Synthetic Biology - Bryant McGill

# Synthetic Biology **Entity class:** Concept or analytic term **Domain:** Biotechnology / Engineering Biology / Computation **Doc Type:** Concept Node **Maturity:** Developing **Related:** [[Asimov (Biotechnology)]], [[Asimov Press]], [[George Church]], [[Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory]] --- ## Definition **Synthetic biology** applies engineering and computational methods to the design, modification and construction of biological systems. ## Corpus Context It marks a transition from describing life to programming aspects of it. Machine learning, biological data and automated laboratories increasingly form a co-creative substrate, while consent, biosecurity and equitable access remain governance questions. ## Backlinks [[Asimov (Biotechnology)]] · [[Asimov Press]] · [[George Church]] · [[Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory]] ## Neurotech source route **Collection:** [[collections/Neurotech|Neurotech]] **Source article:** [[articles/The Organic-Synthetic Brain Atlas|The Organic-Synthetic Brain Atlas]] ## Relationships [[wiki/Synthetic Biology|Synthetic Biology]] is related to [[wiki/Biohybrid Neural Systems|Biohybrid Neural Systems]] as construction of artificial neural functions from biological components.  This entry's documented connections are expressed in its definition and related-work routes, with provenance retained in the source-linked material.  - **Edge source route:** [[collections/Edge|Edge]] connects this topic to exact Annual Question passages promoted into the Simple Reminders archive. ## Related Work in the Corpus  - In [[articles/The Organic-Synthetic Brain Atlas|The Organic-Synthetic Brain Atlas]], **IV.10 — Synthetic Biology and Engineered Artificial Neurons** provides the narrative context for **Synthetic Biology**: A fourth trajectory in the synthetic substrate runs through synthetic biology rather than electronic engineering — constructing artificial neurons and small neural circuits from biological molecular components rather than from…  ## Simple Reminders, Quotations, and Thoughts > "Biotechnology is booming (if not bubbling). But it is very clearly segregated from other kinds of technology, which contribute to the study of, but not the identity of, biology. If, however, life is understood as an algorithm rather than a set of amino acids, then the creation of such really-artificial or really-synthetic life can enlarge the available materials, length, and energy scales. In such a world, biotechnology, nanotechnology, information technology, and manufacturing technology merge into a kind of universal technology of embodied information. Beyond the profound practical implications, forward- rather than reverse-engineering life may be the best way to understand it." > **— Neil Gershenfeld**, *2009, Edge Annual Question, “What Will Change Everything?”* [[reminders/Evolution/Life Can Be Reimplemented in Engineered Materials by Neil Gershenfeld|Life Can Be Reimplemented in Engineered Materials by Neil Gershenfeld]] > "We can start with digitized genetic information and four bottles of chemicals and write new software of life to direct organisms to do processes that are desperately needed, like create renewable biofuels and recycle carbon dioxide. As we learn from 3.5 billion years of evolution we will convert billions of years into decades and change not only conceptually how we view life but life itself." > **— J. Craig Venter**, *2009, Edge Annual Question, “What Will Change Everything?”* [[reminders/Evolution/We Can Write New Software of Life by J. Craig Venter|We Can Write New Software of Life by J. Craig Venter]] > "First the inevitability: the power of information technologies is doubling each year, and moreover comprises areas beyond computation, most notably our knowledge of biology and of our own intelligence. It took 15 years to sequence HIV and from that perspective the genome project seemed impossible in 1990. But the amount of genetic data we were able to sequence doubled every year while the cost came down by half each year." > **— Ray Kurzweil**, *2006, Edge Annual Question, “What Is Your Dangerous Idea?”* [[reminders/Evolution/Information Technology Can Compress Billions of Years Into Decades by Ray Kurzweil|Information Technology Can Compress Billions of Years Into Decades by Ray Kurzweil]] > "Specters from the Disney cartoon The Sorcerer’s Apprentice come to mind. How will a species with limited ability to control itself use such vast new power? The answer will determine the future of our species and life on this planet. In a remarkable demonstration of transparency and foresight, the National Academy of Sciences organized a meeting earlier this month with sibling organizations from the UK and China to discuss the opportunities and threats. The risks were taken seriously, but there was little consensus on where this technology will take us, and how or if we can control it. It seems likely that it will transform our species and life itself, fast. How, no one knows." > **— Randolph Nesse**, *2016, Edge Annual Question, “What Do You Consider the Most Interesting Recent Scientific News? What Makes It Important?”