Magnetic wire could allow early cancer detection

Vermesh O. et al. An intravascular magnetic wire for the high-throughput retrieval of circulating tumor cells in vivo. Nature Biomedical Engineering July 2018

A new study showed that a magnetic wire can be used to detect hard-to-capture tumor cells, which might potentially become an effective way for early cancer detection. The wire, threaded into a vein, works through attracting special magnetic nanoparticles engineered to stick onto roaming tumor cells in the bloodstream. Circulating cancerous cells that have broken off the tumor can serve as cancer biomarkers. One major hurdle in the cancer field is that circulating tumor cells are often very scarce in the bloodstream, and it is almost impossible to catch them in few milliliters of blood samples. The new magnetic wire is the length of a pinky finger and the thickness of a paperclip.  It requires circulating tumor cells to be effectively magnetized with nanoparticles containing a specific antibody that binds to the circulating tumor cells. Once the floating tumor cell and nanoparticle are hitched, cell-magnet complexes in the bloodstream stick to the wire. Then, the wire is removed from the vein, and the cells are stripped for analysis. The technique has only been used in pigs so far, attracts from 10-80 times more tumor cells in a 5-milliliter blood sample than current blood-based cancer-detection methods. This technique could also be used to gather genetic information about tumors located in hard-to-biopsy places or to provide information about the efficacy of cancer treatments. Perhaps one day the magnetic wire may even stand to evolve into a form of treatment, capable of grabbing the cancer cells and preventing them from spreading to other parts of the body. So far, researchers have not found any signs of toxicity with the nanoparticles. Once the technology is approved for humans, the goal is to develop it into a multi-pronged tool that will boost detection, diagnosis, treatment, and evaluation of cancer therapy.

Robots can collectively plan for future

Garattoni L. et al. Autonomous task sequencing in a robot swarm. Science Robotics, July 2018.

Robots are currently able to communicate and coordinate in order to make decisions and carry out simple tasks. But could robots in the future carry out missions that require them to determine which tasks to perform and in what order to perform them? For example, could robots soon save the survivors of a natural disaster? The ability to plan ahead in challenging times is a complex cognitive skill, and it typically emerges from the interactions between the individuals in a group. A new study provides evidence that robots can also collectively decide in what order they should complete their tasks in a group. The researchers have based their study on swarm robotics, a branch of robotics that applies the organized behavior of social animals such as ants in order to produce groups of robots that exhibit artificial intelligence. In this study, they have developed a swarm of robots that can perform a sequence of three actions, without knowing the correct order in advance. During the test, the robots were required to move to three different points in space, where they were to perform a simple task. Only after the tasks were completed would the robots learn whether the order was correct. To solve this problem, some of the robots gradually formed a chain between the three points in space, which the others used as a guide as they tested the various possible combinations by following instructions from the robots who made up the chain. Eventually, they determined the correct sequence by working together. This study demonstrates, for the first time, that robots are able to collectively determine a sequence of actions whose required order was previously unknown. This research paves the road to a number of future applications involving missions in which the ability to autonomously determine the order in which tasks should be completed are needed, such as searching for survivors after a natural disaster, exploring unknown or hostile environments, building structures on dangerous sites, and various applications in agriculture.

Hang that phone up now! Mobile phone radiation impairs memory

Foerster M. et al. A prospective cohort study of adolescents’ memory performance and individual brain dose of microwave radiation from wireless communication. Environmental Health Perspectives, July 2018.

A new study involving nearly 700 adolescents showed that the frequent use of mobile phones can lead to deterioration of memory performance of specific brain regions due to exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) during mobile phone use. The dazzling growth of information and communication technologies brings a dramatic increase in exposure to RF-EMF in our daily life. Several studies have been conducted to identify potential health effects related to RF-EMF, though results have remained inconclusive. Researchers studied 700 adolescents between the ages of 12 and 17 and looked at the link between their daily exposure to RF-EMF and memory performances over the course of one year. The researchers found that cumulative RF-EMF brain exposure from mobile phone use may have a negative effect on the development of figural memory performance. Figural memory, the ability to recall shapes, is mainly mediated by the right brain hemisphere and association of negative effects with RF-EMF was more pronounced in adolescents who used the mobile phone on the right side of the head. This observation suggested that RF-EMF absorbed by the brain is likely responsible for the observed associations. Other aspects of wireless communication, such as texts, playing games, or internet browsing will also cause marginal RF-EMF exposure. However, these were not found to be associated with the negative development of memory. The potential effect of RF-EMF exposure to the brain is a relatively new field and it is not yet clear how RF-EMF could potentially affect brain processes or how relevant the findings are in the long-term. To minimize the potential risks to the brain, experts recommend using headphones or the loud speaker while calling, in particular when network quality is low and the mobile phone is functioning at maximum power.

In recent years scientists have taken huge steps towards the bio-hybrid architecture developed for exploring an alternate approach to the control of autonomous robots (1). The plant-robot interactions through cyborg plants have been investigated in an effort to apply lessons from plants to robots, which provided another role for these organisms other than being a food source or decoration items. There are several joint experimental, numerical and robotic studies conducted in this newly developed area. One of the examples includes a flower robot made by Korean engineers which has the appearance of a common flower with petals, stem and leaves (2). The flower robot has sensing ability, moving mechanism, and home appliance function. It can recognize environmental conditions such as room temperature, pressure, voice and light intensity and can imitate the blooming of a flower, the bending of the stem and the stirring of the leaves in the wind. Other than these, the flower robot functions as a humidifier, a vision/voice recording system and an illumination device. For example, when flower robot receives light, it senses the intensity of the light and blooms. On the contrary, when it is dark, as the flower robot starts fading away and its illumination device turns on to flash the room.

