back to indexLee Cronin: Origin of Life, Aliens, Complexity, and Consciousness | Lex Fridman Podcast #269
link |
The following is a conversation with Lee Cronin,
link |
a chemist from University of Glasgow,
link |
who's one of the most fascinating, brilliant,
link |
out of the box thinking scientists I've ever spoken to.
link |
This episode was recorded more than two weeks ago,
link |
so the war in Ukraine is not mentioned.
link |
I have been spending a lot of time each day
link |
talking to people in Ukraine and Russia.
link |
I have family, friends, colleagues,
link |
and loved ones in both countries.
link |
I will try to release a solo episode on this war,
link |
but I've been failing to find the words
link |
that make sense of it for myself and others,
link |
I ask for your understanding no matter which path I take.
link |
Most of my time is spent trying to help
link |
as much as I can privately.
link |
I'm talking to people who are suffering,
link |
who are angry, afraid.
link |
When I returned to this conversation with Lee,
link |
I couldn't help but smile.
link |
He's a beautiful, brilliant, and hilarious human being.
link |
He's basically a human manifestation
link |
of the mad scientist Rick Sanchez from Rick and Morty.
link |
I thought about quitting this podcast for a time,
link |
but for now at least, I'll keep going.
link |
I love people too much.
link |
You, the listener.
link |
I meet folks on the street or when I run.
link |
You say a few kind words about the podcast
link |
and we talk about life, the small things,
link |
and the big things.
link |
All of it gives me hope.
link |
People are just amazing.
link |
I ask for your support, wisdom, and patience
link |
as I keep going with this silly little podcast,
link |
including through some difficult conversations
link |
and hopefully many fascinating and fun ones too.
link |
This is the Lex Friedman podcast.
link |
To support it, please check out our sponsors
link |
in the description.
link |
And now, dear friends, here's Lee Cronin.
link |
How do you think life originated on Earth
link |
and what insights does that give us about life?
link |
If we go back to the origin of Earth
link |
and you think about maybe 4.7, 4.6, 4.5 billion years ago,
link |
the planet was quite hot.
link |
There was a limited number of minerals.
link |
There was some carbon, some water, and I think
link |
that maybe it's a really simple set of chemistry
link |
that we really don't understand.
link |
So that means you've got a finite number of elements
link |
that are going to react very simply with one another
link |
and out of that mess comes a cell.
link |
So literally sand turns into cells
link |
and it seems to happen quick.
link |
So what I think I can say with some degree of,
link |
I think not certainty, but curiosity,
link |
genuine curiosity is that life happened fast.
link |
Yeah, so when we say fast,
link |
this is a pretty surprising fact
link |
and maybe you can actually correct me and elaborate,
link |
but it seems like most, like 70 or 80% of the time
link |
that Earth has been around, there's been life on it,
link |
like some very significant percentage.
link |
So when you say fast, like the slow part
link |
is from single cell or from bacteria
link |
to something more complicated, organisms.
link |
It seems like most of the time that Earth has been around,
link |
it's been single cell or like very basic organisms,
link |
like a couple billion years.
link |
But yeah, you're right.
link |
That's really, I recently kind of revisited our history
link |
and saw this and I was just looking at the timeline.
link |
Wait a minute, like how did life just spring up so quickly?
link |
Like really quickly.
link |
That makes me think that it really wanted to.
link |
Like put another way, it's very easy for life to spring.
link |
Yeah, I agree, I think it's much more inevitable
link |
and I think I try to kind of, not provoke,
link |
but try and push chemists to think about,
link |
because chemists are central to this problem, right?
link |
Of understanding the origin of life on Earth, at least,
link |
because we're made of chemistry.
link |
But I wonder if the origin of life on a planet,
link |
or sorry, the emergence of life on the planet is as,
link |
common as the formation of a star.
link |
And if you start framing it in that way,
link |
it allows you to then look at the universe
link |
slightly differently, because,
link |
and we can get into this, I think, in quite some detail,
link |
but I think, to come back to your question,
link |
I have little idea of how life got started,
link |
but I know it was simple.
link |
And I know that the process of selection
link |
had to occur before the, by the end of the day,
link |
the selection had to occur before the biology
link |
was established, so that selection built the framework
link |
from which life kind of grew in complexity
link |
and capability and functionality and autonomy.
link |
And I think these are all really important words
link |
that we can unpack over the next while.
link |
Can you say all the words again?
link |
So you said selection, so natural selection,
link |
the original A, B testing.
link |
And so, and then complexity,
link |
and then the degree of autonomy and sophistication,
link |
because I think that people misunderstand what life is.
link |
Some people say that life is a cell,
link |
and some people that say that life is a virus
link |
or life is an on off switch.
link |
I don't think it's that,
link |
life is the universe developing a memory.
link |
And the laws of physics and the way,
link |
well, there are no laws of physics.
link |
It's just memory free stuff, right?
link |
So there's only a finite number of ways
link |
you can arrange the fundamental particles to do things.
link |
Life is the universe developing a memory.
link |
So it's like sewing a piece of art slowly,
link |
and then you can look back at it.
link |
So, so there's a stickiness to life.
link |
It's like universe doing stuff.
link |
And when you say memory, it's like there's a stickiness
link |
to a bunch of the stuff that's building together.
link |
So like you can, in a stable way,
link |
like trace back the complexity
link |
and that tells a coherent story.
link |
Yeah, and I think, yeah.
link |
Okay, that's, by the way, very poetic and beautiful.
link |
Life is the universe developing a memory.
link |
Okay, and then there's autonomy,
link |
you said complexity we'll talk about,
link |
but it's a really interesting idea
link |
that selection preceded biology.
link |
So first of all, what is chemistry?
link |
Like does sand still count as chemistry?
link |
Sure, I mean, as a chemist, a card carrying chemist,
link |
if I'm allowed a card, I don't know.
link |
Don't know what I am most days, actually.
link |
What is a card made of?
link |
That's what I'm thinking.
link |
What's the chemical composition of the card?
link |
So what is chemistry?
link |
Well, chemistry is the thing that happens
link |
when you bring electrons together and you form bonds.
link |
So bonds, well, I say to people
link |
when they talk about life elsewhere,
link |
and I just say, well, there's bonds, there's hope,
link |
because bonds allow you to get heterogeneity.
link |
They allow you to record those memories,
link |
or at least on Earth.
link |
You could imagine a Stanislav Lemtri world
link |
where you might have life emerging
link |
or intelligence emerging before life.
link |
That may be something like Solaris or something,
link |
but to get to selection,
link |
if you can form, if atoms can combine and form bonds,
link |
those bonds, those atoms can bond to different elements
link |
and those molecules will have different identities
link |
and interact with each other differently,
link |
and then you can start to have some degree of causation
link |
or interaction and then selection and then existence.
link |
And then you go up the kind of the path of complexity.
link |
And so at least on Earth, as we know it,
link |
there is a sufficient pool of available chemicals
link |
to start searching that combinatorial space of bonds.
link |
So, okay, this is a really interesting question.
link |
So bonds, almost like cards.
link |
We say there's bonds, there is life,
link |
there's intelligence, there's consciousness.
link |
And what you just made me realize is
link |
that those can emerge, let's put bonds aside,
link |
those can emerge in any order.
link |
That's really brilliant.
link |
So intelligence can come before life.
link |
It's like panpsychists believe that consciousness,
link |
I guess, comes before life and before intelligence.
link |
So consciousness permeates all matter,
link |
it's some kind of fabric of reality.
link |
Okay, so like within this framework,
link |
you can kind of arrange everything,
link |
but you need to have the bonds
link |
that precedes everything else.
link |
Oh, and the other thing is selection.
link |
So like the mechanism of selection, that could proceed.
link |
See, couldn't that proceed bonds too?
link |
Whatever the hell selection is.
link |
So I would say that there is an elegant order to it.
link |
Bonds allow selection, allows the emergence of life,
link |
allows the emergence of multicellularity
link |
and then more information processing,
link |
building state machines all the way up.
link |
However, you could imagine a situation if you had,
link |
I don't know, a neutron star or a sun
link |
or what a ferromagnetic loops interacting with one another
link |
and these oscillators building state machines
link |
and these state machines reading something
link |
out in the environment.
link |
Over time, these state machines would be able
link |
to literally record what happened in the past
link |
and sense what's going on in the present
link |
and imagine the future.
link |
However, I don't think it's ever gonna be
link |
within a human comprehension, that type of life.
link |
I wouldn't count it out because whenever you say,
link |
I know in science, whenever I say something's impossible,
link |
I then wake up the next day and say,
link |
no, that's actually wrong.
link |
I mean, there are some limits, of course.
link |
I don't see myself traveling fast and light anytime soon,
link |
Eric Weinstein says that's possible,
link |
so he will say you're wrong.
link |
Sure, but I'm an experimentalist as well,
link |
so one of my, I have two superpowers.
link |
My stupidity, and I don't mean that as a,
link |
I'm like absolutely completely witless,
link |
but I mean my ability to kind of just start again
link |
and ask the question and then do it with an experiment.
link |
I always wanted to be a theoretician growing up,
link |
but I just didn't have the intellectual capability,
link |
but I was able to think of experiments in my head
link |
I could then do in my lab or when I was a child outside
link |
and then those experiments in my head
link |
and then outside reinforced one another.
link |
So I think that's a very good way of kind of
link |
grounding the science, right?
link |
Well, that's a nice way to think about theoreticians
link |
is they're just people who run experiments in their head.
link |
I mean, that's exactly what Einstein did, right?
link |
But you were also capable of doing that in the head,
link |
in your head, inside your head and in the real world
link |
and the connection between the two
link |
is when you first discovered your superpower stupidity.
link |
Yes, there you go.
link |
What's the second superpower?
link |
Your accent or is that?
link |
Well, I don't know.
link |
I am genuinely curious.
link |
So I have, like everybody, ego problems,
link |
but my curiosity is bigger than my ego.
link |
So as long as that happens, I can cope.
link |
That is so powerful.
link |
You're just dropping some powerful lines.
link |
So curiosity is bigger than ego.
link |
That's something I have to think about
link |
because you always struggle about the role of ego in life
link |
and that's so nice to think about,
link |
don't think about the size of ego,
link |
the absolute size of ego.
link |
Think about the relative size of ego
link |
to the other horses pulling at you.
link |
If the curiosity one is bigger,
link |
then ego will do just fine and make you fun to talk to.
link |
Anyway, so those are the two superpowers.
link |
How do those connect to natural selection
link |
or selection and bonds and, I forgot already,
link |
life and consciousness?
link |
So we're going back to selection in the universe
link |
and origin of life on Earth.
link |
I mean, selection, I'm convinced that selection
link |
is a force in the universe.
link |
Not a fundamental force, but it is a directing force
link |
because existence, although existence appears
link |
to be the default, the existence of what,
link |
why does, and we can get to this later, I think,
link |
but it's amazing that discrete things exist
link |
and you see this cup.
link |
It's not the sexiest cup in the world,
link |
but it's pretty functional.
link |
This cup, the complexity of this cup
link |
isn't just in the object.
link |
It is literally the lineage of people making cups
link |
and recognizing that, seeing that in their head,
link |
making an abstraction of a cup,
link |
and then making a different one.
link |
So I wonder how many billions of cups
link |
have come before this one,
link |
and that's the process of selection and existence,
link |
and the only reason the cup is still used
link |
I like the handle.
link |
It's convenient, so I don't die.
link |
I keep hydration, and so I think we are missing
link |
something fundamental in the universe about selection,
link |
and I think what biology is is a selection amplifier,
link |
and that this is where autonomy comes in,
link |
and actually I think that how humanity is gonna,
link |
humans and autonomous robots,
link |
or whatever we're gonna call them in the future,
link |
will supercharge that even further.
link |
So selection is happening in the universe,
link |
but if you look in the asteroid belt,
link |
selection, if objects are being kicked in and out
link |
of the asteroid belt, those trajectories are quite complex.
link |
You don't really look at that as productive selection
link |
because it's not doing anything to improve its function,
link |
The asteroid belt has existed for some time,
link |
so there is some selection going on,
link |
but the functionality is somewhat limited.
link |
On Earth, at the formation of Earth,
link |
interaction of chemicals and molecules in the environment
link |
gave selection, and then things could happen,
link |
because you could think about, in chemistry,
link |
we could have an infinite number of reactions happen,
link |
but all the reactions that are allowed to happen
link |
don't happen, why?
link |
Because there are energy barriers.
link |
So there must be some things called catalysts out there,
link |
or there are bits of minerals that,
link |
when two molecules get together in that mineral,
link |
it lowers the energy barrier for the reaction,
link |
and so the reaction is promoted.
link |
So suddenly you get one reaction over another
link |
series of possibilities occurring
link |
that makes a particular molecule,
link |
and this keeps happening in steps,
link |
and before you know it,
link |
almost these waves as discrete reactions work together,
link |
and you start to build a machinery
link |
that is run by existence.
link |
So as you go forward in time,
link |
the fact that the molecules, the bonds are getting,
link |
there are more bonds in a molecule,
link |
there's more function,
link |
there's more capability for this molecule
link |
to interact with other molecules, to redirect them,
link |
it's like a series of little,
link |
and I don't want to use this term too much,
link |
but it's almost thinking about
link |
the simplest von Neumann constructor,
link |
that's the simplest molecule
link |
that could build a more complicated molecule
link |
to build a more complicated molecule,
link |
and before you know it,
link |
when that more complicated molecule
link |
can act on the causal chain that's produced itself
link |
suddenly you start to get towards some kind of autonomy,
link |
and that's where life, I think, emerges in earnest.
link |
Every single word in the past few paragraphs,
link |
let's break those apart,
link |
but who's von Neumann, what's a constructor,
link |
the closing of the loop that you're talking about,
link |
the molecule that starts becoming,
link |
I think you said like the smallest von Neumann constructor,
link |
the smallest, the minimal,
link |
so what do all those things mean,
link |
and what is, what are we supposed to imagine
link |
when we think about the smallest von Neumann constructor?
link |
So John von Neumann is a real hero,
link |
actually, not just me, but many people, I think,
link |
computer science and physics.
link |
He was an incredible intellect
link |
who probably solved a lot of the problems
link |
that we're working on today
link |
and just forgot to write them down.
link |
And I'm not sure if it's John von Neumann or Johnny,
link |
as I think his friends called him,
link |
but I think he was Hungarian, a mathematician,
link |
and basically was involved in the Manhattan Project
link |
in developing computation
link |
and came up with all sorts of ideas,
link |
and I think he was one of the first people
link |
to come up with cellular automata.
link |
I didn't know this little fact.
link |
I think so, I think so.
link |
Well, anyway, if he didn't come up with it,
link |
he probably did come up with it and didn't write it down.
link |
There was a couple of people who did at the same time,
link |
and then Conway obviously took it on,
link |
and then Wolfram loves CAs.
link |
There is his fabric of the universe.
link |
And what I think he imagined was that he wasn't satisfied,
link |
and this may be incorrect recollection,
link |
but a lot of what I say is gonna be kind of
link |
just way out of my...
link |
You're, Lee, you're just part of the universe
link |
creating its memory, designing...
link |
Exactly, yeah, rewriting history.
link |
Rewriting history.
link |
Exactly, imperfectly.
link |
So, but what I mean is I think he liked this idea
link |
of thinking about how could a Turing machine
link |
literally build itself without a Turing machine, right?
link |
It's like literally how did state machines emerge?
link |
And I think that von Neumann constructors,
link |
he wanted to conceive of a minimal thing,
link |
autonomous, that could build itself.
link |
And what would those rules look like in the world?
link |
And that's what a von Neumann kind of constructor
link |
looked like, like it's a minimal hypothetical object
link |
that could build itself, self replicate.
link |
And I'm really fascinated by that
link |
because I think that although it's probably not
link |
exactly what happened, it's a nice model
link |
because as chemists, if we could go back
link |
to the origin of life and think about
link |
what is a minimal machine that can get structured randomly?
link |
So like with no prime mover, with no architect,
link |
it assembles through just existence.
link |
So random stuff bumping in together
link |
and you make this first molecule.
link |
So you have molecule A and molecule A interacts
link |
with another random molecule B and they get together
link |
and they realize by working together
link |
they can make more of themselves,
link |
but then they realize they can mutate
link |
so they can make AB prime.
link |
So AB prime is different to AB
link |
and then AB prime can then act back
link |
where A and B are being created
link |
and slightly nudge that causal chain
link |
and make AB prime more evolvable or learn more.
link |
So that's the closing the loop part.
link |
Closing the loop part, got it.
link |
It feels like the mutation part is not that difficult.
link |
It feels like the difficult part
link |
is just creating a copy of yourself as step one.
link |
That seems like one of the greatest inventions
link |
in the history of the universe is the first molecule
link |
that figured out, holy shit, I can create a copy of myself.
link |
I think it's really, really easy.
link |
Okay, I did not expect that.
link |
I think it's really, really easy.
link |
Well, let's take a step back.
link |
I think replicating molecules are rare,
link |
but if you say, I think I was saying on,
link |
I probably got into trouble on Twitter the other day,
link |
so I was trying to work this.
link |
There's about more than 18 mils of water in there.
link |
So one mole of water, 6.022 times 10 to the 23 molecules.
link |
That's about the number of stars in universe, I think,
link |
So there's three universe worth, but between one and.
link |
Somebody corrected you on Twitter?
link |
Yeah, as if, I'm always being corrected.
link |
It's a great, but there's a lot of molecules in the water.
link |
And so there's a lot of, so although it's for you and me,
link |
really hard to conceive of,
link |
if existence is not the default for a long period of time,
link |
because what happens is the molecules get degraded.
link |
So much of the possibilities in the universe
link |
are just broken back into atoms.
link |
So you have this kind of destruction of the molecules
link |
for our chemical reactions.
link |
So you only need one or two molecules
link |
to become good at copying themselves
link |
for them suddenly to then take resources in the pool
link |
and start to grow.
link |
And so then replication actually over time,
link |
when you have bonds, I think is much simpler, much easier.
link |
And I even found this in my lab years ago.
link |
I had one of the reasons I started doing inorganic chemistry
link |
and making rust, making a bit of rust based on
link |
a thing called molybdenum, molybdenum oxide
link |
is this molybdenum oxide, very simple.
link |
But when you add acid to it and some electrons,
link |
they make these molecules you just cannot possibly imagine
link |
would be constructed big, gigantic wheels
link |
of 154 molybdenum atoms in a wheel
link |
or I cost a dodecahedron 132 molybdenum atoms
link |
all in the same pot.
link |
And I realized when I,
link |
and I just finished experiments two years ago,
link |
I've just published a couple of papers on this,
link |
that they're actually, there is a random small molecule
link |
with 12 atoms in it that can form randomly,
link |
but it happens to template its own production.
link |
And then by chance, it templates the ring,
link |
just an accident, just like just an absolute accident.
link |
And that ring also helps make the small 12 mer.
link |
And so you have what's called an autocatalytic set
link |
where A makes B and B helps make A and vice versa.
link |
And you then make this loop.
link |
So it's a bit like these, they all work in synergy
link |
to make this chain of events that grow.
link |
And it doesn't take a very sophisticated model
link |
to show that if you have these objects are competing
link |
and then collaborating to help one another build,
link |
they just grow out of the mess.
link |
And although they seem improbable,
link |
they are improbable, in fact, impossible in one step.
link |
There's multiple steps.
link |
This is when the blind people look
link |
at the blind watchmaker argument
link |
and you talk about how could a watch spontaneously emerge?
link |
It's a lineage of watches and cruder devices
link |
that are bootstrapped onto one another.
link |
Right, so it's very improbable,
link |
but once you get that little discovery
link |
like with the wheel and fire,
link |
it just explodes because it's so successful, it explodes.
link |
It explodes, it's basically selection.
link |
So this templating mechanism that allows you
link |
to have a little like blueprint for yourself,
link |
how you go through different procedures
link |
is to build copies of yourself.
link |
So in chemistry somehow it's possible to imagine
link |
that that kind of thing is easy to spring up.
link |
In more complex organisms, it feels like a different thing
link |
and much more complicated.
link |
Like we're having like multiple abstractions
link |
of the birds and the bees conversation here,
link |
but with human, I'm sorry, with complex organisms,
link |
it feels like difficult to have reproduction to,
link |
that's gonna get clipped out.
link |
I'm gonna make fun of that.
link |
It's difficult to develop this idea
link |
of making copies of yourself or no.
link |
Because that seems like a magical idea for life to,
link |
but wow, that feels like very necessary
link |
for what selection is, for what evolution is.
link |
But then if selection precedes all of this,
link |
then maybe these are just like echoes
link |
of the selecting mechanism at different scales.
link |
Yeah, that's exactly it.
link |
So selection is the default in the universe if you want to.
link |
And what happens is that life,
link |
the solution that life has got on earth,
link |
life on earth, biology on earth is unique to earth.
link |
We can talk about that.
link |
And that was really hard fought for,
link |
but that is a solution that works on earth,
link |
the ribosome, the fundamental machine
link |
that is responsible for every cell on earth
link |
of whatever, wherever it is in the kingdom of life.
link |
That is an incredibly complex object,
link |
but it was evolved over time
link |
and it wasn't involved in a vacuum.
link |
And I think that once we understand that selection
link |
can occur without the ribosome,
link |
but what the ribosome does,
link |
it's a phase transition in replication.
link |
And I think that that, and also technology
link |
that is probably much easier to get to than we think.
link |
Why do you put the ribosome as a central part
link |
of living organisms on earth?
link |
It basically is a combination
link |
of two different polymer systems, so RNA and peptides.
link |
So the RNA world, if you like,
link |
gets transmitted and builds proteins
link |
and the proteins are responsible for all the catalysis.
link |
The majority of the catalysis goes on in the cell.
link |
No ribosome, no proteins, no decoding, no evolution.
link |
So ribosome is looking at the action.
link |
You don't put like the RNA itself as the critical thing,
link |
like information, you put action as the most important thing.
link |
I think the actual molecules
link |
that we have in biology right now are entirely contingent
link |
on the history of life on earth.
link |
There are so many possible solutions.
link |
And this is where chemistry got itself into,
link |
origin of life chemistry gets itself into a bit of a trap.
link |
Yeah, let me interrupt you there.
link |
You've tweeted, you're gonna get,
link |
I'm gonna cite your tweets like it's Shakespeare, okay?
link |
It's surprising you haven't gotten canceled on Twitter yet.
link |
Your brilliance once again saves you.
link |
You like to have a little bit of fun on Twitter.
link |
You've tweeted that quote,
link |
origin of life research is a scam.
link |
So if this is Shakespeare, can we analyze this word?
link |
Why is the origin of life research a scam?
link |
Aren't you kind of doing origin of life research?
link |
Okay, it was tongue in cheek, but yeah,
link |
I think, and I meant it as tongue in cheek.
link |
I'm not doing the origin of life research.
link |
I'm trying to make artificial life.
link |
And I also want to bound the likelihood
link |
of the origin of life on earth,
link |
but more importantly to find origin of life elsewhere.
link |
But let me directly address the tweet.
link |
There are many, many good chemists out there
link |
doing origin of life research, but I want to nudge them.
link |
And I think they're brilliant.
link |
Like there's no question the chemistry they are doing,
link |
the motivation is great.
link |
So what I meant by that tweet is saying
link |
that maybe they're making assumptions about saying,
link |
if only I could make this particular type of molecule,
link |
say this RNA molecule or this phosphodiester
link |
or this other molecule,
link |
it's gonna somehow unlock the origin of life.
link |
And I think that origin of life has been looking at this
link |
for a very long time.
link |
And whilst I think it's brilliant to work out
link |
how you can get to those molecules,
link |
I think that chemistry and chemists doing origin of life
link |
could be nudged into doing something even more profound.
link |
And so the argument I'm making,
link |
it's a bit like right now,
link |
let's say, I don't know, the first Tesla
link |
that makes its way to, I don't know,
link |
into a new country in the world.
link |
Let's say there's a country X
link |
that has never had a Tesla before
link |
and they get the Tesla.
link |
And they take the Tesla,
link |
and what they do is they take the Tesla apart
link |
and say, we want to find the origin of cars in the universe
link |
and say, okay, how did this form and how did this form?
link |
And they just randomly keep making
link |
till they make the door, they make the wheel,
link |
they make the steering column and all this stuff.
link |
And they say, well, that's the route.
link |
That's the way cars emerged on earth.
link |
But actually we know that there's a causal chain of cars
link |
going right back to Henry Ford and the horse and carriage.
link |
And before that, maybe, you know,
link |
where people were using wheels.
link |
And I think that obsession with the identities
link |
that we see in biology right now
link |
are giving us a false sense of security
link |
about what we're looking for.
link |
And I think that origin of life chemistry is in danger
link |
of not making the progress that it deserves
link |
because the chemists are doing this.
link |
The field is exploding right now.
link |
There's amazing people out there, young and old doing this.
link |
And there's deservedly so more money going in.
link |
You know, I used to complain
link |
there's more money being spent searching for the Higgs boson
link |
that we know exists than the origin of life.
link |
You know, why is that?
link |
The origin, we understand the origin of life.
link |
We're gonna actually work out what life is.
link |
And we're gonna be at a bound,
link |
the likelihood of finding life elsewhere in the universe.
link |
And most important for us,
link |
we are gonna know or have a good idea
link |
of what the future of humanity looks like.
link |
You know, we need to understand
link |
that although we're precious,
link |
we're not the only life forms in the universe.
link |
Or that's my very strong impression.
link |
I have no data for that.
link |
It's just right now a belief.
link |
And I want to turn that belief
link |
into a more than a belief by experimentation.
link |
But coming back to the scam,
link |
the scam is if we just make this RNA,
link |
we've got this fluke event, we know how that's simple.
link |
Let's make this phosphodiester,
link |
or let's make ATP or ADP.
link |
We've got that part nailed.
link |
Let's now make this other molecule, another molecule.
link |
And how many molecules are gonna be enough?
link |
And then the reason I say this
link |
is when you go back to Craig Venter,
link |
when he invented his life form, Cyndia,
link |
this micro, this minimal plasmid,
link |
it's a myoplasma, something, I don't know the name of it,
link |
but he made this wonderful cell
link |
and said, I've invented life.
link |
He facsimileed the genome from this entity
link |
and made it in the lab, all the DNA,
link |
but he didn't make the cell.
link |
He had to take an existing cell
link |
that has a causal chain going all the way back to Luca.
link |
And he showed when he took out the gene,
link |
the genes and put in his genes, synthesized,
link |
the cell could boot up.
link |
But it's remarkable that he could not make a cell
link |
And even now today, synthetic biologists
link |
cannot make a cell from scratch
link |
because there's some contingent information embodied
link |
outside the genome in the cell.
link |
And that is just incredible.
link |
So there's lots of layers to the scam.
link |
Well, let me then ask the question,
link |
how can we create life in the lab from scratch?
link |
What have been the most promising attempts
link |
at creating life in the lab from scratch?
link |
Has anyone actually been able to do it?
link |
Do you think anyone will be able to do it
link |
in the near future if they haven't already?
link |
Yeah, I think that nobody has made life
link |
in the lab from scratch.
link |
Lots of people would argue that they have made progress.
link |
So Craig Venter, I think the synthesis
link |
of a synthetic genome milestone in human achievement.
link |
Yeah, can we just walk back and say,
link |
what would you say from your perspective,
link |
one of the world experts in exactly this area,
link |
what does it mean to create life from scratch
link |
where if you sit back, whether you do it
link |
or somebody else does it, it's like,
link |
damn, this is, we just created life.
