Return to Video

Finding life we can't imagine | Christoph Adami | TEDxUIUC

  • 0:10 - 0:12
    So, I have a strange career.
  • 0:13 - 0:16
    I know it because people come up to me,
    like colleagues, and say,
  • 0:16 - 0:18
    "Chris, you have a strange career."
  • 0:18 - 0:19
    (Laughter)
  • 0:20 - 0:21
    And I can see their point,
  • 0:21 - 0:26
    because I started my career
    as a theoretical nuclear physicist.
  • 0:26 - 0:31
    And I was thinking about quarks
    and gluons and heavy ion collisions,
  • 0:31 - 0:32
    and I was only 14 years old...
  • 0:33 - 0:36
    No, no, I wasn't 14 years old.
  • 0:37 - 0:38
    But after that,
  • 0:39 - 0:41
    I actually had my own lab
  • 0:41 - 0:43
    in the Computational
    Neuroscience department,
  • 0:43 - 0:45
    and I wasn't doing any neuroscience.
  • 0:45 - 0:48
    Later, I would work
    on evolutionary genetics,
  • 0:48 - 0:50
    and I would work on systems biology.
  • 0:50 - 0:53
    But I'm going to tell you
    about something else today.
  • 0:53 - 0:57
    I'm going to tell you
    about how I learned something about life.
  • 0:57 - 1:01
    And I was actually a rocket scientist.
  • 1:01 - 1:03
    I wasn't really a rocket scientist,
  • 1:03 - 1:07
    but I was working
    at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory
  • 1:08 - 1:10
    in sunny California, where it's warm;
  • 1:10 - 1:14
    whereas now I am
    in the mid-West, and it's cold.
  • 1:14 - 1:17
    But it was an exciting experience.
  • 1:17 - 1:20
    One day, a NASA manager
    comes into my office,
  • 1:20 - 1:23
    sits down and says
  • 1:24 - 1:25
    that's my office, right there,
  • 1:25 - 1:29
    and I had a nice office
    with the sun shining... anyway -
  • 1:30 - 1:31
    He said, "Chris,
  • 1:32 - 1:36
    can you please tell us,
    how do we look for life outside Earth?"
  • 1:37 - 1:39
    And that came as a surprise to me,
  • 1:39 - 1:43
    because I was actually hired
    to work on quantum computation.
  • 1:44 - 1:45
    Yet, I had a very good answer.
  • 1:45 - 1:47
    I said, "I have no idea."
  • 1:47 - 1:48
    (Laughter)
  • 1:48 - 1:53
    And he told me, "Biosignatures,
    we need to look for a biosignature."
  • 1:53 - 1:55
    And I said, "What is that?"
  • 1:55 - 1:57
    And he said, "It's any
    measurable phenomenon
  • 1:57 - 2:00
    that allows us to indicate
    the presence of life."
  • 2:01 - 2:02
    And I said, "Really?
  • 2:03 - 2:05
    Because isn't that easy?
  • 2:05 - 2:06
    I mean, we have life.
  • 2:08 - 2:10
    Can't you apply a definition,
  • 2:10 - 2:14
    for example, a Supreme Court-like
    definition of life?"
  • 2:15 - 2:18
    And then I thought about it
    a little bit, and I said,
  • 2:18 - 2:19
    "Well, is it really that easy?
  • 2:19 - 2:21
    Because, yes, if you see
    something like this,
  • 2:21 - 2:24
    then all right, fine,
    I'm going to call it life...
  • 2:24 - 2:25
    No doubt about it.
  • 2:25 - 2:27
    But here's something."
  • 2:27 - 2:30
    And he goes, "Right,
    that's life too. I know that."
  • 2:30 - 2:35
    Except, if you think that life
    is also defined by things that die,
  • 2:35 - 2:37
    you're not in luck with this thing,
  • 2:37 - 2:39
    because that's actually
    a very strange organism.
  • 2:39 - 2:41
    It grows up into the adult stage like that
  • 2:41 - 2:43
    and then goes through
    a Benjamin Button phase,
  • 2:43 - 2:49
    and actually goes backwards and backwards
    until it's like a little embryo again,
  • 2:49 - 2:51
    and then actually grows back up,
    and back down and back up...
