5
   

Why Living Cells Are The Future Of Data Processing

 
 
Reply Tue 1 Jan, 2013 05:35 pm
I thought this was kind of interesting - I see a future where a combination of biocomputing and data representation can help us make complex decisions about massively dynamic information ecosystems.


http://www.popsci.com.au/technology/why-living-cells-are-the-future-of-data-processing

Technology //
Not all computers are made of silicon. By definition, a computer is anything that processes data, performs calculations, or uses so-called logic gates to turn inputs (for example, 1s and 0s in binary code) into outputs. And now, a small international community of scientists is working to expand the realm of computers to include cells, animals, and other living organisms. Some of their experiments are highly theoretical; others represent the first steps toward usable biological computers. All are attempts to make life perform work now done by chips and circuit boards.

Last year, for example, a computer scientist at the University of the West of England named Andy Adam­atzky and a team of Japanese researchers built logic gates that ran on soldier crabs. First they constructed mazes that replicated the shape of the wires in a computer's logic gates.

Then they chased two swarms of crabs (inputs) from one end of the gate to the other. When the swarms collided, they combined to form a new swarm (output), which often headed in the direction of the sum of their vectors, demonstrating that a living, somewhat random system can produce useful order.

If crabs are good at clustering together, a single-celled organism that resides in rotting trees-Physarum polycephalum, or slime mold-is surprisingly adept at making maps. Adamatzky and Selim Akl, a computer scientist at Queens University in Ontario, have spent the past few years using slime mold to map networks.

Slime mould "will lead the revolution in the bioelectronics and computer industry."

In one experiment, they took a map of Canada, dropped oat flakes (slime-mold food) on the nation's major cities, and placed the mould on Toronto. It oozed forth to form the most efficient paths to the cities, creating networks of "roads" that almost perfectly mimicked the actual Canadian highway system.

Last April, biocomputers got even more impressive. Swiss bioengineers announced that they had programmed human cells to do binary addition or subtraction, which is how a computer does arithmetic. They genetically engineered the cells with an elaborate circuit of genes that turn one another on or off. The cells can process two inputs added to their dish (the molecules erythromycin and phloretin) and display an answer by producing red or green fluorescent proteins.

What's the point of all of this? Adamatzky says that slime mold's mapping abilities could design roads, wireless networks, and information-processing circuits better than today's computers. Combining slime mold with electronics could also yield benefits. Adamatzky is already making a computer chip that marries the speed of electrical communication with the learning capabilities of slime mold.

The hybrid technology would process information less like a computer and more like a brain, learning and growing through experiences and trial and error, making it possible to solve problems in both neuroscience and computer science. "We envisage that the Physarum-based computing research will lead to a revolution in the bioelectronics and computer industry," he says.

His colleague Akl says one advantage of biocomputers may be that they can function in places that conventional electronics can't. "Think about computing in harsh environments like the bottom of the ocean, the human body, or on another planet where our computers may not survive," he says. Life forms could thrive in settings where silicon chips might melt, freeze, or disintegrate.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 5 • Views: 3,112 • Replies: 22

 
Kolyo
 
  2  
Reply Tue 1 Jan, 2013 06:36 pm
Well, I sure hope they don't program these things with AI software. The last thing we need are intelligent colonies of bacteria.
hingehead
 
  1  
Reply Tue 1 Jan, 2013 08:50 pm
@Kolyo,
Just to be geeky - intelligent bacteria mightn't be bad... they might see symbiosis as a better option than parasitism on 'big life'. Maybe design an FTL vessel for us to build and fly (them not having opposable thumbs and all) so they can check out the rest of the universe?

Which bacteria has most succesfully 'infected' humanity? Our gut bacteria I'm guessing - and we can't live without it.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  3  
Reply Tue 1 Jan, 2013 08:51 pm
OMG. My computer really does have a bug in it.
hingehead
 
  2  
Reply Tue 1 Jan, 2013 11:52 pm
@roger,
Marshall McLuhan on crystal meth

THE BUG IS THE COMPUTER!
0 Replies
 
nothingtodo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 Jan, 2013 12:07 am
@hingehead,
This is unethical beyond the use of viral life to pacemaker hearts or re-connect/repair damaged cells.. Because only a virus exists solely to reproduce and aquire all host organisms.

All else ultimately is too, but life based computing should arrive through energy level choice systems.

I will volunteer for such a program myself, with certain requirements met.
hingehead
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 Jan, 2013 12:13 am
@nothingtodo,
Not to get too anal on you, but nowhere are viruses mentioned.

The rest of your reply went around my head.
nothingtodo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 Jan, 2013 12:57 am
@hingehead,
In current technology, they have built a pacemaker built on virii.

I cannot argue with that notion, because the virus itself acquires life to its own ends. If we as a species bend to allowing 'ANY' life to be placed against its will in systems of flow and return with no free will to evolve and choose, we are at the mercy of our own failed ethics and the rules change on everything.

Much like when you allow alcohol sales to 14 year olds, next your allowing rave parties for them.. Then 14 years old is no longer a child, therefore the rules of work change and 15 year olds are rushed through school and into work.