link |
Well, I can tell you what I would expect,
link |
I would like to be able to do,
link |
is to go from sand to cells in my lab and...
link |
Can you explain what sand is?
link |
Yeah, just inorganic stuff, like basically just,
link |
so sand is just silicon oxide with some other ions in it,
link |
maybe some inorganic carbon, some carbonates,
link |
just basically clearly dead stuff
link |
that you could just grind rocks into sand.
link |
And it would be what, in a kind of vacuum
link |
so they could remove anything else
link |
that could possibly be like a shadow of life
link |
that can assist in the chemical.
link |
You could do that, you could insist and say,
link |
look, I'm gonna take, and not just inorganic,
link |
I want some more, I wanna cheat and have some organic,
link |
but I want inorganic organic,
link |
and I'll explain the play on words in a moment.
link |
So I would like to basically put into a world,
link |
let's say a completely synthetic world, if you like,
link |
a closed world, put some inorganic materials
link |
and just literally add some energy in some form,
link |
be it lightning or heat, UV light,
link |
and run this thing in cycles over time
link |
and let it solve the search problem.
link |
So I see the origin of life as a search problem
link |
in chemical space.
link |
And then I would wait, literally wait for a life form
link |
to crawl out of the test tube.
link |
That's a joke I tell my group.
link |
Literally wait for a very, don't worry,
link |
it's gonna be very feeble,
link |
it's not gonna take over the world.
link |
There's ways of ethically containing it.
link |
Famous last words.
link |
Indeed, indeed, indeed, but I.
link |
You know this is being recorded, right?
link |
It'll make you, it will not make you look good
link |
once it crawls out of the lab
link |
and destroys all of human civilization, but yes.
link |
But there is very good,
link |
there is a very good things you can do to prevent that.
link |
For instance, if you put stuff in your world,
link |
which isn't earth abundant,
link |
so let's say we make life based on molybdenum
link |
and it escapes, it would die immediately
link |
because there's not enough molybdenum in the environment.
link |
So we can put in, we can do responsible life.
link |
Or as I fantasize with my research group on our away day
link |
that would go in, it's, you know,
link |
I think it's actually morally if we don't find,
link |
until humanity finds life in the universe,
link |
this is going on a tangent,
link |
it's our moral obligation to make origin of life bombs,
link |
identify dead planets and bomb them
link |
with our origin of life machines and make them alive.
link |
I think it is our moral obligation to do that.
link |
Some people might argue with me about that,
link |
but I think that we need more life in the universe.
link |
And then we kind of forget we did it
link |
and then come back and then.
link |
So where did you come from?
link |
But coming back to the, what I'd expect.
link |
So I just say. Father, are you back?
link |
I think this is once again, a Rick and Morty episode.
link |
It's definitely all Rick and Morty all the way down.
link |
So we, I imagine we have this pristine experiment
link |
and everything is, you know, sanitized
link |
and we put in inorganic materials
link |
and we have cycles with them,
link |
day, night cycles, up, down, whatever.
link |
And we look for evidence of replication
link |
and evolution over time.
link |
And that's what the experiment should be.
link |
Now, are there people doing this in the world right now?
link |
There are a couple of,
link |
there's some really good groups doing this.
link |
There's some really interesting scientists
link |
doing this around the world.
link |
They're kind of perhaps too much associated with the scam.
link |
So, and so they're using molecules
link |
that are already, were already invented by biology.
link |
So there's a bit of replication built in,
link |
but I still think the work that is doing,
link |
they're doing is amazing.
link |
But I would like people to be a bit freer and say,
link |
let's just basically shake a load of sand in a box
link |
and wait for life to come out
link |
because that's what happened on earth.
link |
And so that we have to understand that.
link |
Now, how would I know I've been successful?
link |
Well, because I'm not obsessing
link |
with what molecules are in life now,
link |
I would wager a vast quantity of money.
link |
I'm not very rich, so just be a few dollars,
link |
but for me, the solution space will be different.
link |
So the genetic material will be not RNA.
link |
The proteins will not be what we think.
link |
The solutions will be just completely different.
link |
And it might be, and it will be very feeble
link |
because that's the other thing we should be able to show
link |
fairly robustly that even if I did make
link |
or someone did make a new life form in the lab,
link |
it would be so poor that it's not gonna leap out.
link |
It is the fear about making a lethal life form
link |
in the lab from scratch is similar to us imagining
link |
that we're gonna make the terminator
link |
at Boston Dynamics tomorrow.
link |
Simply not, and the problem is
link |
we don't communicate that properly.
link |
I know you yourself very, you explain this very well.
link |
There is not the AI catastrophe coming.
link |
We're very far away from that.
link |
That doesn't mean we should ignore it.
link |
Same with the origin of life catastrophe.
link |
It's not coming anytime soon.
link |
We shouldn't ignore it, but we shouldn't let that fear
link |
stop us from doing those experiments.
link |
But this is a much, much longer discussion
link |
because there's a lot of details there.
link |
I would say there is potential for catastrophic events
link |
to happen in much dumber ways.
link |
In AI space, there's a lot of ways to create,
link |
like social networks are creating a kind
link |
of accelerated set of events
link |
that we might not be able to control.
link |
The social network virality in the digital space
link |
can create mass movements of ideas that can then,
link |
if times are tough, create military conflict
link |
and all those kinds of things.
link |
But that's not super intelligent AI.
link |
That's an interesting at scale application of AI.
link |
If you look at viruses, viruses are pretty dumb,
link |
but at scale, their application is pretty detrimental.
link |
And so origin of life, much like all the kind of virology,
link |
the very contentious word of gain of function research
link |
and virology, sort of like research on viruses,
link |
messing with them genetically,
link |
that can create a lot of problems if not done well.
link |
So we have to be very cautious.
link |
So there's a kind of,
link |
whenever you're ultra cautious about stuff in AI
link |
or in virology and biology,
link |
it borders on cynicism, I would say,
link |
where it's like everything we do is going to turn out
link |
to be destructive and terrible.
link |
So I'm just going to sit here and do nothing.
link |
Okay, that's a possible solution except for the fact
link |
that somebody is going to do it.
link |
It's science and technology progresses.
link |
So we have to do it in an ethical way, in a good way,
link |
considering in a transparent way, in an open way,
link |
considering all the possible positive trajectories
link |
that could be taken and making sure as much as possible
link |
that we walk those trajectories.
link |
So yeah, I don't think Terminator is coming,
link |
but a totally unexpected version of Terminator
link |
may be around the corner.
link |
Might be here already.
link |
Yeah, so I agree with that.
link |
And so going back to the origin of life discussion,
link |
I think that in synthetic biology right now,
link |
we have to be very careful about how we edit genomes
link |
and edit synthetic biology to do things.
link |
So that's kind of, that's where things might go wrong
link |
in the same way as Twitter turning ourselves
link |
into kind of strange scale effects.
link |
I would love origin of life research
link |
or artificial life research to get to the point
link |
where we have those worries,
link |
because that's why I think we're just so far away from that.
link |
We are just, you know, right now,
link |
I think there are two really important angles.
link |
There is the origin of life people,
link |
researchers who are faithfully working on this
link |
and trying to make those molecules,
link |
the scan molecules I talked about.
link |
And then there are people on the creationist side
link |
who are saying, look,
link |
the fact you can't make these molecules
link |
and you can't make a cell means that evolution isn't true
link |
and all this other stuff.
link |
Yeah, and so, and I find that really frustrating
link |
because actually the origin of life research
link |
is all working in good faith, right?
link |
And so what I'm trying to do
link |
is give origin of life research
link |
a little bit more of an open context.
link |
And one of the things I think is important,
link |
I really want to make a new life form in my lifetime.
link |
I really want to prove that life is a general phenomena,
link |
a bit like gravity in the universe,
link |
because I think that's gonna be really important
link |
for humanity's global psychological state,
link |
meaning going forward.
link |
That's beautifully put.
link |
So one, it will help us understand ourselves.
link |
So that's useful for science,
link |
but two, it gives us a kind of hope,
link |
if not an awe at all the huge amounts
link |
of alien civilizations that are out there.
link |
If you can build life and understand
link |
just how easy it is to build life,
link |
then that's just as good, if not much better,
link |
than discovering life on another planet.
link |
It's, I mean, it's cheaper.
link |
It's much cheaper and much easier
link |
and probably much more conclusive
link |
because once you're able to create life,
link |
like you said, it's a search problem
link |
that there's probably a lot of different ways to do it.
link |
Once you create the, once you find the first solution,
link |
you probably have all the right methodology
link |
for finding all kinds of other solutions.
link |
Yeah, and wouldn't it be great
link |
if we could find a solution?
link |
I mean, it's probably a bit late for,
link |
I mean, I worry about climate change,
link |
but I'm not that worried about climate change,
link |
and I think one day you could think about,
link |
could we engineer a new type of life form
link |
that could basically, and I don't want to do this,
link |
and I don't think we should do this necessarily,
link |
but it's a good thought experiment
link |
that would perhaps take CO2 out of the atmosphere
link |
or an intermediate life form, so it's not quite alive.
link |
It's almost like an add on
link |
that we can, with a time dependent add on,
link |
you could give to say cyanobacteria in the ocean
link |
or to maybe to wheat and say, right,
link |
we're just gonna, we're gonna fix a bit more CO2,
link |
and we're gonna work out how much we need to fix
link |
to basically save the climate,
link |
and we're gonna use evolutionary principles
link |
to basically get there.
link |
What worries me is that biology has had a few billion years
link |
to find a solution for CO2 fixation,
link |
hasn't really done, it's not,
link |
the solution isn't brilliant for our needs,
link |
but biology wasn't thinking about our needs.
link |
Biology was thinking about biology's needs,
link |
but I think if we can do, as you say,
link |
make life in the lab, then suddenly we don't need
link |
to go to everywhere and conclusively prove it.
link |
I think we make life in the lab.
link |
We look at the extent of life in the solar system.
link |
How far did Earth life get?
link |
Probably we're all Martians.
link |
Probably life got going on Mars.
link |
The chemistry on Mars seeded Earth.
link |
That might have been a legitimate way
link |
to kind of truncate the surface.
link |
But in the outer solar system,
link |
we might have completely different life forms
link |
on Enceladus, on Europa, and Titan.
link |
And that would be a cool thing, because.
link |
Okay, wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute.
link |
Did you just say that you think, in terms of likelihood,
link |
life started on Mars, like statistically speaking,
link |
life started on Mars and seeded Earth?
link |
It could be possible, because life was,
link |
so Mars was habitable for the type of life
link |
that we have right now, type of chemistry before Earth.
link |
So it seems to me that Mars got searching,
link |
doing chemistry, like, and.
link |
It started way before.
link |
Yeah, and so they had a few more replicators
link |
and some other stuff.
link |
And if those replicators got ejected from Mars
link |
and landed on Earth, and Earth was like,
link |
I don't need to start again.
link |
And then it just carried on.
link |
So I'm not going, I think we will find evidence
link |
of life on Mars, either life we put there by mistake,
link |
contamination, or actually life,
link |
the earliest remnants of life.
link |
And that would be really exciting.
link |
It's a really good reason to go there.
link |
But I think it's more unlikely,
link |
because the gravitational situation in the solar system,
link |
if we find life in the outer solar system.
link |
Titan and all that, that would be its own thing.
link |
Wow, that would be so cool.
link |
If we go to Mars and we find life that looks
link |
a hell of a lot similar to Earth life,
link |
and then we go to Titan and all those weird moons
link |
with the ices and the volcanoes and all that kind of stuff,
link |
and then we find there something that looks,
link |
I don't know, way weirder.
link |
Some other, some non RNA type of situation.
link |
But we might find almost life,
link |
like in the prebiotic chemical space.
link |
And I think there are four types of exoplanets
link |
we need to look for, right?
link |
Because when JWST goes up and touch wood,
link |
it goes up and everything's fine.
link |
When we look at a star, well, we know statistically,
link |
most stars have planets around them.
link |
What type of planet are they?
link |
Are they going to be dead?
link |
Are they going to be just a prebiotic origin of life coming?
link |
So are they going to be technological?
link |
So with intelligence on them, and will they have died?
link |
So, you know, had life on them, but gone.
link |
Those are the four states of the boat.
link |
And suddenly, it's a bit like I want to classify planets
link |
the way we classify stars.
link |
And I think that, in terms of their,
link |
rather than having this, oh, we've found methane,
link |
there's evidence of life.
link |
We found oxygen, that's the evidence of life.
link |
We found whatever molecule marker.
link |
And start to then frame things a little bit more.
link |
As those four states.
link |
Which, by the way, you're just saying four,
link |
but there could be, before the dead,
link |
there could be other states
link |
that we humans can even conceive of.
link |
Yeah, yeah, just prebiotic, almost alive,
link |
got the possibility to come alive.
link |
But there could be a post technological.
link |
Like, whatever we think of as technology,
link |
that could be a, like, pre conscious,
link |
like, where we all meld into one super intelligent conscious,
link |
or some weird thing that naturally happens over time.
link |
I mean, I think that all bets are on that.
link |
We join into a virtual metaverse and start creating,
link |
which is kind of an interesting idea,
link |
almost arbitrary number of copies of each other,
link |
much more quickly, so we can mess with different ideas.
link |
Like, I can create a thousand copies of Lex,
link |
like, every possible version of Lex,
link |
and then just see, like,
link |
and then I just have them, like, argue with each other,
link |
and, like, until, like, in the space of ideas
link |
and see who wins out.
link |
How could that possibly go wrong?
link |
But anyway, there's, especially in this digital space
link |
where you could start exploring with AIs mixed in,
link |
you could start engineering arbitrary intelligences,
link |
you can start playing in the space of ideas,
link |
which might move us into a world that looks very different
link |
than a biological world.
link |
Like, our current world, the technology,
link |
is still very much tied to our biology.
link |
It's, we might move past that completely.
link |
Oh, definitely, we definitely will.
link |
We definitely, but that could be another phase then.
link |
Because then you, yeah.
link |
But I did say technological, so I think I agree with you.
link |
I think, so you can have, let's get this right.
link |
So, dead world, no prospect of alive.
link |
Prebiotic world, life emerging.
link |
Living and technological.
link |
And you probably, and the dead one,
link |
you probably won't be able to tell
link |
between the dead never being alive and the dead one,
link |
maybe you've got some artifacts and maybe there's five.
link |
There's probably not more than five.
link |
And I think the technological one could allow,
link |
could have life on it still,
link |
but it might just have exceeded.
link |
Because, you know, one way that life might survive on Earth
link |
is if we can work out how to deal with the coming,
link |
the real climate change that comes when the sun expands.
link |
It might be a way to survive that, you know, but yeah.
link |
I think that we need to start thinking statistically
link |
when it comes to looking for life in the universe.
link |
Let me ask you then, sort of statistically,
link |
how many alien civilizations are out there
link |
in those four phases that you're talking about?
link |
When you look up to the stars
link |
and you're sipping on some wine
link |
and talking to other people with British accents
link |
about something intelligent and intellectual, I'm sure.
link |
Do you think there's a lot of alien civilizations
link |
looking back at us and wondering the same?
link |
My romantic view of the universe
link |
is really taking loans from my logical self.
link |
So what I'm saying is I have no doubt, I have no idea.
link |
But having said that, there is no reason to suppose
link |
that life is as hard as we first thought it was.
link |
And so if we just take Earth as a marker,
link |
and if I think that life is a much more general phenomena
link |
than just our biology,
link |
then I think the universe is full of life.
link |
And the reason for the Fermi paradox
link |
is not that they're not out there,
link |
it's just that we can't interact with the other life forms
link |
because they're so different.
link |
And I'm not saying that they're necessarily like
link |
hasn't depicted in Arrival or other, you know,
link |
I'm just saying that perhaps
link |
there are very few universal facts in the universe
link |
and maybe our technologies are quite divergent.
link |
And so I think that it's very hard to know
link |
how we're gonna interact with alien life.
link |
You think there's a lot of kinds of life that's possible.
link |
I guess that was the intuition you provided
link |
that the way biology itself,
link |
but even this particular kinds of biology
link |
that we have on Earth is something that is just one sample
link |
of nearly infinite number of other possible,
link |
complex, autonomous, self replicating type of things
link |
that could be possible.
link |
And so we're almost unable to see
link |
the alternative versions of us, huh?
link |
I mean, we'll still be able to detect them,
link |
we'll still be able to interact with them,
link |
we'll still be able to like which,
link |
what's exactly is lost in translation?
link |
Why can't we see them?
link |
Why can't we talk to them?
link |
Because I too have a sense,
link |
you put it way more poetically,
link |
but it seems both statistically
link |
and sort of romantically,
link |
it feels like the universe should be teeming with life,
link |
like super intelligent life.
link |
And I just, I sit there and the Fermi paradox is very,
link |
it's felt very distinctly by me
link |
when I look up at the stars because it's like,
link |
it's the same way I feel when I'm driving
link |
through New Jersey and listening to Bruce Springsteen
link |
and feel quite sad.
link |
It's like Lucy Kay talks about pulling off
link |
to the side of the road and just weeping a little bit.
link |
I'm almost like wondering like,
link |
hey, why aren't you talking to us?
link |
It feels lonely, it feels lonely
link |
because it feels like they're out there.
link |
I think that there are a number of answers to that.
link |
I think the Fermi paradox is perhaps based
link |
on the assumption that if life did emerge in the universe,
link |
it would be similar to our life
link |
and there's only one solution.
link |
And I think that what we've got to start to do
link |
is go out and look for selection detection
link |
rather than an evolution detection,
link |
rather than life detection.
link |
And I think that once we start to do that,
link |
we might start to see really interesting things.
link |
And we haven't been doing this for very long
link |
and we are living in an expanding universe
link |
and that makes the problem a little bit harder.
link |
Everybody's always leaving distance wise.
link |
I'm very optimistic that we will,
link |
well, I don't know, there are two movies that came out
link |
within six months of one another,
link |
Ad Astra and Cosmos.
link |
Ad Astra, the very expensive blockbuster
link |
with Brad Pitt in it and saying there is no life
link |
and it's all, we've got to,
link |
life on Earth has more pressures than Cosmos,
link |
which is a UK production,
link |
which basically aliens came and visited Earth one day
link |
and they were discovered in the UK, right?
link |
It was quite, it's a fun film.
link |
But I really loved those two films.
link |
And at the same time, those films,
link |
at the time those films were coming out,
link |
I was working on a paper, a life detection paper,
link |
and I found it was so hard to publish this paper
link |
and it was almost as depressed,
link |
I got so depressed trying to get this science out there
link |
that I felt the depression of the film in Ad Astra,
link |
like life, there's no life elsewhere in the universe.
link |
And, but I'm incredibly optimistic
link |
that I think we will find life in the universe,
link |
firm evidence of life,
link |
and it will have to start on Earth,
link |
making life on Earth and surprising us.
link |
We have to surprise ourselves
link |
and make non biological life on Earth.
link |
And then people say, well, you made this life on Earth,
link |
therefore it's, you're part of the causal chain of that.
link |
And that might be true,
link |
but if I can show how I'm able to do it
link |
with very little cheating
link |
or very little information inputs,
link |
just creating like a model planet.
link |
Some description and watching it, watching life emerge,
link |
then I think that we will be even to persuade
link |
even the hardest critic that it's possible.
link |
Now, with regards to the Fermi paradox,
link |
I think that we might crush that with the JWST.
link |
It's basically, if I recall correctly,
link |
the mirror is about 10 times the size of the Hubble
link |
that we're gonna be able to do spectroscopy,
link |
look at colors of exoplanets, I think, not brilliantly,
link |
but we'll be able to start to classify them.
link |
And we'll start to get a real feel
link |
for what's going on in the universe on these exoplanets.
link |
Cause it's only in the last few decades, I think,
link |
maybe even last decade that we even
link |
came to recognize that exoplanets even are common.
link |
And I think that that gives us a lot of optimism
link |
that life is gonna be out there.
link |
But I think we have to start framing,
link |
we have to start preparing the fact
link |
that biology is only one solution.
link |
I can tell you with confidence that biology on Earth
link |
does not exist anywhere else in the universe.
link |
We are absolutely unique.
link |
Well, okay, I love the confidence,
link |
but where does that confidence come from?
link |
Chemistry, like how many options does chemistry really have?
link |
Many, that's the point.
link |
And the thing is, this is where the origin of life scam
link |
comes in, is that people don't quite count,
link |
they don't count the numbers.
link |
So if biology as you find on Earth is common everywhere,
link |
then there's something really weird going on
link |
that basically written in the quantum mechanics,
link |
there's some kind of these bonds must form over these bonds
link |
and this catalyst must form over this catalyst
link |
when they're all quite equal.
link |
Life is contingent.
link |
The origin of life on Earth was contingent
link |
upon the chemistry available at the origin of life on Earth.
link |
So that means if we want to find other Earth like worlds,
link |
we look for the same kind of rocky world.
link |
We might look in the same zone as Earth
link |
and we might expect reasonably
link |
to find biological like stuff going on.
link |
That would be a reasonable hypothesis,
link |
but it won't be the same, it can't be.
link |
It's like saying, I don't believe in magic.
link |
That's why I'm sure.
link |
I just don't believe in magic.
link |
I believe in statistics and I can do experiments.
link |
And so I won't get the same, exactly the same sequence
link |
of events, I'll get something different.
link |
And so there is TikTok elsewhere in the universe,
link |
but it's not the same as our TikTok, right?
link |
That's what I mean.
link |
Which aspect of it is not the same?
link |
Well, I just think, so what is TikTok?
link |
TikTok is a social media where people upload videos, right?
link |
So I guess there might be.
link |
Well, there's humor, there's attention,
link |
there's the ability to process,
link |
there's ability for intelligent organisms
link |
to collaborate on ideas and find human ideas
link |
and play with those ideas, make them viral, memes.
link |
Humor seems to be kind of fundamental
link |
to the human experience.
link |
And I think that that's a really interesting question
link |
we can ask, is humor a fundamental thing in the universe?
link |
I think maybe it will be, right?
link |
In terms of, you think about in a game theoretic sense,
link |
humor, the emergence of humor serves a role
link |
in our game engine.
link |
And so if selection is fundamental in the universe,
link |
Well, I actually don't know exactly
link |
what role humor serves.
link |
Maybe it's like, from a chemical perspective,
link |
it's like a catalyst for,
link |
I guess it's for several purposes.
link |
One is the catalyst for spreading ideas on the internet.
link |
That's modern humor.
link |
But humor is also a good way to deal
link |
with the difficulty of life.
link |
It's a kind of valve, release valve for suffering.
link |
Throughout human history, life has been really hard.
link |
And for the people that I've known in my life
link |
who've lived through some really difficult things,
link |
humor is part of how they deal with that.
link |
It's usually dark humor.
link |
But yeah, it's interesting.
link |
I don't know exactly what's the more mathematically
link |
general way to formulate what the hell is humor.
link |
What humor does it serve?
link |
But I still, we're kind of joking here,
link |
but it's a counterintuitive idea to me
link |
to think that life elsewhere in the universe
link |
is very different than life on Earth.
link |
And also, like all of each instantiation of life
link |
is likely very different from each other.
link |
Yeah, like maybe there's a few clusters of similar life,
link |
but it's much more likely is what you're saying.
link |
To me, it's a kind of novel thought.
link |
I'm not sure what to do with it.
link |
But you're saying that it's more common
link |
to be a weird outcast in the full spectrum of life
link |
than it is to be in some usual cluster.
link |
So every instantiation of a kind of chemistry
link |
that results in complexity that's autonomous
link |
and self replicating however the hell you define life,
link |
that is going to be very different every time.
link |
It feels like a selection is a fundamental
link |
kind of directed force in the universe.
link |
Won't selection result in a few pockets
link |
of interesting complexities?
link |
I mean, yeah, if we ran Earth over again,
link |
over and over and over,
link |
you're saying it's going to come up with,
link |
there's not going to be elephants every time?
link |
Yeah, I don't think so.
link |
I think that there will be similarities.
link |
And I think we don't know enough
link |
about how selection globally works.
link |
But it might be that the emergence of elephants
link |
was wired into the history of Earth in some way,
link |
like the gravitational force, how evolution was going,
link |
Cambrian explosions, blah, blah, blah,
link |
the emergence of mammals.
link |
But I just don't know enough about the contingency,
link |
All I do know is you count the number of bits
link |
of information required to make an elephant
link |
and think about the causal chain
link |
that provide the lineage of elephants
link |
going all the way back to Luca,
link |
there's a huge scope for divergence.
link |
Yeah, but just like you said, with chemistry and selection,
link |
the things that result in self replicating chemistry
link |
and self replicating organisms,
link |
those are extremely unlikely, as you're saying.
link |
But once they're successful, they multiply.
link |
So it might be a tiny subset of all things
link |
that are possible in the universe, chemically speaking,
link |
it might be a very tiny subset
link |
is actually successful at creating elephants.
link |
Or elephant like or slash human like creatures.
link |
Well, there's two different questions here.
link |
The first one, if we were to reset Earth and to start again.
link |
The different phases, sorry to keep interrupting.
link |
Yeah, no, if we restart Earth and start again,
link |
say we could go back to the beginning
link |
and do the experiment or have a number of Earths,
link |
how similar would biology be?
link |
I would say that there would be broad similarities,
link |
but the emergence of mammals is not a given
link |
unless we're gonna throw an asteroid at each planet
link |
at each time and try and faithfully reproduce what happened.
link |
Then there's the other thing about
link |
when you go to another Earth like planet elsewhere,
link |
maybe there's a different ratio, particular elements,
link |
maybe the bombardment at the beginning of the planet
link |
was quicker or longer than Earth.
link |
And I just don't have enough information there.
link |
What I do know is that the complexity of the story of life
link |
on Earth gives us lots of scope for variation.
link |
And I just don't think it's a reasonable
link |
mathematical assumption to think that life on Earth
link |
that happened again would be same as what we have now.
link |
Okay, but you've also extended that to say
link |
that we might, as an explanation for the Fermi paradox,
link |
that that means we're not able to interact with them.
link |
Or that's an explanation for why we haven't at scale
link |
heard from aliens is they're different than us.
link |
We've only been looking for, say, 70, 80 years.
link |
So I think that the reason we have not found aliens yet
link |
is that we haven't worked out what life is.
link |
No, but the aliens have worked that out, surely.
link |
Statistically speaking, there must be a large number
link |
of aliens that are way ahead of us
link |
on this whole life question.
link |
Unless there's something about this stage
link |
of intellectual evolution that often quickly results
link |
in nuclear war and destroys itself.
link |
Like there's something in this process
link |
that eventually, I don't know, crystallizes the complexity
link |
and it stops, either dies or stops developing.
link |
But most likely, they already figured it out.
link |
And why aren't they contacting us?
link |
Is it some grad student somewhere?
link |
Wants to study a new green planet?
link |
I mean, I don't have a coherent answer to your question,
link |
other than to say that if there are other aliens out there
link |
and they're far more advanced,
link |
they might be in contact with each other.
link |
And they might also, we might be at a point
link |
where what I'm saying quite critically
link |
is it takes two to talk, right?
link |
So the aliens might be there.
link |
But if we don't have the ability to recognize them
link |
and talk to them, then the aliens aren't going
link |
to want to talk to us.
link |
And I think that's a critical point
link |
that probably if that's a filter,
link |
there needs to be an ability for one
link |
to communicate with the other.
link |
And we need to know what life is before we do that.
link |
So we haven't qualified to even join the club
link |
Well, I think they still wanna teach us how to talk, right?