  • 2:51 - 2:53
    Sort of yo-yo... and it never dies.
  • 2:53 - 2:56
    So it's actually life,
  • 2:56 - 3:00
    but it's actually not
    as we thought life would be.
  • 3:01 - 3:03
    And then you see something like that.
  • 3:03 - 3:06
    And he was like, "My God,
    what kind of a life form is that?"
  • 3:06 - 3:07
    Anyone know?
  • 3:07 - 3:10
    It's actually not life, it's a crystal.
  • 3:11 - 3:14
    So once you start looking and looking
    at smaller and smaller things...
  • 3:14 - 3:18
    So this particular person wrote
    a whole article and said,
  • 3:18 - 3:20
    "Hey, these are bacteria."
  • 3:20 - 3:22
    Except, if you look a little bit closer,
  • 3:22 - 3:26
    you see, in fact, that this thing
    is way too small to be anything like that.
  • 3:26 - 3:29
    So he was convinced,
    but, in fact, most people aren't.
  • 3:30 - 3:33
    And then, of course,
    NASA also had a big announcement,
  • 3:33 - 3:36
    and President Clinton
    gave a press conference,
  • 3:36 - 3:42
    about this amazing discovery
    of life in a Martian meteorite.
  • 3:43 - 3:46
    Except that nowadays,
    it's heavily disputed.
  • 3:47 - 3:50
    If you take the lesson
    of all these pictures,
  • 3:50 - 3:52
    then you realize, well, actually,
    maybe it's not that easy.
  • 3:52 - 3:56
    Maybe I do need a definition of life
  • 3:56 - 3:58
    in order to make that kind of distinction.
  • 3:59 - 4:02
    So can life be defined?
  • 4:02 - 4:04
    Well how would you go about it?
  • 4:04 - 4:08
    Well of course, you'd go
    to Encyclopedia Britannica and open at L.
  • 4:08 - 4:11
    No, of course you don't do that;
    you put it somewhere in Google.
  • 4:11 - 4:12
    And then you might get something.
  • 4:12 - 4:14
    (Laughter)
  • 4:14 - 4:15
    And what you might get...
  • 4:15 - 4:19
    And anything that actually refers
    to things that we are used to,
  • 4:19 - 4:20
    you throw away.
  • 4:20 - 4:22
    And then you might come up
    with something like this.
  • 4:22 - 4:24
    And it says something longwinded
  • 4:26 - 4:29
    complicated,
    with lots and lots of concepts.
  • 4:30 - 4:35
    Who on Earth would write something
    as convoluted and complex and inane?
  • 4:37 - 4:41
    Oh, it's actually a really, really,
    important set of concepts.
  • 4:41 - 4:43
    So I'm highlighting just a few words
  • 4:43 - 4:48
    and saying definitions
    like that rely on things
  • 4:48 - 4:54
    that are not based on amino acids
    or leaves or anything that we are used to,
  • 4:54 - 4:55
    but in fact on processes only.
  • 4:55 - 4:57
    And if you take a look at that,
  • 4:57 - 5:01
    this was actually in a book that I wrote
    that deals with artificial life.
  • 5:01 - 5:05
    And that explains why that NASA manager
    was actually in my office to begin with.
  • 5:05 - 5:08
    Because the idea was that,
    with concepts like that,
  • 5:08 - 5:12
    maybe we can actually
    manufacture a form of life.
  • 5:12 - 5:17
    And so if you go and ask yourself,
    "What on Earth is artificial life?",
  • 5:17 - 5:21
    let me give you a whirlwind tour
    of how all this stuff came about.
  • 5:21 - 5:25
    And it started out quite a while ago,
  • 5:25 - 5:29
    when someone wrote one of the first
    successful computer viruses.
  • 5:30 - 5:32
    And for those of you
    who aren't old enough,
  • 5:32 - 5:34
    you have no idea
    how this infection was working...
  • 5:34 - 5:37
    Namely, through these floppy disks.
  • 5:37 - 5:41
    But the interesting thing
    about these computer virus infections
  • 5:41 - 5:45
    was that, if you look at the rate
    at which the infection worked,
  • 5:45 - 5:49
    they show this spiky behavior
    that you're used to from a flu virus.