A very basic example, the issue is much more lengthy, in the original context...
Supposing a revolution occurs and then the use of life which did not attack us, but instead lived in harmony as no threat is cited.. The people who take power can then say, those lesser people who do that to living beings can be harvested for lungs/hearts and eyes whenever the 'better' life requires.

Strong, but it can get that way, even in slight steps.

Life must volunteer, at worst... Anything else is in fact wrong, but we make deals with the devil for betterment of the species.. This is before mentioning a species we have not met, who judges us hypocritical for our attitude if we fail. I will not take it too far.
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 Jan, 2013 02:57 am
@hingehead,
I would suggest anybody wishing to consider that headline seriously should look up Maturana's biological approach to cognition and life which excludes "information" in the computing sense, as a viable concept.
hingehead
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 Jan, 2013 05:07 pm
@fresco,
I think the semantic construct of "'information' in the computing sense" may be flawed. Why is information limited by being in the 'computing sense'? Are you going Godel on me?

fresco
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jan, 2013 02:36 am
@hingehead,
Maturana points out that the adaptation of living structures (which he equates with "cognition") does not require the assumption of "an external reality" from the organism's point of view. What we construe as a scenario in which an organism is "processing information" can also be viewed as a complex meta structure extending beyond what we normally view as the physical boundaries of the organism in which mutual state transitions are "coupled" within the larger structure.

This may seem counter-intuitive steeped as we are in "informational" jargon, but such an approach has now been successfully adopted by second generation cognitive scientists in their studies of active perceptual behavior. after an abortive history of failure with conventional "informational models." What skeptics should bear in mind is that "information" or "data" can never be independent of the (autopoietic) functioning of a "cognate being". The fact that some "cellular mechanisms" can ostensibly mimic the functions of machines devised by humans is not proof that humans themselves employ such mechanisms, or that those cells specifically perform those operations in organisms.
hingehead
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jan, 2013 06:04 am
@fresco,
Oh I see. But does it matter if it isn't procedural mimicry if the output is the same?

Quote:
What skeptics should bear in mind is that "information" or "data" can never be independent of the (autopoietic) functioning of a "cognate being"


Don't think I agree with this - my think has been coloured by James Gleick's "The Information" which eventually merges information/encryption with entropy/order which would happen without a cognate being. Unless of course my act of reading something written means a cognate being is involved. My head hurts. If a tree processes data in a forest?
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jan, 2013 06:15 am
@hingehead,
This reminds me of an article I read a few weeks ago.

Quote:
Scientists have for the first time used DNA to encode the contents of a book. At 53,000 words, and including 11 images and a computer program, it is the largest amount of data yet stored artificially using the genetic material.

The researchers claim that the cost of DNA coding is dropping so quickly that within five to 10 years it could be cheaper to store information using this method than in conventional digital devices.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/aug/16/book-written-dna-code?INTCMP=SRCH
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jan, 2013 07:42 am
@hingehead,
You may have a point about apparent mimicry but not...
Quote:
Don't think I agree with this

...that's THE point on which AI has floundered !
"Information" is defined as "that which informs decisions in choosing between alternatives"......and you should ask "whose decisions ?"..."whose alternatives ?".
hingehead
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jan, 2013 02:32 pm
@fresco,
I guess the problem is the is which definition of information you choose, the one you are apparently quoting is not the one I'm applying here.

Even if it was,, what about the case of information being presented and causing a tropism? No decision made, but action taken.
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jan, 2013 03:39 pm
@hingehead,
"Tropism" is a substitute for the more anthropomorphic "goal directedness". You are suggesting teleology which Maturana rejects. His co-worker Varela was one of the instigators of the recent shift in cognitive science.

I have found this to be a useful approach to these ideas.
http://www.oikos.org/vonobserv.htm
hingehead
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jan, 2013 05:14 pm
@fresco,
Thanks for the link, will follow up when I get a chance
Quote:
"Tropism" is a substitute for the more anthropomorphic "goal directedness"


No it's not. It's a hardwired physical reaction to stimulus. I shine a torch in your eye your pupil contracts - you don't choose to contract it.

I suspect we are talking at different levels - yours is more indepth than mine.
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Jan, 2013 02:04 am
@hingehead,
I don't think the pupilliary response is classified as a tropism. I assumed you meant plant photo-tropism, geo-tropism etc. However you are correct about different levels of analysis with respect to the viability of the concept of "information". The irony is that "information" is a psychological concept (higher level ?) rather than a biological one.
hingehead
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Jan, 2013 03:28 am
@fresco,
For me it's not necessarily biological or psychological - I believe it exists outside a 'cognate' observer. I warmed to Gleick's explanation - information is the opposite of entropy/disorder.
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Jan, 2013 08:00 am
@hingehead,
But who defines order ? Laughing
 

Related Topics

Clone of Micosoft Office - Question by Advocate
Do You Turn Off Your Computer at Night? - Discussion by Phoenix32890
The "Death" of the Computer Mouse - Discussion by Phoenix32890
Windows 10... - Discussion by Region Philbis
Surface Pro 3: What do you think? - Question by neologist
Windows 8 tips thread - Discussion by Wilso
GOOGLE CHROME - Question by Setanta
.Net and Firefox... - Discussion by gungasnake
Hacking a computer and remote access - Discussion by trying2learn
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Why Living Cells Are The Future Of Data Processing
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/26/2024 at 09:27:54