Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [nanotech] Re: Nanosystems which imitate neural networks to realize a Nanofactor

Expand Messages
  • biodun olusesi
    For accepting this, I will personally like to commend you for putting forth such a theoretically-elegant piece. I personally see nothing wrong in borrowing
    Message 1 of 12 , Jan 1, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      For accepting this, I will personally like to commend you for putting forth such a theoretically-elegant piece. I personally see nothing wrong in borrowing concepts from any other field in other to illuminate what 'may be theoretically possible' to move nanotech forward.
      However I am at a loss concerning your comment:
      >>I say it again, to avoid misunderstandings:
      The neural net is inside the small nano unit - and not between
      the nano units<<

      I find it hard to reconcile with this piece from your web writing:

      \\\Self-learning NanoBots

      The teacher (red) is integrated into the freemoving nano unit.
      The graphic is idealised. The teacher has two "sensors" to test the environment here.
      Always, if the nano unit shows an undesired behavior, the teacher (red) sends energy of rearrangement to the adaptive nanoelements. (The NanoBot learns always, i.e. no L-condition necessary.)

      (The NanoBot without adaptive nanoelements is not self-learning but it could be useful in special cases.
      The energy of rearrangement causes random changes of the T nanoelements. The NanoBot would be a stochastic, freemoving searcher.)///


      Now, the point is the teacher is embeded within the nanounit, with sensors to sense and interprete the changes within the millieu the nanounit is situated, yet the nanounit is said to be 'self learning' , and since Each of the nanoelements were sensing the same millieu the 'teacher' is sensing, Will it not be more elegant to simply discard the other elements,allow the 'teacher' the sensing and reporting function under the control of an external computer? - something akin to what Robert Freitas Jnr. had written about! That way you have less space and less design headache. This comment however should be interpreted with respect to the theoretical feasibility of getting nanobots into the intracellular millieu for the purpose of subcellular imaging and manipulation.
      Again, I personally see nothing wrong in borrowing of concepts, whether from AI, or any other source to illuminate how nanotech can move forward, and wish to commend you for your theory
      Biodun
      http://nanotology.org
      zander_cn <carsten.zander@...> wrote:


      Your doubts may be in parts qualified.

      I say it again, to avoid misunderstandings:
      The neural net is inside the small nano unit - and not between
      the nano units. Every intelligent nano unit is a little agent!


      --- In nanotech@yahoogroups.com, "Jean ROCH" <nefastor@h...> wrote:

      > neurons
      > aren't intelligent, it's the association of several neurons (a
      network)
      > which might exhibit behavior that makes sense to us. Enough that
      we'd call
      > it "intelligent".


      You're right. But I've meant:
      intelligent (nanoelement unit) and not (intelligent nanoelement) unit
      To avoid his misunderstandig I'll name them "intelligent nano units"


      > In other words, there's no use for "n" and "o" : a neuron should be
      both.


      I've wrote: "the o-cell represents the kind of connection between
      N-cells"
      I've not wrote: "the o-cell is the connection between N-cells"



      > >The goal is to create a desired...
      > >behavior of the "intelligent" nanoelement unit - by a
      > >simple "evolution" process.
      > Gibberish. What do you mean by evolution ? DNA mutation ? Physical
      motion ?
      > Changes in programming ?


      For example, please search for "Simulated Annealing" "neural
      networks"
      http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Simulated+
      Annealing%22+%22neural+networks%22


      > nanotech is neither the best technology for processing data.


      An intelligent nano unit has to learn simple things only.


      > Fact : ambient conditions are extremely hard to control. Learn about
      the 2nd
      > law of thermodynamics.
      > Fact : when you dip into nanoscale territory, it only gets worse.
      Learn
      > about the Heisenberg principle of incertitude.
      > The degree of control over "reality" that you suggest may well
      remain the
      > stuff of sci-fi for ages to come.


      Learn about biological nanosystems. ;-)
      Possibly such a neural network based nano unit is potentially better
      applicable than a conventional nanodevice. Neural networks are more
      stable and fault-tolerant.


      > >For example: The intelligent nanoelement unit could learn to do
      > >something (e.g. to rotate) when a specific local(!) event happens.
      > Obviously. That's what neurons do.


      No. You've misunderstod it. The whole(!) nano unit could learn to
      rotate, e.g. in a constant field. Some field-sensible T-nanoelements
      could be mixed with nano unit to realize a motor effect.


