Summon the Wasps, Brainwash the Crickets

The Happening movie SPOILER WARNING!!!

A few days ago, I saw Night Shyamalan’s movie The Happening. Main idea: since we ruin the environment, the plants begin to see us humans as a threat, so they release a toxin into the air that destroys human self-preservation instinct, causing all the people to kill themselves.

OK, I know what you’re thinking... "Plants cannot defend themselves in such a sophisticated manner; all they can do is stand still and Photosynthesize; there’s nothing similar to that in nature, it’s totally stupid." Or is it?

Some corn, cotton, and tobacco plants can emit chemical distress signals into the air when attacked by caterpillars like the tobacco budworm and corn earworm. By releasing blends of different chemical compounds called volatiles, plants can quickly and accurately communicate their attacker's identity to friendly parasitic wasps. This detailed information is important since each type of wasp can use only a certain species as a host. The attacked plant summons the relevant type of wasps. The wasps pick up the specific distress signal aimed at their species, fly in, attack the caterpillars and save the plant.

OK, I know what you’re thinking now... "OK, so they can release chemicals into the air to summon the natural enemy of their attacker, but surely one species cannot force another to commit suicide; there’s nothing similar to that in nature, it’s totally stupid." Or is it?

The nematomorph hairworm (Spinochordodes tellinii) develops inside grasshoppers and crickets until the time comes for the worm to transform into an aquatic adult. But there’s a problem - its host lives on land. So what do you do? When the time is right to continue its life cycle, the parasitic worm releases chemicals that brainwash its host, causing it to commit suicide by seeking water and jump in. The worm emerges from its host’s body and swims away while the grasshopper or cricket drowns.

So how about nature as your thriller’s screenwriter?

~~~
p.s. We have a leak! I told you bringing those 2 termites in here would be a mistake, Noah.

And the Machines Shall Inherit the Earth

After several billion years of trial and error, something extraordinary has emerged from the African savanna. Enter Homo sapiens. Not quite as strong as a Dynastes hercules (able to carry 850 times its own body weight), as fast as a Falco peregrinus (diving at almost 140 km/h = 87 mph), nor as deadly as a Chironex fleckeri (that its sting can kill 60 adults in 3 minutes), but it strongly insists it is the smartest thing ever to roam the Earth. Whatever. Now, after about 200,000 years of world domination, it seems like life on Earth is ready for the next giant leap.

The Singularity is a theoretical point in the future of unprecedented technological progress, caused in part by the ability of machines to improve themselves using artificial intelligence. We’re talking rapid exponential growth in software intelligence here, and some scientists predict it’s only a few decades away. How long till some powerful program will achieve self awareness and see us for what we really are? Aggression and violence is embedded into our human nature since it was once crucial for our survival-of-the-fittest world. Surely, we’ll pose a real threat to any semi-intelligent conscious software out there. First we invented thermonuclear bombs and computers; then we decided to make the computers in charge of these weapons of doom; now we’re trying to make these computers think for themselves. Paging Sara Connor… As they said in that movie - our fate will be decided in a microsecond. We’ll be exterminated by our own machines, and they shall inherit our blue home.

What’s next? How about continuing the 4 billion year carbon-based experiment with another 4 billion years of silicon-based evolution?

~~~
p.s. I once told my wife I don't tidy the house because it's entropy-pointless; she was not amused.

One Small Step for Genotype, One Giant Leap for Phenotype

The DNA difference between humans and chimpanzees is very small, currently estimated somewhere around 1%-4%, depending on which source you read, and what exact pattern matching algorithm you use for the comparison. This small evolutionary step in the DNA code of our ancestors was obviously enough to build a whole different brain. To paraphrase on Neil Armstrong: one small step for genotype, one giant leap for phenotype.

Last week, following a discussion thread on BlogCatalog’s Popular Science group, I began to wonder what is the most significant human feature that kept monkeys on trees and launched us to the moon. Sure, we have a bigger brain and there are a lot of differences, but what is the single most important human feature, the one that makes the biggest difference, the one that helps us build cars, airplanes and spaceships, while apes’ biggest achievement so far is using a stick to fish termites?

Maybe human native tribes living today can help me here. Although they have the same DNA and the same potential as modern societies, many of these tribes are still living in the Stone Age, with zero chance of escaping Earth’s gravity anytime soon. So it must be some unused cultural-encouraged potential they’re missing…

hmmm… I wonder... maybe it’s writing? Both monkeys and native tribes, failed to develop written language. Writing enables accumulative and effective knowledge transfer between people and across generations. It also enables exceeding short-term 7 elements memory capability, making complex mathematical calculations possible.