  • 5:49 - 5:51
    And it is in fact due to this arms race
  • 5:51 - 5:55
    between hackers
    and operating system designers
  • 5:55 - 5:56
    that things go back and forth.
  • 5:56 - 6:01
    And the result is kind of
    a tree of life of these viruses,
  • 6:01 - 6:05
    a phylogeny that looks very much
    like the type of life
  • 6:05 - 6:07
    that we're used to,
    at least on the viral level.
  • 6:07 - 6:08
    So is that life?
  • 6:09 - 6:10
    Not as far as I'm concerned.
  • 6:10 - 6:13
    Why? Because these things
    don't evolve by themselves.
  • 6:13 - 6:15
    In fact, they have hackers writing them.
  • 6:15 - 6:19
    But the idea was taken
    very quickly a little bit further,
  • 6:19 - 6:23
    when a scientist working
    at the Santa Fe Institute decided,
  • 6:23 - 6:26
    "Why don't we try to package
    these little viruses
  • 6:26 - 6:29
    in artificial worlds
    inside of the computer
  • 6:29 - 6:30
    and let them evolve?"
  • 6:30 - 6:31
    And this was Steen Rasmussen.
  • 6:31 - 6:34
    And he designed this system,
    but it really didn't work,
  • 6:34 - 6:37
    because his viruses
    were constantly destroying each other.
  • 6:37 - 6:42
    But there was another scientist
    who had been watching this, an ecologist.
  • 6:42 - 6:44
    And he went home and says,
    "I know how to fix this."
  • 6:44 - 6:46
    And he wrote the Tierra system,
  • 6:46 - 6:47
    and, in my book,
  • 6:47 - 6:51
    is in fact one of the first
    truly artificial living systems...
  • 6:51 - 6:55
    Except for the fact that these programs
    didn't really grow in complexity.
  • 6:55 - 6:58
    So having seen this work,
    worked a little bit on this,
  • 6:58 - 6:59
    this is where I came in.
  • 6:59 - 7:03
    And I decided to create a system
    that has all the properties
  • 7:03 - 7:07
    that are necessary to see, in fact,
    the evolution of complexity,
  • 7:07 - 7:10
    more and more complex
    problems constantly evolving.
  • 7:10 - 7:14
    And of course, since I really don't know
    how to write code, I had help in this.
  • 7:14 - 7:16
    I had two undergraduate students
  • 7:16 - 7:18
    at California Institute of Technology
    that worked with me.
  • 7:19 - 7:22
    That's Charles Ofria on the left,
    Titus Brown on the right.
  • 7:22 - 7:25
    They are now, actually,
    respectable professors
  • 7:25 - 7:27
    at Michigan State University,
  • 7:27 - 7:32
    but I can assure you, back in the day,
    we were not a respectable team.
  • 7:32 - 7:34
    And I'm really happy
    that no photo survives
  • 7:34 - 7:36
    of the three of us
    anywhere close together.
  • 7:37 - 7:39
    But what is this system like?
  • 7:39 - 7:41
    Well I can't really go into the details,
  • 7:41 - 7:44
    but what you see here
    is some of the entrails.
  • 7:44 - 7:48
    But what I wanted to focus on
    is this type of population structure.
  • 7:48 - 7:50
    There's about 10,000
    programs sitting here.
  • 7:50 - 7:53
    And all different strains
    are colored in different colors.
  • 7:53 - 7:57
    And as you see here, there are groups
    that are growing on top of each other,
  • 7:57 - 7:58
    because they are spreading.
  • 7:58 - 8:03
    Any time there is a program
    that's better at surviving in this world,
  • 8:03 - 8:05
    due to whatever mutation it has acquired,
  • 8:05 - 8:08
    it is going to spread over the others
    and drive the others to extinction.
  • 8:08 - 8:10
    So I'm going to show you a movie
  • 8:10 - 8:12
    where you're going to see
    that kind of dynamic.
  • 8:12 - 8:16
    And these kinds of experiments are started
    with programs that we wrote ourselves.
  • 8:16 - 8:20
    We write our own stuff, replicate it,
    and are very proud of ourselves.
