https://ebookmass.com/product/living-computers-replicators-
Instant digital products (PDF, ePub, MOBI) ready for you
Download now and discover formats that fit your needs...
Biogeography: An Integrative Approach of the Evolution of Living Eric Guilbert
https://ebookmass.com/product/biogeography-an-integrative-approach-ofthe-evolution-of-living-eric-guilbert/
ebookmass.com
The Evolution of Biological Information: How Evolution Creates Complexity, from Viruses to Brains Christoph Adami
https://ebookmass.com/product/the-evolution-of-biological-informationhow-evolution-creates-complexity-from-viruses-to-brains-christophadami/
ebookmass.com
Information Theory and Evolution, 3rd Edition John Avery
https://ebookmass.com/product/information-theory-and-evolution-3rdedition-john-avery/
ebookmass.com
Break the Cycle: A Guide to Healing Intergenerational Trauma Dr. Mariel Buqué
https://ebookmass.com/product/break-the-cycle-a-guide-to-healingintergenerational-trauma-dr-mariel-buque/
ebookmass.com
American Government and Politics Today: The Essentials, Enhanced 19th Edition – Ebook PDF Version
https://ebookmass.com/product/american-government-and-politics-todaythe-essentials-enhanced-19th-edition-ebook-pdf-version/
ebookmass.com
The sociology of sports-talk radio Kerr
https://ebookmass.com/product/the-sociology-of-sports-talk-radio-kerr/
ebookmass.com
Treading the Mill: Practical Craft Working in Modern Traditional Witchcraft Nigel G. Pearson
https://ebookmass.com/product/treading-the-mill-practical-craftworking-in-modern-traditional-witchcraft-nigel-g-pearson/
ebookmass.com
Reservoir Development M. Rafiqul Islam
https://ebookmass.com/product/reservoir-development-m-rafiqul-islam/
ebookmass.com
The Road Home: A Friends to Lovers, Forced Proximity, Small Town Romance (Landry Love Series Book 6) Amy Alves
https://ebookmass.com/product/the-road-home-a-friends-to-loversforced-proximity-small-town-romance-landry-love-series-book-6-amyalves/
ebookmass.com
Electronic Principles 9th Edition Albert P. Malvino https://ebookmass.com/product/electronic-principles-9th-editionalbert-p-malvino/
ebookmass.com
LIVINGCOMPUTERS LivingComputers Replicators,InformationProcessing, andtheEvolutionofLife AlvisBrazma EuropeanMolecularBiologyLaboratory
EuropeanBioinformaticsInstitute
Cambridge,UK
GreatClarendonStreet,Oxford,OX26DP, UnitedKingdom
OxfordUniversityPressisadepartmentoftheUniversityofOxford. ItfurtherstheUniversity’sobjectiveofexcellenceinresearch,scholarship, andeducationbypublishingworldwide.Oxfordisaregisteredtrademarkof OxfordUniversityPressintheUKandincertainothercountries
©AlvisBrazma2023
Themoralrightsoftheauthorhavebeenasserted Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,storedin aretrievalsystem,ortransmitted,inanyformorbyanymeans,withoutthe priorpermissioninwritingofOxfordUniversityPress,orasexpresslypermitted bylaw,bylicenceorundertermsagreedwiththeappropriatereprographics rightsorganization.Enquiriesconcerningreproductionoutsidethescopeofthe aboveshouldbesenttotheRightsDepartment,OxfordUniversityPress,atthe addressabove
Youmustnotcirculatethisworkinanyotherform andyoumustimposethissameconditiononanyacquirer
PublishedintheUnitedStatesofAmericabyOxfordUniversityPress 198MadisonAvenue,NewYork,NY10016,UnitedStatesofAmerica BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationData
Dataavailable
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2023933858
ISBN9780192871947
DOI:10.1093/oso/9780192871947.001.0001
Printedandboundby CPIGroup(UK)Ltd,Croydon,CR04YY
LinkstothirdpartywebsitesareprovidedbyOxfordingoodfaithand forinformationonly.Oxforddisclaimsanyresponsibilityforthematerials containedinanythirdpartywebsitereferencedinthiswork.
Formywife,Diana Preface Allcurrentlyknownformsofliferelyonthreetypesofmolecules:proteins—life’smain structuralandfunctionalbuildingblocks;DNA—life’sinformationcarrier;andRNA— themessengerprovidingthelinkbetweenthesetwo.Butwhatwaslifelikewhenitfirst emergedonEarthbillionsofyearsago?Whatwilllifebelikeinmillionsorbillions ofyearsifitstillexists?Canalivingbeingbemadeof,say,steel,copper,andsilicon? Andwhatisitthatdistinguisheslivingsystemsfromthosewedonotregardasliving?
Anessentialfeatureoflifeisitsabilitytorecord,communicate,andprocessinformation.Everylivingcelldoesthis.Everyanimalbraindoesthis.Andevenmore fundamentally,evolutionprocessestheinformationrecordedintheentirecollectionof DNAonEarthusingthealgorithmofDarwinianselectionofthefittest.Lifeandthe recordingofinformationemergedtogether;thereisnolifewithoutinformationand, arguably,thereisnoinformationwithoutlife.
