"
Team:Chiba/Project
From 2010.igem.org
(→The Bottom Line is...) |
|||
| (4 intermediate revisions not shown) | |||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
border: 0; | border: 0; | ||
} | } | ||
| + | p{margin:10px 20px 10px;} | ||
| + | |||
</style> | </style> | ||
</html> | </html> | ||
| Line 250: | Line 252: | ||
----- | ----- | ||
We’re inspired by double-click of computer’s mouse. It doesn’t react to the first click but does react when it is accompanied by the second one. This is one of the most accepted, familiarized, and proven mechanism to diminish the erroneous operation. This fail-safe technology should find various uses also in biotechnology. | We’re inspired by double-click of computer’s mouse. It doesn’t react to the first click but does react when it is accompanied by the second one. This is one of the most accepted, familiarized, and proven mechanism to diminish the erroneous operation. This fail-safe technology should find various uses also in biotechnology. | ||
| + | |||
Here is what we envision: once in a while, bacteria might receive input which wasn’t intended. But they are careful enough (they know Homo sapiens always make mistake!) so that they ignore the input for the first time. However, when they receive the two inputs in succession, they finally judge the input(s) are real, and start taking the action as programmed. Also, they are smart enough to distinguish double-clicking from the two separate (or erroneous) inputs. | Here is what we envision: once in a while, bacteria might receive input which wasn’t intended. But they are careful enough (they know Homo sapiens always make mistake!) so that they ignore the input for the first time. However, when they receive the two inputs in succession, they finally judge the input(s) are real, and start taking the action as programmed. Also, they are smart enough to distinguish double-clicking from the two separate (or erroneous) inputs. | ||
| + | |||
First, the circuit must distinguish the second input (stimulus) from the first one, even though they are chemically physically the same . To realize this, we need the counting device. Second, the circuit must distinguishes W-click from two separate clicks; the circuit reacts only when the first and the second input are given in short period of time. Thus, the genetic counter should be coupled with the genetic timers. After a certain time after the first input (timeout), the circuit gets back to the initial state so that the next stimulous is recognized as the first input. | First, the circuit must distinguish the second input (stimulus) from the first one, even though they are chemically physically the same . To realize this, we need the counting device. Second, the circuit must distinguishes W-click from two separate clicks; the circuit reacts only when the first and the second input are given in short period of time. Thus, the genetic counter should be coupled with the genetic timers. After a certain time after the first input (timeout), the circuit gets back to the initial state so that the next stimulous is recognized as the first input. | ||
<html> | <html> | ||
| Line 267: | Line 271: | ||
#However, a certain time after the 1st input, it returns to the initial state. | #However, a certain time after the 1st input, it returns to the initial state. | ||
#Giving two inputs in the limited time the circuit get activated (gives output). | #Giving two inputs in the limited time the circuit get activated (gives output). | ||
| + | <Br><br> | ||
| - | ==Systems== | + | ===<font size="5">Systems</font>=== |
<html> | <html> | ||
<center> | <center> | ||
Latest revision as of 03:10, 28 October 2010
Double Click Bacteria
We’re inspired by double-click of computer’s mouse. It doesn’t react to the first click but does react when it is accompanied by the second one. This is one of the most accepted, familiarized, and proven mechanism to diminish the erroneous operation. This fail-safe technology should find various uses also in biotechnology.
Here is what we envision: once in a while, bacteria might receive input which wasn’t intended. But they are careful enough (they know Homo sapiens always make mistake!) so that they ignore the input for the first time. However, when they receive the two inputs in succession, they finally judge the input(s) are real, and start taking the action as programmed. Also, they are smart enough to distinguish double-clicking from the two separate (or erroneous) inputs.
First, the circuit must distinguish the second input (stimulus) from the first one, even though they are chemically physically the same . To realize this, we need the counting device. Second, the circuit must distinguishes W-click from two separate clicks; the circuit reacts only when the first and the second input are given in short period of time. Thus, the genetic counter should be coupled with the genetic timers. After a certain time after the first input (timeout), the circuit gets back to the initial state so that the next stimulous is recognized as the first input.
 |
The Bottom Line is...
- If there is only an input, nothing happens.
- Duration of the input is not the matter. The circuit cares only the number of input.
- However, a certain time after the 1st input, it returns to the initial state.
- Giving two inputs in the limited time the circuit get activated (gives output).
Systems
 version 1 |
 version 2 |
