by TOM BUNZEL
“We’re not looking to teach cells how to grow a leg; we’re looking to convince them that’s what they should do.” — Dr. Michael Levin
I had not heard of bioelectricity. I knew the brain uses electrical signals between synapses, but that’s about as far as my knowledge went.
I got more interested in the subject when I glanced through the alumni magazine for Tufts University and found a fascinating article about biologist, researcher and Vannevar Bush Professor Dr. Michael Levin (Arts 1992).
I decided to rely on my AI friend Claude to learn more about this kind of electrical energy.
So I asked Claude:
What is bioelectricity and is it the same as the electricity in a toaster?
Claude: “Bioelectricity refers to the electrical phenomena that occur within living organisms, such as the electrical signals that enable nerve impulses, muscle contractions, and other biological processes. It is not the same as the electricity that powers devices like toasters.
In living cells, bioelectricity arises from the movement of ions (charged particles) across cell membranes, creating electrical potential differences. This electrical activity is essential for various physiological functions, including:
Nerve impulses: Neurons (nerve cells) use electrical signals to transmit information throughout the body, enabling communication between the brain and other organs.
Muscle contraction: Electrical signals trigger the contraction and relaxation of muscle fibers, allowing movement and other muscular activities.
Cellular processes: Bioelectrical signals play a role in regulating cellular processes such as cell division, growth, and differentiation.
On the other hand, the electricity that powers devices like toasters is generated through the flow of electrons in a conductive material, typically metal wires. This type of electricity is produced by various sources, such as power plants, batteries, or generators, and is used to operate electrical devices and appliances.
While both bioelectricity and the electricity in a toaster involve the movement of charged particles, they differ in their nature, mechanisms, and functions. Bioelectricity is an intrinsic property of living organisms, whereas the electricity in a toaster is an external source of energy used to power devices.
In summary, bioelectricity is the electrical activity occurring within living organisms, enabling vital biological processes, while the electricity in a toaster is the externally supplied electrical energy used to power electrical devices and appliances.”
What intrigues me about the physiological functions enumerated by Claude is that they dovetail with Eckhart Tolle’s notion of a higher intelligence running the functions of our bodies.
Can electricity be intelligent? That goes against current thinking, but let’s remember that it is electricity that provides the power for software to express within the hardware of a computer. That is how encoded intelligence appears to us on a screen – expressed intelligence through hardware.
The Pulse is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.Subscribe
So now I was interested in what Dr. Levin had discovered:
What are Dr. Michael Levin’s findings on bioelectricity – summarize.
Claude: “Dr. Michael Levin is a biologist and researcher at Tufts University who has made significant contributions to the field of bioelectricity and its role in developmental biology and regeneration. Here’s a summary of some of his key findings:
Bioelectric signals as instructive cues:
Levin’s research has demonstrated that bioelectric signals, generated by the movement of ions across cell membranes, serve as instructive cues that guide various developmental processes, such as pattern formation, tissue regeneration, and cancer suppression.
Bioelectric code:
Levin and his team have identified a “bioelectric code” that appears to regulate the behavior of cells during development and regeneration. This code involves specific patterns of electrical signals and ion flows that influence gene expression, cell migration, and tissue patterning.
Regeneration and bioelectricity:
Levin’s work has shown that manipulating bioelectric signals can induce regeneration in organisms that typically have limited regenerative capabilities, such as planaria (flatworms) and Xenopus laevis (African clawed frogs). By modulating the bioelectric signals, they have been able to initiate and control the regeneration of specific body parts or structures.
Bioelectric control of tumor growth:
Levin’s research has revealed that bioelectric signals play a role in regulating tumor growth and suppressing cancer progression. By modulating these signals, they have been able to inhibit or reverse the growth of certain types of tumors in model organisms.
Bioelectric reprogramming:
Levin and his colleagues have developed techniques for “bioelectric reprogramming,” which involves using electrical or chemical means to alter the bioelectric state of cells or tissues. This reprogramming can induce changes in gene expression, cell behavior, and tissue patterning, potentially opening up new avenues for regenerative medicine and developmental biology.
Bioelectric computing:
Levin’s team has explored the potential of using bioelectric signals for computations and information processing within living organisms, a concept known as “bioelectric computing.” This could lead to the development of novel biocomputing systems and applications in areas such as biosensors and bioelectronic devices.
