Spread the knowledge, share your ideas

[War_Junky_91]

I was recently talking with my friend about my idea for curing AIDs and he told me i should share this idea with people, because maybe nobody else has ever thought of such a thing and somebody might be able to do it.

 

 

 

And then i thought of here, we have a mass of smart people, we could all share our ideas that we might not be able to to, but maybe somebody else can, or in the near future can. Really you could be the only one to ever think of it, why let it die? Say your idea and spread the knowledge.

 

 

 

My idea:

 

This probably isn't able to be created yet, but i have no doubt it could be possible. Nanomachines, have nanomachines programed to recognize the HIV virus flood the blood stream and latch on to every single HIV cell, then we get the nano-machines out of the body using a system of tubes somewhat like dialysis.

[Lateralus]

An idea is not an idea if it requires non-existent technology that you don't know how to design.

[War_Junky_91]

An idea is not an idea if it requires non-existent technology that you don't know how to design.

 

I'm not saying post ideas for laser weapons, and nano-machines are withing our technological grasp, i have no doubt it will be possible within 10 years.

 

 

 

And the whole concept of this thread is to tell your ideas so somebody that does know how to build it or can figure out how to, can, we aren't posting blue prints, we are posting thoughts and ideas.

[Lateralus]

So, brainfarts.

[Jaziek]

 

Oh noes! her nanomachines!!!

[Cup Lion]

Neat idea. Yet, if we are suggesting such things as nano-machines, there would be tons of ideas. All could be as far-fetched as the person wanted.

 

 

 

Aka: We could create a liquid the person could drink that destroys HIV viruses but not bloodcells or anything else, and is easily disposed of via the excretory system.

[Lenin64]

So you think that someone here is part of, or has, a team of scientists who can figure this stuff out, and a big lab with questionably legal funding to devlope and test it all out? .....Stop looking at me!

[dsavi]

Just wait till Trapical gets here.

[War_Junky_91]

So you think that someone here is part of, or has, a team of scientists who can figure this stuff out, and a big lab with questionably legal funding to devlope and test it all out? .....Stop looking at me!

 

Lol, hey you never know who will over hear you talking about something and how far it will go. Thats why i decided to make this thread, some of these may be truely unique ideas and if just one got into the hands of someone who could make it happen imagine how much it could help the world if it was an idea like the one i had.

[warri0r45]

I was recently talking with my friend about my idea for curing AIDs and he told me i should share this idea with people, because maybe nobody else has ever thought of such a thing and somebody might be able to do it.

 

 

 

And then i thought of here, we have a mass of smart people, we could all share our ideas that we might not be able to to, but maybe somebody else can, or in the near future can. Really you could be the only one to ever think of it, why let it die? Say your idea and spread the knowledge.

 

 

 

My idea:

 

This probably isn't able to be created yet, but i have no doubt it could be possible. Nanomachines, have nanomachines programed to recognize the HIV virus flood the blood stream and latch on to every single HIV cell, then we get the nano-machines out of the body using a system of tubes somewhat like dialysis.

 

 

 

Interesting. I'm a critical person so here are my comments/doubts so far (limitations on technology notwithstanding):

 

 

 

1) These nanomachines would need to have surface molecules to recognize and latch on to the HIV virus. You could basically think of it as antibodies glued to the nanomachine. My concern here is how long it would take for the HIV virus to mutate and evade the nanomachines. From what I know, HIV is a characteristically fast evolver, hence why we find it tough to produce viable drugs to deal with it. As a result, youd simply need to manufacture more and more antibodies to glue to your nanomachine to deal with the virus. This kind of regaining old ground is characteristic of the problems we face all the time in developing drugs to deal with viral and even bacterial infection.

 

 

 

But if we're literally talking very small mechanical arms or something as opposed to antibodies, they'd still need to be specific for the virus particle, otherwise they'd be latching onto anything they knock into. How do you control such a mechanical procedure? The only way I could possibly think of is through, as with the antibodies, chemical interactions. Again, I would question how long it would take for the chemical recognition sites on the viron to evolve and evade the nanomachine's machinery. I feel it would only be a matter of time.

 

 

 

2) Your nanomachines would need some mechanism by which to get into cells, otherwise theres a whole swathe of virus particles going untouched and replicating like wildfire. The only way I know of that allows very large molecules into cells is a process called endocytosis, where the cell membrane folds in to a concave parcel of extracellular fluid, grabbing the molecules of interest with it. Now, as far as my knowledge goes (more than willing to be corrected) theres no way that the nanomachines could burst from this intracellular membranous particle. As a result, their surface molecules, which are designed to recognize and eliminate the virus, have no contact to the virus particles within the cell.

 

 

 

Edit: On the other hand, you could do as HIV itself does and encase the nanomachines in a lipid membrane. This would mean that they could fuse with the surface of the cell and the little parcel would then inject it's nanomachine into the cell to do its work. I'm thinking that this is the way to overcome this problem. The implication is that all nanomachines are packaged in membranous compartments and that dialysis removes the membrane-encased nanomachine-viron particle.