Plantas nomadas, made by Mexican artist Gilberto Espaza, is another example of cyborg plants. It uses dirty water to live. It is a miniature eco-system consisting of plants and micro-organisms within a robotic shell. Each of the components symbiotically relies on the others: the plant provides the perfect environment for the microbe, and the microbe (in a microbial fuel cell) transforms nutrients in dirty water into energy to power the robotic components, and the robotic components provide mobility (3).

A team from Switzerland has been working on a project that endows a robot with the ability to react in response to environmental stress of a plant in order to maintain the state of the plant. The robotic devices monitor the changes in morphology and electrical activity of the avocado plants. According to these parameters, it classifies the drought level and triggers irrigation when necessary (4).

Some of the artists like James Stone, who is a Media Artist specializing in digital technologies and fabrication, are interested in seeing if plants are prone to act in certain ways, show preference and possibly display other traits such as emotion. Artists are specifically curious as to what would happen when a plant is augmented with technology but also given full control over such technology to do with it whatever it chooses (5). To see the results of such systems that provides a means for the plant to interact with people or things will surely be fascinating. A study in this line of research is done by a group of researchers in mobile robotics at ETH Zürich, whose long-term research goal is also to bestow machines with the ability to gain and employ knowledge from the universe to improve their intelligence, by building a prototype called iRobot Create. This cyborg plant consists of a computer running Linux, a normal plant and additional sensors and lives its own life, following its internal needs of water, sunlight and electrical energy (6). The cyborg stays away from obstacles using ultrasonic sensors, finds the best light spot using light sensors and goes to a recharge and to a mock-up water station using iRobot’s infrared sensor. Moreover, its sensors pick up noise caused by people moving around nearby, allowing cyborg plant to react by moving out of the way, to prevent themselves from getting underfoot (7).

It is very important to improve the ability of robots to work successfully in a complex and harsh environment, which would increase their usages. In one of those efforts exploring the use of biological systems to control robots under changing environmental conditions, Dr. David Hu and his group from Georgia Institute of Technology (8) used the Mexican jumping bean, Laspeyresia saltitans, which consists of an empty seed housing a moth larva. Heating by the sun stimulates movements by the larva which rolls, jumps and flips by the bean. They explored this unique means of rolling locomotion and recorded bean trajectories across a series of terrain types, including one-dimensional channels and planar surfaces of varying inclination by Time-lapse videography. They found that the shell encumbers the larva’s locomotion, decreasing its speed on flat surfaces by three-fold. Interestingly, they also showed that the two-dimensional search algorithm of the bean resembles the run-and-tumble search of bacteria. When they tested this search algorithm using both an agent-based simulation and a wheeled Scribbler robot, they demonstrated that the algorithm succeeds in propelling the robot away from regions of high temperature. It is amazing that from a study that involves a plant seed, a moth larva and a robot, scientists may develop applications in biomimetic micro-scale navigation systems.

The hi-tech devices that have been inspired by biological systems are not limited by the ones stimulated with plants. The insect world also represents a huge and original database for future bio-inspired systems, vehicles, and micro-vehicles (9). For example, the process of motion detection system in the fly’s eye is a good example of a neural circuit that was used for robot automatic piloting. Recently, a novel bat-like unmanned aerial vehicle inspired by the morphing-wing mechanism of bats has been presented (10). Other than that, body undulation used by snakes and the physical structure of the body of a snake may offer major advantages over typical legged or wheeled locomotion designs in certain types of scenarios, therefore a large number of research groups have developed snake-inspired robots to make use of these benefits (11). Caenorhabditis elegans, a roundworm which has similar motions with snakes but with a simpler structure, was also selected to develop a small crawling robot with a thermal shape memory alloy, a homogeneous mixture or solid solution of two or more metal, as an actuator (a type of motor for moving or controlling a mechanism or system) due to the similarities of its properties to C. elegans muscles. (12).

Not only multicellular organisms but also unicellular (single-celled) organisms are utilized for generating cyborgs; for example, scientists used circuits prepared from Physarum polycephalum, amoeboid plasmodia of the slime mold, to control an omni-directional hexapod robot. Sensory signals from the macro-physical environment of the robot are transduced to cellular scale and processed using the unique micro-physical characteristics of intracellular information processing and the response from the cellular computation is amplified to yield a macroscopic output action in the environment mediated through the robot’s actuators(1).

In addition, a new biorobotic system using human neuroblastoma cultures was introduced in 2011 by a Spanish engineering group (13). Multielectrode Arrays Setups have been designed for direct culturing neural cells over silicon or glass substrates. The main objective of this work is to run a robot using this biological neuroprocessor and the final system could be used for many things such as testing how chemicals influence the behavior of the robot.

In summary, manipulation of robots that use living organisms as an interface to perceive the environment and transfer their responses into functions seem to have endless applications as well as challenges. Biologically-inspired technologies represent an emerging and promising field of interdisciplinary areas composed of engineering, computer sciences, chemistry, biology, physics and even art. In nature there are so many living and non-living elements designed by God to help us develop and improve robots to make our lives easier, better and more productive. Even a flower can offer us with something more than color and scent, and that is if we start thinking outside the box like so many people mentioned above have done.

Safiye Arslan is a Research fellow in the area of molecular biology in Nevada.

References

1. Tsuda, S., Zauner, K. P., & Gunji, Y. P. (2006). Robot Control: From Silicon Circuitry to Cells, Biologically Inspired Approaches to Advanced Information Technology (pp. 20-32). Osaka, Japan: Springer.

2. H. K. Park, S. H. Park, J. O. Park, (2007) “A study on the Moving Mechanism for Flower Robot,” International Conference on Control, Automation and Systems.

