/sci/ - Science & Math

>>16040889
there can be no GOOD reason why viruses exist. the only explanation for all evil (including viruses) in the world, is that god himself is evil.

>>16040889
To call those mobile is like calling a magnetic anti-tank mine mobile.

>>16040889
You have deliberately chosen the most extreme example of a virus that happens to look like an alien creature. Obviously you don't have a question but an agenda.

>>16040889
A virus is an infectious nucleic acid encased in a protein shell (capsid) that is able to enter live cells, integrate itself into hosts genome and use their molecular systems to replicate and assemble more copies of itself. It is mobile for the same reason dust is mobile, relying on brownian motion, air flow, animal vectors (for example insects carrying virions on their surface and infecting plants with it while feeding). There are many hypotheses regarding virus origin, most of them recognize the fact that unlike living cells viruses likely have multiple origin points and there is no last universal common ancestor in their case

>>16040907
Why are their properties so weird, then? Why latch on to living organisms? Other materials don’t do that.

>>16040910
Weird as hell.

>>16040889
ancient bioweapon

>>16040909
which alien creature does it look like?

>>16040909
Cannot distinct a made up drawing from real pics. /sci: pure propaganda dirt for the low IQ`s

>>16041066
>doesn't know what a bacteriophage is
>calls me low IQ
Here's your (you) and a bump you fucking faggot.

>>16040909
Fuck off you imbecile moron.

>>16040889
The virus is like a poo. If it sticks to you it is bad. The poo is known to replicate from the buttox. A vaccine makes the virus constipated so it cannot descend from the buttox

>>16041162
That’s how they worked but not how they evolved or why they evolved or what they are?

>>16041200
>how they evolved
The material of the original viruses were really simple to create, if you think about it add that to the fact that they tend to replicate and thus mutate easily and there you have it. The original virus must have been extremely simple and small and it's easy to assume that they came from prokaryotes existing in a different environment from what we have today.
>>16040931
>Why latch on to living organisms?
It's not like they latch into living organism for the sake of doing so, they want it's nutrients for the sake of stabilizing in a manner it's not outside the scope of the non-living things
On a side note: Have you ever wondered how the shift from eukaryotes and prokaryotes happened? Well, that's an example of how fucked up, random/sudden nature can be. Some cell just absorbed another and instead of destroying it it integrated it into it's system.
>why they evolved
Why has anything evolved anyways?
>what they are?
>>16040910

Sorry, but phages are old technology. You would have to be retarded to believe otherwise.

Did someone say obligate intracellular parasite?

>>16041260
> they came from prokaryotes existing in a different environment from what we have today.
You mean just the temperature and chemicals on earth were different? Like maybe a a gas giant has virus existing in it or something. In what manner was earth different so long ago?

>>16040889
God made viruses to punish sinners.

>>16041343
Perhaps not even earth. The alien bioweapon has some credibility in this aspect, it obviously wasn't fucking made by ayy lmaos but they might have not started in our planet, but rather in a place where a plasmatic membrane made out of lipids wasn't vital for survival and quantity was preferred over quality (complexity) of "organisms".

Threadly reminder that no disease-inducing self-replicating intracellular parasite has ever been actually found in an organism. It's just a conjecture.

They're fairly obviously another of our older cousins without a huge mammal/amphibian protein case.

>>16040889
viruses are not alive since they have no metabolism.
theories about the evolution of life points to self-replicating RNA, and so maybe viruses are a bit similar to that.

>>16042602
If viruses aren't alive they could have existed before life on EARTH?

I am not happy with this scientific agreement. That viruses are 100% not alive.

It seems to me that viruses likely evolved right next to life. And they need life in order to replicate properly. Therefore I would call them a life form myself.

I know, human beings really like things to be either alive or dead. But it seems to me. Viruses are in that domain in between when they could be both alive and dead. Waiting for a host to replicate.

In my definition, that makes them a lifeform because they need that symbiosis of life in order to evolve.

Threadly reminder that there is plenty of proof regarding foreign viral protein presentation on the surface of infected cells, which against a control culture, indicates infection by a virus.

