http://metamodern.com/2009/03/30/a-revolution-in-de-novo-protein-engineering/

In a recent Nature article, researchers describe the design of a peptide foldamer device (a.k.a. “protein”) that binds and releases oxygen in a way that resembles the heme protein, neuroglobin — and they focus more on the design process than on the design product. They advocate an engineering approach that explicitly rejects aspects of the biological model.

I have long argued that, while nature offers inspirations for molecular engineering, close adherence to natural models is often intellectually and technologically crippling.

Protein engineering is often approached as if it were part of biology. Imagine approaching aerospace engineering as if it were part of ornithology: Although the pioneers of human flight learned a lot about wings from birds, if they had waited for success in making artificial feathers and artificial muscle, we’d still be on the ground.

etc...

---

In a post back on March 11, Drexler mentions the FoldIt game in a discussion of protein engineering. . . here's the URL:

http://metamodern.com/2009/03/11/cad-for-nanoengineering-dna-proteins-and-search/

---

In a post back on March 11, Drexler mentions the FoldIt game in a discussion of protein engineering. . . here's the URL:

http://metamodern.com/2009/03/11/cad-for-nanoengineering-dna-proteins-and-search/

http://metamodern.com/2009/03/11/cad-for-nanoengineering-dna-proteins-and-search/

In a post back on March 11, Drexler mentions the FoldIt game in a discussion of protein engineering. . . here's the URL:

http://metamodern.com/2009/03/11/cad-for-nanoengineering-dna-proteins-and-search/

Thanks Sean. I read Drexler every day, but for some reason had missed that post.

---