Closing ones borders and other such things…


[How does the yeast know.
When and where to close its boundary.
I shall always wonder.
Often nature is attributed
To a random process.
Yet, it functions.
As though it has a heart
Of its own.]

[Take for instance.
The temperature tolerance.
Laboratory yeast die when grown
Above 35 deg Celsius.
Yet, the same yeasts
Upon continual exposure
To stress,
Succumb and obey.]

[The science paper
Was aptly titled
Altered sterol composition
renders yeast thermotolerant‘.]

[Selecting for natural
Mutations, Is entitled
Evolutionary engineering.]

[Uwe Sauwer from ETH Zurich
Was the first to put it to use.
Where is the engineering
One may ask.
As nature does the job.
Know not I
For the right selective pressure is
Perhaps where the engineering lies.]

[Where is the limit
To all these
Is it possible to invent
A minimal cell
With minimal set of chromosomes
An organism which can just
Function with its basic needs.
Would it survive
The mounting excess ?]

[Time will only tell.
Craig Venter
And many other ventures,
Put nature to
To ultimate test,
To publish
Articles such as
‘The zero infinitum of event horizon is a pseudo neutral process’.]


4 thoughts on “Closing ones borders and other such things…

  1. The short answer us the yeast does not ‘know’ its an automatic survival mechanism.
    How does my heart know to keep beating or when I cut myself how does the blood know where and when to clot.
    Knowing comes with conscious awareness.

    1. Thank you Kaptonok. I agree with you completely. I see beauty in this random process. Of course, the molecules and atoms do not know but when they form organ systems, new property seem to emerge, which is not specific to any of the single atoms. When I ask how does the yeast know, it is more out of wonder, rather than seeking an answer in black and white. Grey is fine too.

      1. Its not random; for atoms and dead matter, it is governed by the laws of physics and for living organisms by natural selection.
        Natural selection was Darwins name for the process of evolution, he made it clear it had no purpose and no end in view.
        Richard Dawkins called it the Blind Watchmaker in his book of the same name.
        Now should we be in awe of a blind process? Well many scientists are and some like the late Carl Sagon went into ecstasy over the universe.
        Perhaps we should save our awe for great created works of art. You decide.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s