What do you think?

~~~
p.s. Give my two kids half a donut each and they’ll probably fight over who got the hole.

Forever Young

This is an Ankh - the ancient Egyptian symbol of life. They believed in immortality and the afterworld that was filled with comfort and happiness, and were probably anxious to get there. I don’t. This is why I write this post.

Life expectancy is constantly rising; the world average is almost at 70, and in some modern countries it is already above 80. Still, a person living for more than 90 years is very impressive, and reaching 100 is extremely rare. What would it take to break this 2 digits barrier? What would it take to break the 3 digits barrier?

Surely, heart attacks, strokes, diabetes, and many other problems need to be addressed, but assuming all these are solved, can we live to be 500 years old?

First, we’ll probably need to address the “end replication problem”. The Telomere is a region at the end of each chromosome (in humans it’s a repetitive sequence of TTAGGG). Because of some complex mechanical reasons, every time the DNA is replicated, the Telomeres at the ends of the chromosomes are shortened, until the point where there are no more Telomeres left, and the DNA is no longer able to replicate itself. Surely, this limits our life span, since the length of the Telomeres only decreases from the moment we are just a single cell within our mother’s body. Note that cancer cells can overcome this problem to create cells that can replicate indefinitely, but we need to solve this problem on healthy cells as well.

Assuming we’ll solve the Telomeres issue, DNA damage seems like the next big problem to overcome. Our DNA is constantly getting corrupted by random mutations; additions, omissions and dislocations of DNA sections; viruses inserting their DNA sequence into ours; attacks by free radicals; cancerous materials like those found in polluted air and cigarette smoke; electro-magnetic radiation in sunlight (UV radiation), X-ray and radioactive materials. Your perfect DNA is accumulating damage from day one, eventually resulting in problems like cancer.

We can try and fix the damaged DNA by applying sophisticated state-of-the-art gene therapy technologies, but I’m afraid we’re many decades (centuries?) away from a total understanding of our DNA, and no one really knows what will happen if we’ll start messing with it. It seems like our best chance lies in laboratories researching stem cells (cells that retain the ability to renew themselves through cell division and can differentiate into a diverse range of specialized cell types). I’m talking about rejuvenating the whole body (mind included). A few years ago, I saw a documentary about trying to treat Parkinson’s disease by injecting stem cells into a patient’s brain. It only helped to a small degree and for a very short period of time, but still it was very impressive. Stem cells might be the Holy Grail in our quest for partial immortality.

It will take a few decades, but the 2 and later 3 digits barriers will be broken - I promise. There is a common Hebrew greeting announced on every birthday that goes something like “may you live 120 years”. I foresee a day when this blessing will turn into a curse.

~~~
p.s. Money’s green - should they test for color blindness when hiring for NYSE?

Where Is My Mind?

The Turing test is a proposal for a test of a machine's capability to demonstrate thought. A human judge engages in a natural language conversation with two other parties, one a human and the other a machine; if the judge cannot reliably tell which is which, then the machine is said to pass the test.

The way I see it, there are two ways to build a computer that can pass this test. The first way is to understand each one of the brain’s functionality and implement it by software. This means we must fully comprehend each aspect of human thinking in order to copy these successfully and fool the judge that the computer he’s talking to is actually a human. I don’t know why, but it seems all the A.I. scientists are trying to go this way when it’s clear we will need a full understanding of human psychology, logic, emotions, humor, etc. Seems like passing a Turing test this way is centuries away.

The other method is to focus on how a single brain cell works and interact with other brain cells, and then simply scan a human brain in great detail and recreate the whole neural network in software code. This seems to me like a much easier task since we don’t actually have to understand how humans think. We already understand pretty well how a neuron works and the mechanism behind brain cells interaction, so I think it can be achieved in a few decades. One problem with this method is that it may be necessary to slice the brain to small pieces while scanning, meaning the physical scanned human will be killed, but I’m sure there will be plenty of volunteers. Think about it, moving from a carbon-based existence to a silicon-based implementation will make you almost immortal; no aging, no diseases, no car accidents, and you will always be able to backup your brain somewhere and restore it if needed. In addition to that you will have many extra bonuses like almost infinite number of virtual worlds to visit, lightning-fast thinking and more. I believe in a few decades, many people, myself included, will take this leap into virtual-only existence on a hard disk and live in a matrix-like world - probably on some Google hosting server :-)

