History of the Cell

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

Moderators: honeev, Leonid, amiradm, BioTeam

Post Reply
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 » Thu Mar 31, 2005 8:30 pm

Think about algebra: the number, as the simplest of all algebric concepts has no definition. In geometry, the dot has no definition. Therefore, in biology, the cell needs no definition.
Think of it like this: Anything with a membrane, cytoplasm and genome si a cell
"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
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 » Sun Apr 03, 2005 6:20 pm

You do not have to accept my opinion. You are free to have your own
"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
mith
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
Posts: 5345
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 8:14 pm
Location: Nashville, TN
Contact:

Post by mith » Mon Apr 04, 2005 12:07 am

I think there is a difference between define-able and common knowledge. Probably the cell should have been common knowledge, while, at least I think, dots are abstract imaginary objects.
Living one day at a time;
Enjoying one moment at a time;
Accepting hardships as the pathway to peace;
~Niebuhr

User avatar
biostudent84
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 6:00 am
Location: Farmville, VA
Contact:

Post by biostudent84 » Mon Apr 04, 2005 3:07 am

A number is a value representing the count of a group of units.
A point [dot] is a location in three dimensional space used to give positions for more complex units, for example, lines.

This argument is following the lines of Reductionism and Wholisitic science.

The cell is the basic unit of life
--taken from modern Cell Theory

Dr. Matveev has a highly valid point. Remember our debates on whether or not viruses are alive? The definition of a cell must be refined because of this. Asking deeper questions, what is a membrane? If a membrane is a shell protecting the innards of a cell, then by all means, a virus is a cell. But if the definition of membrane is refined to a phospholipid bilayer, then viruses are ruled out. They have a protective shell...but it is not made of lipids...it is made of proteins.

Reading this thread and its attachment, my interest is highly piqued. Please keep us appraised on the events surrounding this research.

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 » Tue Apr 05, 2005 7:40 pm

Even if you consider membrane as a protective layer then a virus can not be a cell cause it has no cytoplasm
"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

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 7 guests