Digital biology and open science -- the coming revolution | Stephen Larson | TEDxVienna
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 18 พ.ค. 2024
- This talk was given at a local TEDx event, produced independently of the TED Conferences. What if we could better understand all of life by playing with virtual replicas inside computers the same way we play with Lego blocks?
This is the idea behind a new revolution called digital biology.
Digital Biology doesn't just use computers to measure and analyze biological systems. Digital Biology uses powerful simulation software to reproduce the basic functions of life. That means that by running a computer program we can see and modify hundreds of thousands even millions of the events that occur within DNA, within cells, within tissues, organs and whole organisms faithfully reproduced as they happen in the real thing.
This new approach to reproducing biological processes inside computers promises to give us the ability to understand malfunctions of life in a whole new way, such as disease and aging, to better unlock the promise of clean biological energy production, and a host of technologies not yet dreamed of.
What if the production of this incredible new technology was not just done behind closed doors of academic institutions always done in the public eye using open science? What if we could take advantage of new crowd-funding techniques to unleash the creativity of science by kickstarting research of this kind?
One significant project pushing the boundaries of what is possible in both digital biology and open science is OpenWorm. OpenWorm is a unique endeavor dedicated to creating the first digital organism in a computer in a completely open science manner. Hundreds of contributors from countries around the world have added to a complex reproduction of the best understood animal in all of biology, a tiny nematode worm. The project has been featured in the Economist, BBC News, The New York Times and more and successfully raised money on Kickstarter to take it to the next level. This case study in what is possible with networked science will be at the center of my exploration of digital biology as I discuss its past, present, and exciting future.
Stephen Larson is co-founder of OpenWorm, an open science project to digitally reconstruct a whole organism. He is CEO of MetaCell, a systems biology informatics company, has co-developed a patent, authored over a dozen peer-reviewed articles, and has been featured in the Economist and Wired. He received his B.S. and M.Eng from MIT in computer science and a neuroscience Ph.D from UCSD.
About TEDx, x = independently organized event In the spirit of ideas worth spreading, TEDx is a program of local, self-organized events that bring people together to share a TED-like experience. At a TEDx event, TEDTalks video and live speakers combine to spark deep discussion and connection in a small group. These local, self-organized events are branded TEDx, where x = independently organized TED event. The TED Conference provides general guidance for the TEDx program, but individual TEDx events are self-organized.* (*Subject to certain rules and regulations)
The biggest problem overlooked in this talk has been highlighted in my peer-reviewed papers, e.g. -- "While physics and chemistry are physical sciences whose interactions are wholly determined by physicality, biology is an information science since all of the defining characteristics of biology are controlled by life’s information processing systems.Biology isn’t just complicated chemistry, since it involves coded messages (semiotics) and coded algorithmic prescriptive instructions (instantiated computer programs) ." ("Biocybernetics and Biosemiosis", in Biological Information 2013, 402-413, www.worldscientific.com/doi/pdf/10.1142/9789814508728_0017)
Dr.Larson says the molecular machines are controlled by "the fundamental rules of physics and chemistry," which is nonsense as control can only be done via prescriptive information. Physical laws constrain, but do not and cannot control (control requires formalism).
See www.programmingoflife.info for more information and links (including the PoL video which has had over 288K views).
"Biology isn’t just complicated chemistry"
Yes it is. We can call DNA a code but that's a metaphor. It's just chemistry. There is nothing more to DNA than a phosphate a sugar and a base and DNA does nothing more than follow the rules of chemistry.
"control can only be done via prescriptive information."
Really? Water flows downhill because it's controlled by gravity. Because it has to.
Adenine bonds with Thymine in DNA because the chemistry controls it. Because it has to.
you write too much.... seu merda
@@AndrewWilsonStooshieif that was true, the we could create the DNA 🧬 with pure chemistry 🧪 and make it come to life. Theres more to it than just chemistry
@@sorhanft dna is pure chemistry and we can create it.
@@sorhanft life isn't just dna but it is just chemistry
good closing words
I was getting a little bit nervous about this talk.
Why I thought this guy was an ID Scientist the way he was describing the complexity
of the cell to precision of the universe.
The bit on how if man was as accurate as a cell , we would of made 10 mistakes
over our entire history and the little animation of the Kinisen , one of many of
the types of nano machines in most of the 30 trillion cells in the human
body that operate with a the preciseness for a very specific purpose.
I'm fairly certain the audience was having the same thoughts , since he didn't
get much of a response to some of his parables of humans being's as the most intelligent
creatures on the planet , but nature beats us at everything from programming ,
engineering and the design and creation of complex life forms.
The complex nano machines like the Flagellum Motor or the Kinesin's that transport materials in all 30,000,000,000 cells in a human body.
Most of these cells having hundreds of machines with many different types.
Or how he mentioned that if humans were as accurate in what we do , that humanity would
have made 10 or 12 mistakes during our history.