 

 

 

3) Dialysis basically works by allowing small molecules of the blood to seep through pores in a semi-permeable membrane into your dialysis solution, given that the dialysis solution contains less of what you're filtering out (hence the filtered molecules get out of the blood by the principle of diffusion). What you'd need to ensure is that the pore size in the membrane is big enough to allow an entire nanomachine-viron particle to get through. Now that's really small relatively speaking, but molecularly, that's huge.

 

 

 

As a result, all the other molecules of the blood that are smaller would be filtered out too (glucose, proteins, enzymes, electrolytes, etc all essential) so you'd need to make sure the solution you're filtering into has the exact concentrations of all of these things. The equal concentrations mean there would be no concentration gradient to diffuse down and hence no pressure for these important molecules to be filtered out along with the nanomachine-viron particle.

 

 

 

The plus here is that, providing you can get the nanomachines small enough, virtually all bacteria would be too big and hence are excluded from diffusing through the dialysis machine into the blood. Id be a bit worried if dialysis machines arent sterile anyway.

 

 

 

The biggest problems to my way of thinking are 1) and 2). Or, if you could get my suggestion of enveloping the nanomachines to work, the only major problem I could see, and it is a huge problem, is 1).

[justin_m23]

Somehow I don't think you'll see any "truly unique" ideas here. Unless of course you accept irrational ones, then there should be plenty of unique ideas to go around.

[Lenticular_J]

Prepare for the zombies.

 

There's my idea. >_>

 

 

 

I have others, but someone would probably go all physics on their [wagon].

[Zonorhc]

Prevention is better than the cure.

 

 

 

Condoms for everybody.

 

 

 

Flog anyone who objects on religious grounds, because I'm pretty sure God would rather people didn't die from STDs than worry about a couple of wasted sperm.

[beniscool218]

Yes!

 

 

 

Let's cure AIDS on the Tipit forums!

 

 

 

Really, let's be realistic here. No matter how many people here collaborate on this, we're not going to make any advances discussing it on a Runescape board.

 

 

 

And also, the idea of nanomachines is almost ridiculous. We could also cure cancer if we created nanomachines to latch on to each mutating cancer cell and destroy it! I don't think you quite understand what you're saying... When you are affected with AIDS or HIV, you don't just have a few hundred inactive cells-- you have trillions of cells. Trillions of active cells flowing through your blood stream. So, to stop these cells, you would need an equal number of nanomachines, correct? Well good luck creating more than a trillion machines-- such machines that we don't even have the technology NOW to create a SINGLE ONE!

 

 

 

OK, so I'm not the person to be defending such science, as I really no next to nothing about the AIDS virus or how it works. I do know however, that it is a rapidly mutating virus that is incredibly hard to treat, because you can't continue the same treatment-- you have to switch them because of the mutations.

 

 

 

So how would these nearly invisible machines recognize the virus? OK, sure, we've built the machine, we can mass produce them to the quantities needed. How do they recognize the virus in a mutated form that humans haven't even seen before? They can't. They can't decipher that which they are not programmed to see. Therefore, those mutated cells will multiply again and again, and continue to mutate.

 

 

 

The puzzle that is the AIDS virus. The treatment that needs to be developed now is for the continuously mutating forms. If we can treat each form successfully for a longer period of time, and we can develop more and more treatments for the different forms, then we can consider the treatment a success.

 

 

 

[hide=Mean]This thread really is a mockery to modern sciences. I'm sorry, but really, it is.[/hide]

 

 

 

Edit:

 

I can see Warrior beat me to the punch here. He knows much more about the disease than I do, but basically our message is the same. He just goes WAY more into depth.

 

 

 

Edit Again:

 

Wow, I would like to really apologize for the rudeness of my last statement. I know, and you probably know too, that you aren't exactly the person who's going to figure out AIDS right here and right now, that you're just speculating-- speculating to help fight a disease that kills millions of people. You're just trying to help and that's extremely admirable for you to formulate your own idea and try to work with others to solve the problem; it's just not realistic though, and that's what I was trying to say.

[Ginger_Warrior]

And what possible qualification would anyone who spends their time browsing the Tip.It Forums have to comment on the development of nanotechnology over the next ten years? If an expert made an educated guess, it still be exactly that - a guess.

 

 

 

This is pointless speculation.

[Hydraides]

Somehad already thought of your idea

 

 

 

 

 

Sorryyy :P

 

 

 

I was watching this programme quit late at night, extremely intresting (I'll try find the name of it)

[dorcus1]

I'd agree with zonorhc on this one.

 

Finding the cure for HIV/AIDS would take tens of billions of dollars. Preventing it would cost much less.

 

 

 

As heartless as this may sound, I believe quarantine is the best method to remove HIV/AIDS from the human population. Quarantine, as in abstinence, being faithful, or using condoms. If an HIV-infected person really wants a kid, get them to adopt one or use IV fertilization. If there aren't any more HIV-infected people around, then there's no AIDS epidemic. Simple, at least in theory. I know I'm oversimplifying this, but if HIV/AIDS is successfully quarantined, there's no need to find a cure.