MNN: Scientist creates lifelike cells out of metal

[China]

Scientist creates lifelike cells out of metal

Researcher says he has created living cells made of metal instead of carbon — and they may be evolving.

Scientists trying to create artificial life generally work under the assumption that life must be carbon-based, but what if a living thing could be made from another element?

One British researcher may have proven that theory, potentially rewriting the book of life. Lee Cronin of the University of Glasgow has created lifelike cells from metal — a feat few believed feasible. The discovery opens the door to the possibility that there may be life forms in the universe not based on carbon, reports New Scientist.

Even more remarkable, Cronin has hinted that the metal-based cells may be replicating themselves and evolving.

Click on the link for the full article

[Metalhead]

This is really awesome...and really bad. Millions of T-1000's running around with only a handful of John Connor's on this earth to keep them occupied.

[z0eboy]

Wow, this is very interesting, thanks for the link definately enjoyed the read.

[GhostofSparta]

Wait, I think I've seen this episode...

[Xameil]

From the ability of Silicon, that should be a vialble option for life. silicon acts much in the same way as carbon in that it can form long chains.

It kinda makes sense if it really is happening. I just wonder if he's using electricity or some other catalyst if the chains are replecating.

[Cheers, Beers and Mountaineers]

insert obligatory "I for one welcome our in this case, new metal overlords."

[PeterMP]

From the ability of Silicon, that should be a vialble option for life. silicon acts much in the same way as carbon in that it can form long chains.

It kinda makes sense if it really is happening. I just wonder if he's using electricity or some other catalyst if the chains are replecating.

Si doesn't have NEARLY the chemical ability of C. It is limited in terms of forming double and triple bonds in the way that you can between C atoms.

The most likely non-C life would a combination of N and P.

Consider me dubious of that these things "evolve" and are life. Making things that filter by size is easy, but nobody would consider that life.

[Xameil]

Si doesn't have NEARLY the chemical ability of C. It is limited in terms of forming double and triple bonds in the way that you can between C atoms.

That would be incorrect. Disilenes are a si-Si double bond. Also, Si is needed in certain lifeforms as it is. Si also forms the crystaline structures that carbon can.

So what chemical ability besides triple bonds that made you want to capitalize Nearly? because from what I know if it, Si is fairly SIMILAR...I can capitalize as well

[PeterMP]

That would be incorrect. Disilenes are a si-Si double bond. Also, Si is needed in certain lifeforms as it is. Si also forms the crystaline structures that carbon can.

So what chemical ability besides triple bonds that made you want to capitalize Nearly? because from what I know if it, Si is fairly SIMILAR...I can capitalize as well

Disilenes are much more reactive than the corresponding alkenes. Si aromatic compounds are essentially unheard of in nature (they can be prepared in the lab, but not easily).

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/anie.198712013/abstract?systemMessage=Wiley+Online+Library+will+be+unavailable+17+Dec+from+10-13+GMT+for+IT+maintenance.

"Disilenes, compounds containing silicon-silicon double bonds, can be isolated as thermally stable, yellow- or orange-colored crystalline compounds; the substituent groups at silicon must be large (mesityl, tert -butyl, etc.) to prevent polymerization. Structural and spectro-scopic studies indicate many similarities between the 3p–3p π bonding in disilenes and the 2p-2p π bonding in olefins, but disilenes are much more reactive than alkenes. The reactions of disilenes lead to many new classes of silicon compounds, including three- and four-membered rings which present novel problems in chemical bonding."

In other words, only diselenes that have been made with special things attached to them so that they don't react aren't reactive.

At a very basic level, Si is similar because it has the same number of valence electrons, but that's at a very basic level. Si is also quite a bit larger than C, which than affects other things. Most notably its willingness to lose and gain electrons (i.e. its ionization energy), which affects the stability of the compounds it makes.

http://www.springerlink.com/content/m9t05976133j1708/

Life requires all sorts of things that it is required for life doesn't mean that those things would be able to replace C.

[amm0409]

When I pulled up the article and saw the image, the first thing I could think of was gallium. It looks like a shiny rock, but will liquefy around room temperature. Then I thought of Shape Shifting. Check out Michio Kaku video about invisible cloak and shape shifting

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xkgkl4_dr-michio-kaku-on-the-inventions-of-the-future_tech

[Xameil]

You are focusing on the disilenes when I just used them to prove that Si can in fact form the double bond. C and Si are very similar. I think the part where Si would have the difference in the life form as we know it would be more of the proteins that C can form where as the Nitrogen compound the Si forms is quite different. However, I think you are quickly dismissing that Si under certain conditions could in fact do similar things that Carbon can.

You are also only considering Si similar to C in that very basic Valence electron. I think you need to think alittle more outside the box. The requirement for life is that long chains are formed. These chains can be formed with Si-O-Si, as well as the silicacarbides.

So yes in the conditions of Earth Si is a poor choice for to create life, but under different conditions Si could have been the more favorable as opposed to C in forming the chains that started life. The first step of evolution.

You must have an Organic chemist background...

[PeterMP]

You are focusing on the disilenes when I just used them to prove that Si can in fact form the double bond. C and Si are very similar. I think the part where Si would have the difference in the life form as we know it would be more of the proteins that C can form where as the Nitrogen compound the Si forms is quite different. However, I think you are quickly dismissing that Si under certain conditions could in fact do similar things that Carbon can.

You are also only considering Si similar to C in that very basic Valence electron. I think you need to think alittle more outside the box. The requirement for life is that long chains are formed. These chains can be formed with Si-O-Si, as well as the silicacarbides.

So yes in the conditions of Earth Si is a poor choice for to create life, but under different conditions Si could have been the more favorable as opposed to C in forming the chains that started life. The first step of evolution.

You must have an Organic chemist background...

The reactivity of Si double bonds isn't limited to diselene, but essentially all of them w/ respect to the corresponding alkenes.

I have a background in biochemistry.

I dispute the idea that the idea that long chains are really that important, and that there is any reason to believe that they were at all important for early life (i.e. pre-evolution and just after evolutionary processes).

I'm not sure that they matter at all (in terms of very basic life), and certainly chemical functionality is also important. Si forms less stable molecules with a whole host of atoms and its molecules generally have more limited chemical functionality under most conditions.

Am I saying it is impossible, no, but it is much less likely than C, and if you were going to imagine almost anything there are better options, including N/P systems (as compared to Si alone, if you want to talk about silicacarbides that changes things though over time, I'd bet the C would out complete the Si, and you'd be left w/ mostly an organic life form w/ Si only retaining specialized roles (though they might be more abundand than Si does on Earth)).

And even something like S can form chains if that is your criteria.

[Madison Redskin]

Well, opening this thread was a mistake. Thanks for making me feel like a moron everyone.

[PeterMP]

Well, opening this thread was a mistake. Thanks for making me feel like a moron everyone.

This might help:

http://www.universetoday.com/91449/why-silicon-based-aliens-would-rather-eat-our-cities-than-us-thoughts-on-non-carbon-astrobiology/