Bacteria make computers look like pocket calculators

Post by jacquesm » Sat, Jul 25, 2009, 1:53 PM UTC

theblackbox wrote: post #8

jacquesm wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To really get your head spinning, what if you used 'strings' on your own dna and you found some interesting ascii segments in there, on 4 billion basepairs the chances of finding something interesting are pretty good ;)

Similar "logic" has inspired a number of scientists to attempt to "decode" the background microwave radiation of the universe as it has the capacity to hold the first act of Romeo and Juliet (dunno how many bits of information that comes too) ... but the idea was that IF a creator wanted to leave a message that could be found by any significantly technologically advanced organism, this would be the best place to shov…

Post by tocomment » Sat, Jul 25, 2009, 4:22 PM UTC

Post by tocomment » Sat, Jul 25, 2009, 8:03 PM UTC

zitterbewegung wrote: post #14

tocomment wrote: post #13

I always wondered if we could could find something in nature that shows P=NP. It could be bacteria, autistic savants, dna computing, etc. Has anyone set up a test like this? I'm thinking you simply increase the number and inputs on an NP problem and watch at what rate the time taken by one of these methods increases. (Is this too naive of an approach?)

Here is something that scientists have studied which does this http://www.tjhsst.edu/~rlatimer/techlab06/Students/OuyangPap... They actually take the approach that you state. They also have to judge how the system solved the problem. If you don't reach an optimal state you could be only approximating P=NP.

Post by nopassrecover » Sat, Jul 25, 2009, 8:51 PM UTC

tocomment wrote: post #13

I always wondered if we could could find something in nature that shows P=NP. It could be bacteria, autistic savants, dna computing, etc. Has anyone set up a test like this? I'm thinking you simply increase the number and inputs on an NP problem and watch at what rate the time taken by one of these methods increases. (Is this too naive of an approach?)

Post by zitterbewegung » Sun, Jul 26, 2009, 5:44 AM UTC

tocomment wrote: post #15

zitterbewegung wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is something that scientists have studied which does this http://www.tjhsst.edu/~rlatimer/techlab06/Students/OuyangPap... They actually take the approach that you state. They also have to judge how the system solved the problem. If you don't reach an optimal state you could be only approximating P=NP.

That's an interesting paper. I wonder why we can't make a "soap surface" computer? Just translate your NP-Complete program into a Steiner tree problem, make the appropriate glass plates and pegs model, get the results and translate back? I wish I knew more computer science. I'd love to try it.