1. Modeling Kinematic Cellular Automata:
An Approach to Self Self-
Replication
Principal Investigator: Consultants:
Tihamer Toth Toth-Fejel Robert Freitas
Tihamer.Toth Toth-Fejel@gd gd-ais.com Matt Moses
March 22, 2004 NIAC Fellows Presentation
NASA Institute for Advanced
Concepts
Phase I: CP CP-02 02-02
3. Rationale
zz Why Self Self-Replication?
zz Why not Self Self-Assembly?
zz Why Kinematic Cellular
Automata?
zz Why both macro and nano scale?
4. Rationale: Why Self Self-Replication?
zz Revolutionary manufacturing
process
zz Nanotechnology
zz Massive reduction in costs per
pound
zz Controlled exponential growth
5. Rationale: Why not SelfRationale: Self-- Assembly?Examples have been demonstratedExamples demonstratedBut…But… zzNot “Genotype + RibotypeRibotype= Phenotype” (GRP)= GRP) zzNo theoryNo theory zzAgainst the principles of sound designAgainst designHowever…However… Use it for simple input partsUse parts
6. Rationale:
Why Kinematic Cellular Automata
(KCA)?
zz Combines Von Neumann’s two
designs
zz Increased flexibility
zz Decreased complexity
zz Large system work envelope
zz Sometimes better than smart dust
7. Rationale:
Why Both Macro and Nano Scale?
zz Abstract design
zz Macro:
zz Possible with current technology
zz Useful products
zz Proof of concept in short term
zz Nano Nano:
zz Quality of atoms (and molecules)
zz Self Self-assembled input parts possible
zz Significant financial payoff
8. Benefit: Cost Reduction/LbBenefit: Lb11041 1041081012101610201024102106108WrenchPentiumPotatoLobsterEigler’sIBM AdDigitalWatchCarYogurtSaltKCA SRSComplexity (Parts and Interactions/lb) Cost ($/lb) SevenSevenMagnitudes!Magnitudes! GAIN
Traditional Top Down ManufacturingvsBottom-up Molecular Replication
11. Project Goals
zz Characterize self self-replication
zz Quantify the complexity of Self Self-
Replicating System (SRS) made
of Kinematic Cellular Automata
(KCA)
zz Confirm approach
zz Design a KCA SRS
zz Simulate designs
12. Project Strategy
zz Hybridize two self self-replication
models
zz Keep it simple
zz Make it complicated
zz Refine approach
zz Attempt design
zz Imitate computers
zz Imitate biology
13. Accomplishments
Goals Accomplishments
Characterize unexplored areaunexplored areaExplored MultiExplored Multi--Dimensional SpaceDimensional SpaceQuantify the Quantify difficultydifficultyNot trivial, but less than a PentiumNot PentiumConfirm or refute Confirm approach Refined ApproachRefined Approach zzUseful SRSUseful SRS zzHierarchy of Subsystems, Cells, Facets, & PartsHierarchy Parts zzTransporter, Assembler, & ControllerTransporter, Controller zzLowLow--level simpler than highlevel high--levellevel zzTopTop--Down vsvsBottomBottom--UpUp zzSelfSelf--Assembly for input PartsAssembly Parts zzStandard conceptsStandard concepts zzUniversal Constructor is approach, not goalUniversal goalDesign a KCA SRSDesign SRSDeveloped Requirements Developed Preliminary DesignPreliminary DesignSimulate designsSimulate designsModeled SimulationsModeled Simulations zzSensor PositionSensor Position zzNAND gate and opNAND op--amp selfamp self--assemblyassembly zzFacetFacet zzTransporter and AssemblerTransporter Assembler
14. Characterizing SelfCharacterizing Self--Replication: Adjusting the Freitas/MerkleFreitas/Merkle116116--Dimension Design SpaceSpaceEvolvabilityReplicatorInformationReplicatorEnergeticsReplicationProcess
Product
Structure
Replicator
Performance
Replicator
Substrate
Replicator
Control
Manipulation
AutonomyManipulationRedundancyManipulationCentralizationManipulationDegrees of FreedomPositionalAccuracy