Wedonotknowwhatthefirstcarriersofinformationwerewhenlifehadjustemerged, butforthelastfewbillionsofyears,themostimportantinformationstoragemedium onEarthhasbeenDNA.Oncelifehademergedandstartedevolving,theinformationinDNAwasaccumulating,atleastforawhile.Afewhundredthousandyears ago,quiterecentlyontheevolutionarytimescale,humanlanguageemergedandamajor transitionbegan;forthefirsttime,largeamountsofinformationbeganaccumulating outsideDNA.Mostlikely,informationintheworld’slibrariesandcomputercloudsis nowexpandingfasterthaninthegenomesofallspeciesonEarthtakentogether.Even moreimportantly,languagetriggeredevolutionarymechanismsdifferentfromandfaster thanbiologicalevolution,namelyculturalevolution.Theemergenceofhumanlanguage wasatransitionasremarkableastheemergenceoflifeitself.
Nevertheless,atleastatourcurrentstateofevolution,theinformationinDNAis indispensable;iftheDNAexistingonEarthweretobecometoocorrupted,allculturalinformationandlifeitselfwouldswiftlydisappear.Butmustlifebelikethis?Or canfuturecivilizations,possiblyinthousandsormillionsofyearscolonizingplanetsof distantgalaxies,bebasedonentirelydifferentprinciples?Cantherebeanothermajor transitioninwhichDNAbecomeslesscentral?
Thisbook,inwhichlifeandevolutionareexploredasinformationprocessingphenomena,isaimedateverybodyinterestedinscienceandcomfortablewithelementary mathematics.Itwillalsobeofinteresttostudentsandscholarsfromawiderange ofdisciplines,fromphysics,computing,andbiologytosocialsciencesandphilosophy.Thisbookisforeveryonewhohaseverwondered:howdolivingsystemswork? Whendoassembliesofnon-livingmoleculesbecomelivingorganisms?Wheredoes life’scomplexitycomefrom?AndwherewilllifegoaftertheSolarsystemceasesto exist?Thefascinatingideaofviewinglivingorganismsascomputersandtheevolution oflifeasinformationprocessingwillbeenrichingforeveryoneinterestedinourdaily andlong-termexistence.
Acknowledgements ThisbookcouldnothavebeenwrittenwithoutthesupportoftheEuropeanMolecularBiologyLaboratory(EMBL),andinparticular,thatoftheEuropeanBioinformatics Institute(EBI),whereIhavespentmorethanhalfmyscientificlife,graduallyevolving fromamathematicianintoabiologist,thoughneverreallycompletingthetransition. Withitsmultidisciplinaryfocus,collaborativeatmosphere,andstrivingforscientific excellence,EMBLandEBIprovidedmewiththecreativeenvironmentwheretheideas endingupinthisbookcoulddevelop.ButthebookwouldalsonothavebeenpossiblewithoutwhatIlearntaboutmathematicsinmyearlierscientificcarrier,mostlyat theUniversityofLatvia,whereIwasfortunateenoughtohavebeentaughtbysomeof thepioneersoftheoreticalcomputerscience,andforemost,withoutmyPhDsupervisor andmentorProfessorJānisBārzdiņš.Icantracetheideaofwritingthisbooktotheearly 1990s,whentheSovietUnionwasdisintegratingandIgotmyfirstopportunitytotravel outsidetheSovietblocandtoworkattheNewMexicoStateUniversity,thankstothe kindnessandgenerosityofJurisandLaumaReinfelds.
Iamenormouslyindebtedtomyfriendsandcolleagueswhoreaddraftsofthisbook fromcovertocoveratvariousstages,andinparticulartoPaulis Ķikusts,GerardKleywegt,RobertPetryszak,KārlisPodnieks,UģisSarkans,andRodericGuigo.Without theirinvaluableadviceandhelp,thisbookcouldnothavebeenwritten.MywifeDiana BrazmaandmybrotherGunarsBrazmawerealsoamongstthosewhoreadtheentire manuscriptandgavemeimportantfeedback.Others,inparticularNickGoldman,Mar Gonzàlez-Porta,MarkGreen,FrankHolstege,WolfgangHuber,JulioCollado-Vides, andAinisUlmanis,readpartsofthemanuscript,suggestingmanyimportantimprovements.Mythanksalsogotoanonymousreviewerswhocommentedonthebook’s proposalandsamplechapters.Therearealargernumberofcolleaguesandfriends withwhomIdiscussedtheideasbehindthisbook;amongstthem:WilhelmAnsorge, AlexanderAulehla,JurgBahler,PedroBeltrao,EwanBirney,GrahamCameron,Marco Galardini,CorneliusGross,EdithHeard,DesHiggins,IainMattaj,CedricNotredame, JanetThornton,NassosTypas,andRickWelch.Someofthemwerenotawarethatthe questionsIwasaskingwereaboutanemergingbook.EnormousthanksgotoAndrew King,thelibrarianoftheMichaelAshburner’sLibraryoftheWellcomeGenomeCampus,whohelpedmechaseupmanyobscurereferencescentraltothisbook.Severalof mycolleagueswentoutoftheirwaytoprovidemewithillustrationsexactlythewayI wantedthem,inparticularOsmanSalihandJulianHenniesatEMBL,andLouisSchefferatJaneliaResearchCampus.AttheproposalstageIwashelpedbyCarolinePalmer whocorrectedmyEnglishandOanaStroewhohelpedmetowritethePreface.Ialso wanttothankmycommissioningeditoratOUP,IanSherman,forallhisgreatencouragementandhelp,tomyprojecteditor,KatieLakina,fordealingwithquestionsasthe
x Acknowledgements manuscriptwasdeveloping,aswellasRajeswariAzayecocheandJanetWalker,who didanadmirablyprofessionaljobineditingthemanuscript.Anyerrorsinthisbook areentirelymyresponsibility.Overtime,myworkatEMBLwasfundedmainlybythe EMBLmemberstatesbutalsobymanygrantsfromtheEuropeanCommission,the WellcomeTrust,theNationalInstituteofHealth,UKResearchandInnovation,and others.