  • 8:20 - 8:22
    And we put them in,
    and what you see immediately
  • 8:22 - 8:25
    is that there are waves
    and waves of innovation.
  • 8:25 - 8:27
    By the way, this is highly accelerated,
  • 8:27 - 8:30
    so it's like a 1000 generations a second.
  • 8:30 - 8:34
    But immediately, the system goes like,
    "What kind of dumb piece of code was this?
  • 8:34 - 8:38
    This can be improved upon
    in so many ways, so quickly."
  • 8:38 - 8:42
    So you see waves of new types
    taking over the other types.
  • 8:42 - 8:44
    And this type of activity
    goes on for quite a while,
  • 8:44 - 8:49
    until the main easy things
    have been acquired by these programs.
  • 8:50 - 8:53
    And then, you see
    sort of like a stasis coming on
  • 8:54 - 8:56
    where the system essentially waits
  • 8:56 - 8:59
    for a new type of innovation,
    like this one,
  • 9:00 - 9:04
    which is going to spread over
    all the other innovations that were before
  • 9:04 - 9:07
    and is erasing the genes
    that it had before,
  • 9:07 - 9:11
    until a new type of higher level
    of complexity has been achieved.
  • 9:11 - 9:14
    And this process goes on and on and on.
  • 9:14 - 9:16
    So what we see here
  • 9:16 - 9:20
    is a system that lives in very much
    the way we're used to how life goes.
  • 9:21 - 9:25
    But what the NASA people
    had asked me really was,
  • 9:25 - 9:28
    "Do these guys have a biosignature?
  • 9:29 - 9:30
    Can we measure this type of life?
  • 9:30 - 9:32
    Because if we can,
  • 9:32 - 9:35
    maybe we have a chance of actually
    discovering life somewhere else
  • 9:36 - 9:39
    without being biased
    by things like amino acids."
  • 9:39 - 9:41
    So I sat down a little bit,
  • 9:41 - 9:43
    and I said, "Well, if we do this,
  • 9:43 - 9:46
    perhaps we should construct a biosignature
  • 9:47 - 9:52
    that is based on life
    as a universal process.
  • 9:52 - 9:57
    In fact, it should perhaps make use
    of the concepts that I developed
  • 9:57 - 10:01
    just in order to sort of capture
    what a simple living system might be."
  • 10:02 - 10:03
    And the thing I came up with...
  • 10:03 - 10:07
    I have to first give you
    an introduction about the idea,
  • 10:07 - 10:11
    and maybe that would be
    a meaning detector,
  • 10:11 - 10:12
    rather than a life detector.
  • 10:13 - 10:15
    And the way we would do that...
  • 10:15 - 10:17
    I would like to find out
    how I can distinguish text
  • 10:17 - 10:22
    that was written by a million monkeys,
    as opposed to text that is in our books.
  • 10:23 - 10:25
    And I would like to do it in such a way
  • 10:25 - 10:28
    that I don't actually have to be able
    to read the language,
  • 10:28 - 10:30
    because I'm sure I won't be able to.
  • 10:30 - 10:32
    As long as I know
    that there's some sort of alphabet.
  • 10:32 - 10:35
    So here would be a frequency plot
  • 10:35 - 10:39
    of how often you find
    each of the 26 letters of the alphabet
  • 10:39 - 10:41
    in a text written by random monkeys.
  • 10:43 - 10:48
    And obviously, each of these letters
    comes off about roughly equally frequent.
  • 10:48 - 10:51
    But if you now look at the same
    distribution in English texts,
  • 10:52 - 10:53
    it looks like that.
  • 10:54 - 10:57
    And I'm telling you,
    this is very robust across English texts.
  • 10:57 - 11:00
    And if I look at French texts,
    it looks a little bit different,
  • 11:00 - 11:02
    or Italian or German.
  • 11:02 - 11:05
    They all have their own type
    of frequency distribution,
  • 11:05 - 11:07
    but it's robust.
  • 11:07 - 11:10
    It doesn't matter whether it writes
    about politics or about science.
  • 11:10 - 11:16
    It doesn't matter whether it's a poem
    or whether it's a mathematical text.
  • 11:16 - 11:17
    It's a robust signature,
  • 11:17 - 11:19
    and it's very stable.
