Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Fungus at Chernobyl absorbs nuclear radiation via radiosynthesis

technologynetworks.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 112 posts

Re: Fungus at Chernobyl absorbs nuclear radiation via radiosynthesis

#61

Post by qubex »

walleeee wrote: post #56
qubex wrote: post #52

What’s astonishing is not the ability to block radiation (after all, biology will always defer to chemistry first, and physics second—there’s no way biology can come up with something that exceeds the capabilities of its substrates) but rather life’s way of rapidly adapting to make use of whichever energy source it can find to eke out an energy budget to thrive on. P.S. Who else heard Dr Ian Malcom say “ Life... find…

Life can't exceed the capabilities of its substrates on their own terms, but it's not clear that life can be fully explained in or reduced to those terms either. Anyways, yes, this is super cool.

I’m glad you made this point, because it allows me to issue a cautionary word to those dualists who think that somehow the mind is something disjoint from the brain.

Re: Fungus at Chernobyl absorbs nuclear radiation via radiosynthesis

#63

Post by raverbashing »

burtonator wrote: post #51

There's simply no way that this type of fungus could absorb enough radiation simply because it's not dense enough. If you want to absorb radiation you have to block it which means it has to come into contact with matter. The only way you can do this is to have either a smaller volumetric amount of something that's dense (lead, gold, uranium, etc) or a LARGE amount of something less dense (water, concrete, etc). If yo…

Density blocks radiation but it's the "hard way" of doing it

It's better to have something that resonates in the frequencies you want to block.

Given that melanin already works in the UV range it's not surprising that maybe with some changes it works with higher frequencies (though not too trivial neither because of the way quantum physics work)

Re: Fungus at Chernobyl absorbs nuclear radiation via radiosynthesis

#64

Post by eloff »

chongli wrote: post #57
burtonator wrote: post #51

There's simply no way that this type of fungus could absorb enough radiation simply because it's not dense enough. If you want to absorb radiation you have to block it which means it has to come into contact with matter. The only way you can do this is to have either a smaller volumetric amount of something that's dense (lead, gold, uranium, etc) or a LARGE amount of something less dense (water, concrete, etc). If yo…

I think the whole framing of this discussion is inappropriate. The interesting thing about this fungus is that it can use the radiation as an energy source to sustain life. The fact that we can’t use the fungus as some kind of miracle lightweight radiation shield is missing the point. Here we have a life form that has adapted to make use of a very unusual (on earth’s surface, anyway) energy source. That should not be…

Agreed, lead blocks radiation quite well. I don't know why anyone would care about that property in a fungus. What is fascinating is that life evolved a novel energy pathway here, this is like photosynthesis but with gamma radiation. I'd love to know more about it.

Re: Fungus at Chernobyl absorbs nuclear radiation via radiosynthesis

#65

Post by acidburnNSA »

raverbashing wrote: post #63
burtonator wrote: post #51

There's simply no way that this type of fungus could absorb enough radiation simply because it's not dense enough. If you want to absorb radiation you have to block it which means it has to come into contact with matter. The only way you can do this is to have either a smaller volumetric amount of something that's dense (lead, gold, uranium, etc) or a LARGE amount of something less dense (water, concrete, etc). If yo…

Density blocks radiation but it's the "hard way" of doing it It's better to have something that resonates in the frequencies you want to block. Given that melanin already works in the UV range it's not surprising that maybe with some changes it works with higher frequencies (though not too trivial neither because of the way quantum physics work)

I work in ionizing radiation transport. We use materials with high electron densities to shield gamma rays. Should we be using a material that "resonates" with gamma rays instead? If so could you provide an example of this working on gamma rays?

Re: Fungus at Chernobyl absorbs nuclear radiation via radiosynthesis

#66

Post by raven105x »

qubex wrote: post #52

What’s astonishing is not the ability to block radiation (after all, biology will always defer to chemistry first, and physics second—there’s no way biology can come up with something that exceeds the capabilities of its substrates) but rather life’s way of rapidly adapting to make use of whichever energy source it can find to eke out an energy budget to thrive on. P.S. Who else heard Dr Ian Malcom say “ Life... find…

On the contrary, I’d argue that most “life” (in the sense of our Eucledian definition of it) relies on exceeding the capabilities of its substrates via emergent properties - at least from the perspective of our current infantile understanding of the universe. Photosynthesis is so efficient because electrons jump multi-molecule gaps due to quantum effects, as we’ve found only a few years ago. The theory that most biological brains heavily leverage quantum processes is rapidly gaining ground as well - we simply lack the intelligence and processing capacity to design anything like it, since compared to our current computational abilities, millions of years worth of entropy may as well be an infinite amount.