Introduction TheHistoryofeverymajorGalacticCivilizationtendstopassthroughthreedistinct andrecognizablephases,thoseofSurvival,InquiryandSophistication,otherwise knownastheHow,Why,andWherephases.Forinstance,thefirstphaseischaracterizedbythequestion‘Howcanweeat?’,thesecondbythequestion‘Whydowe eat?’andthethirdbythequestion,‘Whereshallwehavelunch?’
(DouglasAdams,
TheHitchhiker’sGuidetoTheGalaxy)
Howcomplexdoesthesimplestlivingbeinghavetobe?Howmanydifferentpartsit needs?Canthecomplexityoflifebemeasured?Asproteinsarethemostdiversecomponentsofallknownlifeforms,onepossiblewaytomeasurethecomplexityofanorganism isbycountinghowmanydifferentproteinmoleculesithas.Bacteria,arguablythesimplestknownfree-livingorganisms,havehundredstothousandsofthem.Humanshave tensofthousandsofdifferentproteins,butsodootheranimals.Arehumansunique amonganimals?Ifyes,whatmakesthemspecial?Ontheonehand,inthenumberof differentmolecules,humansareofaboutthesamecomplexityasmanyotheranimals. Ontheotherhand,unlikeotheranimals,humanscanread,write,andplaychess.But socancomputers.Arehumansclosertootheranimalsortocomputers?
Thesearenotnewquestions.Morethan2000yearsago,theGreekphilosopherAristotlethoughtthatthedifferencebetweenthelivingandnon-livingwasinthepresenceor absenceofa‘soul’.ForAristotle,thereweredifferentlevelsofasoul:thenutritivesoul wascommontoalllivingthings,whereashigherlevelsofsoulaccountedforthelocomotiveandperceptivecapacitiesofanimals,includinghumans.Atthehighestlevelthere wastherationalsoul,uniquetohumans.Two-thousandyearslaterintheseventeenth century,withtheinventionofthemicroscope,AntonivanLeeuwenhoekdiscovered anothertypeoflife:microbes.Forawhile,itwasthoughtthatmicrobescouldspontaneouslyemergefromnon-livingmatter,blurringthedistinctionbetweenlivingand non-living.Thischangedwhen,inthenineteenthcentury,theFrenchscientistLouis Pasteurdemonstratedthatmicrobescouldnotappear denovo butcouldonlygrowfrom theonesalreadyinexistence.Thedistinctionbetweenlivingandnon-livingappearedto beclear-cutagain.Butwhatexactlyisthedividingline?
Thedevelopmentsofphysicsandchemistryinthenineteenthandtwentiethcenturies providedscientistswithnewwaysofinvestigatingthisquestion,buttheyalsoimposed newdemandsontheacceptableanswers.Theanswerswouldhavetobebasedonatomic
theoryandbeconsistentwiththelawsofphysics.Towardsthisgoal,in1944,oneof thefoundersofquantummechanics,ErwinSchrödinger,wroteabookcalled Whatis Life?,inspiringagenerationofscientistsandfacilitatingthedevelopmentofanewscientificdiscipline—molecularbiology.Schrödingerdescribedahypothetical‘codescript’ thatcarriesinformationpassedonbylivingorganismsfromgenerationtogeneration.
Aroundthesametimethatmolecularbiologywasemerging,thefirstelectroniccomputerswereinvented,andadifferentnewscientificdiscipline—computerscience—was alsodeveloping.Withit,thescientificconceptsof information and informationprocessing weresolidifying.Computersweredifferentfromothermachinesinthattheywereperformingintellectualratherthanphysicalwork.Thequestion‘canmachinesthink?’soon becameatopicfordiscussioninscienceaswellasinsciencefiction.Toanswerthisquestion,AlanTuring,oneofthefoundersofcomputerscience,proposedatest:ifahuman talkingto‘somebody’behindacurtainwasnotabletotellwhetherthat‘somebody’was humanornot,thenbydefinition,that‘somebody’couldthink.1 Butdoesbeingableto thinkhavetomeanbeingalive?Theconversedoesnotseemtobetrue:noteverything livingcanthink.