      > >http://www.01nn.com/nano/nano.htm
      > This seems to describe a way to implement neural networks at the
      molecular level.


      But the neural net is inside(!) the small nano unit!


      > I suggest you look into the works of Yosef Bar
      > Cohen : his electroactive polymers do exactly that, and more, and
      they don't
      > need neural networks. Polypyrrole is what nanotechnology is really
      like, in
      > the REAL world.


      Thank you for the tip. I'll contact him.

      Carsten








      The Nanotechnology Industries mailing list.
      "Nanotechnology: solutions for the future."
      www.nanoindustries.com


      Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
      Get unlimited calls to

      U.S./Canada


      ---------------------------------
      Yahoo! Groups Links

      To visit your group on the web, go to:
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nanotech/

      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      nanotech-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



      ---------------------------------
      Do you Yahoo!?
      Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. Learn more.

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • nanoparticlesalez@yahoo.com
      Vulvox Nano/Biotechnology Corporation is developing moltranic hardware that can be used to make neurodes and nanobots that self assemble into neural networks
      Message 2 of 12 , Jan 1, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Vulvox Nano/Biotechnology Corporation is developing moltranic hardware that can be used to make neurodes and nanobots that self assemble into neural networks and other learning machines.

        biodun olusesi <otonetafrica2000@...> wrote:
        For accepting this, I will personally like to commend you for putting forth such a theoretically-elegant piece. I personally see nothing wrong in borrowing concepts from any other field in other to illuminate what 'may be theoretically possible' to move nanotech forward.
        However I am at a loss concerning your comment:
        >>I say it again, to avoid misunderstandings:
        The neural net is inside the small nano unit - and not between
        the nano units<<

        I find it hard to reconcile with this piece from your web writing:

        \\\Self-learning NanoBots

        The teacher (red) is integrated into the freemoving nano unit.
        The graphic is idealised. The teacher has two "sensors" to test the environment here.
        Always, if the nano unit shows an undesired behavior, the teacher (red) sends energy of rearrangement to the adaptive nanoelements. (The NanoBot learns always, i.e. no L-condition necessary.)

        (The NanoBot without adaptive nanoelements is not self-learning but it could be useful in special cases.
        The energy of rearrangement causes random changes of the T nanoelements. The NanoBot would be a stochastic, freemoving searcher.)///


        Now, the point is the teacher is embeded within the nanounit, with sensors to sense and interprete the changes within the millieu the nanounit is situated, yet the nanounit is said to be 'self learning' , and since Each of the nanoelements were sensing the same millieu the 'teacher' is sensing, Will it not be more elegant to simply discard the other elements,allow the 'teacher' the sensing and reporting function under the control of an external computer? - something akin to what Robert Freitas Jnr. had written about! That way you have less space and less design headache. This comment however should be interpreted with respect to the theoretical feasibility of getting nanobots into the intracellular millieu for the purpose of subcellular imaging and manipulation.
        Again, I personally see nothing wrong in borrowing of concepts, whether from AI, or any other source to illuminate how nanotech can move forward, and wish to commend you for your theory
        Biodun
        http://nanotology.org
        zander_cn <carsten.zander@...> wrote:


        Your doubts may be in parts qualified.

        I say it again, to avoid misunderstandings:
        The neural net is inside the small nano unit - and not between
        the nano units. Every intelligent nano unit is a little agent!


        --- In nanotech@yahoogroups.com, "Jean ROCH" <nefastor@h...> wrote:

        > neurons
        > aren't intelligent, it's the association of several neurons (a
        network)
        > which might exhibit behavior that makes sense to us. Enough that
        we'd call
        > it "intelligent".


        You're right. But I've meant:
        intelligent (nanoelement unit) and not (intelligent nanoelement) unit
        To avoid his misunderstandig I'll name them "intelligent nano units"


        > In other words, there's no use for "n" and "o" : a neuron should be
        both.


        I've wrote: "the o-cell represents the kind of connection between
        N-cells"
        I've not wrote: "the o-cell is the connection between N-cells"



        > >The goal is to create a desired...
        > >behavior of the "intelligent" nanoelement unit - by a
        > >simple "evolution" process.
        > Gibberish. What do you mean by evolution ? DNA mutation ? Physical
        motion ?
        > Changes in programming ?


        For example, please search for "Simulated Annealing" "neural
        networks"
        http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Simulated+
        Annealing%22+%22neural+networks%22


        > nanotech is neither the best technology for processing data.


