like "parts" of ceramic, metal, or other things and will wall them off OR will eat them:
This field of reserach, with almost no oversight or regulatory commission, scares the living poop striaght out of me!
I think someone's been feeding you the Crichton line... because there are guidelines and oversight for the research. Instead of checking out Rense,
start checking out the blogs of the nanotech researchers:
You can easily see that there's nothing being cyborged here on the cutting edge.
And as for legal oversight, there's lawyers who are becoming expert in the field:
After all, when you create particles that are too small to see or otherwise sense, that possess behavioral characteristics not understood by
the poeple creating them,
Molecules-as-machines don't behave in unexpected ways. Crichton and Hollywood say they do, but they also say that rocket engines make noise in
outer space (and so on and so forth).
Is it not time to force the nano-tech industry to do the same. If we do not, the consequnces could prove fatal, not just for mankind, but for
the entire biosphere as a whole.
You mean like the organization Center For Responisble Nanotechnology, founded by scientists and made up of people who work in the field?
Or Nanoforum, the European Nanotech gateway?
There's thousands of resources;
I'd like to encourage you to NOT read pages from Rense and the like, but start reading pages and blogs from people who work in the field. And sign
up for the CRNano newsletter!