I could stridently insist that natural choice is the only manner in which intricate life can progress, but that’s not strictly real. We can currently design computers that can find out and reason and– nearly– convince an observer that their habits may be human. It’s not unreasonable that in 100 or 200 years, our computer systems will be successfully sentient: human-like robots, similar to Star Trek‘s Commander Data. Alien civilizations that are significantly more advanced than us are likely currently efficient in such productions. The possibility– possibility, even– of such robotic life has ramifications for our forecasts about life on alien planets.
If, as some astrobiologists believe, alien life is most likely to be synthetic– i.e. “manufactured”– would the rules and restrictions on life as we understand it, coming from the laws of physics and chemistry and biology, still use? Or possibly there are different guidelines, and various restraints, when life is the item of clear, deliberate style?
Natural selection appears, at first look, to be so frustratingly inefficient. Generation after generation of baby gazelles are born, predestined to be eaten by lions. Just by chance is one infant born with longer legs, able to run faster, therefore escape being consumed. Naturally, the really beauty of natural selection is that it does not need any insight; natural selection discusses life in deep space precisely because there is no anticipation of any prior knowledge. No Creator is required, because the evolutionary procedure is ensured to continue even without any predefined rules. Life evolves– albeit gradually– without having to understand where it’s going.
But what if it were all different? What would life appear like if it did understand where it was going?
The 1950 s physicist Anatoly Dneprov wrote wacky and typically Soviet sci-fi. His novel Crabs on the Island tells the story of 2 engineers performing an experiment in cybernetics on a deserted island. A single self-replicating robotic (a “crab”) is launched, and forages for the raw products to construct other robots. Quickly the island is overrun with infant robot crabs. The crabs start to alter. Some are bigger than others, and ruthlessly cannibalize the smaller sized robots for spare parts to build even bigger robots. How would such an experiment end? Catastrophically, naturally, as is consistent with the category, with robotic crabs spreading out greatly across the whole island.
What if I have a plan for how my offspring should look and behave, and I do not want to leave anything to chance?
Science fiction can be awfully downhearted, however that pessimism is unproven. Other aspects are at play. Resources are restricted. Ultimately, even the crabs on the island lacked materials with which to make new robots. Undoubtedly, human beings have actually caused tremendous damage to our own world, however we’ve hardly damaged deep space. There’s no indication in the night sky that any organism, biological or synthetic, has actually spread its influence as far and wide as we might expect if they were growing exponentially like robot crabs.
However we must also be cautious with our optimism. We count on the age-old procedures of natural choice to keep recreating robot crabs in check; something will progress to consume them. But what if these were smart organisms, outlining a method to discover brand-new resources, finding brand-new ways to enhance themselves, their evolutionary physical fitness, and their capability to learn from each other and from previous generations? Could such an army of replicating artificial intelligences be possible? If so, could they be stopped? How sensible is it that alien worlds may be inhabited by artificial creatures so advanced that they can bypass natural selection itself? And if that is possible, why has such an animal never ever evolved naturally? If we want to know whether we should fear alien expert system, first we have to understand what’s so unique about it.
By Philip Ball
Is the natural world imaginative? Just take a look around it. Look at the dazzling plumage of tropical birds, the diverse pattern and shape of leaves, the cunning stratagems of microbes, the dazzling abundance of climbing up, crawling, flying, swimming things … LEARN MORE
It has actually most likely not left your attention that the type of smart transmission of experience from one generation to the next– together with the ability to understand when to utilize that info– is not unlike what we see in human society in the cultural transmission of ideas from generation to generation. We do not require genes to find out about science, we just require a school. We don’t require to follow a religion or a political ideology indefinitely and unchallengingly, we can identify when it’s not serving our needs and alter our instructions. Cultural transmission of experiences is a process with spookily Lamarckian characteristics. It was the Enlightenment French biologist Jean-Baptiste Lamarck (1744–1829), who, in the century before Darwin, tried to describe the truth that animals appear to be incredibly well adapted to their environment and had a variety of ideas how this may happen, the best known of which was his two-pronged laws of inheritance– that animals develop characteristics that they use repeatedly, lose traits they don’t use, and hand down gotten qualities to their offspring.