link |
But my worry is that, or I think they would wanna teach us
link |
how to talk like you do when you meet it.
link |
Like when you even meet, I was gonna say child,
link |
but that's a human species.
link |
You want to try to communicate with them
link |
through whatever devices you can,
link |
given what an ant is like.
link |
I just, I worry mostly about that humans
link |
are just too close minded or don't have the right tools.
link |
No, I'm gonna push back on this quite significantly.
link |
I would say, because we don't understand what life is
link |
and because we don't understand
link |
how life emerged in the universe,
link |
we don't understand the physics
link |
that gave rise to life yet.
link |
That means our fundamental description,
link |
I'm way out of my pay grade, even further out.
link |
But I'll say it anyway,
link |
because I think it's a fun.
link |
You don't get paid much anyway, as you said earlier.
link |
So I would say that we,
link |
because we don't understand the universe yet,
link |
we do not understand how the universe spat out life.
link |
And we don't know what life is.
link |
And I think that until we understand that,
link |
it is gonna limit our ability to even,
link |
we don't qualify to talk to the aliens.
link |
So I'm gonna say that they might be there,
link |
but we just, I'm not gonna say that I believe
link |
in interdimensional aliens being present in this room.
link |
Yeah, but I think you're just being self critical,
link |
like we don't qualify.
link |
I think the fact that we don't qualify qualifies us.
link |
We're interesting in our innocence.
link |
No, I'm saying that because we don't understand
link |
causal chains and the way that information
link |
is propagated in the universe.
link |
And we don't understand what replication is yet.
link |
And we don't understand how life emerged.
link |
I think that we would not recognize aliens.
link |
And if someone doesn't recognize you,
link |
you wouldn't go and talk to it.
link |
You don't go and talk to ants.
link |
You don't go and talk to birds
link |
or maybe some birds you do, right?
link |
Cause you can, there's just enough cognition.
link |
So I'm saying because we don't have enough,
link |
our cognitive abilities are not yet where they need to be.
link |
We probably haven't been communicating with them.
link |
So you don't agree with the dating strategy
link |
of playing hard to get?
link |
Cause us humans, that seems to attract us.
link |
Within a species, that's fine.
link |
But I think we don't actually have abstraction.
link |
No, actually I think in this talk, in this conversation,
link |
you've helped me crystallize something
link |
that I think has been troubling me for a long time
link |
with the thermi paradox.
link |
I'm pretty sure that a reasonable avenue
link |
is to say that you would not go and talk to your cat
link |
about calculus, right?
link |
But I would still pet it.
link |
Sure, but I'm not talking about petting a cat.
link |
The analogy is that the aliens are not going to talk to us
link |
because we, and I'm using calculus as analogy
link |
for abstraction because we lack the layer,
link |
the fundamental layer of understanding what life is
link |
and what the universe is in our reality
link |
that it would be so counterproductive
link |
interacting with intelligent alien species
link |
that it would cause more angst for human race.
link |
Okay, they gotta be self interested.
link |
So they'll probably, they more care about
link |
is it interesting for them?
link |
Maybe they, I mean, surely there's a way
link |
to pet the cat in this analogy
link |
because even if we lack complete understanding,
link |
it must be a very frustrating experience
link |
for other kinds of intelligence to communicate with us.
link |
Still, there must be a way to interact with us.
link |
Like perturb the system in interesting ways
link |
to see what these creatures do.
link |
We might actually find the answer.
link |
I mean, again, out of my pay grade,
link |
in a simulation of the Earth,
link |
let's say a simulation where we allow
link |
an intelligent AI to emerge, right?
link |
And that AI, we then give it the objective
link |
is to be curious, interact with other intelligence
link |
And then we might find the parameters required
link |
for that AI to walk with.
link |
And I think you'll find if the AI will not talk
link |
to other AIs that don't share the ability
link |
to abstract at the level of the AI
link |
because it's just a cat and are you gonna travel
link |
20 light years to go and pet a cat?
link |
So not because of the inability to do so,
link |
but because of like boredom.
link |
It's more interested, it will start talking to,
link |
it will spend most, it will spend a majority
link |
of its time talking to other AI systems
link |
that can at least somewhat understand
link |
and it's much more fun.
link |
It's a bit like, do we know that plants are conscious?
link |
Well, plants are unconscious in the way we typically think,
link |
but we don't talk to them.
link |
They could be, right?
link |
Yeah, but there's a lot of people on Earth
link |
who like gardening.
link |
There's always going to be a weird.
link |
They're not talking, they're just gardening.
link |
Okay, well, you're not romantic enough
link |
to see gardening as a way of communication
link |
between humans and plants.
link |
Oh, okay, you've got me there.
link |
But there's ways, there's always going to be
link |
the people who are curious.
link |
Jane Goodall who lives with the chimps, right?
link |
There's always going to be curious intelligent species
link |
that visit the weird Earth planet and try to interact.
link |
I mean, it's a, yeah, I think it's a super cool idea
link |
that you're expressing.
link |
I just kind of have a sense.
link |
Maybe it's a hope that there's always going to be
link |
a desire to interact even with those
link |
that can't possibly understand the depth
link |
of what you understand.
link |
So I'm with you, so I want to be as positive as you
link |
that aliens do exist and we will interact with them.
link |
What I'm trying to do is to give you
link |
a reasonable hypothesis why we haven't yet.
link |
And also something to strive for to be able to do that.
link |
I mean, you know, there is the other view
link |
that the universe is just too big
link |
and life is just too rare.
link |
But I want to come up with an alternative explanation
link |
which I think is reasonable and not being philosophically
link |
and scientifically thought out, which is this,
link |
if you can't actually communicate with the object,
link |
the thing competently, you don't even know it's there,
link |
then there's no point yet.
link |
See, I disagree with that, but I'm totally aligned
link |
with your hopeful vision, which is like,
link |
we need to understand the origin of life.
link |
It will help us engineer life.
link |
It will help us engineer intelligent life through perhaps
link |
on the computer side through simulation
link |
and explore all the ways that life emerges.
link |
And that will allow us to, I think the fundamental reason
link |
we don't see overwhelming amounts of life
link |
is I actually believe aliens,
link |
of course, these are all just kind of open minded beliefs.
link |
It's difficult to know for sure about any of this,
link |
but I think there's a lot of alien civilizations
link |
which are actively communicating with us and we're too dumb.
link |
We don't have the right tools to see it.
link |
That's what I'm saying.
link |
No, but maybe I misinterpreted you,
link |
but I interpreted you to say they kind of tried a few times
link |
and they're like, oh God.
link |
No, no, no, what I'm saying is we, so this goes two ways.
link |
Yeah, I agree with you.
link |
There could be information out there,
link |
but just put in such a way
link |
that we just don't understand it yet.
link |
So sorry if I didn't make that clear.
link |
I mean, it's not just, I don't think we,
link |
I think we qualify as soon as we can decode their signal.
link |
Right, so when you say qualify, got it, got it.
link |
So you mean, we're just not smart enough,
link |
the word qualify was throwing me off.
link |
So we're not smart enough to do,
link |
it's like we just need to get smarter.
link |
And there's a lot of people who believe,
link |
let me get your opinion on this, about UFO sightings.
link |
So sightings of weird phenomena
link |
that, you know, what does UFO mean?
link |
It means it's a flying object
link |
and it's not identified clearly at the time of sighting.
link |
That's what UFO means.
link |
So it could be a physics phenomena,
link |
it could be ball lightning,
link |
it could be all kinds of fascinating.
link |
I was always fascinated with ball lightning as a,
link |
like the fact that there could be physical phenomena
link |
in this world that are observable by the human eye.
link |
Of course, all physical phenomena generally are fascinating
link |
that really smart people can't explain.
link |
Cause it's like, wait a minute,
link |
especially if you can replicate it,
link |
it's like, wait a minute, how does this happen?
link |
That's like the precursor to giant discoveries
link |
in chemistry and biology and physics and so on.
link |
But it sucks when those events are super rare, right?
link |
Physically, like ball lightning.
link |
So that's out there.
link |
And then of course that phenomena
link |
could have other interpretations
link |
that don't have to do with the physics of chemistry,
link |
the biology of earth.
link |
It could have to do
link |
with more extraterrestrial explanations
link |
that in large part, thanks to Hollywood and movies
link |
and all those kinds of things,
link |
captivates the imaginations of millions of people.
link |
But just because it's science fiction
link |
that captivates the imagination of people,
link |
it doesn't mean that some of those sightings,
link |
all it takes is one.
link |
One of those sightings is actually a sign
link |
that it's extraterrestrial intelligence,
link |
that it's object that's not of this particular world.
link |
Do you think there's a chance that that's the case?
link |
What do you make, especially the pilot sightings,
link |
what do you make of those?
link |
So I agree with there's a chance.
link |
There's always a chance.
link |
Any good scientist would have to,
link |
or observationist would have to,
link |
I want to see if aliens exist come to earth.
link |
What I know about the universe
link |
is I think it's unlikely right now
link |
that there are aliens visiting us, but not impossible.
link |
I think the releases, the dramatization
link |
that's been happening politically
link |
saying we're gonna release all this information,
link |
this classified information.
link |
I was kind of disappointed
link |
because it was just very poor material.
link |
And right now, the ability to capture high resolution video,
link |
everybody is carrying around
link |
with them an incredible video device now.
link |
And we haven't got more compelling data.
link |
And so that we've just seeing grainy pictures,
link |
a lot of hearsay, instrument kind of malfunctions
link |
And so I think on balance, I think it's extremely unlikely,
link |
but I think something really interesting is happening.
link |
And then also during the pandemic, right?
link |
We've all been locked down.
link |
We all want to have,
link |
we want to, our imaginations are running riot.
link |
And I think that the,
link |
I don't think that the information out there
link |
has convinced me there are any,
link |
anything interesting on the UFO side.
link |
But what it has made me very interested about
link |
is how humanity is opening up its mind to ponder aliens
link |
and the mystery of our universe.
link |
And so I don't want to dissuade people
link |
from having those thoughts and say, you're stupid
link |
and look at that, it's clearly incorrect.
link |
What I would say is that I lack sufficient data,
link |
replicated observations to make me go,
link |
oh, I'm gonna take this seriously,
link |
but I'm really interested by the fact
link |
that there is this great deal of interest.
link |
And I think that it drives me
link |
to maybe want to make an artificial life form even more
link |
and to help NASA and the Air Force
link |
and whoever go and look for things even more,
link |
because I think humanity wants to know what's out there.
link |
There's this yearning, isn't there?
link |
Yeah, but I see, I almost,
link |
depending on the day, I sometimes agree with you,
link |
but with the thing you just said,
link |
but one of the disappointing things to me
link |
about the sightings, I still hold the belief
link |
that a nonzero number of them
link |
is an indication of something very interesting.
link |
So I don't side with the people who say
link |
everything can be explained
link |
with sensor artifacts kind of thing.
link |
Yeah, I agree with you.
link |
I didn't say that either.
link |
I would say I just don't have enough data.
link |
But the thing I want to push back on is the statement
link |
that everybody has a high definition camera.
link |
One of the disappointing things to me
link |
about the report that the government released,
link |
but in general, just having worked with government,
link |
having worked with people all over
link |
is how incompetent we are.
link |
Like if you look at the response to the pandemic,
link |
how incompetent we are in the face of great challenges
link |
without great leadership.
link |
How incompetent we are in the face
link |
of the great mysteries before us without great leadership.
link |
And I just think it's actually,
link |
the fact that there's a lot of high definition cameras
link |
is not enough to capture the full richness of weird,
link |
of the mysterious phenomena out there
link |
of which extraterrestrial intelligence visiting Earth
link |
I don't think we have,
link |
I don't think everybody having a smartphone
link |
in their pocket is enough.
link |
I think that allows for TikTok videos.
link |
I don't think it allows for the capture
link |
of even interesting, relatively rare human events.
link |
That's not that common.
link |
It's rare to have been the right moment in the right time
link |
to be able to capture the thing.
link |
Let me rephrase what I think on this.
link |
I haven't seen enough information.
link |
I haven't really actively sorted out.
link |
I must admit, but I'm with you
link |
and I love the idea of anomaly detection
link |
in chemistry in particular, right?
link |
I want to make anomalies, sorry,
link |
or not necessarily make anomalies.
link |
I want to understand an anomaly.
link |
Let me give you two from chemistry,
link |
which are really quite interesting.
link |
Phlogiston, going way back,
link |
where people said there's this thing called phlogiston.
link |
And for ages, the alchemists got really this kind of,
link |
that fire is the thing.
link |
And then we determined that phlogiston
link |
wasn't what we thought it is.
link |
Let's go to physics, the ether.
link |
The ether's a hard one
link |
because I think actually the ether might exist.
link |
And I'll tell you what I think the ether is later.
link |
Can you explain the ether?
link |
so the light traveling through the ether in the vacuum,
link |
there is some thing that we call the ether
link |
that basically mediates the movement of light, say.
link |
And I think that...
link |
And then the other one is cold fusion,
link |
which is more of a...
link |
So a few years ago,
link |
people observed that when they did some electrochemistry,
link |
when they were splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen,
link |
that you got more energy out than you put in.
link |
And people got excited
link |
and they thought that this was a nuclear reaction.
link |
And in the end, it was kind of discredited
link |
because you didn't detect neutrons and all this stuff.
link |
But I'm pretty sure...
link |
I'm telling you this on your podcast, but why not?
link |
I'm pretty sure there's interesting
link |
electrochemical phenomena
link |
that's not completely bottomed out yet,
link |
that there is something there.
link |
However, we lack the technology and the experimental design.
link |
So all I'm saying in your response about aliens
link |
is we lack the experimental design
link |
to really capture these anomalies.
link |
And we are encircling the planet
link |
with many more detection systems.
link |
We've got satellites everywhere.
link |
So there is, I do hope
link |
that we are gonna discover more anomalies.
link |
And remember that the solar system
link |
isn't just static in space,
link |
it's moving through the universe.
link |
So there's just more and more chance.
link |
I'm not what with Avi Loeb.
link |
He's generating all sorts of kind of a cult,
link |
I would say, with this, but I'm not against him.
link |
I think there is a finite chance
link |
if there are aliens in the universe
link |
that we're gonna happen upon them
link |
because we're moving through the universe.
link |
What's the nature of the following that Avi Loeb has?
link |
He's doubling down more and more and more
link |
and say there are aliens,
link |
interdimensional aliens and everything else, right?
link |
He's gone from space junk accelerating out of
link |
to interdimensional stuff in a very short space of time.
link |
He's obviously bored.
link |
Or he wants to tap into the psyche and understand.
link |
And he's playfully kind of trying to interact
link |
with society and his peers to say,
link |
stop saying it's not possible.
link |
Which I agree with, we shouldn't do that.
link |
But we should frame it statistically
link |
in the same way we should frame everything
link |
as good scientists, statistically.
link |
Yeah, good scientists.
link |
Recently, the idea of good scientists is,
link |
I take quite skeptically.
link |
I've been listening to a lot of scientists
link |
tell me about what is good science.
link |
That makes me sad.
link |
Because you've been interviewing
link |
what I would consider a lot of really good scientists.
link |
A lot of great thinkers.
link |
But that's exactly right.
link |
And most of the people I talk to
link |
are incredible human beings.
link |
But there's a humility that's required.
link |
Science is not, science cannot be dogmatism.
link |
I mean, authority, like a PhD does not give you authority.
link |
A lifelong pursuit of a particular task
link |
does not give you authority.
link |
You're just as lost in clues as everybody else.
link |
But you're more curious and more stubborn.
link |
So that's a nice quality to have.
link |
But overall, just using the word science and statistics
link |
can often, as you know, kind of become a catalyst
link |
for dismissing new ideas, out of the box ideas, wild ideas,
link |
all that kind of stuff.
link |
I think that, so I like to,
link |
some people find me extremely annoying in science
link |
because I'm basically, I'm quite rude and disruptive.
link |
Not in a rude, you know,
link |
some up to people and say they're ugly or stupid
link |
or anything like that.
link |
I just say, you know, you're wrong.
link |
Or why do you think this?
link |
And something, a gift I got given by society
link |
when I was very young,
link |
because I was in the learning difficulties class at school
link |
is I was told I was stupid.
link |
And so I know I'm stupid,
link |
but I always wanted to be smart, right?
link |
I remember going to school going,
link |
maybe today they're going to tell me
link |
I'm not as stupid as I was yesterday.
link |
And I was always disappointed, always.
link |
And so when I went into academia and everyone says,
link |
you're wrong, I was like, join the queue.
link |
Because it allowed me to walk through the wall.
link |
So I think that people like to always imagine science
link |
as a bit like living in a Japanese house,
link |
the paper walls, and everyone sits in their room.
link |
And I annoy people because I walk straight through the wall.
link |
Not because, why should I be a chemist
link |
and not a mathematician?
link |
Why should I be a mathematician and not a computer scientist?
link |
Because if the problem requires us
link |
to walk through those walls,
link |
but I like walking through the walls.
link |
But as long, then I have to put up,
link |
you know, I have to do good science.
link |
I have to win the people in those rooms
link |
across by good science,
link |
by taking their criticisms and addressing them head on.
link |
And I think we must do that.
link |
And I think that I try and do that in my own way.
link |
And I kind of love walking through the walls.
link |
And it gives me, it's difficult for me personally.
link |
It's quite painful,
link |
but it always leads to a deeper understanding
link |
of the people I'm with.
link |
In particular, you know, the arguments I have
link |
with all sorts of interesting minds,
link |
because I want to solve the problem,
link |
or I want to understand more about why I exist.
link |
You know, that's it really.
link |
And I think we have to not dismiss science
link |
I think we can work with science.
link |
No, science is beautiful,
link |
but humans with egos and all those kinds of things
link |
can sometimes misuse good things,
link |
like social justice,
link |
like all ideas we're all aspire to misuse
link |
these beautiful ideas to manipulate people,
link |
to all those kinds of things.
link |
And that's, there's assholes in every space
link |
and walk of life, including science.
link |
Yeah, yeah, yeah, of course.
link |
And those are no good.
link |
But yes, you're right.
link |
The scientific method has proven to be quite useful.
link |
That said, for difficult questions,
link |
for difficult explanations for rare phenomena,
link |
you have to walk cautiously.
link |
Because the scientific method,
link |
when you totally don't understand something,
link |
and it's rare, and you can't replicate it,
link |
doesn't quite apply.
link |
Yeah, yeah, yeah, that's it.
link |
The challenge is to not dismiss the anomaly
link |
because you can't replicate it.
link |
I mean, we can talk about this.
link |
This is something I realized
link |
when we were developing assembly theory.
link |
People thinking that the track they're on
link |
is so dogmatic, but there is this thing that they see,
link |
but they don't see.
link |
And it takes a bit of time
link |
and you just have to keep reframing it.
link |
And my approach is to say, well, why can't this be right?
link |
Why must we accept that RNA is the only way into life?
link |
Does RNA have a special class of information
link |
that's encoded in the universe?
link |
No, of course it doesn't, right?
link |
RNA is not a special molecule
link |
in the space of all the other molecules.
link |
But it's so elegant and simple
link |
and it works so well for the evolutionary process
link |
that we kind of use that as an intuition
link |
to explain that that must be the only way to have life.
link |
But you mentioned assembly theory.
link |
Well, first let me pause, bathroom break, needed?
link |
Yeah, let's take two minutes.
link |
We took a quick break and offline,
link |
you mentioned to me that you have a lab in your home.
link |
And then I said that you're basically Rick
link |
from Rick and Morty,
link |
which is something I've been thinking
link |
this whole conversation.
link |
And then you say that there's a glowing pickle
link |
that you used something involving cold plasma, I believe.
link |
I don't know, but can you explain
link |
the glowing pickle situation?
link |
And is there many, arbitrarily many versions of you
link |
in alternate dimensions that you're aware of?
link |
I tried to make an electrochemical memory at home
link |
using a pickle and the only way I could get
link |
any traction with it was actually by plugging it
link |
into a very high voltage alternating current
link |
and then putting in a couple of electrodes.
link |
But my kids weren't impressed.
link |
They're not impressed with anything I do,
link |
any experiments I do at home.
link |
I think it's quite funny.
link |
But you connected a pickle to some electrode.
link |
240 volts, yeah, AC.
link |
And then had a couple of electrodes on it.
link |
So what happens is a pickle,
link |
this is a classic thing you do.
link |
I mean, I shouldn't, pranks you do,
link |
you put a pickle into the mains
link |
and just leave it, run away and leave it.
link |
And what happens is it starts to decompose.
link |
It heats up and then explodes
link |
because the water turns to steam
link |
and it just violently explodes.
link |
But I wondered if I could cause the iron,
link |
sodium, potassium ions in the pickle to migrate.
link |
It'd been in a jar, right?
link |
So it'd been in a brine.
link |
That was, yeah, that was not my best experiment.
link |
So I've done far better experiments in my lab at home.
link |
At that time it was a failed experiment,
link |
but you never know, it could,
link |
every experiment is a successful experiment
link |
if you stick with it long enough.
link |
Well, I mean, I get, I got kicked out of my own lab
link |
by my research team many years ago and for good reason.
link |
I mean, my team is brilliant
link |
and I used to go and just break things.
link |
So what I do do at home
link |
is I have a kind of electronics workshop
link |
and I prototype experiments there.
link |
Then I try and then I try and suggest to my team sometimes,
link |
maybe we can try this thing.
link |
And they would just say, oh,
link |
wow, that's not gonna work because of this.
link |
And I'll say, aha, but actually I've tried
link |
and here's some code and here's some hardware.
link |
So I'm doing that less and less now
link |
as I get even more busy, but that's quite fun
link |
because they feel that we're in the experiment together.
link |
You do, in fact, brilliantly, just like Rick
link |
from Rick and Morty, connect up chemistry with computation.
link |
And when we say chemistry,
link |
we don't mean the simulation of chemistry,
link |
a modeling of chemistry.
link |
We mean chemistry in the physical space
link |
as well as in the digital space, which is fascinating.
link |
We'll talk about that.
link |
But first you mentioned assembly theory.
link |
So we'll stick on theory in these big ideas.
link |
I would say revolutionary ideas,
link |
this intersection between mathematics and philosophy.
link |
What is assembly theory?
link |
And generally speaking, how would we recognize life
link |
So assembly theory is a theory,
link |
goes back a few years now in my struggle
link |
for maybe almost 10 years
link |
when I was going to origin of life conferences
link |
and artificial life conferences,
link |
where I thought that everybody was dancing
link |
around the problem of what life is and what it does.
link |
But I'll tell you about what assembly theory is
link |
because I think it's easier.
link |
So assembly theory literally says if you take an object,
link |
and you are able to break the object into parts very gently.
link |
So just maybe let's say take a piece
link |
of very intricate Chinese porcelain
link |
and you tap it just with a hammer or the nail at some point,
link |
and it will fragment into many parts.
link |
And if that object is able to fragment into many,
link |
and you count those parts, the different parts,
link |
so they're unsymmetrical,
link |
assembly theory says the larger the number of parts,
link |
unsymmetrical parts that object has,
link |
the more likely it is that object has been created
link |
by an evolutionary or information process,
link |
especially if that object is not one off,
link |
you've got an abundance of them.
link |
And that's really important.
link |
So because what I'm literally saying about the abundance,
link |
if you have a one off object and you break it into parts
link |
and it has lots of parts,
link |
you'd say, well, that could be incredibly intricate
link |
and complex, but it could be just random.
link |
And I was troubled with this for years
link |
because I saw in reality that assembly theory works.
link |
But when I talked to very good
link |
computational complexity computation lists,
link |
algorithmic complexity people,
link |
they said, you haven't really done this properly.
link |
You haven't thought about it.
link |
It's like, this is the random problem.
link |
And so I kept working this up
link |
because I invented an assembly theory in chemistry,
link |
first of all, with molecules.
link |
And so the thought experiment was,
link |
how complex does a molecule need to be when I find it
link |
that it couldn't possibly have risen by chance,
link |
probabilistically.
link |
And if I found this molecule,
link |
able to detect it enough quantities in the same object,
link |
like a machine, like a mass spectrometer.
link |
So typically in a mass spectrometer,
link |
you weigh the molecules in electric field.
link |
You probably have to have all the order of 10,000
link |
identical molecules to get a signal.
link |
So 10,000 identical molecules that are complex.
link |
What is the chance of them occurring by chance?
link |
Well, we can do the math.
link |
Let's take a molecule like strychnine
link |
or, yeah, so strychnine is a good molecule actually to take
link |
or Viagra is a good molecule.
link |
I made jokes about Viagra because it's a complex molecule.
link |
And one of my friends said, yeah,
link |
if we find Viagra on Mars in detectable quantities,
link |
we know something is up.
link |
And yeah, but anyway, it's a complex molecule.
link |
So what you do is you take this molecule
link |
in the mass spectrometer and you hit it with some electrons
link |
or in electric field and it breaks apart.
link |
And if the larger the number of different parts,
link |
you know when it starts to get refreshed,
link |
my idea was that that molecule could not be created
link |
by chance, probabilistically.
link |
So that was where assembly theory was born
link |
in an experiment, in a mass spec experiment.
link |
And I was thinking about this
link |
because NASA is sending mass spectrometers to Mars,
link |
to Titan, it's gonna send them to Europa.
link |
There's gonna be a nuclear powered mass spectrometer
link |
I mean, this is the coolest experiment ever.
link |
They're not only sending a drone
link |
that's gonna fly around Titan,
link |
it's gonna be powered by a nuclear slug, a nuclear battery,
link |
and it's gonna have a mass spectrometer on it.
link |
Is this already launched?
link |
No, it's Dragonfly
link |
and it's gonna be launched in a few years.
link |
I think it got pushed a year because of the pandemic.
link |
So I think it's three or four years.
link |
Dragonfly, nuclear Dragonfly is going to fly to Titan
link |
and collect data about the composition
link |
of the various chemicals on Titan.
link |
Yeah, I'm trying to convince NASA.
link |
I don't know if I'll be able to convince
link |
the Dragonfly team that they should apply this approach,
link |
but they will get data.
link |
And depending on how good their mass spectrometer is.
link |
But I had this thought experiment anyway,
link |
and I did this thought experiment.
link |
And for me, it seemed to work.
link |
I turned the thought experiment into an algorithm
link |
in assembly theory.
link |
And I basically, assembly theory, if I take,
link |
let's just make it generic.
link |
And so let's just take the word abracadabra.
link |
Say, can I, if you find the word,
link |
so if you have a book with lots of words in it
link |
and you find abracadabra one off,
link |
and it's a rap book that's been written by,
link |
in a random way, set of monkeys in a room.
link |
And you're on typewriters.
link |
And you find one off abracadabra,
link |
But if you find lots of recurrences of abracadabra,
link |
well, that means something weird is going on.
link |
But let's think about the assembly number of abracadabra.
link |
So abracadabra has a number of letters in it.
link |
You can break it down.
link |
So you just cut the letters up.
link |
But when you actually reassemble abracadabra,
link |
the minimum number of ways of organizing those letters.
link |
So you'd have an A, a B, and keep going up.
link |
When you cut abracadabra up into parts,
link |
you can put it together again in seven steps.
link |
So what does that mean?
link |
That means if you basically don't,
link |
you're allowed to reuse things
link |
you make in a chain at the beginning.
link |
That's the memory of the universe,
link |
the process that makes abracadabra.
link |
And because of that causal chain,
link |
you can then get to abracadabra
link |
quicker than the number of letters
link |
for having to specify only in seven.