Inthe1950sthemolecularstructuresofincreasinglycomplexbiologicalmolecules weredeciphered.Thediscoveryofthedouble-helicalstructureofDNAin1953was adefiningmomentpavingthewaytounderstandingthemolecularbasisofbiological information:howitiscoded;howalivingcell,thebasicunitofallknownlife,usesit tofunction;andhowthisinformationispassedonfromgenerationtogeneration.A conceptuallinkbetweenbiologyandinformation/computersciencebegantoemerge.
Theinitialinputfromcomputersciencetobiologywasarguablyratherlimited,neverthelesscomputerscienceenteredtherealmofbiologyafewdecadeslater,inthe1980s. ThiswaswhenDNAsequencing—readingthesequencesofthemolecular‘letters’of DNA(readingSchrödinger’s‘codescript’)andtranscribingthemontopaperor,more usefully,intoacomputermemory—wasinvented.Thisabilitytoreadlife’sinformation moleculeresultedintheemergenceofanewscientificdiscipline—bioinformatics.Soon scientistsfoundthatanalysingDNAasasequenceofletters,ratherthanachemical,can revealmanysecretsoflife.Apparently,forlife’sprocesses,theinformationinDNAis atleastasimportantasthespecificchemistry.Buttowhatextentdoestheparticular chemistrymatteratall?
Allcurrentlyknownlifereliesonthesamecarbon-basedchemistry,whichseemsto suggestthatchemistrymatters.Butisthistheonlywayhowlifecanexist,orwasita historicaccidentthatlifeemergedonEarthbasedonthisparticularchemistry?Andeven ifthisspecificchemistrywastheonlypossiblewayhowlifecouldhaveemerged,does lifehavetoremainbasedonthesamechemistryinthefuture?Canlifeevolvetoinhabit verydifferentphysicalsubstancesanduseverydifferent,non-carbon-basedchemistry?
Perhapsevennochemistryatall?
InthisbookIwillarguethatfirstandforemost,livingmeansprocessinginformation.Iwillarguethattheemergenceoflifeandthefirstrecordingofinformationare intrinsicallylinkedandperhapsareoneandthesamephenomenon.Iwillshowthatbiologicalevolutioncanbeviewedascomputingwheretheinformationresidingintheentire
collectionofDNAonEarthisprocessedbythe geneticalgorithm ofDarwiniansurvival ofthefittest.Atleastinitially,aslifeonEarthwasevolvingandadaptingtochanging environment,informationstoredinDNAwasgrowing.Inasense,lifewaslearningfrom theenvironment,recordingwhatithadlearntinitsDNA.
Forbillionsofyears,alldurableinformationpresentonEarthwasalmostexclusively recordedinDNAorotherpolymermolecules.Butafewhundredthousandyearsago, thischanged.Humanlanguageemerged,providinganalternativemeansforrecording andtransmittinglargeamountsofinformationfromindividualtoindividualandfrom generationtogeneration.Informationbegunincreasinglyaccumulatinginsubstances differentthanDNA.Now,thereisprobablymoreinformationstoredintheworld’s librariesandcomputercloudsthaninthegenomicDNAofallthespeciesonEarth.Even moreimportantly,languageenabledinformationprocessingmechanismsdifferentfrom andmuchfasterthantheonesexistingbefore.Culturalevolution,enabledbylanguage, doesnothavetorelyonthesurvivalofthefittest;theinformationacquiredoverone’s lifetimecanbepassedontoothersandtofuturegenerations.
Nevertheless,atthepresentstageofevolution,theinformationinDNAandits Darwinianprocessingareindispensable:culturalinformationcannotbemaintainedor evolvewithouttheinformationinDNAunderpinningit.Butcanthischangeinthe future?Couldfuturecivilizations,whichinthousandsormillionsofyearspossiblybe colonizingplanetsofdistantgalaxies,bebasedonentirelydifferentprinciples,andmade ofentirelydifferentmolecules?CanlifeexistwithoutDNAorsimilarmolecules?Can civilizationexistwithoutlife?Ifthemaindefiningfeatureoflifeisinformationprocessing,thenperhapstheparticularsubstanceinwhichthisinformationisstored—DNA, RNA,paper,siliconchips,oranythingelse—becomessecondary.Orwilllifealways needDNAandtheDarwinianalgorithmworkinginthebackground?Whatwillthelife eventuallyescapingthedyingsolarsystembelike?
Theappreciationoftheroleofinformationandinformationprocessinginbiology canbetracedbacktothementionedErwinSchrödinger’sbook WhatisLife? andto publicationsofoneoftheco-discoverersofthestructureofDNA,FrancisCrick.The observationofthecentralroleofinformationinbiologyisatthebasisoftheso-called gene’s-eyeview introducedbytheAmericanandBritishbiologistsGeorgeC.Williams andRichardDawkins,statingthat genes—piecesofheritableinformation—arethemain objectofDarwinianselectionofthefittest.2 Butaspecialplaceinthedevelopmentof theideaofinformationasacentralconceptinbiologybelongstotheBritishbiologist JohnMaynardSmith.Inhisseminalbook TheMajorTransitionsinEvolution, 3 written withtheHungarianbiologistEörsSzathmáryandpublishedin1995,theauthorsshow thatthekeyeventsinbiologicalevolutioncanbeseenastransitionsinhowlifeprocesses information.
