| Author | Message | ||
| David Burn (Woubit)
|
By Arjun (Jun) on Thursday, February 24, 2005 - 01:00 am: Would the fruits be particulary large? small? are dimensions/ shape relevant? I can safely answer all of these with an unmodified - generically or genetically - no | ||
| Arjun (Jun)
|
You said 'noish' for colour then. Would they be made brighter? shinier? transparent? | ||
| David Burn (Woubit)
|
By Arjun (Jun) on Thursday, February 24, 2005 - 01:06 am: You said 'noish' for colour then. Would they be made brighter? shinier? transparent? none of these per se, though I guess "transparent" might get the faintest of "yesishes" | ||
| Tim A. Dowd (Bodo)
|
Plastic corn? | ||
| Martin Schwenk (Trickymartin)
|
Albinism relevant? Lack of color? | ||
| David Burn (Woubit)
|
By Tim A. Dowd (Bodo) on Thursday, February 24, 2005 - 03:35 am: Plastic corn? no By Martin Schwenk (Trickymartin) on Thursday, February 24, 2005 - 02:05 pm: Albinism relevant? no Lack of color? no, nor lack of colour  | ||
| Martin Schwenk (Trickymartin)
|
Is the texture relevant? | ||
| David Burn (Woubit)
|
By Martin Schwenk (Trickymartin) on Thursday, February 24, 2005 - 11:35 pm: Is the texture relevant? no | ||
| Martin Schwenk (Trickymartin)
|
So, mankind can now genetically change something about a particular plant, right? Would it help to identify the plant? With which sense could the change be percieved? | ||
| David Burn (Woubit)
|
By Martin Schwenk (Trickymartin) on Thursday, February 24, 2005 - 11:57 pm: So, mankind can now genetically change something about a particular plant, right? mankind can now genetically change several things about various plants Would it help to identify the plant? this could apply to any one of a number of plants With which sense could the change be percieved? sight | ||
| Arjun (Jun)
|
Can they be made invisible (but that's transparent, isnt it)? | ||
| David Burn (Woubit)
|
By Arjun (Jun) on Friday, February 25, 2005 - 07:46 pm: Can they be made invisible no (but that's transparent, isnt it yes )? | ||
| Martin Schwenk (Trickymartin)
|
Could one see the change on a colour photo? on a b/w one? | ||
| David Burn (Woubit)
|
By Martin Schwenk (Trickymartin) on Friday, February 25, 2005 - 09:55 pm: Could one see the change on a colour photo? on a b/w one? on both of those I should say here that this "change" has not actually been made - it is strictly in the realms of "things imagined by a very silly woubit". | ||
| Martin Schwenk (Trickymartin)
|
A visible change thats neither shape nor colour... hmm.. size? orientation? direction? | ||
| David Burn (Woubit)
|
By Martin Schwenk (Trickymartin) on Friday, February 25, 2005 - 10:23 pm: A visible change thats neither shape nor colour... hmm.. size? orientation? direction? none of these, sorry  | ||
| Martin Schwenk (Trickymartin)
|
If one only saw the shadow, would one notice the change? | ||
| David Burn (Woubit)
|
By Martin Schwenk (Trickymartin) on Friday, February 25, 2005 - 10:32 pm: If one only saw the shadow, would one notice the change? no | ||
| Arjun (Jun)
|
Is the property that changed an optical property of materials? | ||
| Martin Schwenk (Trickymartin)
|
patterns? stripes? a change of surface? glowing in the dark? | ||
| David Burn (Woubit)
|
By Arjun (Jun) on Friday, February 25, 2005 - 10:39 pm: Is the property that changed an optical property of materials? I am not sure what this means. The "thing that changed" (in this silly scenario) could most easily be detected by sight, though it could also be detected by touch, which may be just as well. But we are not talking here about altering the "optical property of materials", whatever that may mean. I am a woubit, not a Buzzard By Martin Schwenk (Trickymartin) on Friday, February 25, 2005 - 10:40 pm: patterns? noish stripes? no a change of surface? yesish glowing in the dark? no | ||
| Martin Schwenk (Trickymartin)
|
Change of surface, yet texture ain't relevant? |