>>16040889
Parasitism is a thermodynamic inevitability given that co-opting host mechanisms provides more efficient means of reproduction both in terms of energy expenditure and information requirements. The way I see it viruses evolved from mobile genetic elements like transposons. Imagine a piece of DNA encoding an enzyme that can recognize said piece of DNA and move, or transpose, it across the genome at the expense of host fitness. In the process of transposition mobile elements occasionally get transposed in the immediate vicinity of various genes some of which encode surface glycoproteins and the like. In the course of evolution this led to the emergence of mobile elements that could move not only within a single genome but across cells making use of their recently acquired envelope building machinery.

And interesting side note to add here is that there are mobile elements that parasitize the enzymatic transposition activity of other mobile elements. The parasites themselves encode no activity of their own but only a very small number of nucleotides that act as substrates for the enzymatic machinery of the exploited elements.

>>16040889
It was created by single celled organisms that reproduced asexually as a way to share DNA. It is still used for this purpose today.

>>16040898
akaakcthtually what you are referring to as 'God' is just the satanic demi-urge playing cruel tricks on us

>>16042419
> it obviously wasn't fucking made by ayy lmaos

Then it wouldn't be a bio-'weapon'; weapons are intentionally designed and constructed

>>16040889
>*hits weed vape*
Dude...

>>16040889
>why is it mobile
Viruses aren't mobile, they don't have cillia like bacteria do propel themselves. They are carried around by fluid forces in liquids or air.

>>16040889
>What the hell is a virus?
They seem to me to be similar to inert exossomes, or bits of genetic code that can bounce around outside of cells until they can become active within cells.
They are not alive since they cannot consume organic matter or radiation to grow or reproduce.
However, the system virus+host cell could be considered a sort of "unbounded" living thing, since it does consume energy (the host cell) which is used in producing more copies of the virus.

>>16040889
>What the hell is a virus?
A self-replicating particle.
>Is it a material like a a rock?
No.
>Why does it replicate?
Because nucleic acid likes to replicate. Why do we replicate? Why do plants, fungi or bacteria?
>Is it really descended from normal cells that got corrupted millions of years ago?
No? The best theory for the origin of viruses is that they are transposable nucleic acid moieties, like transposons. They moved between cells (much as plasmids and other cassettes do), and eventually gained enough genetic material to be self-contained.

>>16043693
>A self replicating particle
The more accurate description is an Obligate intracellular parasite. This term denotes that the pathogen can only replicate inside a host cell.

>>16043731
what happens to the virus if it leaves the host cell? does it die?

>>16043736
Obligate intracellular parasite means it can only replicate inside of a host, not that it can only survive inside a host.

>>16040898
can't be viruses just the material works of demons? It would be coherent with the Bible teachings: "death is the wage of sin".
>inb4 but God created demons
no God created free spirits that freely chose to be evil (evil is the absence of God)
>but muh omniscience
God has other attributes other than omniscience and omniscience doesn't trump over those other attributes, so free will is a thing
>but but but
past a certain point it's a mystery because God's mind is ultimately greater than human mind, so it's better to stick to what God revealed to us

>>16041074
Doesn't know what a made up picture is, misses theme and acks to the fact of pure propaganda because pic isn't theme related. Give names to others, should "sweep at his own door".

>>16040889
They take advantage of low entropy inside a cell to replicate, it's probably the only reason why they exist. All life probably exists to convert their surroundings to a higher entropy state, while maintaining their own (body) at a lower.

>>16041286
The BMJ had an article on them this year :)
I think they were called bacteriophages

>>16043736
"Obligate intracellular parasites cannot reproduce outside their host cell, meaning that the parasite's reproduction is entirely reliant on intracellular resources"

>>16040898
God gave us free will. We wouldn't have free will if he came down and stopped us every time something bad happened.

>>16044086
Sounds a little esoteric. Why exactly does life need to convert it's surroundings to higher entropy but maintain their body at lower?

>>16044591
Why it happens is still a mystery to me, I merely proposed what I have observed.
The best I have come up with is that-
1. The entropy of the universe always increases (absolute fact). i.e. change in entropy is always >0.

2. There are many possible configurations of particles that makes a living oraginsm's body (in 3D space), but only very few configurations (compared to total) can make a functional body. From this we can conclude that living oraganism maintain their bodies at lower entropic states.

