> On 4 Oct 2020, at 14:07, John Clark <[email protected]> wrote: > > In the September 25 2020 issue of the journal Science researchers report on > the invention of a sequence of switches made entirely of protein that can > perform AND OR and NOT Boolean logical operations, and thus is Turing > Complete, they call it Co-LOCKR. And they were able to put this simple > computer into a T-Cell antibody, and so they could activate the T-Cell only > when specific conditions are met.
I can accept this, in a very loose sense of “Turing Complete”. But normally “Turing complete” is an attribute of a theory, and “Turing universal” is for a computer/machine. The NOR is not Turing-complete, but the combination of them does provide a Turing universal machinery. It might mean that a composition of such protein could constitute un computer. I doubt that one unique protein can be Turing universal, although (and I did prove this) a sufficiently long DNA + some cytoplasme, including some protein, is Turing Universal (and it makes any theory capable of desiring this Turing-complete). I mention this only because when we apply the notion of Turing universality and Turing completeness in metaphysics, at some point those nuances get important to keep in Mind, and that is why now I distinguish in my posts the notion of universal machinery (like the RE collection of all Turing machine (all set of quadruplets)) and of universal machine (one precise set of quadruplets). When we have a universal machine or function phi_u, we have a universal machinery: phi_u(I, x), i = 0, 1, 2, … And Turing’s work gives the reverse: when we have a universal machinery, we get a universal machine among it. Those things are equivalent with respect of computability, but they are used at different level, and in metaphysics, we need to postulate a universal machinery, before a universal machine. > > Designed protein logic to target cells with precise combinations of surface > antigens <https://science.sciencemag.org/content/369/6511/1637> > > By examining the antigens on the surface of a specific type of cancer cell > you can distinguish cancer cells from healthy normal cells, but it's more > complex than just looking for one specific antigen. However with Co-LOCKR a > T-Cell could be programmed for example, to only attack cells that have > antigens W OR X AND NOT both on their surface, AND antigen Y, AND NOT > antigen Z. That way the T cell would attack cancerous cells but leave normal > healthy cells alone. This is almost starting to sound a little like a > simplified version of one of Drexler's Nanomachines. OK. Looks quite interesting. It could help also in the problem of the origin of life, although here it is the RNA which would need to be “Turing complete” (in that loose sense of belonging to a possible universal machinery). In principle, one protein + one DNA strands (that the protein should be able to elongated if needed) can be a genuine Turing universal machine. They always need some elongate-able tape... Bruno > > John K Clark > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv3Au%2BZFSRc%2B8xm%3Dhj%2B_f3wOff%2Bi61nLS3_1nwwPBP1tKA%40mail.gmail.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv3Au%2BZFSRc%2B8xm%3Dhj%2B_f3wOff%2Bi61nLS3_1nwwPBP1tKA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/EE4AEA93-88D8-4FA3-A6A4-BD9B2F1A43BC%40ulb.ac.be.
