Arquivo para a ‘Bioenginneer’ Categoria
The limits of logical thinking
16
Aug
The full development of modern science and
technology was the realization of a program dreamed of by Francis Bacon, René Descartes and Immanuel Kant as a total domination of man over nature on a dangerous ethical threshold, manufacturing what is natural, but this comes up against two dilemmas: the natural was and (in my opinion) will always be the “unmanufactured” and by making the substance manipulable it continues to be in fact what it was naturally.
In excerpts from Heidegger’s notes between 1936 and 1946 (therefore in the final stage of the 2nd world war), the author wrote an essay called Overcoming Metaphysics, and with all his genius describes what would result in the technical and industrial production of life, wrote: “Since man is the most important raw material, one can count on the fact that, based on current chemical research [of course at the time], factories for the artificial production of human material will one day be installed. The research of the chemist Kuhn, distinguishing from planned directing the production of male and female living beings, according to their respective demands” (Heidegger, Uberwindung der Metaphysik, paragraph 26).
Adono and Horkheimer also expressed in the famous Dialectic of Enlightenment, that this “has always, in the most comprehensive sense of thought in progress, pursued the goal of removing fear from man and establishing him as master. However, the completely enlightened earth sparkles under the sign of triumphal misfortune.” (Adorno, Horkheimer, 1987, p. 25).
Habermas also spoke of this extravaganza of bad science fiction, experimental production of embryos, even a convinced atheist, in his work “Die Zukunft der menschlichen Natur. Auf dem Weg zu einer liberalen Eugenik?” complains about this vision of “partners in evolution” or even “playing God” as metaphors for the self-transformation of the species.
It is not about opposing the advancement of science, a retrograde thought present in all social circles, but about opposing bad science, bad progress that result in scourges for humanity itself.
The sense of fully recovering life, of opposing growing authoritarianism and warmongering, of proclaiming peace, sustainable development and the divine origin of human life is not just a proclamation of faith or serious and sincere humanism, it is a resistance of spirit, hope and a rationality above instrumental and agnostic logic.
What is natural and the possibility of knowing
16
Sep
The problem of knowing the world (natural and not 
cultural, this is what we have) must start from a premise of clearing our minds of cultural convictions, most of them idealistic, that blind us to the possibility of understanding that we do not dominate nature as proposed the Enlightenment, and worse, we run the risk of destroying it and putting civilization in check.
Quoting Edgar Morin in the epigraph of his first chapter of the book “The Nature of Nature”, I write the second in capital letters even to deify it in the sense that it is still unknown to us, and contains mystery that affects us, as proved by the current Pandemic that still challenges us.
Edgar Morin, opening the first chapter: “The Spirit of the Valley”, quotes Karl Popper: “Personally I think there is at least one problem… that interests all thinking men: the problem of understanding the world, ourselves and our knowledge as part of the world”, so this knowledge is neither definitive nor eternal, as everything evolves and is perishable.
To introduce these convictions, he makes a second quote by Jacob Bronowski: “The concept of science is neither absolute nor eternal”, and he will make a third, which is for the next post.
He begins with 5 convictions that made him start this book and where is his “cogito” his suspension of judgment of everything he thought before, his first conviction of these problems states that he: “holds us to the present, they demand that we let go of it to consider them in depth” (Morin, 1973, pg. 13), and professes his second conviction: “the principles of knowledge hide what, henceforth, it is vital to know” (idem) thus detaches himself from his previous ideas.
His third conviction is the strongest, increasingly convinced that the relationship science Ʌ politics, Ʌ ideology when it is not invisible, continues to be treated in an indigent way, through the reabsorption of two of its terms in one of them that has become dominant” (idem) , gives you food for thought.
His fourth conviction is that “that the concepts we use to conceive our society — the whole society — are mutilated and lead to inevitably mutilating actions” (idem).
Finally, his fifth conviction is: “that anthroposocial science must be articulated in the science of nature, and that this articulation requires a reorganization of the structure of knowledge itself” (Idem), so the knowledge we have needs to be modified to from its bases.
He knew that his task was really encyclopedic and vast, that’s why he even isolated himself in a castle (I don’t have the precise data) because his task: “I myself needed exceptional circumstances and conditions’ to move from conviction to action, that is, to work” (idem).
And it is from there that he wrote his complex method with three initial questions: “What does the radical self of self-organization mean? • What is the organization? • What is the complexity?” (page 14).
MORIN, E. The nature of NATURE. Lisbon PUBLICATIONS EUROPA-AMERICA, LDA., 1973.
The order of the Universe
30
Mar
In classical antiquity the model that predominated was the Ptolemaic, which
surpassed the model of Aristotle (384-322 BC) who thought that the Earth was the center of the universe, of course in addition to other models that considered the flat earth the Earth attached to a “ spherical shell ”and others.
Other ideas emerged, but the model of Claudio Ptolemy (85-150) prevailed, until the model of Nicolau Copernicus (1473-1543) appeared in the late Middle Ages, but the Sun was still the center of the Universe, the important here is the mathematical and geometric “order” that he established, which influenced all modern science.
Our limit as a galaxy was proposed in ancient times by Democritus of Abdera (450-370 B.C.), seeing the bright low in the night sky, stated that it consisted of distant stars.
It was only in the 10th century, that the Persian astronomer known as Azophi (Abd al-Rahman al-Sufi), who observed the Andromeda Galaxy, describing it as a “little cloud” and was rediscovered by Simon Marius in 1612, and in 1610 Galileo Galilei confirms that the Milky Way was composed of several stars.
