>>13679560Brute force probably works. If you had enough computational power, you could even afford to even just throw random shit at the wall and see what sticks. But if you were to do this in a sensible manner, I don't really know how you'd proceed. Maybe selecting your functions and seeing what structures can be built around the active site or something, like what you said. We're talking about optimizing the computation of finding a specific molecular behaviour, so only a specialist on the area has a clue on how to do that.
>>13680067I mean, you could have a similar movement in the active site with a different backbone, but it might be impossible for most molecules. The problem depends on how easy it is to replicate the same behaviour for your average enzyme. It would depend on how specific you want the behaviour to be replicated and how complex the original behaviour was in the first place. Maybe certain groups of molecules have a viable substitution while other don't, it's not like they all have to have an alternative.
>>13681627I believe he meant 'substances that don't need to have their production, storage and delivery all within the human body parameters and with it's avalible tools'. So you could have an enzyme with an assembly step that requires 70ºC to happen, which is not reasonable to do in the body but can be done in a lab. Or you could have an enzyme that doesn't do all the functions the natural enzyme does, but you only need it for one function anyways. It could also be something that messes up your body, which you wouldn't want as your everyday option but would make an excellent drug to treat certain conditions.