That might be because they estimate that a approx 20,000,000,000,000 reactions take place
in a human being every second. That in effect would take the most powerful computer
on the planet about 2 hours to process.
It's fascinating how current science shows complexity beyond anything that could of been
imagined 30 years ago . How all 30,000,000,000 cells carry the human genome which
are controlled by thousands of different complex machines that shut off and turn on
different sections of the DNA to make the 100's of different cells as needed.
Or if a couple of mistakes in the 3,2000,000,000 codons of the DNA in any of the 30,000,000,000,000 cells could cause a serious illness.
And just think that there are hundreds of different processes going on in every one
of those 30 trillions cells every second. ( thats 30,000,000,000,000,000 per second)
And how Intelligent People give credit for the billions of random non-directed designs
in nature and in most cases could only hope someday to possibly copy some of them.
Francis Crick, the co-discoverer of the structure of DNA, said this: "Biologists must constantly keep in mind that what they see was not designed, but rather evolved.".
Yet he provided no naturalistic evolutionary explanation as to how the information required to get life going in the first place could have arisen.
+coachmarc2002 indeed, i see this is some theres must have been a basic composite in which this information came to, which gives rise to the fact imagine it a computer code, it is possible to code a code which will "code itself" through trial and error, or in your terms "evolve". a baby code which would adapt and grow like the brain would
+coachmarc2002
where do god's specs come from?
+DB I'm not sure I get what you're asking me. Can you rephrase the question for me.
coachmarc2002
Well, is god more or less complex than his creation?
Does he have more or less information content?
This line will necessarily end in a mechanistic view of mental functions which have already failed to explain the human mind. In particular, experiences that are returned from many people who have near death experiences and return with verifiable information that they had no mean of obtaining when they were alive, and, of course, no way of obtaining by the body while it was dead. Yes, millions of tiny machines, but this cannot explain what happens repeatedly to some humans in those circumstances because the biological machines have stopped, at least temporarily, the senses driven by these machines stop gathering data, all measurable metal function have stopped, and yet when they awaken they have new knowledge that cannot be explained by any mechanistic explanation, i.e. the brain is not the mind.
It will be interesting to see where this leads the philosophy of science.
classical argument from ignorance
"returned from many people who have near death experiences "
So not dead then. Just what they're dying brain managed to salvage in it's last, oxtgen starved, moments.
"the brain is not the mind"
It is. No consciousness has ever been witnessed that wasn't from a physical object.
Beware : beyond this point there be trolls.
I'm not sure how many are legit trolls and how many are just ignorant cultists.
good talk by an eloquent smart guy, and super depressing comments section
Your own comments are depressing indeed and sadly you're really nowhere near as smart as the guy in the vid. And he ain't as smart you think either. ;)
lordsong7
Above all, don't have a thought, cultist, as it would be toxic to your delusions.
You will be rewarded handsomely for your gullibility.
Just believe.
Or else.
I'm disappointed.
10:23 R2D2 peeking out from behind the D.
No tuition here!
if we understood everybody would be vegan for the sake of humanity and evolution
..we would not be able to reverse climate change at the same speed as we would thrue the right management and help of herbavours.
alein technology is crucial .I am Aasif .i am doing B Tech from biotechnology .i want to be best scientist in my field .what should i do for being ..please reply
wanting to be the best scientist in your field is not a goal, it's like you're saying I want to be the richest man in my country...this is not a goal! you have to read(discover), understand(feel familiar with concepts), get involved(practice), by that time you'll have known what do you want, what you're good in, and you'll have your unique prespective about things you're good in. It's simple to say hard to do, the only thing that will make you successful is loving what do you do, and having people around you who have same goals
there's a elephant in the living room here. When brilliant minds like Larson, Craig Venter and others confess that the technology of life is millions of times more advanced than our technology, we can readily see how absurd it is to speculate that life is not intelligently designed.
Joe Palcsak Exactly. But Darwinists and atheists won't let that fact disturb their religion. ;)
Please provide some evidence before just assuming intelligent design. You all need to stop trying to convince yourselves so badly.
+Ollie Prentice Ollie, I am confident that you will hold yourself to the very same standard you impose on me and am therefore delighted to oblige you. The evidence for the intelligent design of living systems comes from the very nature of what makes living systems. At the foundation of all living systems we find the most advanced information storage and processing systems we have ever encountered which prescribe the most technologically advanced feats of engineering we have ever encountered. Both features, with no known exception, are unmistakable signatures of intelligent design. Now its your turn: please provide any evidence that purely natural processes are capable of producing such features.
+Joe Palcsak So you don't agree with natural selection?
+Joe Palcsak do you agree that it is possible to selectively breed animals such as dogs to gain or lose certain attributes? Could you see that process happen through natural circumstance?
Romans 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools...
Yeah, christian cultists often think they are wise.
False
This little girl doesn't wanna say god he avoided saying god by all means weak soul.
Evolution was debunked