  • 11:19 - 11:21
    As long as our books
    are written in English...
  • 11:22 - 11:24
    Because people are rewriting them
    and recopying them...
  • 11:24 - 11:26
    It's going to be there.
  • 11:26 - 11:32
    So that inspired me to think about,
    well, what if I try to use this idea
  • 11:32 - 11:36
    in order, not to detect random texts
    from texts with meaning,
  • 11:36 - 11:39
    but rather detect the fact
    that there is meaning
  • 11:39 - 11:42
    in the biomolecules that make up life.
  • 11:42 - 11:43
    But first I have to ask:
  • 11:43 - 11:45
    what are these building blocks,
  • 11:45 - 11:48
    like the alphabet, elements
    that I showed you?
  • 11:48 - 11:51
    Well it turns out, we have
    many different alternatives
  • 11:51 - 11:54
    for such a set of building blocks.
  • 11:54 - 11:55
    We could use amino acids,
  • 11:55 - 11:58
    we could use nucleic acids,
    carboxylic acids, fatty acids.
  • 11:58 - 12:01
    In fact, chemistry's extremely rich,
    and our body uses a lot of them.
  • 12:01 - 12:04
    So that we actually, to test this idea,
  • 12:04 - 12:07
    first took a look at amino acids
    and some other carboxylic acids.
  • 12:07 - 12:09
    And here's the result.
  • 12:10 - 12:13
    Here is, in fact, what you get
  • 12:13 - 12:16
    if you, for example, look
    at the distribution of amino acids
  • 12:17 - 12:21
    on a comet or in interstellar space
    or, in fact, in a laboratory,
  • 12:21 - 12:25
    where you made very sure
    that in your primordial soup,
  • 12:25 - 12:26
    there is no living stuff in there.
  • 12:28 - 12:33
    What you find is mostly
    glycine and then alanine
  • 12:33 - 12:35
    and there's some trace elements
    of the other ones.
  • 12:35 - 12:37
    That is also very robust...
  • 12:38 - 12:41
    What you find in systems like Earth
  • 12:41 - 12:45
    where there are amino acids,
    but there is no life.
  • 12:45 - 12:49
    But suppose you take some dirt
    and dig through it
  • 12:49 - 12:52
    and then put it into these spectrometers,
  • 12:52 - 12:54
    because there's bacteria
    all over the place;
  • 12:54 - 12:57
    or you take water anywhere on Earth,
  • 12:57 - 12:58
    because it's teaming with life,
  • 12:58 - 13:00
    and you make the same analysis;
  • 13:00 - 13:03
    the spectrum looks completely different.
  • 13:03 - 13:06
    Of course, there is still
    glycine and alanine,
  • 13:06 - 13:09
    but in fact, there are these heavy
    elements, these heavy amino acids,
  • 13:09 - 13:13
    that are being produced
    because they are valuable to the organism.
  • 13:14 - 13:18
    And some other ones
    that are not used in the set of 20,
  • 13:18 - 13:21
    they will not appear at all
    in any type of concentration.
  • 13:22 - 13:24
    So this also turns out
    to be extremely robust.
  • 13:24 - 13:27
    It doesn't matter what kind of sediment
    you're using to grind up,
  • 13:27 - 13:31
    whether it's bacteria
    or any other plants or animals.
  • 13:31 - 13:32
    Anywhere there's life,
  • 13:32 - 13:34
    you're going to have this distribution,
  • 13:34 - 13:36
    as opposed to that distribution.
  • 13:36 - 13:39
    And it is detectable
    not just in amino acids.
  • 13:40 - 13:41
    Now you could ask:
  • 13:41 - 13:44
    Well, what about these Avidians?
  • 13:44 - 13:48
    The Avidians being the denizens
    of this computer world
  • 13:48 - 13:51
    where they are perfectly happy
    replicating and growing in complexity.
  • 13:51 - 13:56
    So this is the distribution that you get
    if, in fact, there is no life.
  • 13:56 - 13:59
    They have about 28 of these instructions.
  • 13:59 - 14:02
    And if you have a system where
    they're being replaced one by the other,
  • 14:02 - 14:04
    it's like the monkeys
    writing on a typewriter.