Quantity of Onboard
Energy Types
Quantity of
Manipulation
Types
Assembly
StyleParts CountParts ScalePartsTypesQuantityof VitaminPartsNutritionalComplexityPartsPreparationPartsComplexityPartsPrecisionMulticellularity
Subunit
Scale
Subunit
Types
Subunit
ComplexityReplicatorKinematicsActiveSubunitsReplicatorPartsAllReplicatorsReplicatorStructureSubunitHierarchy
Replicator
Designability
Subunit
Complexity
Monotonicity
15. Quantifying Difficulty of SRS Design
1.00E+001.00E+011.00E+021.00E+031.00E+041.00E+051.00E+061.00E+071.00E+081.00E+09Units of difficulty# parts+ # interactionsWrenchAutomobile Pentium KCA SRS
16. Hierarchy
Computer
Biology
KCA SRS
Horse
Self-replicating System:
Useful
Processor
Brain and Muscles
Subsystems:
Transporter, Assembler, and Controller
Bus/Memory, ALU, and Controller
Cells
Cells: Cubic devices with only three limited degrees of freedom
Organelles
Facets: Symmetrical implementation
Finite State Machines,
Shift Registers, Adders, and Multiplexers
Proteins
Parts: Inert, Simpler than higher levels
NAND gates
Genes
Self-assembling Subparts:
Wires, Transistors, actuator components
Transistors, Wires
Molecules
Molecules
Molecules
17. Original Approach: Feynman
method
1.1.Start with trivial selfStart self-- replication 2.2.Move the complexity out of the environment and into the SRS by doubling parts count of the component (Trivialthe Trivial+1+1case)case) 3.3.ReiterateReiterate
18. Original Approach: Feynman
method
““Plenty of room at the bottom”, topPlenty top--down, fractal approachapproachMystery
19. Refine Approach (by 180 180°)
••We should start at the
bottom level and work up
••Imitate Mother Nature
••The Trivial+2 case has
already been done
Molecules
20. The Bottom Bottom-up Approach
Well Well-ordered environment,
Simple inert parts
Symmetric facets
Modular cells
Assembler, Transporter, and Controller
subsystems
Self Self-Replicating System
21. Subsystem Requirements
If atoms are analogous to bits,
then:
zz Memory/Bus -- --> Transporter
> zzMoves Parts
zzALU -- --> Assembler
> zzConnects Parts
zz Control -- --> Controller
> zzDecides which Parts go where
zzStandardized
36. Conclusion and Future
Directions
No roadblocks!
zz Final Design for macro physical prototypes
zz Build physical prototypes
zz Build and run small cell collections
zz Build and run subsystems
zz Build macro scale SRS
zz Write Place and Route software
zz Refine concept at nano scale
37. Acknowledgements
zz NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts
zz John Sauter –– Altarum
zz Rick Berthiaume, Ed Waltz, Ken Augustyn, and
Sherwood Spring –– General Dynamics AIS
zz John McMillan and Teresa Macaulay
–– Wise Solutions
zz Forrest Bishop
–– Institute of Atomic Atomic-Scale Engineering
zz Joseph Michael –– Fractal Robots, Ltd.
39. KCA SRS Assumptions
zz Parts supplied as automated cartridges
zz Low rate of errors detected in code
40. Previous and Related Work
zz Freitas and Long - NASA Summer Study:
Advanced Automation for Space Missions (1980)
zz Michael - Fractal Robots
zz Chirikjian and Suthakorn - Autonomous Robots
zz Moses - Universal Constructor Prototype
zz Zyvex - Exponential Assemblers
zz Freitas and Merkle - Kinematic Self Self-Replicating
Machines (2004)
41. Previous Work:NASA Summer Study
Advanced Automation for Space
Missions - Freitas and Long -
(1980)
zz Strengths
zz First major work since 1950s
zz Cooperation of many
visionaries
zz Weaknesses
zz short, no follow follow-up
zz paper study only
zz pre pre-PC technology
http://www.islandone.org/MMSG/aasm/ FOR MORE INFO...