link |
So if you take that to a molecule
link |
and you cut the molecule up into parts,
link |
and you can, on the causal chain,
link |
and you basically start with the atoms
link |
and then bonds, and then you randomly add on those parts
link |
to make the A, make the B, and keep going all the way up,
link |
I found that literally, assembly theory
link |
allows me to say how compressed a molecule is.
link |
So when there's some information in there.
link |
And I realized assembly theory
link |
isn't just confined to molecular space.
link |
It can apply to anything.
link |
But let me finish the molecular argument.
link |
So what I did is I had this theory.
link |
I, with one of my students, we wrote an algorithm.
link |
We basically took the 20 million molecules from a database
link |
and we just calculate their assembly number.
link |
And that's the index.
link |
Like basically, if I take a molecule
link |
and I cut it up into bonds,
link |
what is the minimum number of steps I need to take
link |
to reform that molecule from atoms?
link |
So reusability of previously formed things
link |
is somehow a fundamental part of what it is.
link |
Exactly, it's like a memory in the universe, right?
link |
I'm making lots of leaps here.
link |
Like, it's kind of weird.
link |
I'm saying, right, there's a process
link |
that can form the A and the B and the C, let's say.
link |
And then because we've formed A and B before,
link |
we can use A and B again with no extra cost except one unit.
link |
So that's the kind of what the chain of events.
link |
And that's how you think about memory here
link |
when you say the universe,
link |
when you talk about the universe
link |
or life is the universe creating memory.
link |
So we went through chemical space
link |
and we looked at the assembly numbers.
link |
We were able to classify it.
link |
So, okay, let's test it.
link |
So we're able to take a whole bunch of molecules
link |
and assign an assembly index to them, okay?
link |
And it's just a function of the number of bonds
link |
in the molecule and how much symmetry.
link |
So literally assembly theory is a measure
link |
of how little symmetry a molecule has.
link |
And so the more asymmetry, the more information,
link |
the more weird it is,
link |
like a Jackson Pollock of some description.
link |
So I then went and did a load of experiments.
link |
And I basically took those molecules,
link |
I cut them up in the mass spec
link |
and measured the number of peaks
link |
without any knowledge of the molecule.
link |
And we found the assembly number,
link |
there was almost not quite a one to one correlation,
link |
but almost because not all bonds are equal.
link |
They have different energies.
link |
I then did this using two other spectroscopic techniques,
link |
NMR, nuclear magnetic resonance,
link |
which uses radio frequency to basically jangle the molecules
link |
and get a signature out.
link |
And I also used infrared.
link |
And infrared and NMR almost gave us a one to one correlation.
link |
So what am I saying?
link |
Saying by taking a molecule
link |
and doing either infrared or NMR or mass spec,
link |
I can work out how many parts there are in that molecule
link |
and then put it on a scale.
link |
And what we did in the next part of the work
link |
is we took molecules randomly from the environment,
link |
from outer space, from all around earth,
link |
from the sea, from Antarctica,
link |
and from fossils and so on.
link |
And even NASA, because they didn't believe us,
link |
blinded some samples.
link |
And we found that all these samples that came from biology
link |
produced molecules that had a very high assembly number
link |
above a threshold of about 15.
link |
So basically all the stuff that came
link |
from an ebiotic origin was low.
link |
There was no complexity there.
link |
So we suddenly realized that on earth at least,
link |
there is a cutoff that natural phenomena
link |
cannot produce molecules
link |
that need more than 15 steps to make them.
link |
So I realized that this is a way to make a scale of life,
link |
a scale of technology as well.
link |
And literally you could just go sniffing for molecules
link |
off earth, on Titan, on Mars.
link |
And when you find a molecule in the mass spectrometer
link |
that gives you more than 15 parts,
link |
you'll know pretty much for sure
link |
that it had to be produced by evolution.
link |
And this allowed me to come up with a general definition
link |
of life based on assembly theory,
link |
to say that if I find an object that has a large number
link |
of parts, say an iPhone or Boeing 747,
link |
or any complex object and I can find it in abundance
link |
and cut it up, I can tell you whether that has been produced
link |
by an informational process or not.
link |
And that's what assembly theory kind of does.
link |
But it goes a bit further.
link |
I then realized that this isn't just about life,
link |
it's about causation.
link |
So actually it tells you about
link |
whether it's a causal structure.
link |
So now I can look at objects in the universe,
link |
say that again, this cup and say, right,
link |
I'm gonna look at how many independent parts it has.
link |
So that's the assembly number.
link |
I'll then look at the abundance, how many cups?
link |
There are two on this table,
link |
maybe there's a few more you got stashed away.
link |
So assembly is a function of the complexity of the object
link |
times the number of copy numbers of that object
link |
or a function of the copy number normalized.
link |
So I realized there's a new quantity in the universe.
link |
You have energy, entropy, and assembly.
link |
So assembly, the way we should think about that
link |
is how much reusability there is.
link |
Because reusability is like,
link |
can you play devil's advocate to this?
link |
So could this just be a nice tertiary signal
link |
for living organisms?
link |
Like some kind of distant signal that's,
link |
yeah, this is a nice property,
link |
but it's not capturing something fundamental.
link |
Or do you think reusability is something fundamental
link |
to life and complex organisms?
link |
I think reusability is fundamental in the universe,
link |
not just for life and complex organisms.
link |
It's about causation.
link |
So I think assembly tells you if you find objects,
link |
cause you can do this with trajectories as well.
link |
You think about it,
link |
that the fact there are objects in the universe on earth
link |
You think about it,
link |
we should just have a combinatorial explosion of stuff.
link |
The fact that not everything exists is really weird.
link |
And then as I'm looking at two mugs and two water bottles
link |
and the things that exist kind of are similar
link |
and multiply in copies of each other.
link |
So I would say that assembly allows you to do something
link |
that statistical mechanics and people looking at entropy
link |
have got stuck with for a while.
link |
So I'm making, it's pretty bold.
link |
I mean, I'm writing a paper with Sarah Walker
link |
on this at the moment.
link |
And we're realizing,
link |
we don't want to get ahead of ourselves
link |
because I think that there's lots of ways where this is,
link |
you know, it's a really interesting idea.
link |
It works for molecules and it appears to work
link |
for any objects produced by causation.
link |
Cause you can take a motor car,
link |
you can look at the assembly of the motor car,
link |
look at a book, look at the assembly of the book.
link |
Assembly theory tells you
link |
there's a way of compressing and reusing.
link |
And so when people, I talk to information theorists,
link |
they say, oh, this is just logical depth.
link |
I say, it is like logical depth,
link |
but it's experimentally measurable.
link |
They say, oh, it's a bit like Komogolov complexity.
link |
And so, but it's computable.
link |
And now, okay, it's not infinitely computable,
link |
gets MP hard very quickly, right?
link |
It's very hard problem when you could get,
link |
but it's a computable enough,
link |
you could tractable enough to be able to tell
link |
the difference between a molecule
link |
that's been formed by the random background
link |
And I think that that's really interesting
link |
because until now there's no way
link |
of measuring complexity objectively.
link |
Complexity has required algorithmic comparisons
link |
and programs and human beings to label things.
link |
Assembly is label free.
link |
Well, not entirely.
link |
We can talk about what that means in a minute.
link |
Okay, my brain has been broken a couple of times here.
link |
I'm sorry I explained it really badly.
link |
No, it was very well explained.
link |
It was just fascinating.
link |
And it's, my brain is broken into pieces
link |
and I'm trying to assemble it.
link |
So when you have a molecule,
link |
you're trying to figure out, okay,
link |
if we were to reuse parts of this molecule,
link |
which parts can we reuse as an optimization problem,
link |
and be hard to figure out the minimum amount
link |
of reused components that will create this molecule.
link |
And it becomes difficult when you start
link |
to look at a huge, huge molecules, arbitrarily large.
link |
Cause I'm also like mapping this.
link |
Can I think about this in complexity generally,
link |
like looking at a cellular automata system
link |
and saying like, what's the,
link |
can this be used as a measure of complexity
link |
for like a arbitrarily complicated system?
link |
Yeah, I think it can.
link |
And I think that the question is, and what's the benefit?
link |
Cause there's plenty of, I mean,
link |
in computer science and mathematics and in physics,
link |
people have been really seriously studying complexity
link |
And I think there's a really interesting problems
link |
of where we course grade and we lose information.
link |
And all assembly theory does really,
link |
assembly theory just explains weak emergence.
link |
And so what assembly theory says, look,
link |
going from the atoms that interact,
link |
those first replicators that build one another,
link |
assembly at the minimal level just tells you evidence
link |
that there's been replication and selection.
link |
And I think the more selected something is,
link |
the higher the assembly.
link |
And so we were able to start to know
link |
how to look for selection in the universe.
link |
If you go to the moon,
link |
there's nothing a very high assembly on the moon
link |
except the human artifacts we've left there.
link |
So again, let's go back to the sandbox.
link |
In assembly theory says,
link |
if all the sand grains could stick together,
link |
that's the infinite combinatorial explosion
link |
in the universe, that should be the default.
link |
We don't have that.
link |
Now let's assemble sand grains together
link |
and do them in every possible way.
link |
So we have a series of minimal operations
link |
that can move the sand together.
link |
But all that doesn't exist either.
link |
Now, because we have specific memory where we say,
link |
well, we're gonna put three sand grains in line
link |
or four and make a cross or a triangle
link |
or something unsymmetrical.
link |
And once we've made the triangle
link |
and the unsymmetrical thing, we remember that,
link |
we can use it again, cause on that causal chain.
link |
So what assembly theory allows you to do
link |
is go to the actual object that you exist,
link |
you find in space.
link |
And actually the way you get there is by disassembling.
link |
It's disassembly theory works by disassembling objects
link |
you have and understanding the steps to create them.
link |
And it works for molecules beautifully
link |
cause you just break bonds.
link |
But like you said, it's very difficult.
link |
It's a difficult problem to figure out
link |
how to break them apart.
link |
For molecules, it's easy.
link |
If you just keep low enough in molecular weight space,
link |
So it's a complete theory.
link |
When we start to think about objects,
link |
we can start to assign,
link |
we can start to think about things at different levels,
link |
different atoms, what you assign as your atom.
link |
So in a molecule, the atom, this is really confusing
link |
cause the word atom, I mean smallest breakable part.
link |
So in a molecule, the atom is the bond
link |
cause you break bonds, not atoms, right?
link |
So in a car, the atom might be, I don't know,
link |
a small amount of iron or the smallest reusable part,
link |
a rivet, a piece of plastic or something.
link |
So you gotta be really careful.
link |
In a microprocessor, the atoms might be transistors.
link |
And so the amount of assembly that something has
link |
is a function, you have to look at the atom level.
link |
What are your parts?
link |
What are you counting?
link |
That's one of the things you get to choose.
link |
What is, at what scale is the atom?
link |
What is the minimal thing?
link |
I mean, there's a huge amounts of trade offs
link |
in when you approach a system and try to analyze.
link |
Like if you approach Earth,
link |
you're an alien civilization trying to study Earth,
link |
what is the atom for trying to measure
link |
the complexity of life?
link |
Is it, are humans the atoms?
link |
I would say to start with, you just use molecules.
link |
I can say for sure, if there are molecules
link |
of sufficient complexity on Earth,
link |
then I know that life has made them.
link |
And then go further and show technology.
link |
There are molecules that exist on Earth
link |
that are not possible even by biology.
link |
You needed technology
link |
and you needed microprocessors to get there.
link |
So that's really cool.
link |
And that there's a correlation between that,
link |
between the coolness of that and assembly number,
link |
whatever the measure.
link |
What's the, what would you call the measure?
link |
Yeah, assembly index.
link |
So there are three kind of fundamental
link |
kind of labels we have.
link |
So there's the quantity of assembly
link |
and the assembly, so if you have a box,
link |
let's just have a box of molecules.
link |
So I'm gonna have my box.
link |
We count the number of identical molecules
link |
and then we chop each molecule up
link |
in an individual molecule class
link |
and calculate the assembly number.
link |
So basically you then have a function
link |
that sums over all the molecules for each assembly
link |
and then you divide through.
link |
So you make it divide through
link |
by the number of molecules.
link |
So that's the assembly index for the box?
link |
So that will tell you the amount of assembly in the box.
link |
So basically the assembly equation we come up with
link |
is like basically the sum of e to the power
link |
of the assembly index for molecule i
link |
times the number of copies of the molecule i
link |
and then you normalize.
link |
So you sum them all up and then normalize.
link |
So some boxes are gonna be more assembled than others.
link |
Yeah, that's what they tell me.
link |
So if you were to look at me as a box,
link |
so say I'm a box, am I assembling my parts?
link |
In terms of like, how do you know,
link |
what's my assembly index?
link |
So I've been gentle.
link |
So let's just, we'll talk about the molecules in you.
link |
So let's just take a pile of sand the same way as you
link |
and I would take you and just cut up all the molecules.
link |
I mean, and look at the number of copies
link |
and assembly number.
link |
So in sand, let's say there's probably gonna be
link |
nothing more than assembly number of two or three,
link |
but there might be trillions and trillions of sand grains.
link |
In your body, there might be,
link |
the assembly number is gonna be higher,
link |
but there might not be as quite as many copies
link |
because the molecular weight is higher.
link |
So you do wanna average it out.
link |
You can average, you do average it.
link |
I'm not defined by the most impressive molecules.
link |
No, no, you're an average in your volume.
link |
Well, I mean, we're just working this out,
link |
but what's really cool is you're gonna have
link |
a really high assembly.
link |
The sand will have a very low assembly.
link |
Your causal power is much higher.
link |
You get to make decisions, you're alive, you're aspiring.
link |
Assembly says something about causal power in the universe.
link |
And that's not supposed to exist
link |
because physicists don't accept
link |
that causation exists at the bottom.
link |
So I understand at the chemical level
link |
why the assembly causes causation.
link |
Why is it causation?
link |
Because it's capturing the memory.
link |
Capturing memory, but there's not an action to it.
link |
So I'm trying to see how it leads to life.
link |
Well, it's what life does.
link |
So I think it's, we don't know.
link |
So. Yeah, that's a good question.
link |
What is life versus what does life do?
link |
Yeah, so that's, this is the definition of life.
link |
The only definition we need, right?
link |
The assembly index.
link |
It's basically that life is able to create objects
link |
in abundance that are so complex,
link |
the assembly number is so high,
link |
they can't possibly be formed in an environment
link |
where there's just random interactions.
link |
So suddenly you can put life on a scale.
link |
And then life doesn't exist actually in that camp.
link |
It's just how evolved you are.
link |
And you as an object,
link |
because you have incredible causal power,
link |
you could go and, you can go and, you know,
link |
launch rockets or build cars or create drugs,
link |
or, you know, you can do so many things.
link |
You can build stuff, build more artifacts
link |
that show that you have had causal power.
link |
And that causal power was this kind of a lineage.
link |
And I think that over time,
link |
I've been realizing that physics as a discipline
link |
has a number of problems associated with it.
link |
Me as a chemist, it's kind of interesting
link |
that assembly theory, and I'm really, you know,
link |
I want to maintain some credibility in the physicists eyes,
link |
but I have to push them because they,
link |
physics is a really good discipline.
link |
It's reduced the number,
link |
physics is about reducing the belief system,
link |
but they're down to some things in their belief system,
link |
which is kind of really makes me kind of grumpy.
link |
Number one is requiring order
link |
at the beginning of the universe magically.
link |
We don't need that.
link |
The second is the second law.
link |
Well, we don't actually need that.
link |
This is blasphemous.
link |
Well, in a minute, I'll recover my career in a second.
link |
Although I think the good,
link |
the only good thing about being the regis chair
link |
means I think there has to be an act of parliament to fire me.
link |
But you can always go to Lee's Twitter and protest.
link |
And I think the third thing is that,
link |
so we've got, you know,
link |
we've got the order at the beginning.
link |
The second law and the fact that causation is emergent,
link |
And that time is emergent.
link |
John Carroll just turned off this program.
link |
I think he believes that it's emergent.
link |
So causation is not...
link |
That's clearly incorrect
link |
because we wouldn't exist otherwise.
link |
So physicists have kind of got confused about time.
link |
Time is a real thing.
link |
Well, I mean, so look,
link |
I'm very happy with the current description
link |
of the universe as physics give me,
link |
because I can do a lot of stuff, right?
link |
I can go to the moon with Newtonian physics, I think,
link |
and I can understand the orbit of Mercury with relativity.
link |
And so, and I can build transistors
link |
with quantum mechanics, right?
link |
And I can do all this stuff.
link |
So I'm not saying the physics is wrong.
link |
I'm just saying, if we say that time is fundamental,
link |
i.e. time is nonnegotiable, there's a global clock,
link |
I don't need to require
link |
that there's order been magically made in the past
link |
because that asymmetry is built into the way the universe is.
link |
So if time is fundamental,
link |
I mean, you've been referring to this kind of
link |
an interesting formulation of that is memory.
link |
So time is hard to like put a finger on,
link |
like what the hell are we talking about?
link |
Well, it's just the direction,
link |
but memory is a construction,
link |
especially when you have like,
link |
think about these local pockets of complexity,
link |
these nonzero assembly index entities
link |
that's being constructed and they remember.
link |
Never forget molecules.
link |
But remember, the thing is I invented assembly theory.
link |
I'll tell you how I invented it.
link |
When I was a kid, I mean, the thing is,
link |
I keep making fun of myself to my research group.
link |
I've only ever had one idea.
link |
I keep exploring that idea over the 40 years or so
link |
since I had the idea.
link |
Well, aren't you the idea that the universe had?
link |
So it's very kind of hierarchical.
link |
That's very poetic.
link |
So I think I came up with assembly theory
link |
with the following idea.
link |
When I was a kid, I was obsessed about survival kits.
link |
What is the minimum stuff I would need
link |
to basically replicate my reality?
link |
And I love computers and I love technology
link |
or what technology is gonna become.
link |
So I imagined that I would have
link |
basically this really big truck full of stuff.
link |
And I thought, well, can I delete some of that stuff out?
link |
Can I have a blueprint?
link |
And then in the end, I kept making this smaller.
link |
I got to maybe a half a truck and then to a suitcase.
link |
And then I went, okay, well, screw it.
link |
I wanna carry my entire technology in my pocket.
link |
And I'm not gonna launch into Steve Jobs and iPlayer.
link |
I came up with a matchbox survival kit.
link |
In that matchbox survival kit,
link |
I would have the minimum stuff
link |
that would allow me to interact the environment,
link |
to build my shelter, to build a fishing rod,
link |
to build a water purification system.
link |
And it's kind of like, so what did I use in my box
link |
to assemble in the environment,
link |
to assemble, to assemble, to assemble?
link |
And I realized I could make a causal chain
link |
in my survival kit.
link |
So I guess that's probably why I've been obsessed
link |
with assembly theory for so long.
link |
And I was just pre configured to find it somewhere.
link |
And when I saw it in molecules,
link |
I realized that the causal structure that we say emerges
link |
and the physics kind of gets really stuck
link |
because they're saying that time,
link |
you can go backwards in time.
link |
I mean, how do we let physicists get away
link |
with the notion that we can go back in time
link |
and meet ourselves?
link |
I mean, that's clearly a very hard thing
link |
to allow, physicists would not let other sciences
link |
get away with that kind of heresy, right?
link |
So why are physicists allowed to get away with it?
link |
So first of all, to push back, to play devil's advocate,
link |
you are clearly married to the idea of memory.
link |
You see in this, again, from Rick and Morty way,
link |
you see, you have these deep dreams of the universe
link |
that is writing the story through its memories,
link |
through its chemical compounds
link |
that are just building at top of each other.
link |
And then they find useful components they can reuse.
link |
And then the reused components create systems
link |
that themselves are then reused
link |
and all in this way, construct things.
link |
But when you think of that as memory,
link |
it seems like quite sad that you can walk that back.
link |
But at the same time, it feels like that memory,
link |
you can walk in both directions on that memory
link |
You could walk in both directions,
link |
but I don't think that that makes any sense
link |
because the problem that I have with time being reversible
link |
is that, I mean, I'm just a, you know,
link |
I'm a dumb experimental chemist, right?
link |
So I love burning stuff, burning stuff and building stuff.
link |
But when I think of reversible phenomena,
link |
I imagine in my head,
link |
I have to actually manufacture some time.
link |
I have to borrow time from the universe to do that.
link |
I can't, when anyone says,
link |
let's imagine that we can go back in time or reversibility,
link |
you can't do that.
link |
You can't step out of time.
link |
Time is nonnegotiable, it's happening.
link |
No, but see, you're assuming that time is fundamental,
link |
which most of us do when we go day to day,
link |
but it takes a leap of wild imagination
link |
to think that time is emergent.
link |
No, time is not emergent.
link |
Yeah, I mean, this is an argument we can have,
link |
but I believe I can come up with an experiment.
link |
An experiment that proves
link |
that time cannot possibly be emergent.
link |
An experiment that shows how assembly theory
link |
kind of is the way that the universe produces selection
link |
and that selection gives rise to life.
link |
And also to say, well, hang on,
link |
we could allow ourselves to have a theory
link |
that requires us to have these statements to be possible.
link |
Like we need to have order in the past,
link |
or we can use the past hypothesis,
link |
which is order in the past, but as well, okay.
link |
And we have to have an arrow of time.
link |
We have to require that entropy increases.
link |
And we have to say, and then we can say, look,
link |
the universe is completely closed and there's no novelty
link |
or that novelty is predetermined.
link |
What I'm saying is very, very important
link |
that time is fundamental, which means,
link |
if you think about it,
link |
the universe becomes more and more novel each step.
link |
It generates there's more states
link |
in the next step than it was before.
link |
So that means bigger search.
link |
So what I'm saying is that the universe
link |
wasn't capable of consciousness at day one,
link |
actually, because it didn't have enough states.
link |
But today the universe is, so it's like how?
link |
All right, all right, hold on a second.
link |
Now we've pissed off the panpsychist too, okay.
link |
No, this is brilliant, sorry.
link |
Part of me is just joking, having fun with this thing,
link |
but because you're saying a lot of brilliant stuff
link |
and I'm trying to slow it down before my brain explodes.
link |
So, because I want to break apart
link |
some of the fascinating things you're saying.
link |
So novelty, novelty is increasing in the universe
link |
because the number of states is increasing.
link |
What do you mean by states?
link |
So I think the physicists almost got everything right.
link |
I can't fault them at all.
link |
I just think there's a little bit of dogma.
link |
I'm just trying to play devil's advocate.
link |
I'm very happy to be entirely wrong on this, right?
link |
I'm not right on many things at all,
link |
but if I can make less assumptions
link |
about the universe with this,
link |
then potentially that's a more powerful way
link |
of looking at things.
link |
If you think of time as fundamental,
link |
you can make less assumptions overall.
link |
Exactly, if time is fundamental,
link |
I don't need to add on a magical second law
link |
because the second law comes out of the fact
link |
the universe is actually, there's more states available.
link |
I mean, we might even be able to do weird things
link |
like dark energy in the universe
link |
might actually just be time, right?
link |
Yeah, but then you have to still have to explain
link |
why time is fundamental,
link |
because I can give you one explanation
link |
that's simpler than time and say God.
link |
You know, like just because it's simple
link |
doesn't mean it's, okay, you still have to explain God
link |
and you still have to explain time.
link |
Like why is it fundamental?
link |
So let's just say existence is default,
link |
which means time is the default.
link |
So how did you go from the existence
link |
of the time to the default? Well, we exist, right?
link |
So let's just be very.
link |
We're yet to talk about what exist means.
link |
All right, let's go all the way back.
link |
Yeah, yeah, yeah, okay.
link |
I think it's very poetic and beautiful
link |
what you're weaving into this.
link |
I don't think this conversation is even about the assembly,
link |
which is fascinating and we'll keep mentioning it
link |
in the index on this idea,
link |
that I don't think is necessarily connected to time.
link |
Oh, I think it is deeply connected.
link |
I can't explain it yet.
link |
So you don't think everything you've said
link |
about assembly theory and assembly index
link |
can still be correct even if time is emergent?
link |
So yeah, right now, assembly theory appears to work.
link |
I appear to be able to measure objects of high assembly
link |
in a mass spectrometer and look at their abundance
link |
and you know, all that's fine, right?
link |
It's a nice, if nothing else, it's a nice way
link |
of looking at how molecules can compress things.
link |
Now, am I saying that a time has to be fundamental,
link |
not emergent for assembly theory to work?
link |
No, I think I'm saying that the universe,
link |
it appears that the universe has many different ways
link |
You could have three different types of time.
link |
You could just have time that's,
link |
the way I would think of it,
link |
if you want to hold onto emergent time,
link |
I think that's fine, let's do that for a second.
link |
Hold onto emergent time
link |
and the universe is just doing its thing.
link |
Then assembly time only exists when the universe
link |
starts to write memories through bonds.
link |
So let's just say there's rocks running around,
link |
you know, when the bond happens and selection starts,
link |
suddenly there are, the universe is remembering cause
link |
in the past and those structures will have effects
link |
So suddenly a new type of time emerges at that point,
link |
which has a direction.
link |
And I think Sean Carroll at this point
link |
might even turn the podcast back on and go,
link |
okay, I can deal with that, that's fine.
link |
But I'm just basically trying to condense the conversation,
link |
say, hey, let's just have time fundamental
link |
and see how that screws with people's minds.
link |
You're triggering people by saying fundamental.
link |
Well, you just say, like, let's say.
link |
Why am I, look, I'm walking through the wall.
link |
Why should I grow up in a world where time,
link |
I don't go back in time.
link |
I don't meet myself in the past.
link |
There are no one, there are no aliens coming
link |
from the future, right?
link |
You know, it's just like.
link |
No, no, no, but that's not, no, no, no, hold on a second.
link |
That's like saying we're talking about biology
link |
or like evolutionary psychology
link |
and you're saying, okay, let's just assume
link |
that clothing is fundamental.
link |
People wearing clothes is fundamental.
link |
It's like, no, no, no, wait a minute.
link |
You can't, like, I think you're gonna get in a lot of trouble
link |
if you assume time is fundamental.
link |
Give me one reason why I'm getting into trouble
link |
with time being fundamental.
link |
Because you might not understand
link |
the origins of this memory that might be deeper.
link |
Like this memory, that could be a thing
link |
that's explaining the construction of these
link |
higher complexities better than just saying
link |
it's a search, it's chemicals doing a search
link |
for reusable structures that they can like
link |
then use as bricks to build a house.
link |
Okay, so I accept that.
link |
So let's go back a second because it's a kind of,
link |
I wanted to drop the time bomb at this part
link |
because I think we can carry on discussing it
link |
for many, many, many, many, many days, many months.
link |
But I'm happy to accept that it might be wrong.
link |
But what I would like to do is imagine a universe
link |
where time is fundamental and time is emergent
link |
and ask, let's just then talk about causation
link |
because physicists require that causation.
link |
So this is where I'm gonna go.
link |
Causation emerges and it doesn't exist at the micro scale.
link |
Well, that clearly is wrong
link |
because if causation has to emerge at the macro scale,
link |
life cannot emerge.
link |
So how does life emerge?
link |
Life requires molecules to bump into each other,
link |
produce replicators, those replicators
link |
need to produce polymers.
link |
There needs to be cause and effect at the molecular level.
link |
There needs to be an agardic, non agardic
link |
to an agardic transition at some point.
link |
And those replicators have consequence,
link |
material consequence in the universe.
link |
Physicists just say, oh, you know what?