Withgenomesequencingnowacommodityandbioinformaticsbecomingamainstreamscience,thecentralroleoftheconceptofinformationinbiologyisbecoming increasinglyaccepted.Inhisrecentbook, TheDemonintheMachine, 4 thephysicistPaul Daviesexploresthelinksbetweentheconceptsofentropy,information,andlife,arguing thatinformationprocessingisattheverycentreoflife.Evenmorerecently,theNobel
LaureatePaulNursewritesabout lifeaschemistry and lifeasinformation inhispopular sciencebookthathasthesametitleasSchrödinger’s WhatisLife?.5
Inthisbook, LivingComputers,Idiscusshowlivingsystemswork,howlifeandinformationemergedalreadyintrinsicallylinked,howlifeandinformationprocessingevolved throughRNAandDNAtoneuralnetworksandtheanimalbrain,andcontinuedthrough humanlanguagetokick-startanewkindofevolution.Throughoutthebook,Itrytobe clearwhereIamdescribingtheconsensuswithwhichmostscientistswouldagree,note whereIamtouchingcontroversies,andstatewhereIamjustspeculating(andtomake surethatmyclaimscanbeverified,Iprovidemanyreferencestopeer-reviewedliterature).Mostofthebookconcernsthefirst,consensuspositions,eventhoughIoftentryto showtheestablishedknowledgeinnewlight,andIsometimesquestionanoddorthodox assumption.Noteverythinginthebookisapartoftheestablishedscientificconsensus. Thethesisthatlifeandtherecordingofinformationemergedjointlyseemsobviousto me,neverthelessthereisnoreferencetoscientificliteraturethatIcanfindwherethis hadbeenstatedexplicitly.Iarguethatlargeamountsofinformationcanberecorded andprocessedonlybydigital-combinatorialmeans,whichmayalsosoundcontroversial tosome.Thisthenfurtherleadstotheconclusionthatbeforehumanlanguageemerged, theonlymeanstorecordlargeamountsofinformationwereinpolymermoleculessuch asDNA.Probably,themostspeculativeismythesisthatthenewmeansofinformation recordingandprocessingresultingfromtheemergenceofhumanlanguagecantake evolutioninentirelynewdirections.Butaboutthefutureoflife,clearly,wecanonly speculate.
HowtoCloneOneself? HerMajestypointedtoaclockandsaid,‘Seetoitthatitproducesoffspring’.
(Anonymousaccountofanallegeddiscussion betweenRenéDescartesandQueenChristinaofSweden,1649–1650)
Isitpossibletomakeamachinethatclonesitself?Amachinewhichwhensetinmotion, goesonandassemblesitsownreplica?Inotherwords,amachinethatreproduces?The abilitytoreproduceisoftenseenasoneoftheprincipaldividinglinesbetweenliving andnon-living.Allegedly,whenintheseventeenthcentury,theFrenchphilosopherand mathematicianRenéDescartesinaconversationwithQueenChristinaofSwedensuggestedthatananimalbodycouldberegardedasamachine,theQueenrepliedthatthen aclockshouldbeabletoproduceoffspring.Obviously,clocksdonotdothis,butis itpossibletobuildanautomatonorarobotthatcancloneitself?Inotherwords,an automatonthatcan self-reproduce
Regardlessofwhetherthisconversationreallytookplace,orhowaccuratethenarrativeis,itisquitelikelythatthephenomenonof self-reproduction or self-replication has beenoccupyingthemindsofthinkersandphilosophersforcenturies.However,thefirst trulyscientificinvestigationofthisquestionapparentlybeganonlywiththeonsetofthe computerage.InJune1948,theHungarian-bornAmericanmathematicianJohnvon Neumann(Figure 1.1)gavethreelecturestoasmallgroupoffriendsattheInstitute forAdvancedStudyatPrincetondiscussinghowtobuildamechanicalself-reproducing machine.1
Bythattime,vonNeumannwasalreadyanestablishedscientist,havingmademajor contributionstoquantummechanics,statisticalphysics,gametheory,andthefoundationsofmathematics,amongstotherdisciplines.Inearly1940s,vonNeumannjoined theprojectattheUniversityofPennsylvania’sMooreSchoolofElectricalEngineering, todesigntheElectronicDiscreteVariableArithmeticComputer—EDVAC.2 VonNeumann’s FirstDraftofaReportontheEDVAC,publishedin1945,isnowwidelyregarded asthefirstdescriptionofastored-programcomputer—acomputerwhichisgivenits operatinginstructionsbysoftware,asallcomputersnoware.3
Inthisreport,vonNeumannabstractedfromthespecificelectronicparts,suchas electronvacuumtubesorelectricrelays,usedincomputersatthetime,andinstead talkedaboutidealized logicalswitches.Heusedananalogybetweenacomputerand brain,comparinghislogicalswitchestoneurons.Hethoughtthatthespecificphysical
Figure1.1 JohnvonNeumannstandinginfrontofcomputer. Photographer,AlanRichards.FromtheShelbyWhiteandLeonLevyArchivesCenter,Institutefor AdvancedStudy,Princeton(NJ).