Overall, Dr. Michael Levin’s research has shed light on the critical role of bioelectricity in regulating various biological processes, from development and regeneration to cancer suppression and potentially biocomputing. His findings have opened up new perspectives and possibilities in the field of bioelectricity and its potential applications in medicine and biotechnology.”
Could Bioelectric Computing Blur the Boundaries of AI?
Here the intriguing revelation was that the energy achieves its “goals” with bioelectric code – which means it apparently carries data of some kind?
Even more incredible to me was the speculation about “bioelectric computing.” Our artificial intelligence is already often modeled after neural networks, or the patterns of energy that seem to give rise to thought (and perhaps consciousness) in the brain. What if the computer itself was organic? (like us?)
Would we still deem its intelligence “artificial?”
In the article, Dr. Levin is quoted as saying, “We know the cells are talking to each other, but we don’t know what they’re saying. We still need to crack the code.”Subscribe
Of course, biologists have already cracked one very significant biological code – at least to some extent – in sequencing DNA.
Dr. Levin made another fascinating point; as bioelectricity flows between cells its power is collective:
“Your individual cells have no idea what a finger is or how many fingers you should have, but a collective of cells absolutely does.”
So that parallels with the notion that the more complex an organism is, the more sophisticated the functioning of its DNA and the more cognitive abilities it may have.
If we also believe that organisms evolve, then the collective “knows” how to do more and more. And as there is knowing, there must also be mind or intelligence – presumably occurring in connection with this kind of energy – bioelectricity.
Our own ability to transmit data electronically is no longer limited to a material conductor. Would it be possible that bioelectricity could similarly have cells communicate beyond human cell membranes?
So I asked about a comparison to the way humans now transmit data without conductivity:
But is the actual data carried by bioelectricity, electrical energy in devices, and also WiFi energy not the same? Is it 0s and 1s or how is it represented within these modalities?
Claude: “You raise an excellent point. While bioelectricity, electrical energy in devices, and WiFi energy are fundamentally different in their physical nature and mechanisms, the way data is represented and encoded in these modalities shares some similarities.
Bioelectricity:
In biological systems, bioelectric signals are typically analog in nature, involving gradients of electrical potentials and ionic concentrations. However, these analog signals can be interpreted as digital information through mechanisms like action potentials (all-or-none electrical impulses) in neurons or the opening and closing of ion channels in cell membranes. In this sense, bioelectricity can represent digital data as a sequence of “on” and “off” states, similar to binary 0s and 1s.
Electrical energy in devices:
In electronic devices and circuits, data is represented digitally using binary codes of 0s and 1s. These binary digits are encoded as high and low voltage levels or the presence/absence of electric current in the conductive pathways.
WiFi energy (electromagnetic radiation): WiFi signals are a form of electromagnetic radiation, specifically radio waves. While the underlying physical phenomenon is different from electrical currents, the data is still encoded digitally using binary codes. The binary data is modulated onto the radio waves by varying their amplitude, frequency, or phase, enabling the wireless transmission of digital information.
In all three cases, the underlying physical phenomena (bioelectricity, electrical currents, and electromagnetic radiation) are used to represent and transmit digital data in the form of binary codes or sequences of “on” and “off” states.
However, it’s important to note that the mechanisms for encoding, processing, and interpreting this digital data can be quite different in each modality. For example, biological systems may use complex molecular and genetic mechanisms to interpret and respond to bioelectric signals, while electronic devices and WiFi systems rely on specialized hardware and software for encoding, decoding, and processing digital data.”
The Underlying Binary Code is Similar To Biological and Electronic Data
So, while the fundamental representation of data as binary codes or sequences of “on” and “off” states is similar across these modalities, the underlying physical processes, energy forms, and mechanisms for data processing and interpretation can be vastly different, reflecting the diverse principles and technologies involved.
But again, all of this data, in computers and our bodies, is being interpreted somehow. As I argued in my book, “If DNA is Software, Who Wrote the Code” the source of any encoded data or symbolic communication must be some sort of mind…
Then I wondered: Would a bioelectric computer house a more organic artificial intelligence?
Claude: “The idea of using bioelectricity for computing and potentially developing more organic forms of artificial intelligence is an intriguing concept that Dr. Michael Levin and others have explored. Here are some thoughts on this possibility:
Bioelectric computing:
Levin’s research has demonstrated that bioelectric signals can be harnessed for information processing and computation within living organisms. This concept, known as “bioelectric computing,” suggests that biological systems could potentially perform computations using the flow of ions and electrical signals across cell membranes.