42. Previous Work: Joseph
Michael
zzStrengths zz“The DOS of Utility Fog”“Fog” zzWorking macro modular robotsrobots zzLimited DOF = better structurestructure zzWeaknessesWeaknesses zzFractals just push problem to lower, lesslower, less--accessible levelaccessible level zzno detailed methodology for selfself--replicationreplicationhttp://www.fractal-robots.com/ FOR MORE INFO...
43. Previous Work: Forrest BishopBishop zzStrengths zzVery Limited DOFVery DOF zzClear macro designClear design zzWeaknessesWeaknesses zzNanoscaleNanoscaleimplementation clearly implementation implied, but not clearly designeddesigned zzno detailed methodology for selffor self--replicationreplicationhttp://www.iase.cc/html/overtool.htmFOR MORE INFO...
44. Related Work:
Chirikjian/Suthakorn
zzStrengthsStrengths zzAutonomous implementation of Trivialof Trivial+2+2case (4 parts)case zzDirected towards extraterrestrial applicationsextraterrestrial applications zzLego isomorphic with moleculesmolecules zzWeaknessesWeaknesses zzSmall UC envelopeSmall envelope zzDepends on nonDepends non--replicating jigsjigs zzHigh entropy environment limits extension to Triviallimits Trivial+3+3case case http://caesar.me.jhu.edu/research/self_replicating.htmlcaesar.htmlFOR MORE INFO...
45. Related Work: Zyvex
zzProjectsProjects zzApplying MEMS and nanotubesnanotubes zzParallel Micro and Exponential AssemblyAssembly zzStrengthsStrengths zzFirst and only funded company trying to build a DrexlerianDrexlerianassemblerassembler zzWeaknessesWeaknesses zzMEMS is 1000X too bigMEMS big zzsurfaces too roughsurfaces rough zzExponential Assembly is machine selfExponential self-- assembly (not Universal Constructor; not GRP paradigm; not Utility Fog)FOR MORE INFO...
http:// www.zyvex.com com/
46. Related Work: Freitas/Merkle
Kinematic SelfKinematic Self--Replicating Machines ((LandesLandesBioscience, 2004)Bioscience, First comprehensive review of fieldFirst field1.1.The Concept of SelfThe Self--Replicating MachinesMachines2.2.Classical Theory of Machine ReplicationClassical Replication3.3.MacroscaleMacroscaleKinematic Machine Kinematic ReplicatorsReplicators4.4.MicroscaleMicroscaleand Molecular Kinematic and Machine ReplicatorsMachine Replicators5.5.Issues in Kinematic Machine Replication EngineeringEngineering6.6.Motivations for MolecularMotivations Molecular--Scale Machine Replicator DesignReplicator Design(c) 2004 Robert Freitas and Ralph MerkleFreitas is a technical consultant for this project
47. Related Work: Matt Moses
zStrengths:
zCAD to physical implementation
zLarge envelope UC
zWeaknesses: zStrain bending under load zManual controlMoses is a technical consultant for this project
48. Why Universal Constructors?Envelope = everythingRockUCEnvelope = nothingAssembly LineEnvelope = one thingRobotEnvelope = many thingsSRSEnvelope = every constituent part zzUC is the ability to build anythingUC anything zzUses “Genotype+RibotypeGenotype+Ribotype= Phenotype”= Phenotype” zzConstruction envelope includes itselfConstruction itself zzAtoms equivalent to bitsAtoms bits zzSRS only needs limited UC capabilitySRS capability
