[sci.nanotech] Hameroff's book. A Simple Review

ashley@usage.csd.oz (Ashley Aitken) (09/29/90)

Here is a review of Hameroff's book that I wrote for the Australian Computer 
Journal. 

Ultimate Computing Book Review Dec 20 1988
HAMEROFF, S.R.
1987
Ultimate Computing: Biomolecular Consciousness and NanoTechnology
Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., Amsterdam
357
DFL 160.00 (Hardback)

Ultimate computing is claimed to be the ultimate destiny of both biological
and artificial computational systems.
This book attempts to follow the co-evolution of biology, in particular that 
relating to consciousness (more correctly, intelligence), and information 
processing technology. It suggests that they are both aiming to master the 
ultimate computing arena, nano-scale (billionth of meter and billionth of 
second) information processing.
In doing this, the book discusses many things, most of them are related 
(sometimes very tenuously) to the cytoskeleton ( the internal functional 
structures of a cell).
The author's premise is that the cytoskeleton (a nano-scale system) is the 
cell's information processing system, the location of the cell's intelligence,
and hence the fundamental intelligence of the nervous system. 

The book is rooted in the biological sciences (which seems to be the author's
background) but does not lack in the computational or philosophical areas.
The main subject matter spans the brain/mind, the origins of life, 
cytocomputing, anesthesia (seeing the author is an anesthesiologist), 
and nanotechnology.
The author preaches nano-systems with a fervour and has a peculiar
fascination (bordering on cult following) for microtubules (tubular
cytoskeletal structures).
The discussion of nano-scale technologies, especially computing and engineering
at an atomic level, is very interesting, although somewhat superficial, and 
includes Scanning Tunnelling Microscopes, Von Neumann Replicators and Feynman 
Machines.

To say the book is speculative would be an under-statement. It contains a large
number of "if"s, "maybe"s and "possible that"s. It may be wise to also read
a number of other statements in the book with one of these quantifiers in mind.
Unfortunately the drawings seem to lack insight and are rather confusing. In an
area where they could have ran with the imagination, this is a pity.
Being an inter-disciplinary text there is always the chance that some of the
disciplinary jargon may deter those of a different discipline, but without
considerable compromise there is no easy way around this and one must grin and
bear it.
The book does have an excellent and wide ranging review of the philosophy of
the brain/mind/computer, and a rather extensive categorized reference section.

The book was more enjoyable than I thought it would be at first glance. It
has that out-in-space feel but there is a lot of down-to-earth interesting stuff
dispersed throughout (proven by the fact that I pencil-marked a considerable 
portion).
The book did seem to falter a bit in the middle with the over-cooked discussion
of protein conformational dynamics, but came out of the oven rather well with 
the latter chapter on nanotechnology.

So where does this book fit in ? It is definitely not a textbook or a research
monograph. Any book which acknowledges Max Headroom and PC clones cannot be 
taken too seriously. 
But the point is, it is not a piece of science fiction (not all the time, 
anyway), rather it is a reasoned suggestion about where technology, 
information processing, and intelligence may have come from, and are possibly 
going to.
To me, it most closely resembles a more factual, wide-ranging and 
well-researched (but still somewhat as soft) "Omni article".
Hence, it really belongs on the magazine rack, not the book shelf. But we all 
read magazines from time to time, and I suggest that you may like to "have some
fun!" and read it.
The book would appeal directly to anyone with an interest in biological and 
synthetic intelligence (and to open-minded artificial intelligenciers) and 
indirectly to those interested in the future of information processing systems
who don't mind a speculation every "page" in a while.

Ashley Aitken
University of New South Wales
ashley@spectrum.cs.unsw.oz.au

I guess, as the previous article pointed out, and what I pointed to as the mass
of speculation, is that there is little evidence for any of Hammeroff's
hypotheses.

On a lighter note, I hope there never is (any evidence for the hypotheses). I
am into brain simulation and it is tough enough at the neural level. I would
surely give up the ghost if I needed to go to the cyto-skeleton level to
capture intelligence. But then again this is the nano-technology group
so, perhaps, I better finish now.