3. http://m.ammoth.us/blog/2010/09/a-cyborg-arboretum/

4. http://www.cyborgplant.com/

5. http://www.manofstone.com/cyborgplants/

6. Stocker, J., Veillat, A., Magnenat, S., Colas, F., Siegwart, R. (2011). Towards Adaptive Robotic Green Plants. TAROS 2011: 422-423

7. http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21128305.900-robotassisted-plants-find-their-place-in-the-sun.html

8. West, D. M., Lal, I. K., Leamy, M. J., & Hu, D. L. (2012). Locomotion of Mexican jumping beans. Bioinspiration & Biomimetics, 7(3), 036014. doi:10.1088/1748-3182/7/3/036014

9. http://www.ercim.eu/EU-NSF/Bionics.pdf

10. Colorado, J., Barrientos, A., Rossi, C., & Parra, C. (2012). Inertial attitude control of a bat-like morphing-wing air vehicle. Bioinspiration & Biomimetics, 8(1), 016001. doi:10.1088/1748-3182/8/1/016001

11. Hopkins, J. K., Spranklin, B. W., & Gupta, S. K. (2009). A survey of snake-inspired robot designs. Bioinspiration & Biomimetics, 4(2), 021001. doi:10.1088/1748-3182/4/2/021001

12. Yuk, H., Kim, D., Lee, H., Jo, S., & Shin, J. H. (2011). Shape memory alloy-based small crawling robots inspired by C. elegans. Bioinspiration & Biomimetics, 6(4), 046002. doi:10.1088/1748-3182/6/4/046002

13. Ferrández, J. M., Lorente, V., de Santos, D., Cuadra, J. M., de la Paz, F., Alvarez, J. R., & Fernández, E. (2011). Human neuroblastoma cultures for biorobotics. Conference proceedings : … Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Conference, 2011, 6672-5. doi:10.1109/IEMBS.2011.6091645

Robots that “care” are no longer merely science fiction …

Producing machines that look and behave like people seems to be a human project with a long history. Mention of a Jewish Rabbi producing an instance of the legendary golem (a creature understood to possess an active human-like body, while lacking a soul) appeared as early as the 4th century CE. The celebrated 13th-century Muslim engineer Ibn al-Razzaz al-Jazari undoubtedly designed, and may have constructed, what has been described in present-day terms as “the first programmable human-like robotic device” – a spectacular artifact featuring four robotic musicians performing on a floating boat (Nicks 2010). Inspired by animated life-like figures reportedly created by an ancient Greek named Ctesibus, Leonardo da Vinci – around the time in the 1400s at which he began painting his famous Last Supper – also designed a human-like robot resembling a knight in armor. Fascination with the idea of crafting convincing imitations of people appears to have been part of human history for millennia.

In more recent times, though, modern computers – and with them, research introducing so-called “artificial intelligence” (AI) – have begun to give this long-standing fascination some significant new dimensions. Perhaps the most widely recognized contemporary human-like (or, nowadays, “humanoid”) robot is a product of Japanese science and technology named “ASIMO.” Resembling a short (4 ft 3 in) astronaut wearing a backpack, ASIMO represents the fruit of several decades of research and development conducted by the Honda Motor Company. Videos on the company’s official web site show ASIMO climbing stairs, jogging, balancing on one foot, visually recognizing people by name, and serving a tray of beverages to restaurant patrons. Similar examples of this impressive humanoid robot technology exist in other countries as well – e.g., Turkey (Today’s Zaman 2010), United Arab Emirates (Fahad Inc. 2008), and South Korea (Impactlab.net 2008).

Investment by business enterprises in the significant cost and engineering effort required to design and build these curiously humanoid machines constitutes one of the “new dimensions” previously mentioned. Historical figures such as Al-Jazari and da Vinci, after all, were not responding to global marketing prospects with their robotic creations. In contrast, a current Honda Motor Company web site tells us that ASIMO was intended to be more than an attention-catching novelty from the beginning; in fact, it was “created solely to perform tasks to assist people, especially those lacking full mobility” (Honda Robotics 2011). Similarly, the president of a Robotic Industries Association reports that South Korea is “taking the lead in promoting the use of robots for service applications such as elder care” (Burnstein 2009). A former GM of the Microsoft Robotics Group has identified such assistive care as the market that “intrigues” him the most, citing approaching increases in senior populations – and, consequently, heavier burdens upon healthcare systems – as factors that may “present the ‘killer app’ for personal robots” (Foley 2009). A 2009 online report titled “Robot Nurses to Care for Japanese Elderly within Five Years” reports that Warwick University, in England, has undertaken a “three year 2.7 million dollar project to develop a robot nurse,” predicting that “nurses could be delegating tasks to robotic colleagues by 2020” (Zygbotics 2009).

It is important to note that such robotic “colleagues” of human nurses commonly are intended to be suited for fairly intimate kinds of social interactions with people. One finds, for instance, references to robotic assistance in recreation and with feeding, grooming, walking, bathing, etc. (Babyboomercaretaker.com 2007). Accordingly, we encounter another new dimension. Robotic arms have welded and painted in our automobile factories for decades, but the repetitive activities of these familiar industrial robots are profoundly different from interaction with a humanoid machine that helps one’s aging grandmother eat her dinner and take her medicine (perhaps even chatting and playing a card game with her). Moreover, the latter type of robot no longer is mere science fiction; design and construction of machines to perform these kinds of personal human-robot interactions are taking place now.

