Possibilities endless with artificial life
July 16 2008 / by futuretalk
Category: Other Year: General Rating: 4 Hot
By Dick Pelletier
Bodies that never get sick, clothes that change their material
and color, and machines that fix their own glitches. These are some
of the dreams researchers see as they attempt to copy how nature
gathers non-living matter and transforms it into living things.
Life is generally not thought of as being mechanical, but a cell basically is a miniature machine which rearranges non-living atoms to create parts that “bring it to life.”
What makes life possible, scientists say, is the natural tendency of atoms to assemble into molecules, and molecules to assemble into larger structures. Scientists want to understand this process and use it to create self-replicating nano-materials that can be instructed to “grow” into a variety of products.
If we could make life, researchers say, we could apply its principles towards building almost any product. Life is very complicated, but it repairs itself, organizes itself, and adapts to changes – all automatically. It’s the ideal blueprint for assembling things atom by atom with no material waste and minimal labor costs.
Commercial benefits could include nano-size cell-repair machines that create new arteries, deliver drugs to specific sites, and heal the body from the inside; clothing that changes its molecular structure and color on command; bio-systems that clean up the environment; and powerful nano-chips that improve electronic and communication devices.
Leaders in artificial life research are the European Union’s Programmable Artificial Cell Evolution project, and the NASA-supported Protocell project at Los Alamos National Laboratory, New Mexico. (cont.)
Although most people see this new technology as providing mankind with nearly unlimited commercial and medical benefits, others worry about the ethical and moral issues of human-made life. “The first artificial life form is likely to shock people’s religious and cultural beliefs,” said Professor Mark Bedau of Reed College in Portland, Oregon.
“It’s certainly true we are tinkering with something very powerful here,” adds Steen Rasmussen, chief investigator of the Protocell project. “But there is no difference between what we do here and what humans have always done when we invented fire, transistors and ways to split the atom,” he said.
In addition to providing huge material benefits for mankind, scientists also hope this research will answer such basic questions as “Where does life come from?” and “Can we recognize it when we see it?” These are appropriate philosophical questions at a time when NASA is spending billions exploring Mars and other areas in space looking for signs of life.
Will this future happen? Most researchers say absolutely! The number of U.S. labs working in the field jumped from about 10, forty years ago, to more than 100 today. “It’s a synthetic biology revolution,” said John McCaskill, overseer of the European Union’s artificial life program.
Experts believe the first artificial life unit will be created by 2015, and self-replicating nano-machines providing most of our material needs at little or no cost, could be developed as early as mid-2020s. Comments welcome.
Comment Thread (9 Responses)
-
As with all new innovations, some people just hype this up to absurdity until disillusion inevitably sets in. Artificial life won’t be used for creating nanobots or making obesity disappear, it will be used for mundane purposes like everything else. Expect better cleaning products from this, not bodies that don’t get sick.
Posted by: adbatstone80 July 17, 2008
Vote for this comment - Recommend -
What did we get from the “miracle” of nanotechnolgy? Stain-free pants, that’s what. That’s as far as nano will go for decades to come.
Posted by: adbatstone80 July 17, 2008
Vote for this comment - Recommend -
Nanoparticles now in 48 clinical trials
Posted by: futuretalk July 17, 2008
Vote for this comment - Recommend -
Adbatstone80, why don’t you prove (somehow) that nanotechnology applications will not progress in the next ten to twenty years. If you can’t do that, why don’t you shut the hell up for once.
On the other hand, maybe you’d like to actually do some research and find out how the field is progressing. In fact it is exploding but you wouldn’t know this because you don’t read science journals.
I’d like the point out that nanobots will be created if we want them to be, the basic research already done shows that it is possible. For a new perspective on molecular machines, have a look at this URL
Unless of course you’re allergic to reading.
Posted by: CptSunbeam July 17, 2008
Vote for this comment - Recommend -
I have to agree with adbatstone80. Predicting self-replicating nano-machines in no later than 20 years is silly. The difference between nano-materials, that we kinda started creating, and nano-machines is of the same magnitude as the difference between stone tool and iPhone.
And while synthetic bio-organisms are much more feasible than non-biological nano-robots, but there no reason to automatically assume that they will be so magically all powerful as some expect them to be.
Posted by: johnfrink July 17, 2008
Vote for this comment - Recommend -
johnfrink, nobody said that the utility of nanorobots would arise automatically. There is real research happening right now, and scientists are learning to manipulate these tiny machines with things such as lasers and AFMs with pico-Newton precision. They won’t pop up over night, but a twenty year time scale is not unreasonable at all.
You and your friend adbatstone80 seem to be unaware of any of the research which is occuring. I suggest reading a website such as sciencedaily.com or Technology Review. Check them every single day – you really will need to if you want to keep pace with each new innovation.
And above all, unless you can back up your statement about these projections being “silly”, then keep quiet. Ever heard the expression “put up or shut up”? Also, please read the link I copied about the genuine feasibilty of nanomachines. Adbatstone80 didn’t read it and you obviously didn’t either.
And yes, you are right about the vast difference between supermaterials and nanobots. This has no bearing on the timescale involved. If you think it does, you have fallen victim to the same fallacy as the miserable adbatstone80 – thinking that the past has any bearing on future developments. Progress is accelerating and it is not just about Moore’s Law – the fundamental cause is that we use the previous generation of tools to create the next generation of tools.
A nanoassembler is one example of such a tool. Richard Feynmann could see that we can get better and better tools by fashioning assemblers of assemblers etc. This is not unique to nanotech and is a feature of human progress. It’s too bad that people such as youself and others are so thoroughly blind to the truth of this. It’s small wonder that you simply cannot believe that this amount of progress is possible in only twenty years. Not only is it possible, but the foundations have already been laid.
Posted by: CptSunbeam July 17, 2008
Vote for this comment - Recommend -
CptSunbeam, you are the one who makes an extraordinary claim. You know, that we’ll have self-replication nano-robots in 20 years. And I’ll be honest with you, while your arguments like “shut the hell up” are very powerful (even more so when bold font is used), they do not provide extraordinary evidence required for such claim to be taken seriously.
Posted by: johnfrink July 17, 2008
Vote for this comment - Recommend -
You’re right, extraordinary claims do require extraordinary evidence, but such evidence is abundant, if you can be bothered to go out and find it. Since the technological basis for medical nanobots and the like has been laid already, it will take some even more extraordinary claims from you to refute the results of these reseachers. I’ve heard nothing from you pessimists but hot air. Empty comments that are devoid of content, they just say “this aint gonna happen, stop being so deluded” etc etc. Perhaps you’d like to demonstrate why the researchers will not take the next logical steps.
Posted by: CptSunbeam July 17, 2008
Vote for this comment - Recommend -
“Adbatstone80, why don’t you prove (somehow) that nanotechnology applications will not progress in the next ten to twenty years. If you can’t do that, why don’t you shut the hell up for once.”
Rupturing The Nanotech Rapture by Richard Jones
Biological nanobots could repair and improve the human body, but they’ll be more bio than bot.
Posted by: adbatstone80 July 19, 2008
Vote for this comment - Recommend