Reductionism fails as completely as it does hilariously when it comes to systems where the whole does indeed exceed the sum of its parts due to laws of the universe we have yet to grasp. A much more sane approach is to think of the matter something is comprised of as nothing more than a filter/transformer for the entropy and environment it exists within. Life routinely harnesses entropy whereas our current technology is so ass backwards it does little but struggle against it (dendrites in batteries, for example). What science considers to be degradation or wear and tear is the very process living things rely on to exist - let that sink in.

Re: Fungus at Chernobyl absorbs nuclear radiation via radiosynthesis

#67

Post by acidburnNSA »

jojobas wrote: post #54
burtonator wrote: post #51

There's simply no way that this type of fungus could absorb enough radiation simply because it's not dense enough. If you want to absorb radiation you have to block it which means it has to come into contact with matter. The only way you can do this is to have either a smaller volumetric amount of something that's dense (lead, gold, uranium, etc) or a LARGE amount of something less dense (water, concrete, etc). If yo…

Absorbtion is a misnomer. It uses a tiny fraction of energy of whatever particle it is. In terms of attenuation it cant be different from anything else of similar density and composition.

But then why this seemingly-ridiculous line from the article?

> Scientists are thinking of shielding astronauts and space objects with a layer of this radiation-absorbing protective fungus.

Re: Fungus at Chernobyl absorbs nuclear radiation via radiosynthesis

#68

Post by acidburnNSA »

agumonkey wrote: post #44
barbegal wrote: post #31

I am skeptical that this fungus absorbs radiation significantly more than the equivalent amount of water would. The paper [1] isn't very clear about possible inaccuracies in the results and I don't understand why this experiment hasn't been repeated down on Earth. The mass attenuation coefficient of the fungus is 0.234 cm^2/g at 100MeV whereas water is 0.0166 cm^2/g according to this paper [2]. [1] https://www.biorxi…

still worth for the conversion of radiative energy to biological activity nuclear waste may become green :)

Well technically it already is pretty darn green in that the energy system concentrates its waste into tiny generally well-contained packages that have, per TWh generated, a relatively miniscule negative impact and footprint on the biosphere.

I recognize this is controversial but the numbers are pretty solid.

Re: Fungus at Chernobyl absorbs nuclear radiation via radiosynthesis

#69

Post by acidburnNSA »

DeonPenny wrote: post #28

This is one of the most nature finds a way things I've ever seen

It shouldn't be too surprising since the universe and earth have been and remain naturally filled with radiation for billions of years. The heat that keeps magma warm in the earth comes 50% from radioactive decay of uranium and its daughters. Life today is based on plants and microorganisms absorbing radiation emanating from a giant nuclear reactor in the sky.

This is just a twist on how it's always been done.

Re: Fungus at Chernobyl absorbs nuclear radiation via radiosynthesis

#70

Post by 0xdeadb00f »

eloff wrote: post #64
chongli wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the whole framing of this discussion is inappropriate. The interesting thing about this fungus is that it can use the radiation as an energy source to sustain life. The fact that we can’t use the fungus as some kind of miracle lightweight radiation shield is missing the point. Here we have a life form that has adapted to make use of a very unusual (on earth’s surface, anyway) energy source. That should not be…

Agreed, lead blocks radiation quite well. I don't know why anyone would care about that property in a fungus. What is fascinating is that life evolved a novel energy pathway here, this is like photosynthesis but with gamma radiation. I'd love to know more about it.

> I don't know why anyone would care about that property in a fungus.

My thought would be the possibility of it being cheaper to produce than lead, possible to farm it. That could mean a more lightweight material for insulated suits and stuff along those lines.

Post reply on HN