… and these robots that “care” invite some questions

Considered only as machines meant to assist overburdened nurses with their care of older people, the types of humanoid robots just described might initially be categorized simply as useful new tools. We have reasons to wonder, though, how long those who will be interacting regularly with these life-like robots can be expected to perceive them merely as tools. So-called “animaloid” robots, such as the robotic dog AIBO that was marketed in recent years by the Sony Corporation, admittedly represent a somewhat different class of robotic artifact than the more complex contemporary humanoids such as ASIMO. Nevertheless, empirical studies of human-robot interaction even with AIBO have uncovered some relevant thought-provoking surprises. Not long ago, for example, numerous online postings by owners of AIBO began appearing on Internet forums. One study of these postings noted the following confession by an AIBO owner:

The other day I proved to myself that I do indeed treat him as if he were alive, because I was getting changed to go out, and [AIBO] was in the room, but before I got changed I stuck him in a corner so he didn’t see me! (Friedman, Kahn, and Hagman 2003, 278)

Regardless of whether this posted confession was altogether truthful, its expressed thought of needing modesty in this case clearly alerts us to the potential psychological potency of human interaction with such machines. Abrahamic religions, through their shared accounts of the Garden of Eden, have long recognized appropriateness of modesty between even the primordial man and woman – but application of that sentiment to our dealings with a battery-operated dog suggests how plastic human notions of personhood might be!

For that matter, professional testimony of such plasticity for the specific case of humanoid robots is available in a frequently-quoted set of observations by Professor Sherry Turkle, Director of the MIT Initiative on Technology and Self, at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. One of her MIT colleagues, widely-recognized roboticist Rodney Brooks, is among the many people who have cited Turkle’s report of her first encounter with his experimental humanoid robot, Cog; note carefully Sherry’s candid description of the experience:

Cog “noticed” me soon after I entered its room. Its head turned to follow me and I was embarrassed to note that this made me happy. I found myself competing with another visitor for its attention. At one point, I felt sure that Cog’s eyes had “caught” my own. My visit left me shaken – not by anything that Cog was able to accomplish but by my own reaction to “him.” For years whenever I had heard Rodney Brooks speak about his robotic “creatures,” I had always been careful to mentally put quotation marks around the word. But now, with Cog, I had found the quotation marks had disappeared. Despite myself and despite my continuing skepticism about this research project, I had behaved as though in the presence of another being. (Brooks 2003, 149)

Professor Turkle’s testimony is consistent with an entire literature of contemporary research in human-robot interaction that suggests a deep human predisposition progressively to accept as peers various machines that convincingly mimic human appearance and autonomous behavior. Her reference to discovering herself behaving as though she were “in the presence of another being” points, in turn, toward some questions that invite our reflection.

First, one might inquire whether (and why) it could matter that humans seem so inclined to regard convincingly humanoid machines as peers. For some people, it apparently does not matter. From his perspective as a practicing Zen Buddhist, for example, robotics engineer Masahiro Mori has argued against insisting upon any profound distinction between persons and robots, noting that there “must also be buddha-nature in the machines and robots that my colleagues and I make” (Mori 1999, 174). In contrast, though, a pilot study has suggested that Abrahamic theistic belief in creation of individual human souls by a personal deity may be related to disapproval of human-robot interaction “with life-like personal robots that requires human acceptance of the robots at intimate levels” (Metzler and Lewis 2008, 22). This finding resonates with a respected voice in modern Christian theology. Paul Tillich, in Volume Three of his monumental Systematic Theology, addresses “objects that are produced by the technical act,” warning that “by virtue of producing and directing mere things” one can lose one’s “character as an independent self” and “become a thing” (74). Again, Jewish theologian and philosopher Martin Buber, widely remembered for his distinction between “I – Thou” and “I – It” relations, issues a similar warning in I and Thou:

And in all the seriousness of truth, hear this: without It man cannot live.

But he who lives with It alone is not a man. (34)

Apparently, we have reasons to expect that individuals belonging to Abrahamic religious traditions may especially feel troubled when they find themselves treating humanoid machines as though they were peers.

Within the Abrahamic religious family, after all, human beings historically have been regarded as spiritually special, and understood as belonging to a category fundamentally different from any technological artifacts that they might construct for amusement, or as tools. Anglican priest (and physicist) John Polkinghorne has emphasized significance of “the mystery of the human person,” which involves “our embodied nature, embedded in the physical world but transcending a merely reductive physicality” (Polkinghorne 1998, 80). Both the mystery and the transcendence that Polkinghorne mentions are punctuated clearly, as well, in the Holy Qur’an: And they will ask thee of the Spirit. SAY: The Spirit proceedeth at my Lord’s command: but of knowledge, only a little to you is given (The Night Journey – Sura 17:85). The theistic perspective of this family of religions tends to link the human person, as a free moral agent, with a spiritual level of reality that is not completely expressible in terms of everyday (macro-level) entities such as rocks and trees – and machines.

It may be pertinent at this point to inquire whether the spiritual level of reality envisioned by these religious faiths might arguably be represented even in current science. To be sure, the robotic and AI technologies upon which we have focused in this essay are discussed almost entirely nowadays with so-called “macro-level” accounts of discrete, individualized entities. Computer scientists typically view all “information processing” executed by contemporary computers as reducible to operations of the celebrated Turing Machine formalism, which imagines an abstract machine successively “reading” well-defined symbols (0 or 1) on an external tape, comparing them with its current internal “state,” and then implementing clearly prescribed (albeit possibly null) changes on the tape and its own internal state. Physicists working with quantum mechanics, however, have discovered a quite different level of reality that requires a so-called “quantum-level” description. The description is expressed mathematically in terms of complex numbers (incorporating an imaginary unit equal to the square root of negative one) and it explores a reality in which individualized entities of the macro-level (this table, that book, etc.) simply are no longer present. An atom may be understood to contain four electrons, but – in principle – one cannot select and track, say, the changing locations over time of a specific individual electron among the four. Pondering this strange new reality, mathematical physicist Roger Penrose has argued (via his Shadows of the Mind) that human consciousness cannot be modeled in terms of the Turing Machine formalism, requiring, instead, the resources of an advanced quantum physics. If the emerging technology of “quantum computers” eventually could yield a machine consistent with Roger Penrose’s understanding of how the human brain operates when we experience consciousness, future robots incorporating such computers might open possibilities for exciting new dialogue between religion and science.

