The MAYA-II biocomputer, whose computational core is a DNA molecule, has mastered the game “Tic Tac Toe”. According to scientists, it plays well, although too slowly: existing technologies do not allow such systems to achieve good performance, and each turn in the game takes the machine up to half an hour.There is, however, one more restriction on the game with the MAYA-II machine – the person playing against it must go second after the central field in the game is filled by the computer. A person, making a move, determines the DNA sequence, which is added to all 8 holes corresponding to the outer cells of the game field: “DNA cross” or “DNA zero”. Complementarily interacting with the DNA strand already there, it changes its configuration and properties, causing part of the strand to work as a catalyst for the next reaction.
The computer game is based on a system of logical “gates” built on DNA interactions, each hole contains from 14 to 18 such gates. The result of their work is fluorescence in the field, which MAYA-II selects as a response move.
“Playing with MAYA-II takes https://magic-win-casino.uk/ a long time,” admits one of the authors, Joanne Macdonald: the system takes from 2 to 30 minutes to calculate each move. But in any case, MAYA-II is the release of biocomputers to a new level of power. The first such computer, which appeared in 2003, had much more restrictions: for example, the human player had to not only go second, but could also place his piece (a cross or a zero) only in certain two cells of the playing field.
Best comments
It is unlikely that this technology promises any future: biochemical processes can logically oppose little to electronics. Switching the electronic key takes nanoseconds, since there, on a miniscule scale, several thousand, millions, billions (which is not the point at all, since they belong to one of the lightest particles) of electrons moved at about the speed of light. And the chemical reaction in DNA is a complex process that will never be faster than the simple movement of a negatively charged lepton.
Although, the same DNA may have one advantage over electronics: if, due to its complexity, it will take on fundamentally different functions. For example, perhaps DNA will lose to the computer of the twenties of the last century in addition/multiplication, but perhaps it will win in the accurate calculation of complex exponential functions of high orders. There is nothing supernatural if the difference is only in the principle of approach. It’s like: you can’t take logarithms in your head like a computer, but you can normally perceive human speech. Do you know what you need to do to accept it?? From a mathematical point of view, this means solving the MOST COMPLEX equation that describes your voice as a signal, possibly expanding it into a Fourier series, finding the amplitudes of each component (although all this is sophistry, of course, since there are numerical methods that are more familiar to electronics)), then the results of the analysis must be run through a huge database, comparing the signal with known samples of sounds and words, in order to then attribute the corresponding image to the result. Our computer solves similar problems in its head on the fly, but for the computer this is still a problem (although to its credit, the problem is probably not in the principle of its operation, but in not the most advanced algorithms for solving this problem).
So maybe DNA will find its place in the IT sector. The future will tell. So then.)