We do undoubtedly acquire a tendency to particular cultural ideas from our parents and from society, however we can mold them to our finest advantage, modify them, or perhaps discard them. You might be brought up by parents who are wonderful musicians, however you decide that you never even wish to touch a kazoo. Cultural concepts that are used are enhanced, those that are disregarded run out. It is exactly this ability to enhance and to prune ideas that has triggered human civilization to advance at such breakneck speed. And if this type of cultural transmission does occur on another planet, you can be sure that development will be swift and effective– just as ours continues to be.
Let us do a brief idea experiment. Think of that you belong to a highly advanced alien civilization, intent on spreading your legacy throughout the galaxy. You pertain to an unoccupied world with the intent of “seeding” it. However instead of dropping off a biological particle, you may be such a sophisticated alien that you seed this planet with smart artificial creatures, specially designed robots that have the capability to bypass natural choice. They are set to have the insight that nature is lacking. Their robotic gazelle descendants would know that longer legs are much better and would re-engineer their own design to give them longer legs. Similarly, robotic lions would reprogram their own software to allow them to sneak up on prey more stealthily.
Sci-fi can be extremely downhearted, however that pessimism is unfounded.
What would be completion outcome of such a situation? Would there still be predators and prey? Or would these creatures be improving themselves so rapidly that soon the robotic gazelles are building spaceships to leave the robotic lions and the robot lions are building supercomputers to design weapons of mass robot-gazelle destruction? This absurd circumstance is not nearly as trivial as it appears, because the concept touches on some of the most essential mechanisms and restrictions on advancement. Can intelligence, and the ability to bypass natural choice, also bypass the limits that the natural world enforces?
On the face of it, much of the familiar characteristics of animals and plants that we see around us would simply disappear if the organisms in a community were all very expert systems. Oxford professor Nick Bostrom, for instance, recommends that a community of expert systems will be sharing information in such an efficient and rigid manner in which lots of aspects of animal habits would be unnecessary. Big antlers, peacock feathers, colourful flowers, even birdsong– why trouble with such strange and inefficient methods of communicating easy messages like “I’m here and I’m strong”? Synthetic organisms might attain the same result merely by sending out an e-mail. And if the system is well created, checks will guarantee that the e-mail is a kind of truthful signalling. No phony Tinder profiles permitted.
How likely is it that this universe of interconnected computer systems would be not doing anything but communicating, reproducing, and carrying out their particular objective? Potentially not extremely. If such an alien world of synthetically intelligent organisms really exists, there are some things it can not prevent– no matter how intelligent or how well developed. On the one hand, artificial intelligence can not improve without change, and alter brings the danger of mutation. On the other hand, even the cleverest technique is potentially open to exploitation– video game theory can not be discounted, even by a computer of sci-fi-level superintelligence.
In life (that is, natural organisms like us), anomalies occur due to the fact that deep space has a component of randomness to it. A roaming cosmic ray knocks an electron from an atom, and the copying of your DNA is disrupted. Each cell gets a loyal copy of your DNA, and if it doesn’t, the result is frequently malignant. Not all mutations are always this bad. A mutation that triggers your neck bones to grow for a bit longer as an embryo might or might not be helpful to the adult-you, however probably will not eliminate embryo-you. Variation in specific organisms undoubtedly emerges through anomalies (and also– on Earth at least– through sex).
All of this is very simple when considering natural selection, no one understands ahead of time which features of an organism are advantageous and which features are damaging. Without that foresight, the only method to try different versions is through random however little mutations and changes on the theme that currently exists.
But what if I understand what I want? What if I have a plan for how my offspring should look and act, and I don’t want to leave anything to chance?
As soon as produced, certainly AI will take over deep space?
Think about an artificial intelligence (or perhaps a biological organism) that produces a set of self-replicating intelligent robotic probes to fly off and explore (and colonize) deep space. Each probe will arrive on a different world and begin to create new probes like itself, similar to Dneprov’s Crabs on the Island Will each child probe be identical to the parent? Probably not. The moms and dad probe might pick to make them somewhat different from one another, with smart insight: One may be optimized for swimming undersea, and one for flying in the air. However will there be any mistakes, any anomalies in the process? It would seem that, like any reputable engineer, the parent probe would strive to make sure that each reproduced probe is exactly the method it was meant to be. The benefit of evolutionary mutation exists just since development has no foresight! If you do have insight, it makes good sense to do without the randomness.