Under present circumstances, though, we can discern the outlines of potential difficulties in the not-so-distant future. Specifically, elderly members of the Abrahamic faiths may find themselves increasingly conflicted in responding to robotic “caregivers.” On one hand, following natural predispositions, they will be inclined to accept the machines as caregivers (dropping the skeptical quotation marks, as Professor Turkle did during her encounter with Cog). At the same time, they may retain their religious worldviews and resist accepting the machines as persons. Will they feel authentically comforted, then, by machines programmed to display “artificial empathy”? Will they discover resolution of their conflict in the following conjecture by noted roboticist Hans Moravec?

So, it may be appropriate to say “God” has granted a soul to a machine when the machine is accepted as a real person by a wide human community. (Moravec 1999, 77)

Indeed, in perhaps the next ten years or so, how will people be using quotation marks to distinguish what they consider authentic from mere “make-believe”? Will they be describing new robot nurses as persons – or as “persons”? Will they decide that the machines care for people – or “care” for people? Will the artifacts be considered capable of moral behavior – or “moral” behavior? Will some older people still understand the granting of souls to be determined by God – or by “God”?

For some of us, these already are important questions.

Theodore Albert Metzler is the Director of Darrell W. Hughes Program for Religion and Science Dialogue, Oklahoma City University.

References

• American Honda Motor Co. Inc. 2010. “Asimo, The World’s Most Advanced Humanoid
• Robot.” Accessed December 21, 2010. http://asimo.honda.com/ .
• Babyboomercaretaker.com. 2007. “Robotics in Nursing.” Accessed January 4, 2011.
• http://www.babyboomercaretaker.com/assistive-technology/robotic-technology/Robotics-In-
• Nursing.html .
• Brooks, Rodney A. 2003. Flesh and Machines: How Robots Will Change Us. New York:
• Vintage Books.
• Buber, Martin. 1987. I and Thou. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
• Burnstein, Jeff. 2009. “Robotics and the Big Trends.” Robotics Online. Accessed January 3,
• 2011. http://www.robotics.org/content-detail.cfm/Industrial-Robotics-Feature-
• Article/Robotics-and-the-BigTrends/content_id/1709 .
• Fahad Inc. 2008. “REEM-B: UAE’s First ‘Home-Grown’ Humanoid Robot.” Accessed
• December 21, 2010. http://www.fahad.com/2008/06/reem-b-uaes-first-home-grown-
• humanoid.html .
• Foley, Mary Jo. 2009. “‘Partner bots: The next killer robotics app? (And will Microsoft bite?).”
• ZDNet. Accessed January 3, 2011. http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/partner-bots-the-
• next-killer-robotics-app-and-will-microsoft-bite/2828 .
• Friedman, Batya, Peter H. Kahn, Jr., and Jennifer Hagman. 2003. “Hardware Companions? –
• What Online AIBO Discussion Forums Reveal about the Human-Robotic Relationship.” CHI
• 2003. ACM. CHI Letters 5.1: 273-280. doi: 10.1145/642611.642660.
• Honda Robotics. 2011. “ASIMO.” Accessed January 3, 2011. http://dreams.honda.com/robotics-
• mobility/ .
• Impactlab.net. 2008. “Mahru II – South Korea’s Humanoid Robot.” Accessed December 21,
• 2010. http://www.impactlab.net/2008/10/14/mahru-ii-south-koreas-humanoid-robot/ .
• Moravec. Hans. 1999. Robot: Mere Machine to Transcendent Mind. New York: Oxford
• University Press.
• Nicks, Victoria. 2010. “History of Robots – Robotics Technology in Automata by Al-Jazari.”
• Suite101.com. Accessed December 10, 2010.
• http://www.suite101.com/content/history-of-robots-robotics-technology-in-automata-by-al-
• jazari-a253819 .
• Metzler, Ted, and Lundy Lewis. 2008. “Ethical Views, Religious Views, and Acceptance of
• Robotic Applications: A Pilot Study.” Technical Report WS-08-05. Menlo Park, CA: AAAI
• Press: 15-22.
• Mori, Masahiro. 1999. The Buddha in the Robot: A Robot Engineer’s Thoughts on Science and
• Religion. Tokyo: Kosei Publishing Co.
• Penrose, Roger. 1994. Shadows of the Mind: A Search for the Missing Science of Consciousness.
• New York: Oxford University Press.
• Polkinghorne, John. 1998. Belief in God in an Age of Science. Binghamton: Vail-Ballou Press.
• Tillich, Paul. 1971. Systematic Theology: Three volumes in one. Chicago: The University of
• Chicago Press.
• Today’s Zaman. 2010. “Meet SURALP, Turkey’s first humanoid robot.” Accessed December
• 21, 2010.
• http://www.todayszaman.com/news-224330-meet-suralp-turkeys-first-humanoid-robot.html .
• Zygbotics. 2009. “Robot Nurses to Care for Japanese Elderly within Five Years.” Accessed May
• 13, 2009. http://www.zygbotics.com/2009/03/27/robot-nurses-to-care-for-japanese-elderly-
• within-five-year/ .

The role of mathematics in understanding nature

Mathematics is a discipline of thought. It helps to develop our way of thinking and is an exercise in improving our intelligence. Mathematics can be considered as another kind of language, a language very different from that of a spoken language. When it is hard to convey our thoughts in terms of words, or our words become insufficient to express our thoughts, mathematics may be used as an alternative. On some occasions, expressing ideas via mathematics might be more concise, much clearer and more understandable. Although mathematics is considered to be a separate branch of science, in fact it is related to all branches of science. Nowadays, even in biological and social sciences, extensive studies are being conducted using mathematics.