The model of the Milky Way was established by William Hershel in 1785 (drawing above) and until the discovery of the expansion of the universe, it was composed of galaxies and these by stars and planets.
The current cosmological models came from the hypothesis, today practically confirmed by the clergyman Georges Lamaitre (1854-1966), demonstrated by Edwin Hubble (1889-1953) and theorized and completed by the English physicist Stephen Hawking (1942-2018) and his student Roger Penrose (1931-).
It was from the study of density fluctuations (or anisotropic irregularities of the “matter”) which, analyzing the larger structures began to develop, the result is what is called barionic matter that condenses inside halos of cold dark matter , and these are the ones that formed galaxies as we see today, but dark matter and energy are still studies.
What we want to establish here is how our view of the world and matter also has implications for the view of life studies, and in the present case, of the structures of viruses and small organisms that can help science find solutions to epidemics and pandemics.
In a study that we are doing on publications in Social Networks, the scientist with the largest number of publications in the area of Social Networks is Carl a. Latkin, an infectious disease physician who is a member of the Center for Global Medicine, which is not by chance, our worldview and complexity has changed and it can help us to fight the pandemic.
Primeiro biocomputador feito em Stanford
25
Jul
Conforme notícia no jornal da Universidade de Stanford, uma equipe liderada pelo prof. Markus Covert, professor assistente de bioengenharia, utilizando dados de mais de 900 trabalhos científicos, conseguiram explicar toda interação molecular que ocorre no ciclo de vida da Mycoplasma genitalium, uma das menores bactérias conhecidas.
Embora existam muitos problemas, como por exemplo, a compreensão da interação entre genes, outro prof. Diretor do Instituto Nacional de Saúde, James M. Anderson afirmou que “esta conquista demonstra uma transformação na abordagem para responder questões sobre os processos biológicos fundamentais”, porque os “modelos de computadores mais abrangentes de células inteiras têm o potencial de fazer avançar nossa compreensão sobre a fundação celular e, em última instância, pode informar sobre novas abordagens no diagnóstico e tratamento de doenças”.
A diferença da abordagem é explicada por um estudante co-autor do artigo sobre a descoberta, Jayodita Sanghvi, explicando que muitos problemas podem estar na interação de milhares de genes e não em um único gene como se imaginam em muitas abordagens, mas agora deve-se “trazer todos esses dados em um único lugar e ver como ele se encaixa”, referindo-se a interação de diversos genes.
O artigo “The Dawn of Virtual Cell Biology”, foi publicado na revista Cell, e tem a seguinte lista de autores: Jonathan R. Karr, Jayodita C. Sanghvi, Derek N. Macklin, Miriam V. Gutschow, Jared M. Jacobs, Benjamin Bolival, Nacyra Assad-Garcia, John I. Glass e Markus W. Covert .
Modelo simula todos movimentos humanos
01
Nov
O corpo humano tem aproximadamente 640 músculos, segundo especialista depende do movimento e do que
se quer saber sobre o corpo. Seja como for o número é grande e segundo o bioengenheiro Scot Delp da Universidade de Stanford, foi feito um modelo no qual quase todos os músculos e movimentos estão programados.
Apenas nas pernas são mais de 100 músculos, quase todos necessários para manter o equilíbrio e caminhar corretamente e assim os comando enviados pelo cérebro não são tão simples quanto podemos pensar, e em muitos casos é preciso unir esforços e teoria da bioengenharia, da engenharia mecânica e da cirurgia ortopédica para ajudar uma pessoa.
Uma ferramenta iterativa open source foi criada, chamada OpenSim, e estará exposta num exposição de Museu no The Leonardo , um museu de ciência e tecnologia em Salt Lake City, onde OpenSim faz parte de uma exposição explorando o movimento humano.
A ideia de unir museu e software de modelagem é de Andy Anderson, professor assistente de pesquisa da Universidade de Utah School of Medicine.
Como professor visitante foi trabalhar com Delp e Jennifer Hicks durante este verão passado (inverno no Brasil) e juntaram as peças até obterem OpenSim para lançarem na exposição em sua cidade natal, Salt Lake City.
A exposição Leonardo de Salt Lake City é curiosa pois caminhando pelo piso sensível a pressão, você tem resultados que apresentados no outro lado com saídas em código de cores de impressão conforme sua distribuição de peso, identificando até mesmo desequilíbrios leve que pode ser colocar tensão indevida sobre seus membros e articulações. São defeitos de posturas e andar que pode levar a dor ou a artrite. Segundo os pesquisadores mesmo algumas anormalidades relativamente pequenas podem levar a cirurgias tão radicais como a de substituição de quadril e joelho, podem em certos casos tornarem-se necessárias.
Segundo disse Andy a ACM Tech News: “Este é um estudo divertido porque as pessoas podem inserir e ver vários movimentos ortopédicos e ver como eles afetam o seu movimento”.
Como a exposição é dirigida a crianças, para tornar as pesquisas mais acessíveis a um público mais jovem, a equipe de desenvolvimento do OpenSim está criando um jogo de futebol interativo . O jogador do mundo real ajusta a força de dois músculos da perna sobre o jogador de futebol simulado para gerar a força necessaria
“Esta é uma versão simplificada de nosso software, mas afiando as coisas para baixo a apenas dois músculos, podemos fazer a ciência das crianças algo movimento pode entender e se divertir com”, disse Hicks, um engenheiro mecânico e gerente do projeto OpenSim em Stanford.
Afirmou Hicks: “O mais importante, é ser baseado em física real e fisiologia realista, e ele serva para que realmente tanto ensine como diverta.”