link |
I'm gonna have a bunch of particles in a box.
link |
I'm gonna think about it in a Newtonian way
link |
and a quantum way and I'll add on an arrow of time
link |
so I can label things
link |
and causation will happen magically later.
link |
Explain causation and they can't.
link |
The only way I can reconcile causation
link |
is having a fundamental time
link |
because this allows me to have a deterministic universe
link |
that creates novelty.
link |
And there's so many things to unpack here
link |
but let's go back to the point.
link |
You said, can assembly theory work with emergent time?
link |
Sure it can, but it doesn't give me a deep satisfaction
link |
about how causation and assembly gives rise
link |
to these objects that move through time and space.
link |
And again, what am I saying to bring it back?
link |
I can say without fear, take this water bottle
link |
and look at this water bottle
link |
and look at the features on it.
link |
There's writing, you've got a load of them.
link |
I know that causal structures gave rise to this.
link |
In fact, I'm not looking at just one water bottle here.
link |
I'm looking at every water bottle
link |
that's ever been conceived of by humanity.
link |
This here is a special object.
link |
In fact, Leibniz knew this.
link |
Leibniz who was at the same time of Newton,
link |
he kind of got stuck.
link |
I think Leibniz actually invented assembly theory.
link |
He gave soul, the soul that you see in objects
link |
wasn't the mystical soul, it is assembly.
link |
It is the fact there's been a history of objects related
link |
and without the object in the past,
link |
this object wouldn't exist.
link |
There is a lineage and there is conserved structures,
link |
causal structures have given rise to those.
link |
And you're saying it's just a simpler view
link |
if time is fundamental.
link |
And it shakes the physicist's cage a bit, right?
link |
Because I'm gonna say, but I think that.
link |
I just enjoy the fact that physicists are in cages.
link |
I think that, I mean, I would say that, you know,
link |
Lee Smolin, I don't want to speak for Lee.
link |
I mean, I'm talking to Lee about this.
link |
I think Lee also is an agreement
link |
that time has to be fundamental,
link |
but I think he goes further.
link |
You know, even in space,
link |
I don't think you can go back to the same place in space.
link |
I've been to Austin a few times now.
link |
This is my, I think third time I've been to Austin.
link |
Is Austin in the same place?
link |
No, the solar system is moving through space.
link |
I'm not back in the same space.
link |
Every event in the universe is unique.
link |
Doesn't mean we can't go back though.
link |
I mean, you know, let's just, you know,
link |
rest this conversation, which was beautiful,
link |
with a quote from the Rolling Stones
link |
that you can't always get what you want,
link |
which is you want time to be fundamental,
link |
but if you try, you'll get what you need,
link |
which is assembly theory.
link |
Okay, let me ask you about,
link |
continue talking about complexity,
link |
and to clarify with this beautiful theory of yours
link |
that you're developing,
link |
and I'm sure we'll continue developing
link |
both in the lab and in theory.
link |
Yeah, it can't be said enough,
link |
just the ideas you're playing with in your head are just,
link |
and we've been talking about are just beautiful.
link |
So if we talk about complexity a little bit more generally,
link |
maybe in an admiring romantic way,
link |
how does complexity emerge from simple rules?
link |
Okay, the nice algorithm of assembly is there.
link |
I would say that the problem I have right now is,
link |
I mean, you're right, we can, about time as well.
link |
The problem is I have this hammer called assembly,
link |
and everything I see is a nail.
link |
So now let's just apply it to all sorts of things.
link |
We take the Bernard instability.
link |
The Bernard instability is you have oil,
link |
if you heat up oil, let's say on a frying pan,
link |
when you get convection, you get honeycomb patterns.
link |
Take the formation of snowflakes, right?
link |
Take the emergence of a tropical storm,
link |
or the storm on Jupiter.
link |
When people say, let's talk about complexity in general,
link |
what they're saying is,
link |
let's take this collection of objects
link |
that are correlated in some way,
link |
and try and work out how many moving parts there are,
link |
how this got, how this exists.
link |
So what people have been doing for a very long time
link |
is taking complexity and counting what they've lost,
link |
calculating the entropy.
link |
And the reason why I'm pushing very hard on assembly
link |
is entropy tells you how much you've lost.
link |
It doesn't tell you the microstates are gone.
link |
But if you embrace the bottom up with assembly,
link |
those states, and you then understand the causal chain
link |
that gives rise to the emergence.
link |
So what I think assembly will help us do
link |
is understand weak emergence at the very least,
link |
and maybe allow us to crack open complexity in a new way.
link |
And I've been fascinated with complexity theory
link |
I mean, as soon as I could,
link |
I learned of the Mandelbrot set,
link |
and I could just type it up in my computer and run it,
link |
and just show it and see it kind of unfold.
link |
It was just this kind of,
link |
this mathematical reality that existed in front of me,
link |
I just found incredible.
link |
But then I realized that actually we were cheating.
link |
We're putting in the boundary conditions all the time.
link |
We're putting in information.
link |
And so when people talk to me
link |
about the complexity of things,
link |
I say, but relative what, how do you measure them?
link |
So my attempt, my small attempt, naive attempt,
link |
because there's many greater minds than mine
link |
on the planet right now thinking about this properly.
link |
And you've had some of them on the podcast, right?
link |
Just absolutely fantastic.
link |
But I'm wondering if we might be able to reformat
link |
the way we would explore algorithmic complexity
link |
What's the minimum number of constraints we need
link |
in our system for this to unfold?
link |
So whether it's like, if you take some particles
link |
and put them in a box,
link |
at a certain box size, you get quasi crystallinity
link |
coming out, right?
link |
But that quite, that emergence, it's not magic.
link |
It must come from the boundary conditions you put in.
link |
So all I'm saying is a lot of the complexity that we see
link |
is a direct read of the constraints we put in,
link |
but we just don't understand.
link |
So as I said earlier to the poor origin of life chemists,
link |
you know, origin of life is a scam.
link |
I would say lots of the complexity calculation theory
link |
is a bit of a scam
link |
because we put the constraints in,
link |
but we don't count them correctly.
link |
And I'm wondering if...
link |
Oh, you're thinking and starting to drop
link |
as assembly theory, assembly index
link |
is a way to count to the constraints.
link |
So assembly theory doesn't do,
link |
doesn't lower any of the importance of complexity theory,
link |
but it allows us to go across domains
link |
and start to compare things,
link |
compare the complexity of a molecule,
link |
of a microprocessor, of the text you've writing,
link |
of the music you may compose.
link |
You've tweeted, quote,
link |
"'Assembly theory explains why Nietzsche understood
link |
we had limited freedom rather than radical freedom.'
link |
So we've applied assembly theory
link |
to cellular automata in life and chemistry.
link |
What does Nietzsche have to do with assembly theory?
link |
Oh, that gets me into free will and everything.
link |
So let me say that again.
link |
Assembly theory explains why Nietzsche understood
link |
we had limited freedom rather than radical freedom.
link |
Limited freedom, I suppose, is referring to the fact
link |
that there's constraints or what is radical freedom?
link |
So Sartre was like believed in absolute freedom
link |
and that he could do whatever he wanted in his imagination.
link |
And Nietzsche understood that his freedom
link |
was somewhat more limited.
link |
And it kind of takes me back to this computer game
link |
that I played when I was 10.
link |
So I think it's called Dragon's Lair.
link |
Do you know Dragon's Lair?
link |
I think I know Dragon's Lair, yeah.
link |
Dragon's Lair, I knew I was being conned, right?
link |
Dragon's Lair, when you play the game,
link |
you're lucky that you grew up
link |
in a basically procedurally generated world.
link |
That was RPG a little bit.
link |
No, it's like, is it turn based play?
link |
It was a role playing game.
link |
But really good graphics and one of the first laser disks.
link |
And when you actually flick the stick,
link |
you took, it's like it was like a graphical adventure game
link |
And when I played this game, I really, you know,
link |
you could get through the game in 12 minutes
link |
if you knew what you were doing without making mistakes,
link |
just play the disk, play the disk, play a disk.
link |
So it was just about timing.
link |
And actually it was a complete fraud
link |
because all the animation has been prerecorded on the disk.
link |
It's like the Black Mirror, the first interactive
link |
where they had all the, you know,
link |
several million kind of permutations of the movie
link |
that you could select on Netflix.
link |
I've forgotten the name of it.
link |
So this was exactly that in the laser disk.
link |
So you basically go left, go right, fight the yoga,
link |
And when you flick the joystick at the right time,
link |
it just goes to the next animation to play.
link |
It's not really generating it.
link |
And I played that game and I knew I was being had.
link |
So to you, Dragon Lair is the first time you realized
link |
that free will is an illusion.
link |
And why does assembly theory give you hints
link |
about free will, whether it's an illusion or not?
link |
Yeah, so no, so not tightly.
link |
If I do think I have some will and I think I am an agent
link |
and I think I can interact and I can play around
link |
with the model I have of the world
link |
and the cost functions, right?
link |
And I can hack my own cost functions,
link |
which means I have a little bit of free will.
link |
But as much as I want to do stuff in the universe,
link |
I don't think I could suddenly say,
link |
I mean, actually this is ridiculous.
link |
Cause now I say I could try and do it, right?
link |
Like I'm suddenly give up everything
link |
and become a rapper tomorrow, right?
link |
Maybe I could try that,
link |
but I don't have sufficient agency
link |
to make that necessarily happen.
link |
I'm on a trajectory.
link |
So when in Dragon's Lair,
link |
I know that I have some trajectories that I can play with
link |
where Sartre realized he thought
link |
that he had no assembly, no memory.
link |
He could just leap across and do everything.
link |
And Nietzsche said, okay, I realize I don't have
link |
full freedom, but I have some freedom.
link |
And the assembly theory basically says that,
link |
it says, if you have these constraints in your past,
link |
they limit what you were able to do in the future,
link |
but you can use them to do amazing things.
link |
Let's say I'm a poppy plant and I'm creating some opiates.
link |
Opiates are really interesting molecules.
link |
I mean, they're obviously great for medicine,
link |
cause great problems in society.
link |
But let's imagine we fast forward a billion years,
link |
what will the opioids look like in a billion years?
link |
Well, we can guess because we can see
link |
how those proteins will evolve
link |
and we can see how the secondary metabolites will change.
link |
But they can't go radical.
link |
They can't suddenly become, I don't know,
link |
like a molecule that you find in an OLED in a display.
link |
They will have some,
link |
they will be limited by the causal chain that produced them.
link |
And that's what I'm getting at,
link |
saying we are unpredictably predictable
link |
or predictably unpredictable within a constraint
link |
on the trajectory we're on.
link |
Yeah, so the predictably part
link |
is the constraints of the trajectory
link |
and the unpredictable part is the part
link |
that you still haven't really clarified
link |
the origin of the little bit of freedom.
link |
So you're just arguing,
link |
you're basically saying that radical freedom is impossible.
link |
You're really operating in a world of constraints
link |
that are constrained by the memory of the trajectory
link |
of the chemistry that led to who you are.
link |
Okay, but even just a tiny bit of freedom,
link |
even if everything, if everywhere you are in cages,
link |
if you can move around in that cage a little bit,
link |
And so the question is in assembly theory,
link |
if we're thinking about free will,
link |
where does the little bit of freedom come from?
link |
What is the eye that can decide to be a rapper?
link |
What, why, what is that?
link |
That's a cute little trick we've convinced each other of
link |
so we can do fun tricks at parties
link |
or is there something fundamental
link |
that allows us to feel free, to be free?
link |
I think that that's the question that I wanna answer.
link |
I know you wanna answer it and I think it's so profound.
link |
Let me have a go at it.
link |
I would say that I don't take the stance of Sam Harris
link |
because I think Sam Harris, when he said,
link |
the way he says it is almost,
link |
it's really interesting.
link |
I'd love to talk to him about it.
link |
Sam Harris almost thinks himself out of existence, right?
link |
Because, do you know what I mean?
link |
Yeah, well, I mean, he has different views
link |
on consciousness versus free will.
link |
I think he saves himself with consciousness.
link |
He thinks himself out of existence with free will.
link |
Yeah, yeah, exactly.
link |
So I mean, there's no point, right?
link |
He's a leaf floating on a river.
link |
Yeah, I think that he, I don't know,
link |
I'd love to ask him whether he really believes that
link |
and then we could play some games.
link |
No, no, I then would say,
link |
I'll get him to play a game of cards with me
link |
and I'll work out the conditions on which he says no,
link |
and then I'll get him to the conditions he says yes,
link |
and then I'll trap him in his logical inconsistency
link |
with that argument.
link |
Because at some point when he loses enough money
link |
or the prospect of losing enough money,
link |
there's a way of basically mapping out a series of...
link |
So what will is about, let's not call it free will,
link |
but what will is about is to have a series of decisions
link |
equally weighted in front of you.
link |
And those decisions aren't necessarily energy minimization.
link |
Those decisions are a function of the model
link |
you've made in your mind, you're in your simulation.
link |
And the way you've interacted in reality
link |
and also other interactions you're having
link |
with other individuals and happenstance.
link |
And I think that there's a little bit of delay in time.
link |
So I think what you're able to do is say,
link |
well, I'm gonna do the counterfactual.
link |
I've done all of them.
link |
And I'm gonna go this way.
link |
And you probably don't know why.
link |
I think free will is actually very complex interaction
link |
between your unconscious and your conscious brain.
link |
And I think the reason why we're arguing about it
link |
is so interesting in that we just,
link |
some people outsource their free will
link |
to their unconscious brain.
link |
And some people try and overthink
link |
the free will and the conscious brain.
link |
I would say that Sam Harris has realized
link |
his conscious brain doesn't have free will,
link |
but his unconscious brain does.
link |
That's my guess, right?
link |
And that he can't have access to the unconscious brain.
link |
Yeah, and that's kind of annoying.
link |
And so he's just, he's going to, through meditation,
link |
come to acceptance with that fact.
link |
Yeah, it's just maybe okay.
link |
But I do think that I have the ability to make decisions
link |
and I like my decisions.
link |
In fact, I mean, this is an argument I have
link |
with some people that some days I feel
link |
I have no free will and it's just an illusion.
link |
And this is one, and it makes me more radical,
link |
if you like, you know, that I get to explore
link |
more of the state space.
link |
And I'm like, I'm going to try and affect the world now.
link |
I'm really going to ask the question
link |
that maybe I dare not ask or do the thing I dare not do.
link |
And that allows me to kind of explore more.
link |
It's funny that if you truly accept
link |
that there's no free will, that is a kind of radical freedom.
link |
It's funny, but you're, because the little bit
link |
of the illusion under that framework that you have
link |
that you can make choices, if choice is just an illusion
link |
of psychology, you can do whatever the hell you want.
link |
But we don't, do we?
link |
But because you don't truly accept
link |
that you think that there's like, you think there's a choice
link |
which is why you don't just do whatever the hell you want.
link |
Like you feel like there's some responsibility
link |
for making the wrong choice, which is why you don't do it.
link |
But if you truly accept that the choice
link |
has already been made, then you can go,
link |
I don't know what is the most radical thing.
link |
I mean, but yeah, I don't, I wonder what,
link |
what am I preventing myself from doing
link |
that I would really want to do?
link |
Probably like humor stuff.
link |
Like I would love to, if I could like save a game,
link |
do the thing and then reload it later,
link |
like do undo, it probably would be humor.
link |
Just to do something like super hilarious.
link |
That's super embarrassing.
link |
And then just go, I mean, it's basically just fun.
link |
I would add more fun to the world.
link |
I mean, I sometimes do that as I've, you know,
link |
I sometimes I try and mess up my reality in unusual ways
link |
by just doing things because I'm bored, but not bored.
link |
I'm not expressing this very well.
link |
I think that this is a really interesting problem
link |
that perhaps the hard sciences don't really understand
link |
that they are responsible for
link |
because the question about how life emerged
link |
and how intelligence emerges and consciousness and free will
link |
they're all ultimately boiling down
link |
to some of the same mechanics.
link |
I think, my feeling is that they are the same problem
link |
again and again and again.
link |
The transition from a, you know, a boring world
link |
or a world in which there is no selection.
link |
So I wonder if free will has something to do
link |
with selection and models.
link |
And also the models you're generating in the brain
link |
and also your, the amount of memory,
link |
your working memory have available at any one time
link |
to generate counterfactuals.
link |
Well, that's fascinating.
link |
So like the decision making process is a kind of selection
link |
and that could be just another,
link |
yet another manifestation of the selection mechanism
link |
that's pervasive throughout the universe.
link |
Okay, that's fascinating to think about.
link |
Yeah, there's not some kind of fundamental,
link |
it's own thing or something like that.
link |
That is just yet another example of selection.
link |
Yeah, and in the universe that's intrinsically open,
link |
you want to do that because you generate novelty.
link |
You mentioned something about,
link |
do cellular automata exist outside the human mind
link |
in our little offline conversation?
link |
Why is that an interesting question?
link |
So cellular automata, complexity,
link |
what's the relationship between complexity
link |
and the human mind and trees falling in the forest?
link |
Infrastructure, so the CA,
link |
so when John von Neumann and Conway and Feynman
link |
were doing CA, it was doing on paper.
link |
CA is cellular automata.
link |
Just drawing them on paper.
link |
How awesome is that, that they were doing cellular automata
link |
on paper and then they were doing it on a computer
link |
that takes like forever to print out anything and program.
link |
People are now with the TikTok,
link |
kids these days with the TikTok don't understand
link |
how amazing it is to just play with cellular automata,
link |
arbitrarily changing the rules as you want,
link |
the initial conditions,
link |
and see the beautiful patterns emerge,
link |
sing with fractals, all of that.
link |
You've just given me a brilliant idea.
link |
I wonder if there's a TikTok account that's just dedicated
link |
to putting out CA rules and if there isn't,
link |
we should make one.
link |
100% and that will get.
link |
So we have millions of views.
link |
No, it'll get dozens.
link |
We'll just have it running.
link |
So look, I kind of, I love CAs.
link |
We just have to make one.
link |
I actually, a few years ago,
link |
I made some robots that talk to each other,
link |
chemical robots that played the game of Hex,
link |
invented by John Nash, by doing chemistry.
link |
And they communicated via Twitter,
link |
which were experiments they were doing.
link |
And they had a lookup table of experiments
link |
and robot one said, I'm doing experiment 10.
link |
And the other robot, okay, I'll do experiment one then.
link |
And they communicated via Twitter.
link |
Can you maybe quickly explain what the game of Hex is?
link |
Yes, so it's basically a hexagonal board
link |
and you try and basically you color each element
link |
on the board of each hexagon
link |
and you try and get from one side to the other
link |
and the other one tries to block you.
link |
How are they connected?
link |
So what are the robots?
link |
So it's a chemical.
link |
Yeah, let's go back.
link |
So there are two robots.
link |
Each robot was doing dye chemistry.
link |
So making RGB, red, green, blue, red, green, blue,
link |
And they could just choose from experiments
link |
to do red, green, blue.
link |
Initially I said to my group,
link |
we need to make two chemical robots that play chess.
link |
And my group were like, that's too hard.
link |
But anyway, so we had the robot.
link |
By the way, people listening to this should probably know
link |
that Lee Cronin is an amazing group of brilliant people.
link |
He's exceptionally well published.
link |
He's written a huge number of amazing papers.
link |
Whenever he calls himself stupid
link |
and is a sign of humility,
link |
and I deeply respect that and appreciate it.
link |
So people listening to this should know
link |
this is a world class scientist
link |
who doesn't take himself seriously,
link |
which I really appreciate and love.
link |
Anywho, talking about serious science,
link |
we're back to your group rejecting your idea
link |
of chemical robots playing chess via dyes.
link |
So you went to a simpler game of Hex.
link |
Okay, so what else?
link |
The team that did it were brilliant.
link |
I think they still have PTSD from doing it.
link |
Cause I said, this is a workshop.
link |
What I'd often do is I have about 60 people on my team.
link |
And occasionally before lockdown,
link |
I would say, I'm a bit bored.
link |
We're gonna have a workshop on something.
link |
Who wants to come?
link |
And then basically about 20 people turn up to my office
link |
and I say, we're gonna do this mad thing.
link |
And then it would just self organize.
link |
And some of them would be like, no, I'm not doing this.
link |
And then you get left with the happy dozen.
link |
And what we did is we built this robot
link |
and doing dye chemistry is really easy.
link |
You can just take two molecules,
link |
react them together and change color.
link |
And what I wanted to do is have a palette
link |
of different molecules.
link |
You can react combinatorially and get different colors.
link |
So you've got two robots.
link |
And I went, wouldn't it be cool
link |
if the robots basically shared
link |
the same list of reactions to do.
link |
And they said, oh, and because of,
link |
then you could do a kind of multi core chemistry.
link |
Like they weren't,
link |
so you'd have two chemical reactions going on at once
link |
and they could basically outsource the problem.
link |
But they're sharing the same tape.
link |
So robot one would say, I'm gonna do,
link |
I'm gonna do experiment one.
link |
And the other robot says, I'll do experiment 100.
link |
And then they could cross it off.
link |
But I wanted to make it.
link |
That's brilliant, by the way.
link |
Well, I wanted to make it groovier.
link |
And I said, look, let's have them competing to make,
link |
so they're playing a game of hex.
link |
And so when the robot does an experiment
link |
and the more blue the dye,
link |
the more it gets the higher chance it gets
link |
to make the move it wants on the hex board.
link |
So if it gets a red color is like,
link |
it gets down weighted in the other robot.
link |
And so what the robots could do is they play,
link |
And cause the fitness function or the optimization function
link |
was to make the color blue,
link |
they started to invent reactions
link |
we didn't, weren't on the list.
link |
And they did this by not cleaning
link |
because we made cleaning optional.
link |
So when one robot realized if it didn't clean its pipes,
link |
it could get blue more quickly.
link |
And the other robot realized that.
link |
So it was like getting dirty as well.
link |
Unintended consequences of super intelligence.
link |
That was the game.
link |
Communicating through Twitter though.
link |
They were, they were doing it through Twitter
link |
and Twitter bland them a couple of times.
link |
I said, come on, you've got a couple of robots
link |
Stop banning them.
link |
But in the end they had, we had to take them off Twitter
link |
and they just communicated via a server.
link |
Cause it was just, there were people saying,
link |
you can still find it.
link |
Cronin lab one and Cronin lab two on Twitter.
link |
And it was like, make move, wait, you know, mix A and B,
link |
Answer blue, you know.
link |
I really find it super compelling
link |
that you would have a chemical entity
link |
that's communicating with the world.
link |
That was one of the things I want to do
link |
with my origin of life reaction, right?
link |
Is basically have a, have a reactor.
link |
That's basically just randomly enumerating
link |
for chemical space and have some kind of cycle
link |
and then read out what the molecules reading out
link |
using a mass spectrometer and then convert that to text
link |
and publish it on Twitter and then wait until it says
link |
I reckon that would get, I reckon that,
link |
that Twitter account would get a lot of followers.
link |
And I'm still trying to convince my group
link |
that we should just make an origin of life Twitter account.
link |
Where it's going blue and it's like, hello, testing.
link |
Well, I'll share it.
link |
I particularly enjoy this idea
link |
of a non human entity communicating with the world
link |
via human designed social network.
link |
It's quite a, quite a beautiful idea.
link |
How we were talking about CA's existing
link |
outside the human mind.
link |
So I really admire Stephen Wolfram.
link |
I think he's a genius, clearly a genius
link |
and trapped in is actually,
link |
it's like a problem with being so smart
link |
is you get trapped in your own mind, right?
link |
And I've, I tried to actually,
link |
I tried to convince Stephen that assembly theory
link |
He was like, no, it's just nonsense.
link |
I was a little bit sad by that.
link |
So nonsense applied,
link |
even if it applied to the simplest construct
link |
of a one dimensional cellular automata, for example.
link |
Well, I mean, actually,
link |
maybe I'm doing myself a bit too down.
link |
It was just as a theory was coming through
link |
and I didn't really know how to explain it,
link |
but we are going to use assembly theory
link |
and CA's in cellular automata,
link |
what I was really curious about is why people marvel.
link |
I mean, you marvel CA's and their complexity.
link |
And I said, well, hang on that complexity is baked in
link |
because if you play the game of life in a CA,
link |
you have to run it on a computer.
link |
You have to have a,
link |
you have to do a number of operations,
link |
put in the boundary conditions.
link |
So is it surprising that you get this structure out?
link |
Is it manufactured by the boundary conditions?
link |
And it is interesting because I think
link |
a cellular automata running them
link |
is teaching me something about
link |
what real numbers are and aren't.
link |
I haven't quite got there yet.
link |
I was playing on the airplane coming over.
link |
I'm just realized,
link |
I have no idea what real numbers are really.
link |
And I was like, well,
link |
I do actually have some notion of what real numbers are.
link |
And I think thinking about real numbers as functions
link |
rather than numbers is more appropriate.
link |
And then if you then apply that to CA's,
link |
then you're saying, well, actually,
link |
why am I seeing this complexity in this rule?
link |
Is it, you know, is it,
link |
you've got this deterministic system
link |
and yet you get this incredible structure coming out.
link |
Well, isn't that what you'd get with any real number
link |
as you apply it as a function
link |
and you're trying to read it out to an arbitrary position?
link |
And I wonder if CA's are just helping me,
link |
well, my misunderstanding of CA's
link |
might be helping me understand them
link |
in terms of real numbers.
link |
I don't know what you think.
link |
Yeah, well, the functions,
link |
but the devil's in the function.
link |
It's like, which is the function
link |
that's generating your real number.
link |
Like that, it seems like it's very important
link |
the specific algorithm of that function
link |
because some lead to something super trivial,
link |
some lead to something that's all chaotic
link |
and some lead to things that are just walked
link |
that fine line of complexity and structure.
link |
So let's take it back a second.
link |
So take the logistic map or something, logistic equation,
link |
where you have this equation,
link |
which is you don't know what's gonna happen at n plus one,
link |
but once you've done n plus one, you know full time,
link |
you can't predict it.
link |
For me, CA's and logistic equation feel similar.
link |
And I think what's incredibly interesting
link |
and I share your kind of wonder at running a CA,
link |
but also I'm saying, well,
link |
what is it about the boundary conditions
link |
and the way I'm running that calculation?
link |
So in my group, with my team,
link |
we actually made a chemical CA.
link |
We made Game of Life.
link |
We actually made a physical grid.
link |
I haven't been able to publish this paper.
link |
It's been trapped in purgatory for a long time,
link |
but it might be about.
link |
You wrote it up as a paper,
link |
how to do a chemical formulation of the Game of Life,
link |
We made a chemical computer and little cells.
link |
And I was playing Game of Life.
link |
With the BZ reactions,
link |
each cell would pulse on and off, on and off, on and off.
link |
We have little stirrer bars and we have little gates.
link |
And we actually played Conway's Game of Life in there.
link |
And we got structures in that.
link |
We got structures in that game from the chemistry
link |
that you wouldn't expect from the actual CA.
link |
So that was kind of cool in that.
link |
Cause they're interacting outside of the cells more.
link |
So what's happening is you're getting noise.
link |
So the thing is that you've got this BZ reaction
link |
that gives on off, on off, on off,
link |
but there's also a wake
link |
and those wakes constructively interfere
link |
or in such a non trivial way that's non deterministic.
link |
And the non determinism in the system
link |
gives very rich dynamics.
link |
And I was wondering if I could physically
link |
make a chemical computer with this CA
link |
that gives me something different.
link |
I can't get in a silicon representation of a CA
link |
where all the states are clean.
link |
Cause you don't have the noise trailing
link |
into the next round.
link |
You just have the state.
link |
So the paper in particular,
link |
so that's just a beautiful idea to use a chemical computer
link |
to construct the cellular automaton,
link |
the famous one of game of life.
link |
But it's also interesting.
link |
And it's a really interesting scientific question
link |
of whether some kind of random perturbations
link |
or some source of randomness
link |
can have a significant constructive effect
link |
on the complexity of the system.
link |
And indeed, I mean, whether it's random
link |
or just non deterministic
link |
and can we bake in that non determinism at the beginning?
link |
I wonder what is the,
link |
I'm trying to think of what is the encoding space.
link |
The encoding space is pretty big.
link |
We have 49 stirrups of 49 cells,
link |
49 chem bits all connected to one another
link |
and like an analog computer,
link |
but being read out discreetly as the BZ reaction.
link |
So just to say the BZ reaction is a chemical oscillator.
link |
And what happened in each cell
link |
is it goes between red and blue.
link |
So two Russians discovered it,
link |
Belouzov and Sapkinsky.
link |
I think Belouzov first proposed it
link |
and everyone said, you're crazy.
link |
It breaks the second law.
link |
And Sapkinsky said, no, it doesn't break the second law.
link |
It's consuming a fuel.
link |
And so, and then, and it's like,
link |
there's a lot of chemistry hidden
link |
in the Russian literature actually,
link |
because Russians just wrote it in Russian.
link |
They didn't publish it in English speaking journals.
link |
It's heartbreaking actually.
link |
Well, it's sad and it's great that it's there, right?
link |
I'm sure we will find a way of translating it properly.
link |
Well, the silver lining slash greater sadness
link |
of all of this is there's probably ideas
link |
in English speaking.
link |
Like there's ideas in certain disciplines
link |
that if discovered by other disciplines
link |
would crack open some of the biggest mysteries
link |
in those disciplines.
link |
Like computer science, for example,
link |
is trying to solve problems
link |
like nobody else has ever tried to solve problems.
link |
As if it's not already been all addressed
link |
in cognitive science and psychology,
link |
in mathematics, in physics,
link |
in just whatever you want to, economics even.
link |
But if you look into that literature,
link |
you might be able to discover some beautiful ideas.
link |
Obviously Russian is an interesting case of that.
link |
It's because there's a loss in translation,
link |
but you said there's a source of fuel, a source of energy.
link |
So the BZ reaction, you have an acid in there
link |
called malonic acid.
link |
And what happens is it's basically like a battery
link |
that powers it and it loses CO2.
link |
So decarboxylates, it's just a chemical reaction.
link |
What that means we have to do is continuously feed
link |
or we just keep the BZ reaction going
link |
in a long enough time.
link |
So it's like it's reversible in time.
link |
But only like, yeah.
link |
But only like, but it's fascinating.
link |
I mean, the team that did it,
link |
I'm really proud of their persistence.
link |
We made a chemical computer and it can solve
link |
It can solve traveling salesman problems actually.
link |
But like I say, it's.
link |
But not any faster than a regular computer.
link |
Is there something you can do?
link |
Maybe, I'm not sure.
link |
I think we can come up with a way of solving problems,
link |
also really complex, hard ones,
link |
because it's an analog computer and we can,
link |
it can energy minimize really quickly.
link |
It doesn't have to basically go through every element
link |
in the matrix, like flip it, it just reads out.
link |
So we could actually do Monte Carlo
link |
by just shaking the box.
link |
It's literally a box shaker.
link |
You don't actually have to encode the shaking of the box
link |
in a silicon memory and then just shuffle everything around.
link |
Yeah, and you can.
link |
It's analog, it's natural.
link |
So it's an organic computer.
link |
So I was playing around with this
link |
and I was kind of annoying some of my colleagues
link |
and wondering if we could get to chemical supremacy
link |
like quantum supremacy.
link |
And I kind of calculated how big the grid has to be
link |
so we can actually start to solve problems faster
link |
than a silicon computer.
link |
But I'm not willing to state how that is yet
link |
because I'm probably wrong.
link |
It's not that it's any top secret thing
link |
is I want, I think I can make a chemical computer
link |
that can solve optimization problems faster
link |
than the silicon computer.
link |
That's fascinating.
link |
But then you're unsure how big that has to be.
link |
Yeah, I think, I mean.
link |
It might be a big box, hard to shake.
link |
It might be exactly a big box, hard to shake
link |
and basically a bit sloppy.
link |
Did we answer the question about
link |
do cellular atomic exists outside the mind?
link |
We didn't, but I would posit that they don't.
link |
And I, but I think minds can, well.
link |
So the mind is fundamental.
link |
Well, I mean, sorry, let's go back.
link |
So as a physical phenomena, do CAs exist
link |
in physical reality, right?
link |
I would say they probably don't exist
link |
outside the human mind, but now we've constructed them.
link |
They exist in computer memories.
link |
They exist in my lab.
link |
They exist on paper.
link |
So they are, they emerge from the human mind.
link |
I'm just interested in, because Stephen Wolfram likes CAs,
link |
a lot of people like CAs and likes to think of them
link |
as minimal computational elements.
link |
I'm just saying, well, do they exist in reality
link |
or are they a representation of a simple machine
link |
that's just very elegant to implement?
link |
So it's a platonic question, I guess.
link |
I mean, it's, there's initial conditions.
link |
There's a memory in the system.
link |
There are simple rules that dictate
link |
the evolution of the system.
link |
The idea, the rules, the.
link |
Yeah, people are using CAs as models
link |
for things in reality to say, hey, look,
link |
you can do this thing in a CA.
link |
And my, when I see this, I'm saying, oh, that's cool.
link |
But what does that tell me about reality?
link |
Where's the CA in space?
link |
It's a mathematical object.
link |
So for people who don't know cellular automata,
link |
there's usually a grid, whether it's one dimensional,
link |
two dimensional, or three dimensional.
link |
And it evolves by simple local rules,
link |
like you die or are born if the neighbors are alive or dead.
link |
And it turns out if you have,
link |
with certain kinds of initial conditions
link |
and with certain kinds of very simple rules,
link |
you can create like arbitrarily complex
link |
and beautiful systems.
link |
And to me, whether drugs are involved or not,
link |
I can sit back for hours and enjoy the mystery of it,
link |
how such complexity can emerge as it gives me almost like,
link |
you know, people talk about religious experiences.
link |
It gives me a sense that you get to have a glimpse
link |
at the origin of this whole thing.
link |
Whatever is creating this complexity from such simplicity
link |
is the very thing that brought my mind to life,
link |
this me, the human, our human civilization.
link |
And yes, those constructs are pretty trivial.
link |
I mean, that's part of their magic
link |
is even in this trivial framework,
link |
you could see the emergence,
link |
or especially in this trivial framework,
link |
you could see the emergence of complexity from simplicity.
link |
I guess what Lee, you're saying is that this is not,
link |
you know, this is highly unlike systems
link |
we see in the physical world,
link |
even though they probably carry some of the same magic,
link |
like mechanistically, that's all.
link |
I mean, I'm saying that the operating system
link |
that a CA has to exist on is quite complex.
link |
And so I wonder if you're getting the complexity
link |
out of the CA from the boundary conditions
link |
of the operating system, the underlying digital computer.
link |
Oh, wow, those are some strong words against CAs then.
link |
I didn't realize. Not against.
link |
I mean, I'm in love with CAs as well.
link |
I'm just saying they aren't as trivial as people think.
link |
They are incredible.
link |
To get to that richness,
link |
you have to iterate billions of times,
link |
and you need a display, and you need a math coprocessor,
link |
and you need a von Neumann machine
link |
based on a Turing machine
link |
of digital error correction and states.
link |
Wow, to think that for the simplicity of a grid,
link |
you're basically saying a grid is not simple.
link |
It requires incredible complexity to bring a grid to life.
link |
Well, then what is simple?
link |
That's all I wanted to say.
link |
I agree with you with the wonder of CAs, I just think.
link |
But remember, we take so much for granted
link |
what the CA is resting on.
link |
Because von Neumann and Feynman weren't showing,
link |
weren't seeing these elaborate structures.
link |
They could not get that far.
link |
Yeah, but that's the limitation of their mind.
link |
Yeah, yeah, exactly.
link |
The limitation of their pencil.
link |
But I think the question is
link |
whether the essential elements of the cellular automata
link |
is present without all the complexities
link |
required to build a computer.
link |
And my intuition, the reason I find it incredible
link |
is that, yeah, my intuition is yes.
link |
It might look different.
link |
There might not be a grid like structure,
link |
but local interactions operating under simple rules
link |
and resulting in multi hierarchical complex structures
link |
feels like a thing that doesn't require a computer.
link |
I agree, but coming back to von Neumann and Feynman
link |
and Wolfram, their minds, the non trivial minds
link |
to create those architectures and do it
link |
and to put on those state transitions.
link |
And I think that's something
link |
that's really incredibly interesting
link |
that is understanding how the human mind
link |
builds those state transition machines.
link |
I could see how deeply in love
link |
with the idea of memory you are.
link |
So it's like how much of E equals MC squared
link |
is more than an equation.
link |
It has Albert Einstein in it.
link |
You're saying you can't just say this is a,
link |
like the equations of physics are a really good
link |
simple capture of a physical phenomenon.
link |
It is also, that equation has the memory of the humans.
link |
Absolutely, absolutely, yeah.
link |
But I don't, I don't know if you're implying this.
link |
I don't, that's a beautiful idea,
link |
but I don't know if I'm comfortable
link |
with that sort of diminishing the power of that equation.
link |
No, no, it enhances it.
link |
Because it's built on the shoulders, it enhances it.
link |
I think it enhances it, it's not,
link |
that equation is a minimal compressed representation
link |
of reality, right?
link |
We can use machine learning or Max Tegmark's AI Feynman
link |
to find lots of solutions for gravity,
link |
but isn't it wonderful that the laws that we do find
link |
are the maximally compressed representations?
link |
Yeah, but that representation, you can now give it as,
link |
I guess the universe has the memory of Einstein
link |
with that representation.
link |
But then you can now give it as a gift for free.
link |
Yeah, yeah, it's low memory.
link |
To other alien civilizations.
link |
Einstein had to go through a lot of pain to get there,
link |
but it's low memory.
link |
So, I say that physics and chemistry and biology
link |
are the same discipline.
link |
They're just physics, laws in physics.
link |
There's no such thing as a law in physics.
link |
It's just low memory stuff.
link |
Because you've got low memory stuff,
link |
you can, things reoccur quickly.
link |
As you can get, build in more memory,
link |
you get to chemistry, so things become more contingent.
link |
When you get to biology, more contingent still,
link |
and then technology.
link |
So, the more memory you need,
link |
the more your laws are local.
link |
That's all I'm saying.
link |
And the less memory, the more the laws are universal,
link |
because they're not laws.
link |
They are just low memory states.
link |
We have to talk about a thing you've kind of mentioned
link |
already a bunch of times,
link |
but doing computation through chemistry,
link |
chemical based computation.
link |
I've seen you refer to it as in a sexy title
link |
of Kemputation, Kemputation.
link |
So, what is computation?
link |
What is chemical based computation?
link |
Okay, so Kemputation is a name I gave
link |
to the process of building a state machine
link |
to make any molecule physically in the lab.
link |
And so, as a chemist, chemists make molecules by hand.
link |
And they're quite hard.
link |
The chemists have a lot of tacit knowledge,
link |
a lot of ambiguity.
link |
It's not possible to go uniformly to the literature
link |
and read a recipe to make a molecule,
link |
and then go and make it in the lab every time.
link |
Some recipes are better than others,
link |
but they all assume some knowledge.
link |
And it's not universal what that is.
link |
Like, so it's carried from human to human.
link |
Some of that implicit knowledge.
link |
And you're saying, can we remove the human
link |
Can we like a program?
link |
Okay, well, by the way, what is a state machine?
link |
So a state machine is a, I suppose,
link |
a object either abstract or mechanical
link |
where you can do a unit operation on it
link |
and flick it from one state to another.
link |
So a turnstile would be a good example of a state machine.
link |
There's some kinds of states
link |
and some kind of transitions between states.
link |
And it's very formal in nature
link |
in terms of like it's precise,
link |
how you're doing those transitions.
link |
Yes, you can mathematically precisely
link |
describe a state machine.
link |
So, I mean, a very simple Boolean gates
link |
are a very good way of building
link |
kind of logic based state machines.
link |
Obviously a Turing machine,
link |
the concept of a Turing machine
link |
where you have a tape and a read head
link |
and a series of rules in a table
link |
and you would basically look at what's on the tape.
link |
And if you're shifting the tape from left to right,
link |
and if you see a zero or one,
link |
you look in your lookup table and say,
link |
right, I've seen a zero and a one.
link |
I then do, I then respond to that.
link |
So in the turnstile would be,
link |
is there a human being pushing the turnstile
link |
in direction clockwise?
link |
If yes, I will open, let them go.
link |
If it's anticlockwise, no.
link |
So yeah, so a state machine has some labels
link |
and a transition diagram.
link |
So you're looking to come up with a chemical computer
link |
to form state machines to create molecules,
link |
or what's the chicken and the egg?
link |
So computation is not a chemical computer
link |
because we talked a few moments
link |
about actually doing computations with chemicals.
link |
What I'm now saying is I want to use state machines
link |
to transform chemicals.
link |
And so build chemicals programmatically.
link |
Yeah, I mean, I get in trouble saying this.
link |
I said to my group, oh, I shouldn't say it
link |
because it's, but I said, look, we should make the crack bot.
link |
Is it in the crack robot?
link |
The robot that makes crack.
link |
Oh, oh, oh, oh, crack bot.
link |
The robot that makes crack,
link |
but maybe we should scrub this from, but.
link |
Or, well, so maybe you can educate me
link |
on breaking bad with like math, right?
link |
Yeah, so in breaking bad.
link |
You want to make basically some kind of mix
link |
of ex machina and breaking bad.
link |
For the record, I don't, but I said.
link |
I said, that's what I'm going to do
link |
once you release the papers.
link |
I shaved my head and I'm going to live a life of crime.
link |
Anyway, I'm sorry.
link |
So yeah, let's get back to, so indeed,
link |
it is about making drugs, but importantly,
link |
making important drugs, so let's.
link |
Yeah, but let's go back.
link |
So the basic thesis is chemistry is very analog.
link |
There is no state machine.
link |
And I wandered into the, through the paper walls
link |
in the Japanese house a few years ago and said,
link |
okay, hey, organic chemist, why are you doing this analog?
link |
They said, well, chemistry is really hard.
link |
You can't automate it, it's impossible.
link |
I said, but is it impossible?
link |
And they said, you know, I got the impression
link |
they were saying it's magic.
link |
And so when people tell me things are magic,
link |
it's like, no, no, they can't be magic.
link |
Right, so let's break this down.
link |
And so what I did is I went to my group one day
link |
about eight years ago and said, hey guys,
link |
I've written this new programming language for you.
link |
And so everything is clear.
link |
And you know, you have to, you're not allowed to
link |
just wander around the lab willy nilly.
link |
You have to pick up things in order,
link |
go to the balance of the right time and all this stuff.
link |
And they looked at me as if I was insane
link |
and basically kicked me out of the lab and said,
link |
no, don't do that, we're not doing that.
link |
So I went back the next day and said,
link |
I'm gonna find some money so we can make cool robots
link |
do chemical reactions.
link |
And everyone went, that's cool.
link |
And so in that process.
link |
The first we tried to convert the humans to become robots
link |
and next you agree you might as well just create the robots.
link |
Yes, but so in that, the formalization process.
link |
Yeah, so what I did is I said, look, chemical,
link |
to make a molecule, you need to do four things abstractly.
link |
I want to make a chemical Turing machine.
link |
Cause a Turing machine, you think about this,
link |
imagine a Turing machine.
link |
Turing machine is the ultimate abstraction of a computation
link |
because it's been shown by Turing and others
link |
that basically a universal Turing machine
link |
should be able to do all computations that you can imagine.
link |
It's like, wow, why don't I think of a Turing machine
link |
Let's think of a magic robot that can make any molecule.
link |
Let's think about that for a second.
link |
How do we then implement it?
link |
And I think it's right.
link |
So what is the abstraction?
link |
So to make any molecule, you have to do a reaction.
link |
So you have to put reagents together, do a reaction
link |
in a flask typically.
link |
Then you're after the reaction,
link |
you have to stop the reactions.
link |
You do what's called a workup.
link |
So whatever, cool it down, add some liquid to it, extract.
link |
So then after you do the workup, you separate.
link |
So you then remove the molecules, separate them all out.
link |
And then the final step is purification.
link |
So reaction, workup, separate, purify.
link |
So this is basically exactly like a Turing machine
link |
where you have your tape, you have your tape head,
link |
you have some rules, and then you run it.
link |
So I thought, cool.
link |
I went to all the chemists and said, look,
link |
chemistry isn't that hard.
link |
Reaction, workup, separation, purification.
link |
Do that in cycles, forever, for any molecule,
link |
all the chemistry, done.
link |
And they said, chemistry is that hard.
link |
I said, but just in principle.
link |
And I got a few very enlightened people to say,
link |
yeah, okay, in principle, but it ain't gonna work.
link |
And this was in about 2013, 2014.
link |
And I found myself going to an architecture conference
link |
almost by accident.
link |
It's like, why am I at this random conference
link |
And that was because I published a paper
link |
on inorganic architecture.
link |
And they said, come to architecture conference.
link |
But the inorganic architecture is nano architecture.
link |
It's not, and I went, okay.
link |
And then I found these guys at the conference,
link |
3D printing ping pong balls and shapes.
link |
And this is through it.
link |
3D printing was cool.
link |
And I was like, this is ridiculous.
link |
Why are you 3D printing ping pong balls?
link |
And I gave them a whole load of abuse
link |
like I normally do when I first meet people,
link |
how to win friends and influence people.
link |
And then I was like, oh my God, you guys are geniuses.
link |
And so I got from, they were a bit confused
link |
because I was calling them idiots
link |
and then call them geniuses.
link |
It's like, will you come to my lab
link |
and we're gonna build a robot to do chemistry
link |
with a 3D printer.
link |
And I said, oh, that's cool, all right.
link |
So I had them come to the lab
link |
and we started to 3D print test tubes.
link |
So you imagine, you know, 3D print a bottle
link |
and then use the same gantry to basically,
link |
rather than to squirt out a plastic out of a nozzle,
link |
have a little syringe and jet chemicals in.
link |
So we had the 3D printer that could simultaneously
link |
print the test tube and then put chemicals
link |
into the test tube.
link |
Wow, so it's really end to end.
link |
Yeah, I was like, that would be cool
link |
because they've got G code to do it all.
link |
And I was like, that's cool.
link |
So I got my group doing this and I developed it a bit
link |
and I realized that we could take those unit operations.
link |
And we built a whole bunch of pumps and valves.
link |
And I realized that I could basically take the literature
link |
and I made the first version of the computer in 2016, 17.
link |
I made some architectural decisions.
link |
So I designed the pumps and valves in my group.
link |
I did all the electronics in my group.
link |
They were brilliant.
link |
I cannot pay tribute to my group enough in doing this.
link |
They were just brilliant.
link |
And there were some poor souls there that said,
link |
Lee, why are you making us design electronics?
link |
I'm like, well, because I don't understand it.
link |
They're like, so you're making us design stuff
link |
because you don't understand.
link |
It's like, yeah, it's like, but can we not just buy some?
link |
I said, well, we can, but then I don't understand
link |
how to, you know, what bus they're gonna use
link |
and there's serial ports and all this stuff.
link |
I just wanted, and I made, I came up with a decision
link |
to design a bunch of pumps and valves
link |
and use power of the ethernet.
link |
So they've got one cable for power and data,
link |
plug them all in, plug them all into a router
link |
and then I made the state machine.
link |
And there was a couple of cool things I did.
link |
Oh, they did actually.
link |
We got the abstraction.
link |
So reaction, workup, separation, purification.
link |
And then I made the decision to do it in batch.
link |
Now it's in batch.
link |
All chemistry had been digitized before apparently,
link |
and once it's been done, but everyone been doing it in flow
link |
and flow is continuous and there are infinities everywhere
link |
and you have to just, and I realized
link |
that I could actually make a state machine
link |
where I basically put stuff in the reactor,
link |
turn it up from one state to another state,
link |
stop it and just read it out.
link |
And okay, and I was kind of bitching
link |
at electrical engineers saying, you have it easy.
link |
You don't have to clean out the electrons, you know.
link |
Electrons don't leave a big mess.
link |
They leave some EM waste.
link |
But in my state machine I built in cleaning.
link |
So it's like, we do all the operation
link |
and then it cleans the backbone and then can do it again.
link |
So there's no, so what we managed to do
link |
over a couple of years is develop the hardware,
link |
develop the state machine.
link |
And we encoded three molecules.
link |
We did three, the first three, we did nitole,
link |
a sleeping drug, rafinamide, antiseizure and Viagra.
link |
You know, and I could make jokes on the paper.
link |
It's a hard problem, blah, blah, blah, blah.
link |
And then in the next one, what we did is said, okay,
link |
my poor organic chemist said, look, Lee,
link |
we've worked with you this long.
link |
We've made a robot that looks like
link |
it's gonna take our jobs away.
link |
And not just take our jobs away, what we love in the lab,
link |
but now we have to become programmers.
link |
But we're not even good programmers.
link |
We just have to spend ages writing lines of code
link |
that are boring and it's not as elegant.
link |
I went, you're right.
link |
So then, but I knew because I had this abstraction
link |
and I knew that there was language,
link |
I could suddenly develop a state machine
link |
that would interpret the language,
link |
which was lossy and ambiguous and populate my abstraction.
link |
So I built a chemical programming language
link |
that is actually gonna be recursively enumerable.
link |
It's gonna be a Turing complete language actually,
link |
which is kind of cool, which means it's formally verifiable.
link |
So where we are now is we can now read the literature
link |
using a bit of natural language processing.
link |
It's not the best.
link |
There are many other groups have done a better job,
link |
but we can use that language reading
link |
to populate the state machine and basically add, subtract.
link |
We got about a number of primitives that we,
link |
basically program loops that we dovetail together
link |
and we can make any molecule with it.
link |
Okay, so that's the kind of program synthesis.
link |
So you start at like literally,
link |
you're talking about like a paper,
link |
like a scientific paper that's being read.
link |
So natural language processing,
link |
extracting some kind of details about chemical reactions
link |
and the chemical molecules and compounds involved.
link |
And then that, in GPT terms,
link |
serves as a prompt for the program synthesis
link |
that's kind of trivial right now.
link |
There you have a bunch of different like for loops
link |
and so on that creates a program in this chemical language
link |
that can then be interpreted by the chemical computer,
link |
Yeah, computer, that's the word.
link |
Everything sounds better in your British accent,
link |
but it's, I love it.
link |
So the, into the computer and that's able to then
link |
basically be a 3D printer for these, for molecules.
link |
Yeah, I wouldn't call it a 3D printer.
link |
I would call it a universal chemical reaction system
link |
because 3D printing gives the wrong impression, but yeah.
link |
And the nice thing is that that code now that we call it,
link |
the KyDL code is really interesting because now,
link |
so computation, what is computation?
link |
Computation is what computing is to mathematics, I think.
link |
Computation is the process of taking chemical code
link |
and some input reagents and making the same molecule,
link |
making the molecule reproducibly every time without fail.
link |
What is computation?
link |
It's the process of using a program
link |
to take some input conditions
link |
and give you an output same every time, right, reliably.
link |
So the problem is, now maybe you can push back
link |
and correct me on this.
link |
So I know biology is messy.
link |
My question is how messy is chemistry?
link |
So the, if we use the analogy of a computer,
link |
it's easier to make computation in a computer very precise,
link |
that it's repeatable and makes errors almost never.
link |
If it does the exact same way over and over
link |
and over and over.
link |
What about chemistry?
link |
Is there messiness in the whole thing?
link |
Can that be somehow leveraged?
link |
Can that be controlled?
link |
Can it be that removed,
link |
do we wanna remove it from the system?
link |
Oh, yes and no, right.
link |
Is there messiness?
link |
There is messiness because chemistry is like,
link |
you're doing reactions on billions of molecules
link |
and they don't always work,
link |
but you've got purification there.
link |
And so what we found is at the beginning,
link |
everyone said it can't work.
link |
It's gonna be too messy.
link |
It will just fail.
link |
And I said, but you managed to get chemistry
link |
to work in the lab.
link |
Are you doing something?
link |
So I would say, now go back to the first ever computer
link |
or the ENIAC, 5 million soldered joints,
link |
400,000 valves that are exploding all the time.
link |
Was that, would you have gone, okay, that's messy.
link |
have we got the equivalent of the ENIAC in my lab?
link |
We've got 15 computers in the lab now.
link |
And they, are they unreliable?
link |
Yeah, they fall apart here and there,
link |
but are they getting better really quickly?
link |
Are they now able to reliably make more,
link |
are we at the point in the lab
link |
where there are some molecules
link |
we would rather make on the computer
link |
than have a human being make?
link |
Yeah, we've just done,
link |
we've just made a anti influenza molecule
link |
and some antivirals,
link |
six steps on the computer that would take a human being
link |
about one week to make Arbidol of continuous labor.
link |
And all they do now is load up the reagents,
link |
press go button and just go away and drink coffee.
link |
Wow, so this, I mean, and this is, you're saying
link |
this computer is just the early days.
link |
And so like some of the criticism just have to do
link |
with the early days.
link |
And yes, I would say this,
link |
something like this is quite impossible.
link |
So the fact that you're doing this is incredible.
link |
Not impossible, of course, but extremely difficult.
link |
It did seem really difficult.
link |
And I do keep pinching myself when I go in the lab.
link |
I was like, is it working?
link |
And it's not, you know, it does clog, it does stop.
link |
You got to clean, this is great.
link |
It's, you know, but it's getting more reliable
link |
because I made some, we just made design decisions
link |
and said, we are not going to abandon the abstraction.
link |
If the von Neumann implementation was abandoned,
link |
I mean, think about what we do to semiconductors
link |
to really constrain them to what we do to silicon
link |
in a fab lab, we take computation for granted.
link |
Silicon is not in its natural state.
link |
We are doping the hell out of it.
link |
It's incredible what they're able to accomplish
link |
and achieve that reliability at the scale they do.
link |
Like you said, that's after Moore's law, what we have now.
link |
And where we, you know, how it started, you know,
link |
We started at the bottom, now we're here.
link |
We have only have 20 million molecules.
link |
Well, say 20 million molecules in one database,
link |
maybe a few hundred million
link |
in all the pharmaceutical companies.
link |
And those few hundred million molecules are responsible
link |
for all the drugs that we've had in humanity,
link |
except, you know, biologics for the last 50 years.
link |
Now imagine what happens when a drug goes out of print,
link |
goes out of print because there's only a finite number
link |
of manufacturing facilities in the world
link |
that make these drugs.
link |
It goes out of print.
link |
Isn't that computer?
link |
This is a printing press, but for chemistry.
link |
And not only that, we can protect the KyDL
link |
so we can stop bad actors doing it.
link |
We can encrypt them and we can give people license.
link |
KyDL, that's the name, sorry to interrupt,
link |
is the name of the programming language?
link |
Yeah, the KyDL is the name of the programming language
link |
and the code we give the chemicals.
link |
So Ky, as in, you know, just for,
link |
it's actually like an XML format,
link |
but I've now taken it from script
link |
to a fully expressible programming language
link |
so we can do dynamics and there's for loops in there
link |
and conditional statements.