  • 14:04 - 14:09
    Each of these instructions
    appears with roughly the equal frequency.
  • 14:10 - 14:14
    But if you now take
    a set of replicating guys
  • 14:14 - 14:16
    like in the video that you saw,
  • 14:16 - 14:18
    it looks like this.
  • 14:19 - 14:20
    So there are some instructions
  • 14:20 - 14:23
    that are extremely valuable
    to these organisms,
  • 14:23 - 14:25
    and their frequency is going to be high.
  • 14:25 - 14:29
    And there's actually some instructions
    that you only use once, if ever.
  • 14:29 - 14:30
    So they are either poisonous
  • 14:30 - 14:35
    or really should be used
    at less of a level than random.
  • 14:35 - 14:37
    In this case, the frequency is lower.
  • 14:38 - 14:41
    And so now we can see,
    is that really a robust signature?
  • 14:41 - 14:42
    I can tell you indeed it is,
  • 14:42 - 14:46
    because this type of spectrum,
    just like what you've seen in books,
  • 14:46 - 14:48
    and just like what you've seen
    in amino acids,
  • 14:48 - 14:50
    it doesn't really matter
    how you change the environment,
  • 14:51 - 14:53
    it's very robust, it's going
    to reflect the environment.
  • 14:53 - 14:56
    So I'm going to show you now
    a little experiment that we did.
  • 14:56 - 14:58
    And I have to explain to you,
  • 14:58 - 14:59
    the top of this graph
  • 14:59 - 15:02
    shows you that frequency
    distribution that I talked about.
  • 15:02 - 15:07
    Here, that's the lifeless environment
  • 15:07 - 15:11
    where each instruction occurs
    at an equal frequency.
  • 15:12 - 15:17
    And below there, I show, in fact,
    the mutation rate in the environment.
  • 15:17 - 15:20
    And I'm starting this
    at a mutation rate that is so high
  • 15:20 - 15:24
    that even if you would drop
    a replicating program
  • 15:24 - 15:28
    that would otherwise happily grow up
    to fill the entire world,
  • 15:28 - 15:31
    if you drop it in, it gets mutated
    to death immediately.
  • 15:31 - 15:37
    So there is no life possible
    at that type of mutation rate.
  • 15:37 - 15:41
    But then I'm going to slowly
    turn down the heat, so to speak,
  • 15:41 - 15:43
    and then there's this viability threshold
  • 15:43 - 15:47
    where now it would be possible
    for a replicator to actually live.
  • 15:47 - 15:52
    And indeed, we're going to be dropping
    these guys into that soup all the time.
  • 15:53 - 15:54
    So let's see what that looks like.
  • 15:54 - 15:57
    So first, nothing, nothing, nothing.
  • 15:57 - 15:59
    Too hot, too hot.
  • 15:59 - 16:01
    Now the viability threshold is reached,
  • 16:02 - 16:06
    and the frequency distribution
    has dramatically changed
  • 16:06 - 16:07
    and, in fact, stabilizes.
  • 16:08 - 16:09
    And now what I did there
  • 16:09 - 16:13
    is, I was being nasty,
    I just turned up the heat again and again.
  • 16:13 - 16:15
    And of course, it reaches
    the viability threshold.
  • 16:15 - 16:18
    And I'm just showing this to you
    again because it's so nice.
  • 16:18 - 16:19
    You hit the viability threshold.
  • 16:20 - 16:22
    The distribution changes to "alive!"
  • 16:22 - 16:26
    And then, once you hit the threshold
  • 16:26 - 16:30
    where the mutation rate is so high
    that you cannot self-reproduce,
  • 16:30 - 16:36
    you cannot copy the information
    forward to your offspring
  • 16:36 - 16:41
    without making so many mistakes
    that your ability to replicate vanishes.
  • 16:41 - 16:42
    And then, that signature is lost.
  • 16:44 - 16:46
    What do we learn from that?
  • 16:46 - 16:50
    Well, I think we learn
    a number of things from that.
  • 16:50 - 16:51
    One of them is,
  • 16:52 - 16:57
    if we are able to think about life
    in abstract terms...