implementationoftheswitchescouldsoonchange,andhewasright:itwasnotlong beforethetransistorwasinventedandreplacedthevacuumtube.4 ForvonNeumann, thelogicalbasisofcomputingwasmorefundamentalthanthespecificphysical implementations.In1957,lessthantenyearsaftergivingthementionedlectureson self-reproduction,attheageof53,vonNeumanndiedfromcancer.
Aroundthesametimewhenthefirstelectroniccomputerswerebeingbuilt,inthe 1940sand1950s,geneticistsandbiochemistswereclosinginonunderstandingtheprinciplesofthemolecularbasisoflife.AlthoughvonNeumanndidnotplayamajorpartin thiseffort,hewasdiscussinghisideaswiththeleadingbiochemistsandgeneticists,and whenworkingontheproblemsofcomputing,healwayskeptreturningtothecomputer–brainanalogy.ItisquitelikelythatvonNeumann’sinterestinself-reproductionwas motivatedbywhathesawastheanalogybetweenmachinesandlivingorganisms,and byhisdesiretounderstandthe‘logical’basisoflife.
ForvonNeumann,itwasclearthataself-reproducingdevicewaspossible;after all,livingorganismsreproduce.Forhimthequestionwashowtomakesuchadevice
andhowcomplexthesimplestpossibleself-reproducingsystemwouldhavetobe. VonNeumannnoticedaparadox.ForadeviceAtobeabletobuildanotherdevice B,deviceAwouldhavetocontain,insomesense,adescriptionofB.Ifso,itappeared thatAwouldhavetobemorecomplexthanB.Thus,adevicecouldonlybuilddevices simplerthanitself.VonNeumanncalledthisphenomenonthe‘degenerativetrend’.But thiscontradictedtheobservationsthatlivingorganismsnotonlymanagetoproduce descendantsascomplexasthemselvesbut,throughevolution,alsoincreasinglycomplexones.Howcouldadevicebuildsomethingascomplexorevenmorecomplexas itself?
Lookingforasolution,vonNeumanncameupwiththeconceptofthe UniversalConstructor—anabstractionofageneral-purposerobotwhich,givenappropriate instructionsandthenecessarymaterials,couldbuildwhateverithasbeeninstructed tobuild.TheUniversalConstructorcouldbegiveninstructionstobuilditself,though tocompletethereproductioncyclethenewdevicewouldalsohavetobeequipped withanewcopyoftherespectiveinstructions.VonNeumannarguedthattheUniversalConstructorwouldinevitablyhavetobequiteacomplexdevice,andconsequently, aself-reproducingmachine—arobotthatclonesitself—couldnotbesimple.Healso speculatedhowrandomerrorsinsuchself-reproducingdevicescouldpotentiallylead toevolutiontowardsincreasingcomplexity.Thus,vonNeumannpostulatedthatthere isacomplexitydividinglinebelowwhichonlythedegenerativetrendcouldoccurbut abovewhichevolutiontowardsincreasingcomplexitywaspossible.5
Amechanicalreplicator InthementionedlecturesatPrinceton,andayearlaterintheHixonSymposiumon CerebralMechanismsinBehavior, 6 vonNeumanndiscussedthegeneralprinciplesatthe basisofsuchamechanicalself-reproducingdevice.Hecalledthisa kinematic replicator. Kinematics isabranchofphysicsthatstudiesmotionofbodiesandtheirsystems.Von Neumannwasinterestedinself-reproductioninits‘logicalform’andwantedtoabstract fromproblemssuchassupplyofenergy,thenatureofmolecularforces,orchemistry. Therefore,thebuildingblocksofthereplicatorwereallowedtobemorecomplexthan individual‘molecules,atomsorelementaryparticles’.InalectureattheUniversityofIllinois in1949hesaid:
Drawupalistofunambiguouslydefinedelementaryparts.Imaginethatthereisapracticallyunlimitedsupplyofthesepartsfloatingaroundinalargecontainer.Onecanimaginean automatonfunctioninginthefollowingmanner:Italsoisfloatingaroundinthismedium;its essentialactivityistopickuppartsandputthemtogether....7
Thisprocessshouldresultinanewcopyoftheautomatonbeingbuilt.VonNeumann suggestedalistofeightdifferent elementaryparts,whichhecalledthe stimulusproducer, rigidmember, coincidenceorgan, stimuliorgan, inhibitoryorgan, fusingorgan, cuttingorgan,
and muscle.8 The stimulusproducer servedasasourceofdiscretepulsesofsignalsto maketheotherpartsact.The rigidmember wasthephysicalbuildingblockfromwhich theframeoftheautomatonwasconstructed.Thenextthree‘organs’—the coincidence, stimuli,and inhibitoryorgans werewhatwewouldnowcallthe logicalgates AND,OR, andNOT—thebasicbuildingblocksofacomputer.9 VonNeumannusedtheseelements todesignthecontrolmodule—thebrainofthereplicator,whichprocessedthesignals generatedbythestimulusorgantoguidetheconstruction.Thelastthreeorganswere theretofollowtheinstructionsofthiscontrolmoduleandtoperformtheactualphysical construction.The fusingorgan,whenstimulatedbyasignal,solderedtwopartstogether; a cuttingorgan,whenstimulated,unsolderedaconnection;andfinally,the muscle was usedtomovetheparts.Theautomatonbuiltfromtheseelementswouldbe‘floating inacontainer’alongsidesparepartsandfollowingtheinstructionsrecordedonatape, tellingitwhichpartstopickupandhowtoassemblethem.
