“The possibilities are tantalising: if our proposed test were carried out in a biological system, and returned a positive result, we might be able to learn quantum engineering design principles from nature. We could then try to create biomimetic technologies that are more robust and perhaps even more powerful than the current generation of quantum technologies, which are almost exclusively based on highly isolated systems. If we were able to turbocharge artificial light harvesting, such as in a solar cell for example, there would be a huge potential for providing affordable, renewable energy.”
“If we were able to turbocharge artificial light harvesting, such as in a solar cell for example, there would be a huge potential for providing affordable, renewable energy.”
Is this actually realistic or is it, like one of the comments said, ‘balderdash’?
I’m not sure I’m qualified to answer that. IF biological systems can utilize quantum effects, that would be interesting, so it’s certainly worth investigating. IF it is true, then it is highly plausible these systems are evolved. It is further plausible speculation that we might learn to copy these systems.
So we have 2 or 3 orders of speculation to work through before we get there, but each step is plausible. Not balderdash, IMO, but not available from Amazon any time soon either.
About, ‘balderdash’ , I get the gist of what it means but just to make sure.
It’s a more socially acceptable way of calling BS, right?
In this conversation, “quantum effects” is poorly defined. We observe quantum effects already and all the time in biology. For example, any process that relies on absorption of a photon at a particular wave length (such as color vision), well that is a quantum effect.
Balderdash is senseless talk or writing; nonsense, bunk, piffle, poppycock or twaddle (origin: pre-1750).
So, in a way, ‘yes’?
Unless you want me to look up disambiguations of bullsh*t, yes.
This topic was automatically closed 3 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.