[extropy-chat] Re: Nano-assembler feasibility

Mon Mar 29 03:56:47 UTC 2004

This is as off base to the technical aspects of the discussion could be,
but a logical method of molecular assembly is to add an overriding
interactive controller "chipset"  to  organisms.
Epigenetics is the bio equivalent.  It is a very high level language
chemistry.  To intervene in a manner which re-directs the epignetic
program to carry out assembly instructions which might be encoded in
newly added DNA or a separate structure akin to a mitochondria as the
active factory unit is also a high level
enterprise.  To add a programing (silico , bio or de-novo)  chipset which
allows outside control over diverse cell biofunctions is another task.
Each individual cell in a mass of of cells needs to be addressible and
able to be directed individually and separately from each other cell.
This is going to be an enormous undertaking but if each part of the
process is developed separately and then integrated, it might be much
simpler than addressing  the complexity of the whole.

Morris

Brett Paatsch wrote:

> Robert J. Bradbury wrote:
>
> > I'm going to focus on an extremly narrow set of
> > points in this discussion.  The wider set of the discussion
> > is very large.
>
> Me too.
>
> > On Sun, 28 Mar 2004, Brett Paatsch wrote:
> >
> > > My point was there is no specification for a system to
> > > produce an assembler of any finite number of parts.
> >
> > This is not completely accurate.  Eric's specification for his
> > nanoassembler is reasonably precise (at the 100 nm scale).
>
> Which specification?
>
> >  Given
> > the amount of time it took Eric and Ralph to create their
> > molecular designs and the scale-up required for the
> > assembler I would estimate you are talking less than five
> > years for a group of clever graduate students.
>
> It's not *me* that talking timeframes - its me asking which
> specification is the basis for your timeframes? ;-)
>
> > The incentive is high -- they would make their careers.
> > There will be only a few people who will claim "we designed
> > and built the Drexler nanoassmebler".
>
> And those who find Eldorado will be rich - there just one l-ee-ttle
> problem.  Where's Eldorado?  :-)
>
> On the other hand those who look for Eldorado and don't
> find it will be shorter on time and money for other things.
>
> >Those people will walk on water. They may also go down
> > in history as being more significant than Jesus (because they
> > may be able to lay a legitimate claim that they have actually
> > saved more people).
>
> May (above) is a word that can be replaced with may-not. The
> point is why should they choose to try? What basis for confidence
> do you offer them that this is a good place to spend time, effort
> and money?
>
> > > And therefore there is no sound basis for either
> > > (a) estimating how soon that system could be produced
> > > such that the first assembler could be made, or
> >
> > Well Zyvex seems to be projecting within 10 years.
> > (Disclaimer: I do not know any inside information with
> > respect to Zyvex).  I  simply know Jim to be a good manager
> > and someone who wants to make nanotechnology happen.
> > Zyvex in my opinion is in a good position to take one of the
> > possible fronts.
>
> So does Zyvex have a specification for an assembler at the
> (microscale even) or not?
>
> If so, they can probably right their own check for R&D funding.
>
> If not, they can "project" all they like the US is a relatively free
> country so far as projecting without promising or legally
> guaranteeing goes.
>
> For what its worth I hope someone can show that an assembler
> is possible at some scale. But wishing won't make it so. Mine
> or anyone else's.
>
> > > (b) suggesting optimisations or streamlines on that design
> > > to bring the estimated time of arrival or assembly of that
> > > first assembler forward.
> >
> > One does not need to discuss this.
>
> My point was without a specification to improve on there is
> nothing to optimise and no basis for putting down a time
> estimate.
>
> Its like saying the estimated travel time to X is Y. So how do
> we cut down the travel time to X to less than Y? My point is
> - its a pointless question until you specify X as a specific place.
>
> > There are nanoscale assemblers now (from DNA polymerase
> > complexes to the ribosome).
>
> This is a different use of the word assembler.
>
> > The only questions
> > one needs to ask are with respect to what environments in which
> > they may be limited to operating and what are the materials they
> > are limited to assembling?
>
> The "only questions" in relation to what? - your shifting the frame
> of reference. Biology can and does do some limited forms of
> assembly that's not the point.
>
> > > If the computer is not part of the assembler then its not a
> > > self-replicating system, if it is, the parts for the computing
> > > subsystem have to be included in the parts for building the first
> > > assembler.
> >
> > As Christine Peterson recently proposed self-replication is
> > to be de-emphasized [1] as an component of nanotech.
>
> This is off-topic but sure others are de-emphasising it too. And
> some of them are getting funded. As you have pointed out biology
> does some forms of  assembly too. But this is nothing to do with
> "Nano-santa" nano-assembler feasibility.
>
> > Though
> > I may continue to have debates with people such as Robert
> > Freitas on the topic -- self-replication and nanotech are not
> > tied together.
>
> Agreed. But "self"-replication means different things in different
> contexts.
>
> > Though self-replication has been with humanity for thousands
> > of years and we should have a balanced perspective with
> > respect to its costs and benefits -- it is not necessary to include
> > it in the nanotechnology debate.
>
> There's that slippery little word "self" again :-)
>
> That amoebas and some simple bio-critters can "self"-replicate
> does not mean we are in a position to do a count down towards
> Nano-santas or Genie machines.
>
> Cheers,
> Brett Paatsch
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat