Thread: 17-Year-Old Manifests Cancer-Killing Nanoparticle

I wish the article went into more details on what the invention meant for cancer treatment, instead of rambling on about her age.

It's fairly recent (Dec 8th) , so I bet it'll get more into detail later.

"17-Year-Old Manifests Cancer-Killing Nanoparticle"

Like, from her vagina?

Sorry, I'll use less questionable vocabulary next time

And who knows? You never know

It's actually a nano reassembler. It works on cancer cells by rearranging them on a subatomic level into copies of itself. Certainly cancer is now a thing of the past. The only problem is that it also does this indiscriminately to every other known substance.

The first article is kind of annoying. The whole angle seemed to be "you should be ashamed and feel terrible if you achieved any less when you were her age." Mentioning it at the beginning, and then going on to discuss the invention, would be fine. Let the readers feel bad about themselves and praise her age if they choose to. But it didn't really go into what she created at all, like will it actually be able to help people? I have no idea. The writer can't get past the fact that she's 17.

What's the bet she does nothing groundbreaking for the rest of her life?
There's way too much focus on people in both science and technology.
Almost every major discovery or invention, especially these days, is a result of
the culmination of the work and research of many people, and very, very rarely just one person alone.

Debatable.

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The main thing with scientists is having a big ego.

If you find something that no one else discovered, you're obviously going to have a huge ego trip there. But I'm going run before I raped by the smart people in DV here D:

Originally Posted by Xei

Debatable.

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I don't see how that contradicts what I said....
Maybe the article, or the bits I read, wasn't what you wanted to point out. But that's what you get when you link an article with along with a one word retort.

Link - You may be right. But I think it can be done without the ego. Coz it also gets in the way when other people discover something that goes against the current consensus
and everyone berates the fuck out of the person who discovered it, coz they are too wound up in their own version of the universe.
If only they could fully comprehend the scientific discoveries they'd made. They would all be enlightened and lose this ego bullshit.
Quite sad that they still think science is gonna help us in some way. Most people are not changed by it at all. They go on living as if we really aren't one with the universe, as if we aren't just slightly more intelligent apes.
Science is just cool, that's about it. Unless more open people come across it.

Science is just used to hopefully find answers, but I think the problem with that is that people are too afraid to take risks that involves screwing up their schemata of life. When a person finds out the truth of something that makes their way of thinking completely utter and useless shit, that's some heavy stuff to suppress.

I want to be a Biochemist, and hopefully lucid dream to learn things that can help me find new things for science. I know I won't make any huge discoveries, but dreaming just makes science more fun...in my opinion. Some people may think differently, and that's okay, I just like experimenting with different ways of learning.

That was totally off from this topic, but I think you get what I'm saying.

And the reason why I say there's a huge ego involved is that back then, a huge ego was what kept most scientists motivated because of the low salary. That was until politics realized..."HOLY SHIT...WE CAN MAKE BOOM BOOM WITH THIS!"

The ego thing is still going to be apparent, because if someone finds something that can change the world, you obviously want to take credit for it, but that itself, like you said, involves other people berating the hell out of each other.

Its almost impossible to prevent people from being single-minded when it comes to science, but that's how it has to be. When people who are "open-minded," they usually get trolled like hell.

Nowadays, it's all about realism, before, idealism was encouraged in science. But after we've gotten so high strung with the shit we can develop, we sort of eliminated the need for idealism in science, because people are so obsessed with finding answers instead of just philosophical statements.

That's what I think.

I agree completely.
And you're on to something with using lucid dreaming. I also would like to see more people doing the same thing, or using isolation tanks to enhance the way they think.

Link, please find out how abiogenesis works so we can settle the case once and for all?

Creating something from nothing huh? That's a tough one.

I can make myself depressed after I pleasured with myself and feel like nothing...small, but we all have to start somewhere right?

Originally Posted by Wayfaerer

Link, please find out how abiogenesis works so we can settle the case once and for all?

The Origin of Life - Abiogenesis - Dr. Jack Szostak - YouTube

So is she the Chosen One?

To those who look at the age of the person, yep.

But I don't think she can see the world in binaries and codes.

Originally Posted by Linkzelda41

I can make myself depressed after I pleasured with myself

lol this thread is going to get hijacked.