Engineering was one of the earliest application fields of mathematics. It has strong links with mathematics as well as physics. Many engineering problems can be considered as an application of mathematics and hence applied mathematicians and engineers share common research areas. Engineers try to improve the quality of life by designing new products and in the design process, geometry and mathematics play a vital role.

Since the first day of existence on the world, mankind has tried to understand and formulate the surroundings and events that take place around them. They have investigated the world and the cosmos and accumulated knowledge. Each question that was answered yielded more questions to be answered and the more the knowledge that was acquired the better the extent of our ignorance about the universe was understood.

The universe has been established in a very complex orderly manner. The magnificent order observed cannot be expressed well in words, but may also be expressed using mathematics. A person who develops their knowledge of mathematics can understand more about this supreme order. For example, the universal gravitational law, which describes the movement of planets, can best be understood through mathematical equations, while the solutions of the equations yield the well-known elliptic paths. The concept of infinity that is attributed to the Creator can be realized through the concept of infinity that is frequently used in mathematics. So mathematics is an essential tool in developing our understanding of the nature and universe. It is essential also in applying the principles of physical laws in nature to improve our quality of life. The design of an airplane requires extensive mathematical calculations and applications of physical laws.

Finally, it should be noted that mathematics also has its limits, as it is something that has been developed by human beings and may not be sufficient to express the total order and all physical laws. Chaotic motion, a very complex order, was developed recently to understand some phenomena that do not obey the rules of deterministic motion. A daily example of such motion would be atmospheric motion. With even super computers and satellite technology, the path of the hurricane Katrina could not be predicted precisely due to its largely chaotic behavior and these errors cost thousands of lives.

Basic engineering principles and their applications in nature

First, let’s briefly describe some of the fundamental engineering courses and their aims. Dynamics is the science of motion. It models motion, describing the relation among displacement, velocity and acceleration. The specific type of motion and its causes, such as forces, movements, impulses etc. are examined. Dynamics deal with solid bodies while fluid mechanics basically deals with liquids and gases.. In the context of fluid mechanics the rest states of fluids as well as their motions are investigated. The strength of materials deals basically with the design of structures and mechanical parts to loading conditions. Under a given loading condition, what would be the best design for withstanding the loads while using the minimum amount of material? Materials science deals basically with the mechanical properties of various materials and the causes (microstructure etc.) of those properties. Proper selection of the materials to perform the required task is another important issue.

Living organisms can also be considered as some sort of design, but of course they are different from man-made designs. Living organisms, whether they are plants, animals or human beings, are designed to perform a specific predetermined task. The organism has to move, find food, safely operate and resist the forces that act on it throughout its life, and it must reproduce. Therefore, organisms have to be designed (or more precisely created) according to the principles of engineering. The development of technology drew attention to creatures and the underlying engineering principles in their structures. Extensive research on living creatures revealed a clear conclusion: Designs applied in nature are much more sophisticated then the ones humans come up with.

Bernoulli’s principle is a fundamental principle in fluid mechanics. Basically, the principle states that when the velocity of fluid increases the pressure drops and visa versa. The lift force generated in the wing of a plane is explained with this principle. Air separates in front of the wing and reattaches at the back. When the upper surface of the wing is slightly curved and the bottom flatter, the air particles in the upper part travel a further distance at a higher velocity and meet the particles traveling under the wing at the back. The relatively higher velocity on top causes a pressure difference in the lift direction and this lift force balances the weight of the plane. Many applications of Bernoulli’s principle can be found in living organisms. A fish moving in water is a good example. In particular, fish that swim at great speeds, like the tuna, have distinctive body shapes: The mouth of the fish is at the front where the fluid comes to rest and the pressure is very high, making the fluid intake of oxygen easier. The heart is located at the minimum pressure point to make it easier for it to beat. The eyes are located on a precise saddle point, a place which is not affected by velocity changes. Since the pressure is constant for all ranges of velocities, vision is not distorted by movement. Another example is the human body. When one breathes in the fluid velocity in the nose increases and pressure drops. The outer pressure is higher than the inner pressure and the walls tend to collapse. If bones were found at the tip of the nose, they might easily break when excessive force was present. We need some other material to sustain the shape yet be elastic enough not to break down. Cartilage is the best choice in this case, as it has both strength and elasticity. Our ears are also made from the same material. If bones were used instead of cartilage in our ears, resting our head on one side would be painful or even cause damage to the ears.

Insect flight is another important issue and has attracted considerable research recently. Fluid scientists now realize that insect flight is much more developed than our flight techniques. Turbulence is the main issue. In turbulent flow, the fluids move in erratic paths colliding with each other, forming eddies and irregularities. This is a dangerous state, especially for planes, and increases the friction forces between fluid and structure. Therefore the maintenance of a regular flow (laminar flow) over the wings is advantageous. However, all insects benefit from turbulence and some portion of their lift is gained from eddies that are formed over their wings. Mechanical insect robots are built to understand insect flight. Insects have movable elastic wings, but aircraft only have immovable rigid wings. Movable elastic wings would certainly improve the flight of planes and their maneuverability, but extensive research has to be done before these designs can be safely implemented.

The bumps on the fins and heads of some whales are not accidents of nature. They were given to them by the Creator for some very special purposes. They decrease the friction (drag) force by 10% and increase the lift by 5%.1 When some have the effect of decreasing drag, they can also decrease lift and visa versa. This effect of both decreasing drag and increasing lift, which can be observed in whales, is very uncommon in fluid mechanics.