        An intelligent nano unit has to learn simple things only.


        > Fact : ambient conditions are extremely hard to control. Learn about
        the 2nd
        > law of thermodynamics.
        > Fact : when you dip into nanoscale territory, it only gets worse.
        Learn
        > about the Heisenberg principle of incertitude.
        > The degree of control over "reality" that you suggest may well
        remain the
        > stuff of sci-fi for ages to come.


        Learn about biological nanosystems. ;-)
        Possibly such a neural network based nano unit is potentially better
        applicable than a conventional nanodevice. Neural networks are more
        stable and fault-tolerant.


        > >For example: The intelligent nanoelement unit could learn to do
        > >something (e.g. to rotate) when a specific local(!) event happens.
        > Obviously. That's what neurons do.


        No. You've misunderstod it. The whole(!) nano unit could learn to
        rotate, e.g. in a constant field. Some field-sensible T-nanoelements
        could be mixed with nano unit to realize a motor effect.


        > >http://www.01nn.com/nano/nano.htm
        > This seems to describe a way to implement neural networks at the
        molecular level.


        But the neural net is inside(!) the small nano unit!


        > I suggest you look into the works of Yosef Bar
        > Cohen : his electroactive polymers do exactly that, and more, and
        they don't
        > need neural networks. Polypyrrole is what nanotechnology is really
        like, in
        > the REAL world.


        Thank you for the tip. I'll contact him.

        Carsten








        The Nanotechnology Industries mailing list.
        "Nanotechnology: solutions for the future."
        www.nanoindustries.com


        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
        Get unlimited calls to

        U.S./Canada


        ---------------------------------
        Yahoo! Groups Links

        To visit your group on the web, go to:
        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nanotech/

        To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        nanotech-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



        ---------------------------------
        Do you Yahoo!?
        Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. Learn more.

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






        The Nanotechnology Industries mailing list.
        "Nanotechnology: solutions for the future."
        www.nanoindustries.com



        ---------------------------------
        Yahoo! Groups Links

        To visit your group on the web, go to:
        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nanotech/

        To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        nanotech-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.




        ---------------------------------
        Do you Yahoo!?
        Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less.

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • zander_cn
        Thank you for the tip, Biodun (otonetafrica2000) I ve added two chapters at http://www.01nn.com/nano/nano.htm 1.) One local teacher for each nano unit versus
        Message 3 of 12 , Jan 1, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Thank you for the tip, Biodun (otonetafrica2000)

          I've added two chapters at
          http://www.01nn.com/nano/nano.htm

          1.)
          One local teacher for each nano unit versus
          one global teacher for many nano units

          Both methods have advantages and disadvantages.
          A global, external teacher wouldn't "know" the local conditions of
          each nano unit. However, a local teacher could optimally tune the
          relations between the nano unit and the environment.
          On the other hand, a global, external teacher would allow a massively
          parallel process. The only teacher could be e.g. an external computer.
          Perhaps in some cases both methods can be combined.


          2.)
          Nano units with Associative Memory

          Nano units with an Associative Memory based neural network inside
          could hypothetically give us the possibility to use only one global,
          external teacher for many nano units.
          All the nano units would learn synchronously and massively parallel.

          For example, the nano units have to learn:

          If input 1 then output x
          If input 2 then output y
          If input 3 then output z

          Neural networks with Associative Memory can learn this in the
          following way:

          The external teacher sends the associated signals to all the nano
          units always at the same time.

          The signal 1 and the signal x are externally(!) and globally(!)
          created at the same time.
          And so signal 2 and signal y.
          And so signal 3 and signal z.
          And so on.

          Carsten


          --- In nanotech@yahoogroups.com, biodun olusesi
          <otonetafrica2000@y...> > Will it not be more elegant to simply
          discard the other elements,allow the 'teacher' the sensing and
          reporting function under the control of an external computer? -
          something akin to what Robert Freitas Jnr. had written about! That way
          you have less space and less design headache. This comment however
          should be interpreted with respect to the theoretical feasibility of
          getting nanobots into the intracellular millieu for the purpose of
          subcellular imaging and manipulation.
          > Again, I personally see nothing wrong in borrowing of concepts,
          whether from AI, or any other source to illuminate how nanotech can
          move forward, and wish to commend you for your theory
          > Biodun
          > http://nanotology.org
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.