Is There A Living Thing With NO CELLS?

Debate and discussion of any biological questions not pertaining to a particular topic.

Moderators: honeev, Leonid, amiradm, BioTeam

User avatar
SgtSlaughter
Garter
Garter
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:14 pm
Location: Henderson, Minnesota

Is There A Living Thing With NO CELLS?

Post by SgtSlaughter » Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:24 pm

My Bio Teacher (Mr. Gregor) will give me an "A" if I can prove that there is a living thing with no cells.
They have to share the characteristics of a living thing. Can anyone help me? No a Virus is not an answer I've tried.
Homeostasis
Organization
Metabolism
Growth
Adaptation to surroundings
Response to stimuli
Reproduction
and Evolution
Try your Best I'll try to report every day.
"To become old and wise. You must first be young and stupid."-???me???

User avatar
Jones
King Cobra
King Cobra
Posts: 622
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 9:26 pm
Location: Wyoming

Post by Jones » Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:36 pm

Not possible. Unless you would go far enough to say a soul is a living thing, or an aura, or something like that.
J o n e s i e
A question that sometimes drives me hazy: am I or are the others crazy? -Albert Einstein

User avatar
mith
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
Posts: 5345
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 8:14 pm
Location: Nashville, TN
Contact:

Post by mith » Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:53 pm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-cellular_life

Other than that, you might want to consider robotic forms of life such as nanobots which don't really exist yet. I think probably your teach was trying to prove a point.
Living one day at a time;
Enjoying one moment at a time;
Accepting hardships as the pathway to peace;
~Niebuhr

User avatar
Draco
King Cobra
King Cobra
Posts: 762
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 3:16 pm
Location: England

Post by Draco » Wed Jan 23, 2008 5:12 pm

Thats not possible.
Why can't this be left blank?

User avatar
MrMistery
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
Posts: 6832
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: Romania(small and unimportant country)
Contact:

Post by MrMistery » Wed Jan 23, 2008 7:55 pm

I've heard of Mimivirus before. It's a virus that has a very basic and incomplete metabolism. But nevertheless it has it. that is why some postulated that maybe, just maybe cells are but what a primitive virus-like organism evolved into
However, currently one of the conditions for something to be called alive is to be made of cells. You will need to earn your A through another method
"As a biologist, I firmly believe that when you're dead, you're dead. Except for what you live behind in history. That's the only afterlife" - J. Craig Venter

User avatar
Jones
King Cobra
King Cobra
Posts: 622
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 9:26 pm
Location: Wyoming

Post by Jones » Wed Jan 23, 2008 9:50 pm

Yeah but even if it were a nanobot or something like that it's not really living at all. It's just running.
J o n e s i e
A question that sometimes drives me hazy: am I or are the others crazy? -Albert Einstein

User avatar
SgtSlaughter
Garter
Garter
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:14 pm
Location: Henderson, Minnesota

Post by SgtSlaughter » Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:48 pm

Yeah I thought it was easy but it's impossible.
thanks.
"To become old and wise. You must first be young and stupid."-???me???

User avatar
SgtSlaughter
Garter
Garter
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:14 pm
Location: Henderson, Minnesota

Post by SgtSlaughter » Wed Jan 23, 2008 11:42 pm

My info is wrong they need...
-A Universal Genetic Code
-To be able to Reproduce
-To be able to Evolve
-To be able to Growth and Development
-The use of materials Energy
-Respond to their Environment
-Cellular organization
-And to maintain an Internal Stability
thats what my book says anyway.
"To become old and wise. You must first be young and stupid."-???me???

Darby
Viper
Viper
Posts: 1278
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 5:29 pm
Location: New York, USA

Re: Is There A Living Thing With NO CELLS?

Post by Darby » Thu Jan 24, 2008 12:32 pm

If that is the actual list, your teacher has set you to fail - "Universal Genetic Code" only exists if you assume that all life on other planets also is DNA-based (kind of like how the U.S. always wins the baseball World Series), which is silly at the start, and cellular organization without cells - what's that even mean?

User avatar
SgtSlaughter
Garter
Garter
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:14 pm
Location: Henderson, Minnesota

Post by SgtSlaughter » Thu Jan 24, 2008 1:28 pm

Yes but there is no proof of life on other planets yet. The cellular organization would be the characteristic that would be cast aside.
"To become old and wise. You must first be young and stupid."-???me???

User avatar
MrMistery
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
Posts: 6832
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: Romania(small and unimportant country)
Contact:

Post by MrMistery » Fri Jan 25, 2008 3:27 am

@darby
Well since there is no known life on other planets the definition stands. We have no idea how life would be on other planets, so right now we can only make a definition of the organisms we do know.
However, "Universal Genetic Code" is not such a good remark. There are organisms with slightly different genetic codes, like some species of Tetrahimena, Paramecium and Mycoplasma. I don't think your teacher is arguing that a Paramecium is not alive...
"As a biologist, I firmly believe that when you're dead, you're dead. Except for what you live behind in history. That's the only afterlife" - J. Craig Venter

User avatar
SgtSlaughter
Garter
Garter
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:14 pm
Location: Henderson, Minnesota

Post by SgtSlaughter » Mon Jan 28, 2008 10:14 pm

Yea probably not.
"To become old and wise. You must first be young and stupid."-???me???

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests