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

Why are cells small?

burrito.bio

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 86 posts

Re: Why are cells small?

#71

Post by nickpp »

lukan wrote: post #69
ChrisKnott wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes too much “it’s not X it’s Y”, and too few references to personal actions/biography.

I also got curious, this is the most personal comment I could find https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44498083 Funny, but might as well be generic, trained from reddit comments. What a time we live in.

Such sleeper accounts, slowly acquiring clout and time on the platform are often used by botnets. One day they (or their actions) will be sold to the highest bidder to upvote a comment, support an idea, ideology, politician or party or some virtual product, stock or coin.

Re: Why are cells small?

#72

Post by myrmidon »

Nice article! There is another interesting perspective:

Anything selfreplicating kinda needs to be as small as possible (compared to the smallest internal mechanisms required), otherwise the replication time grows out of control: Consider a 3D printer that can fully selfreplicate by depositing individual molecules: If this was the size of a regular printer, the replication time would be hopelessly long (>billion years even if it could deposit billions of atoms/s).

This applies somewhat universally, and is one of the reason why our current industrial tech is so unsuitable for selfreplication: Any "printing" like process (books, metal stamping, lithography) requires internal features that are much smaller than the output it produces.

Re: Why are cells small?

#73

Post by lukan »

nickpp wrote: post #71
lukan wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also got curious, this is the most personal comment I could find https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44498083 Funny, but might as well be generic, trained from reddit comments. What a time we live in.

Such sleeper accounts, slowly acquiring clout and time on the platform are often used by botnets. One day they (or their actions) will be sold to the highest bidder to upvote a comment, support an idea, ideology, politician or party or some virtual product, stock or coin.

Possible and that is definitely a thing, but I personally I would not rule out, that there still can be a human behind it, just with that specific style and careful about his privacy.

Re: Why are cells small?

#74

Post by zygentoma »

trumpdong wrote: post #55
ErroneousBosh wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the fascinating things about biology I think is this - that if the cells of your body were the size of an egg, they'd be way, way too big and you'd probably die.

I also find it interesting that if your spleen were to go prompt critical, it would irradiate you and you'd probably die. That is my favorite fact about nuclear physics.

What does that even mean? :D

Wouldn't this be true about any organ?

Re: Why are cells small?

#76

Post by ErroneousBosh »

trumpdong wrote: post #55
ErroneousBosh wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the fascinating things about biology I think is this - that if the cells of your body were the size of an egg, they'd be way, way too big and you'd probably die.

I also find it interesting that if your spleen were to go prompt critical, it would irradiate you and you'd probably die. That is my favorite fact about nuclear physics.

For sure. You should definitely avoid bioaccumulating fissionable radionuclides in your spleen, not even a tiny amount if you can help it.

Re: Why are cells small?

#77

Post by trumpdong »

zygentoma wrote: post #74
trumpdong wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also find it interesting that if your spleen were to go prompt critical, it would irradiate you and you'd probably die. That is my favorite fact about nuclear physics.

What does that even mean? :D Wouldn't this be true about any organ?

Another fun fact: if your ears were tomatoes, you'd be deaf.

Re: Why are cells small?

#78

Post by magicalhippo »

trumpdong wrote: post #54
cwmoore wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting topology. How empty is the vacuole?

empty in terms of normal cell components, apparently it stores relatively huge amounts of nitrates that are a necessary energy source for it

Rather large gas tank:

Collected and stored sediment samples were found to have surviving T. namibiensis cells after over two years. The cells had no access to any added sulfide or nitrate during this time. In the surviving cells, there was a notable size decrease. To survive without growing the cells depended on the nutrient stores of the central vacuoles.

Re: Why are cells small?

#79

Post by Someone »

shevy-java wrote: post #63
why_at wrote: post #35

I've recently gotten into microscopy as a hobby and comparing the relative size of microbes is really interesting. There are entire animals (tardigrades for one) which can be smaller than some single celled organisms. There are even single celled organisms which will prey upon and eat multicellular animals.

Tardigrades are really cute. https://i.imgur.com/9BoxjK8.jpeg Some call them water bears. I am not quite sure they look like bears (six leg bear?) but the stubbly legs are indeed cute.

> I am not quite sure they look like bears

From the front, they somewhat do. See https://uconnladybug.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/0...

Post reply on HN