The 'Adjacent Possible' – and How It Explains Human Innovation | Stuart Kauffman | TED

From the astonishing evolutionary advances of the Cambrian explosion to our present-day computing revolution, the trend of dramatic growth after periods of stability can be explained through the theory of the "adjacent possible," says theoretical biologist Stuart Kauffman. Tracing the arc of human history through the tools and technologies we’ve invented, he explains the impact human ingenuity has had on the planet -- and calls for a shift towards more protection for all life on Earth.

Follow TED!

#TED #TEDTalks #technology

[BeReaL-BB]

This is exactly the train of thought I use daily to make decisions in the quantum bioinformatics research field aspects of counterintelligence information gathering risk/benefit analysis.”we are of nature not above it”!❤

[gameoflearningenglish]

This presentation is absolutely perfect.

[-gg]

This is perfect! I get a little teary-eyed thinking about these concepts. It usually is a simple answer for complex things.

[KafshakTashtak]

Great presentation, although I wished this video showed more of the slides.

[timhaug]

Stephen Jay Gould in one of his essays about 30 years ago made the same point that many adaptations that originated for one purpose were later modified for another purpose through evolution.

[MsSedonan]

I am reminded of Earthship Technology and how it may be the way forward for many. We have to allow this type of architecture.

[invox]

Like he said "possibilities are infinite but for a limited time". We might be in a Cambrian explosion but have to be aware that we might also be close to a(nother) extintion... Which this world has seen SIX major ones so far.

[elizsmith]

I have another book titled The Adjacent Possible, by Nancy Hillis, Ph.D. Which is about evolving your art, from blank canvas to prolific artist. There’s probably a parallel. I haven’t finished the book yet.

[liminal]

We need thinkers and feelers like Dr. Kauffman now more than ever.

[andreys]

TLDR: Put fungal-bacteria mix into a fertilizer and it will solve all our problems - GDP will be happy, bacteria happy, Kauffman happy, everyone will go to outer space and so on

[jamesrunco]

So I feel like he skipped/cut some connective tissue in between the infinity of things and climate change/compost parts of his talk. I'm going to summarize the point of this video into a <1 minute read.

-Everything created makes it easier/faster to create new things. Via either intentional logical progressions or random combinations.

-At a certain point there are enough things to interact that the time to create a new thing is reduced to almost 0 allowing for an almost instant explosion of creative production. Since the time is reduced so dramatically, the limiting factors are materials and energy (though he doesn't specifically address energy).

Human invention has hit this "infinite expansion" threshold and is rapidly consuming all available resources to make things. This infinite creation is not environmentally sustainable. (He doesn't expressly say it, but everything created has an impact on the environment and ensuring that the impact is positive has not been a priority in most of this creation). Without intentional countermeasures we are going to use all the finite resources that are readily available (Earth).

I THINK he is proposing using specifically designed fungal colonies to absorb carbon and pollutants from the atmosphere by converting the large swaths of Earth's agricultural land around the globe into duel use food production/carbon capture facilities.

There seemed to be a side point about the way we currently produce fertilizer being counter-productive but this point was poorly developed. I think he was basically saying we need to convert a massive thing that is currently a detriment to being part of the solution. He seemed aware of a way to do this, but familiarly referred to obscure things that even the highly educated would not neccessary know about. He spoke of the methods of a particular composting approach as if they were common knowledge.

If he wants to make a greater impact on the environment, he should hire a competent grad student with excellent communication skills and spend a few hours explaining his ideas to her. Then let her make a succinct presentation that explains all the things he knows and is trying to communicate. This would be humbling for him, but likely be better for the planet.

[oryxchannel]

OMG! He ended with "soil" and "composts". See "terra preta"! How I miss Sir Ken Robinson.

[feedbackzaloop]

As an engineer I can say the world-machine analogy still holds, it is just the definition of a machine expanded over the years and includes more probabalistic properties.
Also,
TV - 1928
Helicopter - 1929
Computer - ok, that one is questionable, but I'd still name Z1 in 1938
Jet engines - 1867, by 1930 we got turbojets already
Rockets - Han Dynasty ~ 200 BC
Plastics - first polimers described in 1833

[ArtVandelay]

Good grief. I really wanted to hear a lecture by Kauffman, but this was even harder to go through than his writings.

[numbakrunch]

I feel like he's teaching the alphabet but only including a few Greek letters and some Sanskrit in some order that only he understands.

[lemonsavery]

I got kindof lost after he said "the number of things reaches infinity in finite time" 6:09. Like, no, just say near infinite, which is almost certainly what you mean. It will not actually go infinite in finite time.

[ElectricRay]

I love Stuart Kauffman's stuff but this is a bit of a muddled presentation. The adjacent possible is a wonderful idea, which explains *limitations* on innovation (you cannot skip directly to "non-adjacent possibilities" - in fact if they are not adjacent they are not even visible, so they are impossible - but you must go through all the intermediate adjacencies first) but I think grafting this onto Kurzweil's potty idea of the singularity misses the mark. As some adjacent possibilities come closer, others move further away. There is no exponential progress toward anything: we are rather exponentially progressing *away* from where we were, in no particular direction, towards nowhere in particular, like a deflating balloon. The universe is not waking up any time soon.

[mutecartography]

A friend has... I assume it still exists, an old engine block in his yard. Near his back door for some reason. Right outside of the kitchen. His wife had an idea. They planted herbs in the ... holes for the pistons. Whatever they are called. Didn't see that coming.

[kumomiayahua]

Very similar to what I understood out of emergentism from Mary Midgley (science and poetry)

[HairyPinkTroll]

7:42 when I see that, it confirms the recent UN Report on Freedom in relation to Economic Success - because Scribe, Solicitor, Clergy, Wealthy Merchants….. when has it not been about controlling information and people? If everyone who wanted to know, could know - I really think we could solve Any problem. Of course there will be new ones, stay the course and we can solve those too.