link |
Right, but the structure, it started out as like an XML
link |
And also, the chemist doesn't need to program in KyDL.
link |
They can just go to the software and type in add A to B,
link |
reflux, do what they would normally do,
link |
and it just converts it to KyDL
link |
and they have a linter to check it and error correct.
link |
So how do you, you know, not with ASCII,
link |
but because it's a Greek letter,
link |
how do you go with, how do you spell it
link |
just using the English alphabet?
link |
XDL, but all we use, we put in Ky.
link |
And it was named by one of my students
link |
and one of my postdocs many years ago
link |
and I quite liked it.
link |
It's like, it's important, I think,
link |
when the team are contributing to such big ideas,
link |
cause there's their ideas as well.
link |
I try not to just rename, I didn't call it Cronon
link |
or anything that, cause they keep saying, you know,
link |
is the chemistry, when they're putting stuff
link |
in the computer, one of my students said,
link |
we're asking now, is it Cronon complete?
link |
And I was like, what does that mean?
link |
I said, well, can we make it on the damn machine?
link |
And I was like, oh, is that a compliment or a majority?
link |
But they're like, well, it might be both.
link |
Yeah, so you tweeted, quote,
link |
why does chemistry need a universal programming language,
link |
For all the reasons you can think of.
link |
Reliability, interoperability, collaboration,
link |
remove ambiguity, lower cost, increase safety,
link |
open up discovery, molecular customization,
link |
and publication of executable chemical code.
link |
Which is fascinating, by the way.
link |
Just publish code.
link |
And can you maybe elaborate a little bit more
link |
about this CHI DL, what does the universal language
link |
of chemistry look like?
link |
A Cronon complete language.
link |
It's a Turing complete language, really.
link |
But, so what it has, it has a series of operators in it,
link |
like add, heat, stir.
link |
So there's a bunch of unit operations.
link |
And all it is, really, is just,
link |
it's with chemical engineers,
link |
when I talked about this,
link |
that you've just rediscovered chemical engineering.
link |
And I said, well, yeah, I know.
link |
I said, well, that's trivial.
link |
I said, well, not really.
link |
Well, yes, it is trivial, and that's why it's good,
link |
because not only have we rediscovered chemical engineering,
link |
we've made it implementable on the universal hardware
link |
that doesn't cost very much money.
link |
And so the CHI DL has a series of statements.
link |
Like define the reactor.
link |
So defines the reagents.
link |
So they're all labels, so you assign them.
link |
And what I also implemented at the beginning is,
link |
because I give all the hardware IP address,
link |
you put it on a graph.
link |
And so what it does is like the graph is equivalent
link |
to the processor firmware, the processor code.
link |
So when you take your CHI DL,
link |
and you go to run it on your computer,
link |
you can run it on any compatible hardware
link |
in any configuration, it says, what does your graph look like?
link |
As long as I can solve the problem on the graph
link |
with these unit operations,
link |
and you have the resources available, it can compile.
link |
All right, we can carry on for years.
link |
But it is really, it's chempilation.
link |
Chempilation, yeah.
link |
And what it now does is it says, okay,
link |
the problem we have before is it was possible
link |
to do robotics for chemistry,
link |
but the robots were really expensive.
link |
They were vendor locked.
link |
And what I want to do is to make sure
link |
that every chemist in the world can get access
link |
to machinery like this at virtually no cost,
link |
because it makes it safer.
link |
It makes it more reliable.
link |
And then if you go to the literature
link |
and you find a molecule that could potentially cure cancer,
link |
and let's say the molecule that could potentially
link |
cure cancer takes you three years to repeat,
link |
and maybe a student finishes their PhD in the time
link |
and they never get it back.
link |
So that it's really hard to kind of get all the way
link |
to that molecule, and it limits the ability
link |
of humanity to build on it.
link |
If they just download the code and can execute it,
link |
it turns, I would say the electronic laboratory notebook
link |
in chemistry is a data cemetery,
link |
because no one will ever reproduce it.
link |
For now, the data cemetery is a Jupiter notebook
link |
and you can just execute it.
link |
A notebook and people can play with it,
link |
Orders of magnitude is increased.
link |
We'll talk about the, so as with all technologies,
link |
I think there's way more exciting possibilities,
link |
but there are also terrifying possibilities,
link |
and we'll talk about all of them.
link |
But let me just kind of linger on the machine learning
link |
So you're describing programming,
link |
but it's a language, I don't know if you've heard
link |
about OpenAI Codex, which is.
link |
Yeah, I'm playing with it.
link |
You're playing, of course you are.
link |
Yeah, you really are Rick from Rick and Morty.
link |
Okay, except philosophically deep.
link |
I mean, he is, I guess, kind of philosophically deep too.
link |
So for people who don't know, GPT, GPT3,
link |
that's a language model that can do natural language
link |
generation, so you can give it a prompt
link |
and it can complete the rest of it.
link |
But it turns out that that kind of prompt,
link |
it's not just completes the rest of it,
link |
it's generating like novel sounding text,
link |
and then you can apply that to generation
link |
of other kinds of stuff.
link |
So these kinds of transformer based language models
link |
are really good at forming deep representations
link |
of a particular space, like a medium, like language.
link |
So you can then apply it to specific subset of language
link |
like programming, so you can have it learn
link |
the representation of the Python programming language
link |
and use it to then generate syntactically
link |
and semantically correct programs.
link |
So you can start to make progress on one of the hardest
link |
problems in computer science, which is program synthesis.
link |
How do you write programs that accomplish different tasks?
link |
So what OpenAI Codex does is it to generate
link |
those programs based on a prompt of some kind.
link |
Usually you can do a natural language prompt,
link |
so basically as you do when you program,
link |
you write some comment which serves the basic documentation
link |
of the inputs and the outputs and the function
link |
of the particular set of code and it's able
link |
Point being is you can generate programs
link |
using machine learning, using neural networks.
link |
Those programs operate on the boring old computer.
link |
Can you generate programs that operate,
link |
this gotta be a clever version of programs for this,
link |
but can you write programs that operate on a computer?
link |
Yep, there's actually software out there right now
link |
you can go and do it.
link |
Yeah, yeah, it's a heuristic, it's rule based,
link |
but we have, what we've done, inspired by Codex actually,
link |
is over the summer I ran a little workshop.
link |
Some of my groups got this inspired idea
link |
that we should get a load of students
link |
and ask them to manually collect data,
link |
to label chemical procedures into Kydy L.
link |
And we have a cool synth reader.
link |
So there's a bunch of people doing this right now,
link |
but they're doing it without abstraction.
link |
And because we have an abstraction
link |
that's implementable in the hardware,
link |
we've developed basically a chemical analog of Codex.
link |
When you say, sorry to interrupt,
link |
when you say abstraction in the hardware, what do you mean?
link |
So right now, a lot of people doing machine learning
link |
and reading chemistry and saying,
link |
oh, you've got all these operations,
link |
add, shake, whatever, heat.
link |
But because they don't have a uniform,
link |
I mean, it's a couple of groups doing it,
link |
competitors actually, and they're good, very good.
link |
But they can't run that code automatically.
link |
They are losing meaning.
link |
And the really important thing that you have to do
link |
is generate context.
link |
And so what we've learned to do with our abstraction
link |
is make sure we can pull the context out of the text.
link |
And so can we take a chemical procedure
link |
and read it and generate our executable code?
link |
What's the hardest part about that whole pipeline
link |
from the initial text, interpreting the initial text
link |
of a paper, extracting the meaningful context
link |
and the meaningful chemical information
link |
to then generating the program
link |
to then running that program in the hardware?
link |
What's the hardest part about that pipeline
link |
as we look towards a universal Turing computer?
link |
So the hardest thing with the pipeline
link |
is that the software, the model gets confused
link |
between some meanings, right?
link |
So if, you know, chemists are very good at inventing words
link |
that aren't broken down.
link |
So I would, the classic word that you would use
link |
for boiling something is called reflux.
link |
So reflux is, you would have a solvent
link |
in a round bottom flask, at reflux it would be boiling,
link |
going up the reflux condenser and coming down.
link |
But that term reflux to reflux could be changed, you know,
link |
to people often make up words, new words,
link |
and then the software can fall over.
link |
But what we've been able to do is a bit like in Python
link |
or any programming language is identify
link |
when things aren't matched.
link |
So you present the code and you say, this isn't matched.
link |
You may want to think about this.
link |
And then the user goes and says, oh, I mean reflux
link |
and just ticks a box and collects it.
link |
So what the Codex or the Chemex does in this case
link |
is it just, it suggests the first go
link |
and then the chemist goes in and corrects it.
link |
And I really want the chemist to correct it
link |
because it's not safe, I believe, for it to allow AI
link |
to just read literature and generate code at this stage.
link |
Because now you're having actual, by the way, Chemex,
link |
nice, nice name, so you are unlike, which is fascinating.
link |
It's that we live in a fascinating moment in human history.
link |
But yes, you're literally connecting AI
link |
to some physical and like it's building something
link |
in the physical realm, especially in the space
link |
of chemistry that operates sort of invisibly.
link |
Yeah, yeah, I would say that's right.
link |
And it's really important to understand
link |
those labeling schemes, right?
link |
And one of the things I was never,
link |
I was always worried about the beginning
link |
that the abstraction was gonna fall over.
link |
And the way we did it was just by brute force to start with.
link |
We just kept reading the literature and saying,
link |
is there anything new?
link |
Can we add a new rule in?
link |
And actually our KyDL language expanded, exploded.
link |
There was so many extra things we had to keep adding.
link |
And then I realized the primitives still were maintained
link |
and I could break them down again.
link |
So it's pretty good.
link |
I mean, there are problems.
link |
There are problems of interpreting any big sentence
link |
and turning it into an actionable code.
link |
And in Codex, it's not without its problems.
link |
You can crash it quite easily, right?
link |
You can generate nonsense.
link |
But boy, it's interesting.
link |
I would love to learn to program now using Codex, right?
link |
Just hacking around, right?
link |
And I wonder if chemists in the future will learn
link |
to do chemistry by just hacking around with the system
link |
and writing different things.
link |
Because the key thing that we're doing with the chemistry
link |
is that where a lot of mathematical chemistry went wrong
link |
is people, and I think Wolfram does this in Mathematica,
link |
he assumes that chemistry is a reaction where atom A
link |
or molecule A reacts with molecule B
link |
to give molecule C.
link |
That's not what chemistry is.
link |
Chemistry is take some molecule,
link |
take a liquid or a solid, mix it up and heat it
link |
and then extract it.
link |
So the programming language is actually with respect
link |
to the process operations.
link |
And if you flick in process space,
link |
not in chemical graph space, you unlock everything
link |
because there's only a finite number of processes
link |
you need to do in chemistry.
link |
And that's reassuring.
link |
And so we're in the middle of it, it's really exciting.
link |
It's not the be all and the end all.
link |
And there is like I say, errors that can creep in.
link |
One day we might be able to do it without human interaction
link |
and you simulate it.
link |
And you'll know enough about the simulation
link |
that the lab won't catch fire.
link |
But there are so many safety issues right now
link |
that we've got to really be very careful,
link |
protecting the user, protecting the environment,
link |
protecting misuse.
link |
I mean, there's lots to discuss
link |
if you want to go down that route
link |
because it's very, very interesting.
link |
You don't want Novichoks being made
link |
or explosives being made or recreational drugs being made.
link |
But how do you stop a molecular biologist making a drug
link |
that's gonna be important for them looking
link |
at their particular assay
link |
on a bad actor trying to make methamphetamine?
link |
I saw how you looked at me when you said bad actor,
link |
but that's exactly what I'm gonna do.
link |
I'm trying to get the details of this so I can be first.
link |
Don't worry, we can protect you from yourself.
link |
I'm not sure that's true, but that statement gives me hope.
link |
Does this ultimately excite you about the future
link |
or does it terrify you?
link |
So let's, we mentioned that time is fundamental.
link |
It seems like you're at the cutting edge of progress
link |
that will have to happen, that will happen,
link |
that there's no stopping it.
link |
And I, as we've been talking about,
link |
I see obviously a huge number of exciting possibilities.
link |
So whenever you automate these kinds of things,
link |
just the world opens up.
link |
It's like programming itself and the computer,
link |
regular computer, has created innumerable applications.
link |
It made the world better in so many dimensions.
link |
And it created, of course, a lot of negative things
link |
that we, for some reason, like to focus on
link |
using that very technology to tweet about it.
link |
But I think it made a much better world,
link |
but it created a lot of new dangers.
link |
So maybe you can speak to when you have,
link |
when you kind of stand at the end of the road
link |
for building a really solid, reliable, universal computer.
link |
What are the possibilities that are positive?
link |
What are the possibilities that are negative?
link |
How can we minimize the chance of the negative?
link |
Yeah, that's a really good question.
link |
So there's so many positive things,
link |
from drug discovery, from supply chain stress,
link |
for basically enabling chemists
link |
to basically build more productive in the lab, right?
link |
Where this is, the computer's not gonna replace the chemist.
link |
There's gonna be a Moore's law of molecules, right?
link |
There's gonna be so many more molecules we can design,
link |
so many more diseases we can cure.
link |
So chemists in the lab as researchers,
link |
that's better for science.
link |
So they can build a bunch of,
link |
like they could do science at a much more accelerated pace.
link |
So it's not just the development of drugs,
link |
it's actually like doing the basic understanding
link |
and the science of drugs.
link |
And the personalization, the cost of drugs right now,
link |
we're all living longer, we're all having more and more,
link |
we know more about our genomic development,
link |
we know about our predetermination,
link |
and we might be able to,
link |
one dream I've got is like,
link |
imagine you can work at your genome assistant
link |
tells you you're gonna get cancer in seven years time,
link |
and you have your personal computer
link |
that cooks up the right molecule just for you to cure it,
link |
That's a really positive idea.
link |
The other thing is when drugs,
link |
so right now I think it's absolutely outrageous
link |
that not all of humanity has access to medicine.
link |
And I think the computer
link |
might be able to change that fundamentally
link |
because it will disrupt the way things are manufactured.
link |
So let's stop thinking about manufacturing
link |
in different factories.
link |
Let's say that computers,
link |
clinical grade computers or drug grade computers
link |
will be in facilities all around the world,
link |
and they can make things on demand
link |
as a function of the cost.
link |
Maybe people won't be able to afford
link |
the latest and greatest patent,
link |
but maybe they'll be able to get the next best thing
link |
and will basically democratize,
link |
make available drugs to everybody that they need.
link |
And there's lots of really interesting things there.
link |
So I think that's gonna happen.
link |
I think that now let's take the negative.
link |
Before we do that,
link |
let's imagine what happened,
link |
go back to a really tragic accident a few years ago,
link |
well not accident,
link |
an act of murder by that pilot on the,
link |
I think it was Eurowings or Swisswings.
link |
But what he did is plane took off,
link |
he waited till his pilot went to the toilet,
link |
he was a co pilot,
link |
he locked the door and then set the autopilot
link |
he set the altimeter or the descend height to zero.
link |
So the computer just took the plane into the Alps.
link |
Now, I mean, that was such a tragedy
link |
that obviously the guy was mentally ill,
link |
but it wasn't just a tragedy for him,
link |
it was for all the people on board.
link |
But what if, and I was inspired by this
link |
and my thinking, what can I do to anticipate
link |
problems like this in the computer?
link |
and I'm sure Boeing and Airbus will be thinking,
link |
oh, maybe I can give the computer
link |
a bit more situational awareness.
link |
So whenever one tries to drop the height of the plane
link |
and it knows it's above the Alps,
link |
we'll just say, oh no, computer says no,
link |
we're not letting you do that.
link |
Of course, he would have been able to find another way,
link |
maybe fly it until it runs out of fuel or something,
link |
Keep anticipating all the large number of trajectories
link |
that can go negative,
link |
all those kinds of running into the Alps
link |
and try to at least make it easy
link |
for the engineers to build systems that are protecting us.
link |
Yeah, and let's just think,
link |
what in the computer world right now with Kydeals,
link |
let's just not think about what I'm doing right now.
link |
What I'm doing right now is it's completely open, right?
link |
Everyone's gonna know Kydeals and be playing with them,
link |
making them more easier and easier and easier.
link |
But what we're gonna start to do,
link |
it makes sense to encrypt the Kydeals in such a way,
link |
let's say you work for a pharmaceutical company
link |
and you have a license to make given molecule,
link |
well, you get issued with a license
link |
by the FDA or your local authority
link |
and they'll say, right, your license to do it,
link |
here it is, it's encrypted and the Kydeal gets run.
link |
So you have a license for that instance of use, easy to do.
link |
Computer science has already solved the problem.
link |
So the fact that we all trust online banking, right,
link |
the right now, then we can secure it.
link |
I'm 100% sure we can secure the computer.
link |
And because of the way we have a many,
link |
it's like the same mapping problem that you,
link |
to actually reverse engineer a Kydeal
link |
will be as hard as reverse engineering the encryption key,
link |
brute force, it will be cheaper
link |
to just actually buy the regulated medicine.
link |
And actually people aren't gonna want to then
link |
make their own fake pharmaceuticals
link |
because it'll be so cheap to do it.
link |
We'll drop the cost of access to drugs.
link |
Now what will happen?
link |
Recreational drugs.
link |
People will start saying,
link |
well, I want access to recreational drugs.
link |
Well, it's gonna be up to,
link |
it's gonna accelerate that social discussion
link |
that's happening in the US and Canada and UK,
link |
everywhere, right?
link |
Because cost goes down, access goes up.
link |
Giving cannabis THC to some people who've got epilepsy
link |
isn't literally, forgive the term, a no brainer
link |
because these poor people go from seizures like every day
link |
to maybe seizures just once every few months.
link |
That's an interesting idea to try to minimize the chance
link |
that it can get into like the hands of individuals
link |
like terrorists or people that want to do harm.
link |
Now with that kind of thing,
link |
you're putting a lot of power in the hands of governments,
link |
in the hands of institutions.
link |
And so then emerge the kind of natural criticism
link |
you might have of governments that can sometimes use these
link |
for ill, use them as weapons of war,
link |
not tools of betterment.
link |
So, and sometimes not just war against other nations,
link |
but war against its own people
link |
as it has been done throughout history.
link |
Well, I'm thinking, so there's another way of doing it,
link |
a decentralized peer to peer version
link |
where, and what you have to do,
link |
I'm not saying you should adopt a blockchain,
link |
but there is a way of maybe taking Kydeals
link |
and put them in blockchain.
link |
Here's an idea, let's just say,
link |
the way we're doing it in my lab right now
link |
is we go to the literature,
link |
we take a recipe to make a molecule,
link |
convert that to Kydeal and diligently make it in the robot
link |
We, that, so we, I would call mining proof of work,
link |
proof of synthesis, right?
link |
Proof of the synthesis.
link |
Yeah, yeah, but this is cool because suddenly
link |
when you actually synthesize it,
link |
you can get the analytical data,
link |
but there's also a fingerprint in there
link |
of the impurities that get carried across
link |
because you can never make one, something 100% pure.
link |
That fingerprint will allow you to secure your Kydeal.
link |
So what you do is encrypt those two things.
link |
So suddenly you can have people out there mining
link |
and what you could do perhaps is do the type of thing,
link |
we need to basically look at the way that contact tracing
link |
should have been done in COVID
link |
where people are given the information.
link |
So you have just been in contact with someone COVID,
link |
you choose, I'm not telling you to stay at home,
link |
you choose, right?
link |
So now if we could imagine a similar thing,
link |
like, you know, you have got access to these chemicals,
link |
they will have these effects,
link |
you choose and publicize it,
link |
or maybe it's out somewhere, I don't know.
link |
I'm not a policymaker on this.
link |
And what my job here is
link |
to not just make the technology possible,
link |
but to have as open as a discussion as possible
link |
with people to say, hey,
link |
can we stop childhood mortality with this technology?
link |
And do those benefits outweigh the one off
link |
where people might use it for terrorism
link |
or people might use it for recreational drugs?
link |
Chemify, which is the name of the entity
link |
that will make this happen,
link |
I think we have some social responsibilities as an entity
link |
to make sure that we're not enabling people
link |
to manufacture personal drugs, weapons at will.
link |
And what we have to do is have a discussion with society,
link |
with the people that invest in this,
link |
with people that are gonna pay for this,
link |
to say, well, do you wanna live longer?
link |
And do you wanna be healthier?
link |
And are you willing to accept some of the risks?
link |
And I think that's a discussion to have.
link |
So by the way, when you say personal drugs,
link |
do you mean the illegal ones?
link |
Or do you have a concern of just putting the manufacturer
link |
of any kind of illegal drugs
link |
in the hands of regular people?
link |
Cause they might, like dose matters.
link |
They might take way too much.
link |
I mean, I would say, to be honest,
link |
the chances of computers being,
link |
well, shouldn't always never.
link |
So the fact I can now say this means
link |
it's totally gonna come true, right?
link |
And I'm going to do it.
link |
I cannot imagine that computers will be
link |
in people's houses anytime soon,
link |
but they might be at the local pharmacy, right?
link |
And if you've got a drug manufacturing facility
link |
in every town, then you just go
link |
and they give you a prescription.
link |
They do it in such a way, they format it
link |
so that you don't have to take 10 pills every day.
link |
You get one manufactured for you
link |
that has all the materials you need
link |
and the right distribution.
link |
But you mentioned recreational drugs.
link |
And the reason I mention it,
link |
cause I know people are going to speak up on this.
link |
If the drug is legal, there's to me,
link |
no reason why you can't manufacture it for recreation.
link |
I mean, you can do it right now.
link |
What do you have against fun, Lee?
link |
I have, so I mean, I'm a chemistry professor
link |
in a university who's an entrepreneur as well.
link |
I just think I need to be as responsible
link |
as I can in the discussion.
link |
Sure, no, sure, sure.
link |
But I know, so let me be the one that says
link |
like there's nothing, cause you have said
link |
recreational drugs and like terrorism in the same sentence.
link |
I think let's make sure we draw a line
link |
that there's real dangers to the world
link |
of terrorists of bio warfare.
link |
And then there's a little bit of weed.
link |
So I haven't, I mean, I think it's up to the society
link |
to tell his governments what it wants,
link |
what's acceptable, right?
link |
And if it becomes, let's say that THCs
link |
become heavily acceptable and that you can modify them.
link |
So let's say there's, let's say it's like blood type.
link |
There's a particular type of THC
link |
that you tolerate better than I do.
link |
Then why not have a machine that makes the one you like?
link |
And then, and why not?
link |
It's the perfect brownie.
link |
Yeah, and I think that that's fine.
link |
But I'm, we're so far away from that.
link |
I can barely get the thing to work in the lab, right?
link |
And I mean, it's reliability and all this other stuff,
link |
but what I think is gonna happen in the short term,
link |
it's gonna turbocharge molecular discovery reliability
link |
and that will change the world.
link |
That's super exciting.
link |
You have a draft of a paper titled
link |
Autonomous Intelligent Exploration,
link |
Discovery and Optimization of Nanomaterials.
link |
So we are talking about
link |
automating engineering of nanomaterials.
link |
How hard is this problem?
link |
And as we continue down this thread of the positives
link |
and the worrisome,
link |
what are the things we should be excited about?
link |
And what are the things we should be terrified about?
link |
And how do we minimize the chance
link |
of the terrifying consequences?
link |
So in this robot, the robot does all the heavy lifting.
link |
So the robot basically is an embodied AI.
link |
I really like AI in a domain specific way.
link |
One of the, as you should say at this point,
link |
there was an attempt in the 60s,
link |
Joshua Leidenberg and some really important people
link |
did this that made an AI to try and guess
link |
if organic molecules and the mass spectrometer
link |
were alien or not.
link |
And they failed because they didn't have assembly theory.
link |
And when I, and I, and that.
link |
Wait, what does assembly theory
link |
give you about alien versus human life?
link |
Well, no, it just, it tells you about unknown,
link |
the degree of unknowns.
link |
You can fingerprint stuff.
link |
They weren't looking at,
link |
they were trying to basically just look at the corpus
link |
of complex organic molecules.
link |
So when I was a bit down about assembly theory,
link |
cause I couldn't convince referees
link |
and couldn't convince computational people
link |
interested in computational complexity,
link |
I was really quite depressed about it.
link |
And I mean, I've been working with Sarah Walker's team
link |
and I think she, you know,
link |
I think she also invented an assembly theory somewhere.
link |
We can talk about it later.
link |
When I found the AI not working for the dendrial project,
link |
I suddenly realized I wasn't totally insane.
link |
Coming back to this nano robot.
link |
So what it does is it basically, like a computer,
link |
but now what it does is it squirts a liquid
link |
with gold in it in a test tube
link |
and it adds some reducing agents,
link |
so some electrons to make the gold
link |
turn into a nanoparticle.
link |
Now, when gold becomes a nanoparticle,
link |
it gets a characteristic color, a plasmon.
link |
So it's a bit like if you look at the sheen
link |
on the gold wedding ring or gold bar or something,
link |
those are the ways that conducting electrons
link |
basically reflect light.
link |
What we did is we randomly squirt the gold,
link |
the gold particle and the reducing agent
link |
and then we measure the UV, we measure the color.
link |
And so what we do is we've got, the robot has a mind.
link |
So it has a mind where in a simulation,
link |
it randomly generates nanoparticles and the plasmon,
link |
the color that comes out, randomly imagines in its head.
link |
It then with the others,
link |
that's the imaginary side of the robot.
link |
In the physical side of the robot,
link |
it squirts in the chemicals and looks at the color
link |
and it uses a genetic algorithm
link |
and a map elite actually on it.
link |
And it goes around in cycles and refines
link |
the color to the objective.
link |
Now we use two different points.
link |
We have an exploration and an optimization.
link |
They're two different.
link |
So the exploration just says, just do random stuff
link |
and see how many different things you can get.
link |
And when you get different things,
link |
try and optimize and make the peak sharper, sharper, sharper.
link |
And what it does after a number of cycles
link |
is it physically takes a sample
link |
of the optimized nanomaterial,
link |
resets all of the round bottom flasks, cleans them
link |
and puts the seed, physical seed back in.
link |
And then what this robot is able to do
link |
is search a space of 10 to the 23 possible reactions
link |
in just a thousand experiments in three days.
link |
And it makes five generations of nanoparticles
link |
which get nicer and nicer in terms of shape
link |
and color and definition.
link |
And then at the end, it outputs a Kydl code.
link |
That could then be.
link |
Wow, it's doing the search for programs
link |
in the physical space.
link |
So it's doing a kind of reinforcement learning.
link |
Yeah, yeah, in the physical space.
link |
With the exploration and the optimization.
link |
And that Kydl will work on any computer
link |
or any qualified hardware.
link |
That's now that's a general piece of code
link |
that can replicate somewhat maybe perfectly
link |
That's incredible.
link |
But the nanoparticles themselves are done.
link |
The robot has all the thinking.
link |
So we don't try and imply any self replication
link |
or try and get the particles to make themselves.
link |
Although it would be cool to try.
link |
So, well, there you go.
link |
That's, those are famous last words
link |
for the end of human civilization.
link |
Would be cool to try.
link |
So is it possible to create molecules
link |
that start approaching this question
link |
that we started this conversation,
link |
which is the origin of life.
link |
To start to create molecules that have lifelike qualities.
link |
So have the replication, have like complex,
link |
start to create complex organisms.
link |
So we have done this with the oxides.