Streamlining is a very important issue for an object that moves in a fluid. Fluid particles move around an object that follows a path. Roughly speaking these paths are streamlines (in a steady motion) and it is a general rule that abrupt distortion of these streamlines should be avoided. Smooth changes in the streamline help to reduce the friction force between the object and fluid. All organisms, particularly those that move at greater speeds, have been created in accordance to streamlining principles. In these you can find many species of birds and fish, such as dolphins, sharks, whales etc. The friction reduction caused by the shape of a dolphin is still a controversial issue in science and the underlying mechanism has not yet been well understood.

An example of the strength of natural materials can now be given. Our bones are optimum structures, combining strength with lightness. In modern buildings, 60-70% of the buildings consist of the skeletons, which carry the loads and moments. In our body, our skeleton is only 1/7th of our body weight. Bones have inspired a new generation of lightweight structures. For instance, a bridge inspired by the backbone was recently designed.2 When a longitudinal cross-section is taken from a femur, some curved lines are observed. Recent numerical simulations revealed that these lines are to be found in one exact place and their configuration increases the strength of the bone. Our backbone and the muscles around it withstand very high loads, equivalent to 7,000 Newtons or approximately 700 kilograms of weight.3 The bones of mammals are hollow inside to increase strength. The inner to outer ratio of the radii is at the optimum range, between 0.4 and 0.7.4

Hardness is another important issue in some applications. Seashells are the leaders in this issue. Their microstructures are being investigated under electron microscopes to invent new materials with extreme hardness properties. Micro-cracks inside a material grow over time, finally leading to failure. This is a major problem in turbine blades and this phenomenon is responsible for some plane crashes. In seashells, micro-crack inhibiting mechanisms are inserted to prevent crack growth. Inspired by spider silk and the microstructure of bird feathers, a new generation of bullet-proof waistcoats has been developed.

Owls are very silent flyers; they need to be so in order to approach rodents as rodent ears are highly sensitive to sound. Recent investigations have shown that the special geometry of their wings results in this silent flight. Their feathers are placed to form fringes on their wings. The technology might be mimicked to reduce the noise generated in planes.5

A recent engineering discipline is robotics. There are industrial robots, which are designed to perform some very special tasks. But there are also robots inspired by living organisms. A new robot is designed to mimic caterpillar motion so that it can be stable enough in a hazardous region, pass through small gaps and detect humans who are alive under debris.6 By mimicking the motion and body of a scorpion, a military robot was designed with a camera and sensors to safely operate in a battle region.7 Of course there are human-like robots that are designed to mimic our motion and activities. The developments in robotics teach us a very important lesson: All animals are much more sophisticated in their locomotion, actions, and behavior and it is extremely hard to mimic those. A robot that can move freely like a cat and climb a tree yet maintain its balance has not yet been produced. Our robots are very slow in motion, and their stability in movement is an important technological issue that requires extensive sensors and control designs.

Newly developing engineering branches

As mentioned above, one of the newly developing branches of engineering is robotics. Day by day, better robots are being designed and those designs try to better mimic animals and humans. Some 50 years ago, a human walking might be considered a simple issue, but now we know that comfort in walking and excellent balance in such movement are very complex issues.3 Each new design in robotics adds to our knowledge of understanding animal locomotion and behavior and how miraculous their designs are. Some people think that robots may take control of the world in the future. Yet this is simply not possible: If humans are to design them, there is no way that such machines can be superior to the designers.

Other promising new fields are the MEMS (Micro-electrical machinery systems) and nano-technology. These are design attempts on extremely small scales which actually mimic some micro biological systems and micro-physics. A vertebrate consists of an enormous number of cells, while the chemical and physical events that take place inside the cells and their establishment as a system are crucial parts of staying alive. It is extremely hard to design at the micro and nano scale and it is likely that research in this field will reveal more about understanding the art of God.

Notes

1. M. Le Page, “Speed Bumps Give Humpbacks a Surprise Boost,” New Scientist, 13 January 2001, p. 22.
2. I. Sample, “A Bridge with Backbone,” New Scientist, 16 September 2000, p. 7.
3. R. Mc Neill Alexander, The Human Machine, Colombia University Press, 1992.
4. R. Mc Neill Alexander, Optima for Animals, Princeton University Press, 1996.
5. C. Seife, “Deadly Hush,” New Scientist, 6 march 1999, p. 10.
6. C. Zandonella, “Wriggle into Rubble,” New Scientist, 10 November 2001, p. 22.
7. D. Graham-Rowe, “Walk Like a Scorpion,” New Scientist, 21 April 2001, p. 18.

A woman was desperately looking for her lost child, hastily glancing at every child. When she finally found her lost child she embraced him with absolute relief and joy. Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, told his Companions to look at this woman and asked: “Would that woman throw her child into fire?” “No, she would not.” “By God, He is more merciful than she.” As this hadith very clearly indicates, we are born into the loving hands of our mothers and cared for by the Eternal Mercy of God. In this issue we feature “Love for Humankind,” in which a thorough definition of love is presented, as the strongest chain that binds humans one to another.

Intelligence is a great gift as long as it is used for serving the truth. When we reflect upon the creation, when we view the world around us through the eyes of wisdom, the feeling of love will blossom within our hearts spontaneously. Everything in this vast universe has been and continues to be fashioned perfectly. Even if we have never heard about what scientists call the “Golden Ratio,” we are somehow aware of the aesthetic beauty found everywhere in nature, be it a pine cone or the design of the human finger. Even within the smallest thing in nature, miracles are hidden. If we raise our gaze to the sky, the huge celestial bodies moving through space are no less amazing. One cannot help but ask how did it all begin? Where are all they heading? And more importantly, where are “we” heading?