* [[reminders/Evolution/Gene Editing May Transform Our Species Faster Than We Can Govern It by Randolph Nesse|Gene Editing May Transform Our Species Faster Than We Can Govern It by Randolph Nesse]] > "In May 2014, a team of molecular biologists led by Floyd Romesberg created a new genetic code, a self-replicating system that codes life forms using chemically modified DNA. This is a BFD; insofar as we know, for 4 billion years all life on this planet replicated using the four known base pairs of DNA (ATCG). Now we can swap in other chemicals. This third evolutionary logic-tree of life would initially be completely human designed-driven and could rapidly diverge from all known life. In theory scientists could begin to breed plants and animals with a very different genetic makeup from that of any other creature on the planet. And these new life forms may be immune to all known viruses and bacteria." > **— Juan Enriquez**, *2016, Edge Annual Question, “What Do You Consider the Most Interesting Recent Scientific News? What Makes It Important?”* [[reminders/Evolution/Humanity Has Created a Third Evolutionary Tree of Life by Juan Enriquez|Humanity Has Created a Third Evolutionary Tree of Life by Juan Enriquez]] > “The earliest computing, in the first computer store in the world, Dick Heyser in Santa Monica, had me try something that I had read in SciAm by Martin Gardner: Conway's 'Game of Life'. The literal incarnation of the initial premise: Simplicity reduced to that YinYang: a cell is On or Off, black or white. But there is one more thing added here now: iteration. With just four rules each cell is said to live or die and in each cycle the pattern changes, iteratively. From dead dots on paper, and static pixels on phospor, it sprang to—life! Not only patterns, but blinkers, gliders, even glider guns, heck glider gun canons! Indeed, it is now seen as a true Turing-complete machine. Artificial Life. Needless to say: very deep.” > **— Kai Krause**, *2012, Edge Annual Question, “What Is Your Favorite Deep, Elegant, Or Beautiful Explanation?”* [[reminders/Digital Life/Simple Rules Can Generate Artificial Life by Kai Krause|Simple Rules Can Generate Artificial Life by Kai Krause]] > “In other words, it was OK for wisdom to sometimes lag behind in the race, because it would catch up when needed. With more powerful technologies such as nuclear weapons, synthetic biology and future strong artificial intelligence, however, learning from mistakes is not a desirable strategy: we want to develop our wisdom in advance so that we can get things right the first time, because that might be the only time we’ll have. In other words, we need to change our approach to tech risk from reactive to proactive. Wisdom needs to progress faster.” > **— Max Tegmark**, *2016, Edge Annual Question, “What Do You Consider The Most Interesting Recent [Scientific] News? What Makes It Important?”* [[reminders/AI Control/Technology Is Advancing Faster Than Wisdom by Max Tegmark|Technology Is Advancing Faster Than Wisdom by Max Tegmark]] > “The problem with all this is that we cannot excel our way out of modern problems. Within the same century, we have unlocked the twin nuclei of both cell and atom and created the conditions for synthetic biological and even digital life with computer programs that can spawn with both descent and variation on which selection can now act. We are in genuinely novel territory which we have little reason to think we can control; only the excellent would compare these recent achievements to harmless variations on the invention of the compass or steam engine. So surviving our newfound god-like powers will require modes that lie well outside expertise, excellence, and mastery.” > **— Eric R. Weinstein**, *2013, Edge Annual Question, “WHAT *SHOULD* WE BE WORRIED ABOUT?”* [[reminders/Existential Risk/Synthetic Biological and Digital Life Put Humanity in Genuinely Novel Territory by Eric R. Weinstein|Synthetic Biological and Digital Life Put Humanity in Genuinely Novel Territory by Eric R. Weinstein]] From [[wiki/The Prospect for Designed Genetic Change|The Prospect for Designed Genetic Change]]: Sinsheimer urges preparation for genetic interventions he says were not yet in hand. > "The larger and the deeper challenges—those concerned with the defined genetic improvement of man—perhaps fortunately are not yet in our grasp, but they are etched clear upon the horizon. We should begin to prepare now for their reality." > **— Robert L. Sinsheimer**, *1969, “The Prospect for Designed Genetic Change”* [[reminders/Selection/Genetic Improvement Was Clear on the Horizon by Robert L. Sinsheimer|Genetic Improvement Was Clear on the Horizon by Robert L. Sinsheimer]] From [[wiki/Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance|Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance]]: The authors project both genetic control and future ethical consensus; neither is presented here as an achieved consensus. > "The ability to control the genetics of humans, animals, and agricultural plants will greatly benefit human welfare; widespread consensus about ethical, legal, and moral issues will be built in the process." > **— M. C. Roco and W. S. Bainbridge**, *2002, Overview of Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance* [[reminders/Selection/Genetic Control Was Cast as a Path to Human Welfare by M. C. Roco and W. S. Bainbridge|Genetic Control Was Cast as a Path to Human Welfare by M. C. Roco and W. S. Bainbridge]] From [[wiki/Daedalus, or Science and the Future|Daedalus, or Science and the Future]]: Haldane contrasts public reactions to physical inventions with reactions to biological change. > "The chemical or physical inventor is always a Prometheus. There is no great invention, from fire to flying, which has not been hailed as an insult to some god. But if every physical and chemical invention is a blasphemy, every biological invention is a perversion." > **— J. B. S. Haldane**, *1923 lecture; 1924, Daedalus, or Science and the Future* [[reminders/Evolution/Every Biological Invention Begins as a Perversion by J. B. S. Haldane|Every Biological Invention Begins as a Perversion by J. B. S. Haldane]]