Two recent developments in biological sciences and technology have lead me to believe the Tricorder of Star Trek fame is not so distant.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0002075
(http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0002075)
The first is a hand held medical scanner/communication device. Granot, Ivorra and Rubinsky published their creation through the online PLoS ONE journal on April 30th of this year. The technology uses a very similar setup to the newer cellular phones, and detects voltage differences to produce images. From the pictures you can see it is pretty much a modified cell phone, connected to an electrode setup.
http://www.barcoding.si.edu/BackgroundPublications/Hebert_et_al_2003_DNABarcodes.pdf (http://www.barcoding.si.edu/BackgroundPublications/Hebert_et_al_2003_DNABarcodes.pdf)
The second article was published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society of London in 2003. Hebert et al provide a complete system to taxonomic identification through the Cytochrome Oxidase I gene of mitochondrial DNA. This gene is found in all animals, and varies quite a bit between species, however, its intraspecific variation is low. The mutation rate of the gene is just right for acting as a species barcode, whereas the DNA sequence identifies the species by its closeness to a record of known gene sequences. The aim is to sequence this gene in all animal species and use it as a universal identifier. There are several worldwide barcoding initiatives going on for most of the major taxonomic groupings. I really don't see it as that far off before we have a good record for all described vertebrate species, although it will probably take much longer for the invertebrates. The practical uses for this is immense. Already, barcoding has been used to uncover fish market fraud. http://amphidrome.wordpress.com/2008/08/27/fishmonger-fraud/ (http://amphidrome.wordpress.com/2008/08/27/fishmonger-fraud/)
Now, wouldn't it be cool if you could combine the two of these? You would have a cell phone that could do biological scanning, as well as sequence COI genes and compare them to the online database. You would have a combination communicator, biological scanner, and species identification device, in essence, a tricorder.
Its not that far off.
http://www.barcodinglife.org/views/login.php (http://www.barcodinglife.org/views/login.php) - The heart of the barcoding initiative. Note the search engine of over 160 thousand barcodes. You can simply type your sequence in and it will give you the closest matches.
I've long been of the opinion that science follows science fiction; that, in a sense, by visualizing and writing about future technologies, schi-fi authors are creating a trail for science to follow.
Quote from: Nigel on January 16, 2009, 04:02:13 PM
I've long been of the opinion that science follows science fiction; that, in a sense, by visualizing and writing about future technologies, schi-fi authors are creating a trail for science to follow.
Also the nerds that grow up on sci-fi... turn into scientists ;-)
Quote from: Ratatosk on January 16, 2009, 04:09:59 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 16, 2009, 04:02:13 PM
I've long been of the opinion that science follows science fiction; that, in a sense, by visualizing and writing about future technologies, schi-fi authors are creating a trail for science to follow.
Also the nerds that grow up on sci-fi... turn into scientists ;-)
Well yeah, exactly. They grow up and the visions in their heads, the technologies they try to develop, were formed by the sci-fi they read. It's not some mystical process.
Also the really good scifi authors actually use the groundbreaking scientific theory of the day and try to extrapolate.
eg. Gene Roddenberry did not pull warp theory out his ass
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on January 16, 2009, 06:24:34 PM
Also the really good scifi authors actually use the groundbreaking scientific theory of the day and try to extrapolate.
eg. Gene Roddenberry did not pull warp theory out his ass
It's true... he teleported it out of his ass.
Some Star Trek stuff was dead on...others, not so much (teleporters for example, would never work like that).
As for this, the potential is incredible. I assume rigging this all together would not be much more expensive than the use of the key components as well, correct? I know the modified cell phone is considered very cheap tech,and thus useful in Third World settings, so hopefully the move from that to the tricorder would not be much more difficult.
Quote from: Ratatosk on January 16, 2009, 04:09:59 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 16, 2009, 04:02:13 PM
I've long been of the opinion that science follows science fiction; that, in a sense, by visualizing and writing about future technologies, schi-fi authors are creating a trail for science to follow.
Also the nerds that grow up on sci-fi... turn into scientists ;-)
You called?
You know, I was never really interested in the old fashioned scifi.
The first "science fiction" movie/show I really got into was Jurassic Park, and was my favorite for years and years.
Didn't end up as a paleontologist though, but I guess that sort of stuff would be included under non paleobiology too.