3. Living organisms use lower entropy substrates (food), and convert them into higher entropy products (poop). The change in entropy is the energy they harness. The energy is used by them to make their surroundings more livable, comfortable (to maintain their body at lower entropy, otherwise they will perish and their bodies will succumb to higher entropic states which are non functional).

there4, We can conclude, "to function in way such that net change in entropy is kept positive(>0) in the world (universe) they are in, they (life) maintain their bodies at lower entropy"

From this we can make an analogic connection between us and viruses, "Viruses are to cells what we are to universe".

in summary - net entropic change is positive.

now questioning it will be asking why is the universal entropic change always positive?. its because as the space expands, more possibilities are created from particle configurations.

>>16044591
Why it happens is still a mystery to me, I merely proposed what I have observed.
The best I have come up with is that-
1. The entropy of the universe always increases (absolute fact). i.e. change in entropy is always >0.

2. There are many possible configurations of particles that makes a living oraginsm's body (in 3D space), but only very few configurations (compared to total) can make a functional body. From this we can conclude that living oraganism maintain their bodies at lower entropic states.

3. Living organisms use lower entropy substrates (food), and convert them into higher entropy products (poop). The change in entropy is the energy they harness. The energy is used by them to make their surroundings more livable, comfortable (to maintain their body at lower entropy, otherwise they will perish and their bodies will succumb to higher entropic states which are non functional).

there4, We can conclude, "to function in way such that net change in entropy is kept positive(>0) in the world (universe) they are in, they (life) maintain their bodies at lower entropy"

From this we can make an analogic connection between us and viruses, "Viruses are to cells what we are to universe".

in summary - net entropic change is positive.

now questioning it will be asking why is the universal entropic change always positive?. its because as the space expands, more possibilities are created for particle configurations.

>>16044086
>>16044591
>>16044830
ok but what does this have to do with viruses specifically? Broadly speaking the emergence of viruses (and parasitism in general) is inevitable due to the evolutionary instability of parasite-free states in autonomously replicating systems.

>>16042857
This seems like a pretty reasonable account on the origin of viruses.

>>16044912

I suggested that a living organism is a "system" that takes advantage of an entropic gradient. It does not matter if the gradient has been produced by life itself. So you get "systems" on "systems" or life on life.

A virus hacks the entropic gradient that was intended for survival of the cell, and uses it for its own replication. This definitely results in higher entropy inside the cell and it perishes (mostly).

The first "system" (I think) that could ever take advantage of the gradient intended for cell's replication, would have been a relatively stable, short stretch of free RNA that would get involved with cellular nucleic acid replication processes.

Slowly with time, evolution through darwinism favoured emergence of "systems" that were better with getting involved with enzymes and proteins that were essential for nucleic acid replication, this meant some enzymes that favoured the hacking of replication machinery, all inside a tiny packet, a coat, that also protected the unstable RNA. and you get a life that grows on life.

How that free RNA arises is just a matter of time, given permutations and combinations resulting from replication processes.

Parasites probably appeared in a more complex form, but they do the same. Taking adavantage of thermodynamic processes that favour the survival of the host.

>>16044275
prove that you could have done otherwise.

>>16045053
Not that anon but the image you posted is pathetic.

>>16045068
explain why.

>>16042419
>Perhaps not even earth. The alien bioweapon has some credibility in this aspect, it obviously wasn't fucking made by ayy lmaos but they might have not started in our planet, but rather in a place where a plasmatic membrane made out of lipids wasn't vital for survival and quantity was preferred over quality (complexity) of "organisms".
completely unnecessary. everything necessary for viruses was available on earth. no need to stray away.

>>16043976
>"death is the wage of sin".
death is also the wage of good. all humans share the same fate, whatever morality. dont bring that book of incoherence into this.

>>16044830
>The entropy of the universe always increases (absolute fact).
no it isnt stupid. time doesnt even have an iherent direction, we just perceive time the way we do because were adapted for it.

>>16044830
>There are many possible configurations of particles that makes a living oraginsm's body (in 3D space), but only very few configurations (compared to total) can make a functional body.
true, what ratios would these two categories have against each other?

>>16045427
Show me a human who was good and not sinful

>>16045442
according to the nt jesus didnt sin yet his wage was death too.

>>16045466 (checked)
The claim is that he picked up the tab.

>>16042586
This. Virology is a flea circus.

>>16040889
>Why do Viruses exist?
because they can