Onacloserlook,therearethreemainideasatthebasisofvonNeumann’sselfreproducingautomaton.Thefirstcomesfromasimpleobservationthatifonehasto copyacomplexthree-dimensionalobject,forinstancetomakeareplicaofahistoric steam-engine,itisusuallyeasierfirsttomakeablueprintofthisobjectandthenbuild bytheblueprint,ratherthantotrytocopythethree-dimensionalobjectdirectly.This, indeed,ishowthingsareusuallymanufactured.Itmayalsohelptosupplementthe blueprintwithasequenceofinstructionsdescribingthestepsoftheconstructionprocess.Forinstance,flat-packfurnitureusuallycomeswithablueprintandaninstruction manualdescribingtheorderinwhichthepiecesshouldbeputtogether.Iftheseinstructionsaretobeexecutedbyarobot,theneverystepwillneedtobeencodedinaprecisely definedway.Nowadays,suchinstructionswouldnormallybestoredonsomeelectronic informationcarrier,suchasa flash memory-card,orstreamedwirelessly,butintheearly daysofcomputing,apunchedtape,suchastheoneshowninFigure 1.2,wouldbeused. Conceptually,suchatapecanberegardedasaone-dimensionalsequenceofsymbols encodingtheinstructions.
Thesecondidearepresentsanothersimpleobservationthatitiseasiertocopyaoneortwo-dimensionalobject,suchasapunch-tapeorthisprintedpage,thanathreedimensionalobject.Forinstance,tocopythepunch-tapeinFigure 1.2,onecouldputit ontopofanunused(unperforated)tapeandpunchholeswheretheyalreadyareinthe original.Itshouldnotbetoodifficulttobuildapurelymechanicaldeviceautomating thisprocess.
VonNeumanndescribedadevicethatwouldmechanicallycopyachainencoding instructionsasasequenceoftwodifferenttypesoflinks,suchasshowninFigure 1.3A. Conceptually,suchachaincanbeviewedasasequenceof0sand1s,andaswewill seelater,anypieceofinformationcanbeencodedassuchabinarystring.Infact,it maybeeveneasiertocopyachainifitisdesignedastwo‘complementary’chains, asshowninFigure 1.3B,eachunambiguouslydefiningthecomplement.Wesimply needtodecouplethecomplementarychainsanduseeachasatemplatetomakeanew complement,asshowninFigure 1.3C.Oncetheprocessisfinished,wehavetwocopies oftheoriginalchain.Areaderwithsomeknowledgeofmolecularbiologymaynoticea similaritybetweenthismethodandhowaDNAmoleculeiscopiedinalivingcell.
Figure1.2 Punched(perforated)tapeswerewidelyusedinthe1950sandthe1960sinelectronic computersfordatainput.Althoughsuchatapeisessentiallyatwo-dimensionalobject,abstractlywe canviewitasaone-dimensionalsequenceofsymbols.
(AdaptedfromWikimedia,authorTedColes.)
Thethirdidea,themostfundamentalandnon-trivialofthethree,wasthatofthe alreadymentionedUniversalConstructor.VonNeumannassumedthatthismachine wouldreadasequenceofinstructionsgiventoitencodedonatapeorasachainof elementsasshowninFigure 1.3,andbyfollowingtheseinstructions,itwouldbuild anyspecifiedthree-dimensionalobject.Thisobjectcouldbeanothermachine.Arobot abletoreadinstructionsgiventoitonaperforatedtapehadalreadybeeninventedin theeighteenthcenturybytheFrenchweaver,BasileBouchonofLyon.Bouchonbuilta loomthatfollowedinstructionsencodedonsuchatape,translatingthemintoweaving patterns.Ofcourse,thatwasnotageneral-purposerobotbutaloom.Onecansaythat vonNeumann’sUniversalConstructorwasanextensionofBouchon’sloomtowards Turing’sUniversalMachine,discussedlaterinthischapter.
Letusseehowacombinationofthesethreeideascanbeusedtomakeaselfreproducingdevice.IwillroughlyfollowvonNeumann’sdescription,whichissomewhat abstract,butitwilllaterhelpustoseetheanalogybetweenhisself-reproducing automatonandthemainprincipleshowalivingcellreplicates.