However even if you can be 100 percent accurate, and can entirely stopping bugs from sneaking into your software (our hypothetical moms and dad is incredibly smart, after all), we have seen that variation is, nonetheless, necessary. Even if you do not desire anomalies, you need a swimming child probe and a flying daughter probe. The offspring of each of those daughters will likewise change: one granddaughter probe for swimming in deep water and one for shallow water. As time goes on and the environment in the world changes, a broad variety of synthetic animals will develop. Not through the systems we are familiar with on Earth, however diverse. Each one will be completely engineered to its niche, without the awkward wisdom teeth and appendixes that we carry with us, which betray our origins as animals not created by anyone.
Even if natural choice isn’t running on this well-oiled and super-intelligent community, a few of the rules of advancement will still apply, no matter how versatile and self-designed they may be. Even super-intelligent synthetic life types undergo the ruthlessly inevitable limitations troubled them by game theory– they would, after all, be contending versus other super-intelligent organisms like themselves. If exploitation pays, exploitation will happen. Selfishness is a threat that will exist even in a neighborhood of super-intelligent artificial aliens. And some things like anomaly, and even death, can’t be gotten rid of simply by being extremely smart. Even for a radical, technological, non-Darwinian life kind, so many of the concepts that we use to understand the advancement of life in the world, like compromises, still apply, therefore it is unlikely that they would create themselves to live forever.
If astrobiologists wonder why we have not discovered any sign of alien life so far, we need to be twice as puzzled regarding why we haven’t discovered any indicator of alien super-life. When created, certainly AI will take over the universe? Well, it hasn’t happened yet, so possibly the danger is less than we thought. And what about artificial life kinds that are more modest in their capabilities? Could a world progress a whole community all by itself, based on synthetic life types that accelerate evolution by having at least a fundamental Lamarckian ability, passing their life time experiences on to their offspring? It’s possible that, because environments can quickly alter, such organisms might not have such an advantage over natural choice after all, at least not until they can evolve the ability to interact, comply, and prepare their evolutionary techniques deliberately. If you are an alien species seeding a planet with some prototypical artificial organism, perhaps it’s much better to seed it with Darwinian creatures, instead of Lamarckians.
It’s possible that we, ourselves, are artificial animals, seeded onto planet Earth by smart aliens billions of years earlier. But there is no sign of this, no fingerprint of alien interference. We might also have actually evolved naturally– we reveal all the signs of natural choice pure and basic, with no trace of Lamarckian acceleration.
We actually do have the capability to adapt our advancement, to spread out the ideas and experiences of our lifetime both to our own offspring and to others. We have Lamarckian abilities through our culture and through our innovation, and what is more, we have the intelligence to understand how and when to utilize them– although it stays to be seen whether we will be intelligent adequate to be able to find our escape of the ecological dead end into which our broadening consumption has led us. Utilizing modern techniques of genetic engineering, we can even change the contents of our genes, remove the vulnerability to disease, and maybe even stop aging. Eventually we might have the ability to alter the shape of our really advancement, growing an additional arm, or wheels, or whatever takes our fancy.
Perhaps our alien seeders knew that consciousness would progress. Possibly this was the grand strategy the whole time: Lamarckian artificial organisms might not endure their early evolutionary phases, however would one day mature. Our creators knew this and were client enough to wait for the day when that would happen. This is potentially an unlikely circumstance, however it does expose the possibility that alien worlds will be occupied by “synthetic” life kinds that are however identical from what we would get out of natural selection.
Read our interview with Arik Kershenbaum here
Arik Kershenbaum is a zoologist college speaker, and fellow at Girton College, University of Cambridge. He belongs to the international board of advisors for METI.org, a think tank on the subject of messaging extraterrestrial intelligence.
From The Zoologist’s Guide To The Galaxy by Arik Kershenbaum. Released by plan with Penguin Press, a member of Penguin Random Home LLC. Copyright © Arik Kershenbaum, 2021.
Lead image: WinWin artlab/ Shutterstock