  • 16:57 - 16:59
    And we're not talking
    about things like plants,
  • 16:59 - 17:01
    and we're not talking about amino acids,
  • 17:01 - 17:03
    and we're not talking about bacteria,
  • 17:03 - 17:05
    but we think in terms of processes...
  • 17:05 - 17:07
    Then we could start to think about life
  • 17:08 - 17:10
    not as something
    that is so special to Earth,
  • 17:10 - 17:13
    but that, in fact, could exist anywhere.
  • 17:13 - 17:17
    Because it really only has to do
    with these concepts of information,
  • 17:17 - 17:21
    of storing information
    within physical substrates...
  • 17:21 - 17:25
    Anything: bits, nucleic acids,
    anything that's an alphabet...
  • 17:25 - 17:27
    And make sure that there's some process
  • 17:27 - 17:31
    so that this information can be stored
    for much longer than you would expect...
  • 17:31 - 17:36
    The time scales for
    the deterioration of information.
  • 17:36 - 17:39
    And if you can do that,
    then you have life.
  • 17:39 - 17:41
    So the first thing that we learn
  • 17:41 - 17:46
    is that it is possible to define life
    in terms of processes alone,
  • 17:46 - 17:51
    without referring at all
    to the type of things that we hold dear,
  • 17:51 - 17:54
    as far as the type of life on Earth is.
  • 17:54 - 17:57
    And that, in a sense, removes us again,
  • 17:57 - 18:00
    like all of our scientific discoveries,
    or many of them...
  • 18:00 - 18:02
    It leads to s continuous
    dethroning of man...
  • 18:02 - 18:05
    Of how we think we're special
    because we're alive.
  • 18:05 - 18:08
    Well, we can make life;
    we can make life in the computer.
  • 18:08 - 18:11
    Granted, it's limited,
  • 18:11 - 18:16
    but we have learned what it takes
    in order to actually construct it.
  • 18:16 - 18:18
    And once we have that,
  • 18:19 - 18:21
    then it is not such
    a difficult task anymore
  • 18:21 - 18:25
    to say, if we understand
    the fundamental processes
  • 18:25 - 18:29
    that do not refer
    to any particular substrate,
  • 18:29 - 18:32
    then we can go out and try other worlds,
  • 18:33 - 18:36
    figure out what kind of chemical
    alphabets might there be,
  • 18:37 - 18:42
    figure enough about the normal chemistry,
    the geochemistry of the planet,
  • 18:42 - 18:46
    so that we know what this distribution
    would look like in the absence of life,
  • 18:46 - 18:49
    and then look for large
    deviations from this...
  • 18:49 - 18:54
    This thing sticking out, which says,
    "This chemical really shouldn't be there."
  • 18:54 - 18:56
    Now we don't know that there's life then,
  • 18:56 - 18:57
    but we could say,
  • 18:57 - 19:01
    "Well at least I'm going to have to take
    a look very precisely at this chemical
  • 19:01 - 19:03
    and see where it comes from."
  • 19:03 - 19:06
    And that might be our chance
    of actually discovering life
  • 19:07 - 19:09
    when we cannot visibly see it,
  • 19:09 - 19:11
    as I've shown you.
  • 19:12 - 19:16
    And so that's really the only
    take-home message that I have for you.
  • 19:16 - 19:21
    Life can be less mysterious
    than we make it out to be
  • 19:21 - 19:24
    when we try to think
    about how it would be on other planets.
  • 19:24 - 19:28
    And if we remove the mystery of life,
  • 19:28 - 19:33
    then I think it is a little bit easier
    for us to think about how we live,
  • 19:33 - 19:36
    and how perhaps we're not as special
    as we always think we are.
  • 19:36 - 19:38
    And I'm going to leave you with that.
  • 19:38 - 19:40
    And thank you very much.
  • 19:40 - 19:42
    (Applause)
Title:
Finding life we can't imagine | Christoph Adami | TEDxUIUC
Description:

How do we search for alien life if it's nothing like the life that we know? Christoph Adami shows how he uses his research into artificial life -- self-replicating computer programs -- to find a signature, a "biomarker," that is free of our preconceptions of what life is.

more » « less
Video Language:
English
Team:
TED
Project:
TEDxTalks
Duration:
19:51

English subtitles

Revisions Compare revisions