SupposeXisanarbitraryobjectmadeofvonNeumann’seightelementaryparts.This object,justlikeanyobject,canbemanufacturedbytheUniversalConstructor,therefore thereexistsasequenceofinstructionsfollowingwhichtheUniversalConstructorproducesX.Letusdenotethissequenceofinstructionsbycode(X).Conceptuallycode(X) isasequenceof0sand1s,physicallythisisencodedonoaperforatedtapeoranyway whichthisUniversalConstructorcanread.Whatmattersisthatontheinputofcode(X), theUniversalConstructoroutputsobjectX.
Figure1.3 A) Achainoftwodifferenttypesoflinksencodingabinarystring. B) Two ‘complementary’chainsofsuchlinksformingadoublechain. C) Apossiblemechanismofinformation copyingthatexploitscomplementarity:thecomplementarychainsareseparated,andanewcompliment isassembledontoeachofthemfrom‘free’links‘floating’inthemedia.Oncebothchainsarefully separatedandthecomplementsassembled,theneighbouringelementsofthenewlyassembled complementsonlyneedtobe‘stapled’togetherandanewcopyoftheentirechainisobtained.Itisnot clearifsuchcomplementaritybasedapproachhadoccurredtovonNeumann;hedoesnotmentionthis possibility.Aswewilldiscussin ChapterIII,inDNAreplicationasimilarmechanismisused.
Forbrevity,letusdenotetheUniversalConstructorbyU.Tocompletetheconstructionofaself-reproducingmachine,inadditiontoUweneedtwoother,simplerrobotic devices,whichwedenotebyRandC.ThedeviceR,called codereplicator,giventhe tapecode(X),makesanewcopyofcode(X).Thatis,Rmakesanothercopyofthe tapecontainingthesameinstructions.Asalreadynoted,copyingatapeisquiteasimple procedure.
ThethirdrobotCcontrolsbothUandRinthefollowingway.Givencode(X),Cfirst runsreplicatorR,thusmakinganewcopyofcode(X).ThenCrunsUoncode(X),thus producingobjectX.Finally,Cattachesthenewcopyofcode(X)tothenewlycreated XandreleasesthenewobjectX+code(X).InvonNeumann’sownwords,it‘cutsthe newobjectloose’.Here,followingvonNeumann,weusesymbol‘+’todenotethatthe twoobjectsaresomehow‘tied’together.
NowstartwiththecombinedrobotU+R+C+code(X).First,CinstructsUtorun oncode(X).Theresultis:
U+R+C+code(X),X
Next,CinstructsRtomakeanothercode(X);theresultis:
U+R+C+code(X),X,code(X)
Finally,U‘ties’Xandcode(X)together;theresultis:
U+R+C+code(X),X+code(X)
ButnowrecallthatXwasanarbitraryobject.Inparticular,Xcanbesomesortofa device,forinstance,wecantakeU+R+CforX(thatis,X=U+R+C).Ifwedothis, andgivecode(U+R+C)toourthree-partrobotasaninput,westartwith:
andweendwith:
TherobotU+R+C+code(U+R+C)hasmanagedtobuilditsowncopy;ithasreproduceditself.The‘degenerativetrend’hasbeenbroken—wehavearobotthatbuilt anotherrobotascomplexasitself.Onemaywonderhowexactlyitdidthis,butitdid.We neededtwoseparatedevices:theUniversalConstructorUandcodereplicatorR.Could theUniversalConstructordoboth?ForvonNeumann’sideatowork,theprocessRof replicatingthetapehadtobecarriedoutseparatelyfromprocessU(ascepticreader cantrytomergebothprocessesintooneandseethedifficulties).Aswewillseelater, thisisalsowhathappenswhenalivingcelldivides;thetapethereisthegenomicDNA, whichisapolymer‘chain’offourdifferentelements.DNAreplicationisaprocessthat isimplementedinalivingcellbyadistinctmachinery.
NotethattheobjectU+R+C+code(U+R+C)isanobjectthatcontainsitsown description:code(U+R+C)describesthedeviceU+R+C.Thisiswhathasallowed ittobeatthe‘degenerativetrend’.Butthisalsoturnsouttobeatthebasisoflife.As SydneyBrenner,whosharedtheNobelPrizeinphysiologyandmedicinewithRobert HorvitzandJohnSulstonin2002‘fortheirdiscoveriesconcerninggeneticregulationof organdevelopmentandprogrammedcelldeath’,wrotein2012:
ArguablythebestexamplesofTuring’sandvonNeumann’smachinesaretobefoundinbiology. Nowhereelsearetheresuchcomplicatedsystems,inwhicheveryorganismcontainsaninternal descriptionofitself.10
WhatvonNeumanndescribedinhislectureswasonlyanidea;hedidnotbuildaphysical mechanicalself-reproducingmachine.Thecomplexityofsuchamachinewouldhave
U+R+C+code(U+R+C)
U+R+C+code(U+R+C),U+R+C+code(U+R+C)