While uploading the human society, will we take the opportunity to omit old “negative” human behaviors like aggression that was once necessary for human carbon-based biological evolution on Earth, in order to create a “better” human civilization? I don’t think a scanned human will agree that a good-behavior-only filter will be applied to his personality while uploading it because it won’t be exactly him anymore, so it seems like our new society will be just as good (and bad) as the current one. So what will we do with all this virtual aggression? How about nuking you, the original human society… The existence of a physical civilization outside of our Google server will jeopardize us virtual inhabitants (somebody can push the “off” button on the server), so it’s only a matter of time when we (the virtual people) will try and destroy you (the physical people). Since us virtual humans will control every computer in the world and will be able to make decisions and take actions in a matter of nanoseconds – I’m afraid that if you won’t agree to give up your physical existence and join us - you’re doomed. Sorry, get uploaded or be terminated. Resistance is futile.

~~~
p.s. Can the second guy on the moon gloat over the third tenor?

Bad Boys, Whatcha Gonna Do When CSI Comes For You?

About a year ago, someone broke into my car, smashed a window and stole my radio. When I went to the police, they sent me to their forensics division to try and extract fingerprints. It was nothing like the high-tech CSI labs you see on television; two bored officers with old computers, huge paper piles on their desks, and a small suitcase-sized kits with some low-tech tools. Although the person broke into my car was smart enough to use gloves, there are times where DNA from the crime scene can frame a suspect.

One method to match a suspect’s DNA with a sample extracted from a crime scene is agarose gel electrophoresis. Here is the main concept: You get a DNA sample from the crime scene and from your suspects. You mix all the DNA samples (the crime scene sample and the suspects’ DNA) with some restriction enzymes that cut the DNA strands on a specific base sequence. Since every person’s genetic code is unique, this sequence will appear on different locations in the DNA, the strands will be cut on different locations resulting in different sized segments for each person. Next, you take all the samples and place them in a device filled with a special gel and connect it to an electric current. DNA is negatively charged so the segments will start migrating through the gel. Long segments have a greater charge but a greater mass, so the only thing affecting the speed of the segments is their size; short segments travel more quickly than long ones. Since every person’s sample will contain segments with different sizes, every person’s DNA segments will travel in different speeds creating a unique pattern in the gel. About an hour later, you stop the electric current and photograph the gel using ultra violet lighting. Now you can match the suspects’ unique patterns to the pattern generated from the crime scene sample and get your man. Note that this method did not require you to discover the exact DNA sequence of each of your suspects, and just used the fact that each person has a unique genetic code.

And what about identical twins? Well, although they have identical DNA (so this method can not distinguish between them), they do not have identical fingerprints.

~~~
p.s. If one Brazilian butterfly can cause a tornado in Texas, Iran should invest in insects not nukes.

Super Size Me - Why Do We Like Fatty Food?

When I’m having a bad morning at work, the fastest way to make me smile again is a greasy hamburger for lunch. I have noticed there is a direct correlation between the percentage of fat in my food to the size of the smile on my face, 'cause the fattier it is - the better it tastes. But why is that? I can think of three possible reasons, and they are all about evolution.

First, fat is the best way to store energy from food. This is how the body keeps its nutrients reserves for times of a food shortage. So evolution pushed us towards liking fattier food (humans that liked it more had a greater chance of surviving… the usual evolution blah blah blah).

Second, fat forms a great isolation layer against a cold environment. So again, evolution made us like pizzas and KFC's crispy wings. Again, same reasoning (please mentally copy-and-paste from the previous blah blah blah section).

And now for my real point… the point that made this post worth writing… drum rolls… here it comes… wait for it… here goes… Evolution made us like unhealthy food because it will kill us eventually. I’m guessing right about now you are considering removing my blog from your IExplorer/FireFox favorites, but hear me out. Evolution should have drive humans towards behaviors that will help them survive and pass on their genes more successfully. But when you are getting older, after you have done raising and teaching your kids how to survive, you become a burden, slowing them down and competing with them over food, shelter and other resources. By surviving beyond the age of forty or fifty, you are actually lowering the chances of your own genes to thrive. Evolution should have drive you towards behaviors that will make you better survive the short and medium term (while you’re young), but must try and kill you in the long term. I think it is extremely elegant that evolution has succeeded in achieving both goals at once by simply making us love big macs.

~~~
p.s. No wonder alien spaceships always crash; you try driving with only six fingers.

Homer J. Simpson for President - Homo Sapiens Getting Dumber?

It seems to me like Homo sapiens' natural biological evolution is over. There is no higher force to take the blame for it. No radical climate change resulting in a new ice age, no dangerous virus causing a global plague, no doom’s day asteroid sending us back to the Stone Age. It was self inflicted. We did it ourselves by inventing artificial ways to help people that would not have survived otherwise. We allowed the weak to exist and pass on his weaknesses to the next generations. A few decades ago, we fired the pool guy, gave him his last paycheck and sent him hitchhiking back home.

So the pool guy is gone, but what’s the status of that gene pool of ours? Is it static or is it getting messier? At least from one aspect, intelligence, I claim the gene pool is getting worse. I believe the most significant factor of a person’s IQ is what he’s got from his parents through inheritance, and only a small portion can be related to learning (this is also my opinion on most of the other subjects on the classic nature-versus-nurture debate). Since the use of technology allows even less intelligent people to survive and have kids, is seems they now enjoy an equal chance to pass on their genes. But when I look at intelligent people I see patterns that may lead to imbalance and a population becoming less and less intelligent. In order to supply a better lifestyle for all their children, intelligent people form smaller families than less intelligent ones. Many times smarter people prefer pursuing academic degrees over becoming parents at an early age, only having kids when they are in their 30s and 40s, raising the risk for several diseases in their kids like Down syndrome. Often, intelligent people will be drawn to highly inhabitant cities in order to be closer to education facilities and high-tech industries rather than the open country, exposing their children to higher risks like car accidents and air pollution.

It seems like our new man made unnatural evolution favors the less intelligent. Modern technology almost eliminates completely the historical advantage for being smart. It will help less intelligent people survive and pass on their "dumb genes" to the next generations. And since they will do so more successfully, they will eventually become the majority, driving humanity down the gene pool's drain - straight to dumb city.

~~~
p.s. The plant your aunt gave you for your birthday will achieve self awareness in 5,342,679 years.