link |
I talked about earlier with the moxides
link |
and the rings and the bulls.
link |
And the problem is that, well, they do,
link |
they auto catalytically enhance one another.
link |
So they would, I guess you would call it self replication.
link |
But because there's limited function and mutation,
link |
they're pretty dumb.
link |
So they don't do very much.
link |
So I think the prospect of us being able to engineer
link |
a nano material life form in the short term,
link |
like I said earlier,
link |
my aim is to do this, of course.
link |
I mean, on one hand, I'm saying it's impossible.
link |
On the other hand, I'm saying I'm doing it.
link |
So which is it, Lee?
link |
It's like, well, I think we can do it,
link |
but only in the robot.
link |
So the causal chain that's gonna allow it is in the robot.
link |
These particles, if they do start to self replicate,
link |
the system's gonna be so fragile
link |
that I don't think anything dangerous will come out.
link |
It doesn't mean we shouldn't treat them
link |
as potentially, I mean, I don't want to scare people
link |
like gain of function.
link |
We're gonna produce stuff that comes out.
link |
Our number one kill switch is that we always try
link |
to search a space of objects
link |
that don't exist in the environment.
link |
So even if something got out, it just would die immediately.
link |
It's like making a silicon life form or something.
link |
Which is the opposite of oftentimes
link |
gain of function research is focused on
link |
how do you get a dangerous thing
link |
to be closer to something that works with humans?
link |
To have it jump to humans.
link |
So that's the one good mode to operate on
link |
is always try to operate on chemical entities
link |
that are very different than the kind of chemical environment
link |
that humans operate in.
link |
Yeah, and also, I mean, I'll say something dramatic,
link |
which may not be true.
link |
So I should be careful.
link |
If let's say we did discover a new living system
link |
but it was made out of a shadow biosphere
link |
and we just released it in the environment,
link |
It's gonna use different stuff.
link |
Yeah, it'll just live.
link |
I found one of my biggest fantasies
link |
is actually is like a planet
link |
that's basically half in the sun,
link |
it doesn't rotate, right?
link |
And you have two different origins of life on that planet
link |
and they don't share the same chemistry.
link |
And then the only way time they recognize each other
link |
is when they become intelligent, they go,
link |
well, what's that moving?
link |
So they co evolve and that's fascinating.
link |
I mean, so one fascinating thing to do
link |
is exactly what you were saying, which is a life bomb,
link |
which is like try to focus on atmospheres
link |
or chemical conditions of other planets
link |
and try within this kind of exploration optimization system
link |
try to discover life forms that can work in those conditions
link |
and then you send those life forms over there
link |
and see what kind of stuff they build up.
link |
Like you can do like a large scale,
link |
it's kind of a safe physical environment
link |
to do large scale experiments, it's another planet.
link |
Yeah, so look, I'm gonna say something quite contentious.
link |
I mean, Elon wants to go to Mars,
link |
I think it's brilliant wants to go to Mars,
link |
but I would counter that and say,
link |
is Elon just obsessed with getting humanity?
link |
Or Earth, or what about just technology?
link |
So if we do technology, so Elon either needs
link |
to take a computer to Mars
link |
because he needs to manufacture drugs on demand,
link |
because zero cost payload and all that stuff is just code.
link |
Or what we do is we actually say, hang on,
link |
it's quite hard for humans to survive on Mars.
link |
Why don't we write a series of origin of life algorithms
link |
where we embed our culture in it?
link |
It's a very Ridley spot Prometheus,
link |
which is a terrible film by the way, but anyway.
link |
And dump it on Mars and just terraform Mars.
link |
And what we do is we evolve life on Mars
link |
that is suited to life on Mars,
link |
rather than brute forcing human life on Mars.
link |
So one of the questions is, what is human culture?
link |
What are the things you encode?
link |
Some of it is knowledge, some of it is information.
link |
But the thing that Elon talks about,
link |
the thing I think about, I think you think about as well
link |
is some of the more unique aspects of what makes us human,
link |
which is our particular kind of consciousness.
link |
So he talks about the flame of human consciousness.
link |
That's one of the questions is,
link |
can we instill consciousness into other beings?
link |
Because that's a sad thought that whatever this thing
link |
inside our minds, that hopes and dreams and fears
link |
and loves can all die.
link |
Yeah, but I think you already know
link |
the answer to that question.
link |
I have a robot lawnmower at home.
link |
My kids call it CC, cool car.
link |
It's a robo mower.
link |
And the way it works, it has an electric field
link |
around the perimeter and it just tell it the area.
link |
And it goes out and goes from its base station,
link |
Gets to the perimeter, detects perimeter,
link |
then chooses a random angle, rotates around and goes on.
link |
My kids call it cool cutter.
link |
I don't know why it's a she.
link |
They just, when they were like quite young,
link |
they called it, I don't want to be sexist there.
link |
It could be a he, but they liked.
link |
They gendered the lawnmower?
link |
They gendered the lawnmower.
link |
But I was thinking this lawnmower,
link |
if you apply integrated information theory to lawnmower,
link |
the lawnmower is conscious.
link |
Now, integrated information theory is,
link |
people say it's a flawed way of measuring consciousness,
link |
but I don't think it is.
link |
I think assembly theory actually measures consciousness
link |
Consciousness is something that is generated
link |
over a population of objects, of humans.
link |
Consciousness didn't suddenly spring in.
link |
Our consciousness has evolved together, right?
link |
The fact we're here and the robots we leave behind,
link |
they will have some of that.
link |
So we won't lose it all.
link |
Sure, consciousness requires
link |
that we have many models being generated.
link |
It's not just one domain specific AI, right?
link |
I think the way to create consciousness,
link |
I'm going to say unashamedly,
link |
the best way to make a consciousness is in a chemical system
link |
because you just have access to many more states.
link |
And the problem right now,
link |
we're making silicon consciousness
link |
because you just don't have enough states.
link |
So there are more possible states,
link |
or sorry, there are more possible configurations possible
link |
in your brain than there are atoms in the universe.
link |
And you can switch between them.
link |
You can't do that on a core I10.
link |
It's got 10 billion, 12 billion, 14 billion transistors,
link |
but you can't reconfigure them as dynamically.
link |
Well, you've shared this intuition a few times already
link |
that the larger number of states
link |
somehow correlates to greater possibility of life,
link |
but it's also possible the constraints are essential here.
link |
I mean, but coming back to the,
link |
you worry that something's lost.
link |
I agree, but I think that we will get to an AGI,
link |
but I wonder if it's not,
link |
it can't be separate from human,
link |
it can't be separate from human consciousness
link |
because the causal chain that produced it came from humans.
link |
So what I kind of try and suggest heavily
link |
to people worry about the existential threat of AI saying,
link |
I mean, you put it much more elegantly earlier,
link |
like we should worry about algorithms on, dumb algorithms
link |
written by human beings on Twitter driving us insane, right?
link |
And doing acting in odd ways.
link |
Yeah, I think intelligence,
link |
this is what I have been in eloquent
link |
in trying to describe it partially
link |
because I try not to think too deeply through this stuff
link |
because then you become a philosopher.
link |
I still aspire to actually building a bunch of stuff.
link |
But my sense is super intelligence leads
link |
to deep integration to human society.
link |
So like intelligence is strongly correlated.
link |
Like intelligence, the way we conceive of intelligence
link |
materializes as a thing that becomes a fun entity
link |
to have at a party and with humans.
link |
So like it's a mix of wit, intelligence, humor,
link |
like intelligence, like knowledge,
link |
ability to do reasoning and so on,
link |
but also humor, emotional intelligence,
link |
ability to love, to dream, to share those dreams,
link |
to play the game of human civilization,
link |
the push and pull, the whole dance of it,
link |
the whole dance of life.
link |
And I think that kind of super intelligent being
link |
is not the thing that worries me.
link |
I think that ultimately will enrich life.
link |
It's again, the dumb algorithms,
link |
the dumb algorithms that scale in the hands of people
link |
that are too, don't study history,
link |
that don't study human psychology and human nature,
link |
just applying too broadly for selfish near term interests.
link |
That's the biggest danger.
link |
Yeah, I think it's not a new danger, right?
link |
I now know how I should use Twitter
link |
and how I shouldn't use Twitter, right?
link |
I like to provoke people into thinking.
link |
I don't want to provoke people into outrage.
link |
It's not a good thing for humans to do, right?
link |
And I think that when you get people into outrage,
link |
they take sides and taking sides is really bad.
link |
But I think that we're all beginning to see this.
link |
And I think that actually I'm very optimistic
link |
about how things will evolve because, you know,
link |
I wonder how much productivity has Twitter
link |
and social media taken out of humanity?
link |
Because how many now, I mean,
link |
so the good thing about Twitter is it gives power,
link |
so it gives voice to minorities, right?
link |
And that's good to some degree.
link |
But I wonder how much voice does it give
link |
to all sorts of other problems
link |
that don't need this emerge?
link |
By the way, when you say minorities,
link |
I think, or at least if I were to agree with you,
link |
what I would say is minorities broadly defined
link |
in these small groups of people that it magnifies
link |
the concerns of the small versus the big.
link |
That is good to some degree.
link |
But I think, I mean, I have to be careful
link |
because I think I have a very,
link |
I mean, I think that the world isn't that broken, right?
link |
I think the world is pretty cool place.
link |
I think academia is really great.
link |
I think climate change presents
link |
a really interesting problem for humanity
link |
that we will solve.
link |
I like how you said it.
link |
It's a pretty cool problem for civilization.
link |
Well, it's a bunch of it.
link |
There's a bunch of really, really big problems
link |
that if solved can significantly improve
link |
the quality of life or learn.
link |
That ultimately is what we're trying to do,
link |
improve how awesome life is
link |
for the maximum number of people.
link |
Yeah, and I think that the coming back to consciousness,
link |
I don't think the universe is doomed to heat death, right?
link |
It's one of the optimists.
link |
That's why I want to kind of nudge you
link |
into thinking that time is fundamental
link |
because if time is fundamental,
link |
then suddenly you don't have to give it back.
link |
The universe just constructs stuff.
link |
And what we see around us in our construction,
link |
I know everyone's worried about how fragile civilization is.
link |
And I mean, look at the fundamentals.
link |
We're good until the sun expands, right?
link |
We've got quite a lot of resource on earth.
link |
We're trying to be quite cooperative.
link |
Humans are nice to each other
link |
when they're not under enormous stress.
link |
But coming back to the consciousness thing,
link |
are we going to send human beings to Mars
link |
or conscious robots to Mars?
link |
Or are we gonna send some hybrid?
link |
And I don't know the answer to that question right now.
link |
I guess, you know,
link |
Elon is gonna have a pretty good go at getting there.
link |
I'm not sure whether,
link |
I have my doubts, but I'm not qualified.
link |
I'm sure people have their doubts that computation works,
link |
but I've got it working.
link |
And most of the cool technologies we have today
link |
and take for granted,
link |
like the airplane, a aforementioned airplane,
link |
were things that people doubted.
link |
Like majority of people doubted
link |
before they came to life and they come to life.
link |
And speaking of hybrid AI and humans,
link |
it's fascinating to think about all the different ways
link |
that hybridization, that merger can happen.
link |
I mean, we have, currently have the smartphone,
link |
so there's already a hybrid,
link |
but there's all kinds of ways that hybrid happens.
link |
How we and other technology play together,
link |
like a computer, how that changes
link |
the fabric of human civilization is like wide open.
link |
if you remove cancer,
link |
if you remove major diseases from humanity,
link |
there's going to be a bunch of consequences
link |
we're not anticipating.
link |
Many of them positive, but many of them negative.
link |
Many of them, most of them, at least I hope,
link |
are weird and wonderful and fun
link |
in ways that are totally unexpected.
link |
And we sitting on a porch with a bottle of Jack Daniels
link |
and a rocker will say,
link |
kids these days don't appreciate
link |
how hard we had it back in the day.
link |
I gotta ask you, speaking of nudging,
link |
you and Joscha Bach nudge each other on Twitter quite a bit
link |
in wonderful intellectual debates.
link |
And of course, for people who don't know Joscha Bach,
link |
he's this brilliant guy.
link |
He's been on the podcast a couple times.
link |
You tweeted, or he tweeted,
link |
Joscha Bach, everyone should follow him as well.
link |
You should definitely follow Mr. Lee Cronin, Dr. Lee Cronin.
link |
He tweeted, dinner with Lee Cronin.
link |
We discussed that while we can translate
link |
every working model of existence into a Turing machine,
link |
the structure of the universe might be given
link |
by weeks of nonexistence in a pattern generated
link |
by all possible automata, which exist by default.
link |
And then he followed on saying face to face is the best.
link |
So the dinner was face to face.
link |
What is Joscha talking about in weeks, quote,
link |
weeks of nonexistence in a pattern generated
link |
by all possible automata, which exist by default.
link |
So automata exist by default, apparently.
link |
And then there's weeks of nonexistence.
link |
What the hell is nonexistence in the universe?
link |
That's, and also in another conversation,
link |
you tweeted it's state machines all the way down,
link |
which presumably is the origin story of this discussion.
link |
And then Joscha said, again, nudging, nudging,
link |
nudging slash trolling, Joscha said,
link |
you've seen the light, welcome friend.
link |
Many foundational physicists effectively believe
link |
in some form of hyper computation.
link |
Lee is coming around to this idea.
link |
And then you said, I think there are notable differences.
link |
First, I think the universe does not have to be a computer.
link |
Second, I want to understand how the universe emerges,
link |
constructors that build computers.
link |
And third is that there is something below church touring.
link |
Okay, what the heck is this dinner conversation about?
link |
Maybe put another way, maybe zooming out a little bit.
link |
Are there interesting agreements or disagreements
link |
between you and Joscha Bach that can elucidate
link |
some of the other topics we've been talking about?
link |
Yeah, so Jascha has an incredible mind
link |
and he has, he's so well read
link |
and uses language really elegantly.
link |
It bamboozles me at times.
link |
So I'm, so often I'm using, I'm describing concepts
link |
in a way that I built from the ground up.
link |
And so we misunderstand each other a lot.
link |
And he's floating in the clouds, is that what you're saying?
link |
Something like, not quite, but I think,
link |
so this concept of a Turing machine.
link |
So a Turing machine, Turing machines, I would argue,
link |
and I think this is not, the Turing machine,
link |
the universe is not a Turing machine.
link |
Biology is not even a Turing machine, right?
link |
And because Turing machines don't evolve, right?
link |
There is this problem
link |
that people see Turing machines everywhere,
link |
but isn't it interesting the universe gave rise to biology
link |
that gave rise to intelligence,
link |
that gave rise to Alan Turing,
link |
who invented the abstraction of the Turing machine
link |
and allowed us to digitize.
link |
And so I've been looking for the mystery
link |
at the origin of life, the origin of intelligence
link |
and the origin of this.
link |
And I, when I discussed with Yasha,
link |
I think Yasha, he was saying, well, the universe,
link |
of course the universe is a Turing machine.
link |
Of course there's a hyper computer there.
link |
And I think we got kind of trapped in our words and terms
link |
because of course it's possible for a Turing machine
link |
or computers to exist in the universe.
link |
But what I'm trying to understand is
link |
where did the transition of continuous discrete occur?
link |
And I've been, and this is because of my general foolishness
link |
of understanding the continuous.
link |
But I guess what I'm trying to say is
link |
there were constructors before there were abstractors
link |
because how did the universe abstract itself into existence?
link |
And it goes back to earlier saying,
link |
could the universe of intelligence have come first?
link |
What's a constructor, what's an abstractor?
link |
So the abstractor is the ability of say,
link |
of Alan Turing and Gödel and Church
link |
to think about the mathematical universe and to label things.
link |
And then from those labels to come up with a set of axioms
link |
with those labels and to basically understand
link |
the universe mathematically and say, okay,
link |
I can label things.
link |
Where did the labeler come from?
link |
Where is the prime labeler?
link |
Even if the universe is not a Turing computer,
link |
does that negate the possibility
link |
that a Turing computer can simulate the universe?
link |
Just because the abstraction was formed at a later time,
link |
does that mean that abstraction,
link |
this is to our cellular automata conversation.
link |
You were taking away some of the magic
link |
from the cellular automata because very intelligent
link |
biological systems came up with that cellular automata.
link |
Well, this is where the existence is the default, right?
link |
Is it, does the fact that we exist
link |
and we can come up with a Turing machine,
link |
does that mean the universe has to be
link |
a Turing machine as well?
link |
But can it be a Turing machine though?
link |
That's a, so the has to be and the can it be.
link |
I don't know, I don't understand
link |
if it has to be or not, can it be?
link |
But can the universe have Turing machines in it?
link |
Sure, they exist now.
link |
I'm wondering though, maybe,
link |
and this is where things get really hairy,
link |
is I think the universe maybe in the past
link |
did not have the computational power that it has now.
link |
This is almost like a law of physics kind of,
link |
so the computational power is not,
link |
you can get some free lunch.
link |
Yeah, I mean, the fact that we now,
link |
we sit here in this period in time
link |
and we can imagine all these robots
link |
and all these machines and we built them.
link |
And so we can easily imagine going back in time
link |
that the universe was capable of having them,
link |
but I don't think it can.
link |
So the universe may have been a lot dumber computationally.
link |
And I think that's why,
link |
I don't want to go back to the time discussion,
link |
but I think it has some relationship with it.
link |
The universe is basically smarter now than it used to be
link |
and it's going to continue getting smarter over time
link |
because of novelty, generation,
link |
and the ability to create objects
link |
within objects within objects.
link |
You know, there's a, perhaps it's grounded in physics,
link |
there's this intuition of conservation.
link |
Yeah. That stuff is conserved.
link |
Like you're not, you've always had all,
link |
everything, you're just rearranging books
link |
on the bookshelf through time.
link |
So, okay. But you're saying like
link |
new books are being written.
link |
Which laws do you want to break?
link |
At the origin of the big bang,
link |
you had to break the second law
link |
because we got order for free.
link |
Well, what I'm telling you now
link |
is that the energy isn't conserved in the universe.
link |
Oh, it's the second law. Okay. I got you.
link |
So because, but not in a mad way.
link |
Okay. So computation potentially is not conserved,
link |
which is a fascinating idea.
link |
Intelligence is not conserved.
link |
Complexity is not conserved.
link |
I suppose that's deeply connected
link |
to time being fundamental.
link |
The natural consequence of that
link |
is if time is fundamental
link |
and the universe is inflating in time, if you like,
link |
then there are one or two conservation laws
link |
that we need to have a look at.
link |
And I wonder if that means the total energy
link |
of the universe is actually increasing over time.
link |
And this may be completely ludicrous,
link |
but we do have all this dark energy.
link |
We have some anomalies, let's say,
link |
dark matter and dark energy.
link |
If we don't add them in,
link |
galaxies, so dark matter, I think doesn't hold.
link |
You need to hold the galaxies together
link |
and there's some other observational issues.
link |
Could dark energy just be time?
link |
So figuring out what dark energy is
link |
might give us some deep clues
link |
about this, not just time, but the consequences of time.
link |
So it could be that, I mean,
link |
I'm not saying there's perpetual motions allowed
link |
and it's free lunch, but I'm saying
link |
if the universe is intrinsically asymmetric
link |
and it appears to be, and it's generating novelty
link |
and it appears to, couldn't that just be mechanistically
link |
how reality works?
link |
And therefore I don't really like this idea that the,
link |
so I want to live in a deterministic universe
link |
that is undetermined, right?
link |
The only way I can do that is if time is fundamental.
link |
Because otherwise it's all the rest of us,
link |
it's just sleight of hand because the physicists will say,
link |
yes, everything's deterministic.
link |
Newtonian mechanics is deterministic.
link |
Quantum mechanics is deterministic.
link |
Let's take the Everettian view.
link |
And then basically we can just draw out
link |
this massive universe branching, but it closes again
link |
and we get it all back.
link |
And don't worry, your feeling of free will is effective.
link |
But what the physicists are actually saying
link |
is the entire future is mapped out.
link |
And that is clearly problematical.
link |
That's not so clear.
link |
It's just problematic.
link |
Well, yeah, yeah, so it's.
link |
Because that maybe is just the way it is.
link |
It's problematic to you, a particular creature
link |
along this timeline.
link |
I want to reduce the number of beliefs
link |
I need to understand the universe.
link |
So if time is fundamental, I don't need
link |
to have magic order at the beginning,
link |
and I don't need a second law.
link |
But you do need the magical belief
link |
that time is fundamental.
link |
Well, I need the observation that I'm seeing
link |
to be just how it is all the way down.
link |
But the Earth also looks flat
link |
if you agree with your observation.
link |
So we can't necessarily trust our observation.
link |
I know the Earth isn't flat
link |
because I can send a satellite into space.
link |
No, but now you see, now you're using the tools
link |
of science and the technology of science.
link |
But I'm saying I'm going to do experiments
link |
that start to show.
link |
I mean, I think that it's worth.
link |
So if you can't, so if I cannot do an experiment
link |
or a thought experiment that will test this assumption,
link |
then the assumption is without merit really in the end.
link |
You know, that's fine.
link |
That's a beautiful ideal you hold yourself to.
link |
That's given that you think deeply in a philosophical way,
link |
you think about some of these really important issues
link |
and you have theoretical frameworks like assembly theory.
link |
It's really nice that you're always grounded
link |
That's all I have.
link |
That's so refreshing.
link |
That's so beautifully refreshing.
link |
Now that we're holding you to the grounded
link |
in an experiment to the harsh truth of reality,
link |
let me ask the big ridiculous question.
link |
What is the meaning of this whole thing?
link |
What's the meaning of life?
link |
This time is fundamental.
link |
It's marching forward.
link |
And along this long timeline come along a bunch
link |
of descendants of apes that have come up
link |
with cellular automata and computers and now computers.
link |
I have so many different answers to this question.
link |
It depends on what day.
link |
I would say that given the way of the conversation
link |
we had today, I'd say the meaning,
link |
well, we make our own meaning.
link |
I think that's fine.
link |
But I think the universe wants to explore
link |
every possible configuration that it's allowed us
link |
And this goes back to the kind of question
link |
that you were asking about Yasha and the existence
link |
and non existence of things, right?
link |
So if the universe is a Turing machine is churning
link |
through a lot of states and you think about
link |
combinatorial theory before assembly theory,
link |
so everything is possible.
link |
What Yasha and I were saying is, well,
link |
not everything is possible.
link |
We don't see the combinatorial explosion.
link |
We see something else.
link |
And what we see is evidence of memory.
link |
So there clearly seems to be some interference
link |
between the combinatorial explosion of things
link |
and what the universe allows.
link |
And it's like this kind of constructive,
link |
destructive interference.
link |
So maybe the universe is not just about,
link |
it is assembling objects in space and time.
link |
And those objects are able to search more space and time.
link |
And the universe is just infinitely creative.
link |
And I guess I'm searching for why the universe
link |
is infinitely creative.
link |
It is infinitely creative.
link |
And maybe the meaning is just simply to make
link |
as many objects, create as many things as possible.
link |
And I see a future of the universe that doesn't result
link |
in the heat death of the universe.
link |
The universe is gonna extract every ounce
link |
of creativity it can out of it,
link |
because that's what we see on Earth, right?
link |
And if you think that almost like intelligence
link |
is not conserved, that maybe creativity isn't either.
link |
Maybe like it's an infinite well.
link |
So like creativity is ultimately tied to novelty.
link |
You're coming up with cool new configurations of things,
link |
and maybe that just can continue indefinitely.
link |
And this human species that was created along the way
link |
is probably just one method,
link |
like that's able to ask the universe about itself.
link |
It's just one way to explore creativity.
link |
Maybe there's other meta levels on top of that.
link |
Like obviously, as a collective intelligence
link |
will create organisms, maybe there'll be organisms
link |
that ask themselves questions about themselves
link |
in a deeper, bigger picture way than we humans do.
link |
First to ask questions about the humans,
link |
and then construct some kind of hybrid systems
link |
that ask themselves about the collective aspect.
link |
Just like some weird stacking
link |
that we can't even imagine yet.
link |
And that stacking, I mean, I have discussed this stacking
link |
a lot with Sarah Walker, who's a professor of physics
link |
and astrobiology at ASU.
link |
And we argue about how creative the universe is gonna be,
link |
and is it as deterministic as all that?
link |
Because I think she's more of a free will thinker,
link |
and I'm of a less free will thinker,
link |
but I think we're beginning to converge
link |
and understanding that.
link |
Because there's simply a missing understanding.
link |
Right now, we don't understand how the universe,
link |
we don't know what rules the universe has
link |
to allow the universe to contemplate itself.
link |
So asking the meaning of it
link |
before we even know what those rules are
link |
is premature, but my guess is that it's not meaningless,
link |
and it isn't just about that.
link |
And there are three levels of meanings.
link |
Obviously, the universe wants us to do stuff.
link |
We're interacting with each other,
link |
so we create meaning in our own society
link |
and our own interactions with humanity.
link |
But I do think there is something else going on.
link |
But because reality is so weird,
link |
we're just scratching at that.
link |
And I think that we have to make the experiments better.
link |
And we have to perhaps join across,
link |
not just for the computation lists.
link |
And what I tried to do with Yashua is meet him halfway,
link |
say, well, what happens if I become a computation list?
link |
A lot, it turns out,
link |
because I can make Turing machines in the universe.
link |
Because on the one hand, I'm making computers
link |
which are state machines inspired by Turing.
link |
On the other hand, I'm saying they can't exist.
link |
Well, clearly, I can't have my cake and eat it,
link |
so there's something weird going on there.
link |
So then, did the universe have to make a continuous
link |
to a discrete transition, or is the universe just discrete?
link |
It's probably just discrete.
link |
So if it's just discrete, then there are,
link |
I will then give Yashua his Turing like property
link |
But maybe there's something else below it,
link |
which is the constructor that constructs a Turing machine
link |
that then constructs, you know,
link |
it's a bit like you generate a computing system
link |
that then is able to build an abstraction
link |
that then recognizes it can make a generalizable abstraction
link |
because human beings with mathematics
link |
have been able to go on and build physical computers.
link |
If that makes any sense.
link |
And I think that's the meaning.
link |
I think that's, you know, as far as we can,
link |
the meaning will be further elucidated
link |
with further experiments.
link |
Well, you mentioned Sarah.
link |
I think you and Sarah Walker
link |
are just these fascinating human beings.
link |
I'm really fortunate to have the opportunity
link |
to be in your presence, to study your work,
link |
to follow along with your work.
link |
Like I told you offline,
link |
I hope we get a chance to talk again
link |
with perhaps just the two of us,
link |
but also with Sarah.
link |
That's a fascinating dynamic for people who haven't heard.
link |
I suppose on Clubhouse is where I heard you guys talk,
link |
but you have an incredible dynamic.
link |
And I also can't wait to hear you and Yashua talk.
link |
So I think if there's some point in this predetermined
link |
or yet to be determined future where the three of us,
link |
you and Sarah, or the four of us with Yashua
link |
could meet and talk would be a beautiful future.
link |
And I look forward to most futures,
link |
but I look forward to that one in particular.
link |
Lee, thank you so much
link |
for spending your valuable time with me today.
link |
It's been a pleasure.
link |
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Lee Cronin.
link |
To support this podcast,
link |
please check out our sponsors in the description.
link |
And now let me leave you with some words
link |
from the math scientist, Rick Sanchez
link |
of Rick and Morty fame.
link |
To live is to risk it all.
link |
Otherwise you're just an inert chunk
link |
of randomly assembled molecules
link |
drifting wherever the universe blows you.
link |
Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.