The human mind has always been busy with questions about the universe, about death, about the meaning of life and other such subjects. We have made countless inventions and we even feel that we are coming close to the day when we will be able to make artificial intelligence that is able to think as we do. Even though we still have not been able to produce robots that think like people, we have unfortunately invented a machine which can turn our children into robots; the television, although an invention with many uses, is an invention that can also be harmful.

Our hope for the future is ever-growing. We feel the support of our readers with the increasing number of subscribers to The Fountain Magazine; we hope that with this interest, as we learn more about this world and about how this world is perceived by all of us, the interest in love, tolerance, and dialog with our fellow human beings will continue to develop.

The word ‘robot’ was first used in the 1922 play R.U.R. by the Czech playwright Karel Capek: the title is an acronym for Rossum’s Universal Robots which become so sophisticated that they take over the world. ‘Robot’ is compounded from the Czech words ‘robota’ or work, and ‘robotnik’ or serf (Capek. 1923).

The use of industrial robots, first clearly identified in the 1960s, along with computer aided design (CAD) and computed aided manufacturing (CAM) systems, characterizes the latest trends in the automation of the manufacturing process (Roth, 1983). These technologies arc leading industrial automation through another transition, the scope of which is still unknown.

Growth of the robotics market has slowed compared to the early 1980s. The use of industrial robots is at present concentrated in rather simple, repetitive tasks which do not to require high precision. However, manufacturing market analysis predicts that early next century industrial robots will become increasingly viable in applications which require more precision and sensory sophistication such as assembly tasks. The automotive industry, where robots have been economically justified since the 1970s, will continue to be the leading user. However, the major growth of the US robot population will occur in non-automotive industries.

2. Robot classes and characteristics

Robots can be classified in many ways. To establish a generic classification system, we shall refer to dimensions or degrees of freedom or DOF.

The DOF of a mechanical system refers to the number of physical axes through which motion can occur. In robotics, DOF can often be equated with the number of joints in the robot.

Typical present-day industrial robots have from one to six-DOF, although more are certainly possible. For example, a wrist can be made more flexible by adding rotation to the twisting already in that joint. Similarly, a fourth DOF can be added to the shoulder, where the arm joins the base to allow additional rotation of the arm. Industrial robots are also classified by the mechanical configuration of the individual elements of the arm and actuators. Theses classifications are: rectangular class (X,Y,Z): cylindrical class (R,?,Z): spherical class (R,?,?); and jointed class (?1,?1,?). This classification begins with simple movements in a rectangular co-ordinate system such as the x-y co-ordinate system.

3. World’s robot population

More than 610.000 industrial robots are now at work according to a new annual publication by the secretariat of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UN/ECE) and the International Federation of Robotics (IFR).

The world’s robot population grew by about 6% in 1993 compared with 8% the year before. These growth rates fall significantly short of those of 16-23% recorded in the booming late 1980s and early 1990s. However, in view of the deep recession which commenced at the end of 1990 in robot-using countries and resulted in large reductions in investment and industrial employment, growth in the robot stock of 6%-8% is still quite impressive. 

Japan accounts for more than half of the world robot stock. However, the net increase in Japanese robot stock fell sharply in both 1992 and 1993. In 1993, the net increase in the robot stock was only about a third of the record year 1990, underscoring the depth of the Japanese recession.

With 325 robots for every 10.000 persons employed in manufacturing, Japan has by far the world’s highest robot density followed by Singapore with 109, Sweden with 73, Italy with 70 and Germany with 62. As a result of falling employment in the manufacturing industry in 1992-1993, robot density increased rapidly in many countries even though the robot stock increased only modestly.

In most countries, welding is the predominant application area for robots, particularly for major motor vehicle producing countries, accounting for more than 20% of the total robot stock. In a few countries machining was the largest application area. Assembly was the largest application area in Japan, accounting for 40% of the total stock of robots. It is worth noting that in Japan assembly accounted for 50% of the net increase in stock while welding only had a share of 9%.After a solid recovery in 1994, the robot market is forecast to boom in the period up to 1998. Based on macroeconomics forecast of the development of world economics the UN/ECE and IFR forecast that the world stock of industrial robots will increase from some 610,000 units at the end of 1993 to over 830.000 units at the end of 1997. As the number of personnel employed in industry is falling, the density of robots measured as the number of robots per 10.000 workers will continue to surge. In terms of units, shipments are estimated to increase from about 54.000 units in 1993 to over 103,000 units in 1997.

While the robot market was expected to be somewhat hesitant in Japan in 1994 and 1995, it was expected to boom in the United States, Western Europe and the dynamic Asian economies. If growth and world trade gain momentum as predicted from 1995, the prospects for the robotics business seem extremely bright.

The potential for expansion of robotics is enormous. If other industrialized countries were to approach the robot densities of Japan and if industry in general were to reach only half the robot density of the motor vehicle sector, the robot stock would increase manifold, and this is not counting the potential for robots in the service industries. The following example gives an illustration of the potential: if industry in France and the United Kingdom were to achieve a robot density half that of the motor vehicle industry in those countries, the robot stock would more than double; if it reached half the density of the Japanese motor vehicle industry, the robot stock in those countries would increase more than 20 times.

4. Summary

The emphasis in this article has been on industrial robots and techniques currently used in that environment. The future of robotics depends on improvements in many technologies to reduce cost and increase the range of performance so that robots become effective in more environments. These technologies include motors, actuators, contact sensors, non contact sensors, mechanisms, lubrication, electronics, computers and artificial intelligence.

References 

• CAPEK. K. (1923) R.U.R.. Samuel French. London.
• ROTH. B. (1983) Principles of Automation, in Future Directions in Manufacturing Technology, based on the Unilever Research and Engineering Division Symposium held at Port Sunlight, April 1983. Unilever Research. UK