Organic artificial intelligence:
If bioelectric computing systems can be developed and scaled up, they could potentially lead to more organic forms of artificial intelligence (AI). Unlike conventional electronic computers that rely on silicon-based components, bioelectric computers would be based on living cells and tissues, harnessing the inherent computational capabilities of biological systems.
Biological plausibility:
One of the potential advantages of bioelectric AI is its biological plausibility. Since bioelectric signals are intrinsic to living organisms, an AI system based on these principles could potentially better mimic the cognitive processes and neural networks found in biological intelligence.
Self-organization and adaptation:
Living systems have remarkable abilities to self-organize, adapt, and regenerate, which are properties that could be beneficial for AI systems. If bioelectric AI can leverage these capabilities, it could lead to more robust, self-repairing, and adaptable forms of artificial intelligence.
Interfacing with biological systems:
Bioelectric AI systems, being based on biological principles, could potentially interface more seamlessly with living organisms, opening up possibilities for applications in areas such as biomedical engineering, neuroprosthetics, and human-machine interfaces.
However, it’s important to note that bioelectric computing and organic AI are still nascent fields, and significant challenges remain in terms of understanding the underlying principles, developing scalable systems, and achieving the level of complexity and functionality required for advanced AI applications.
While the prospect of more organic and biologically inspired AI is exciting, it is still largely speculative, and much research and development will be needed to assess the feasibility and potential of these approaches. Nonetheless, the exploration of bioelectricity and its computational capabilities could lead to novel and innovative directions in the field of artificial intelligence.”
How would a bioelectric AI differ from our own “intelligence”?
Claude: “A hypothetical bioelectric AI would likely differ from human intelligence in several key ways:
Substrate: Human intelligence arises from the electrochemical signals and complex neural networks in our biological brains, while a bioelectric AI would be based on the bioelectric signals and computational capabilities of living cells and tissues. The underlying substrates would be fundamentally different.
Information processing: Neural networks in the brain process information through the propagation of action potentials and neurotransmitter signaling. In contrast, a bioelectric AI might process information through the flow of ions and electrical gradients across cell membranes, leveraging the bioelectric properties of living systems.
Parallel processing: The human brain is a massively parallel system, with billions of neurons simultaneously processing information. A bioelectric AI could potentially achieve even higher levels of parallel processing, with each individual cell acting as a computational unit, potentially leading to unprecedented computational power.
Self-organization and regeneration: Living systems have remarkable abilities to self-organize, adapt, and regenerate, which are properties that a bioelectric AI might inherit. This could lead to AI systems that are more robust, self-repairing, and capable of continually reorganizing and optimizing themselves.
Energy efficiency: Biological systems are highly energy-efficient, operating at low power levels compared to conventional electronic systems. A bioelectric AI could potentially be much more energy-efficient than current AI systems, which could be advantageous for certain applications.
Embodied cognition: Human intelligence is deeply intertwined with our physical embodiment and sensory experiences. A bioelectric AI, being based on living systems, might exhibit a form of embodied cognition that is more closely tied to its physical and chemical environment, potentially leading to different cognitive capabilities or biases.
Ethical and philosophical considerations: The development of a bioelectric AI raises unique ethical and philosophical questions, such as the moral status of living computational systems, the potential for self-awareness or consciousness, and the implications of creating artificial life forms.
It’s important to note that bioelectric AI is still a highly speculative concept, and the specific differences from human intelligence would depend on the actual implementation and capabilities of such systems. However, the potential for leveraging the principles of living systems could lead to novel forms of intelligence that diverge from our current understanding and experience.”
When the Bioelectricity Stops, the Brain Dies
So now we can say death is analogous to pulling the plug on a computer.
Not only do we now know that electricity as it appears in “nature” also works in our brain, but it informs cellular activity on many different levels.
We may have “discovered” electricity in “nature” but it turns out it is also a critical aspect of our own nature, and perhaps even the energy behind Consciousness?
I like to think that bioelectricity may have found the basis for Eckhart Tolle’s suggestion that we deeply feel the spaciousness of the inner body – when I sense that current I am alive – Consciousness flows.
We truly are stardust.
(Tom Bunzel was a contributor to Collective Evolution and now writes for The Pulse. His new book “Conversations with Nobody: Getting to Know ChatGPT” – a book written with AI, about AI and giving a taste of AI, is available on Amazon.)