Scientists are racing to make “living” computers powered by human cells

It may have its roots in science fiction, but few researchers are making real progress trying to create computers from living cells.

Welcome to the strange world of biocomputers.

Among those leading the way is a group of scientists in Switzerland, whom I went to meet.

One day, they hope to see data centers full of “live” servers that replicate aspects of how artificial intelligence (AI) learns — and could use part of the power of existing methods.

This is the vision of Dr. Fred Jordan, co-founder of the final lab I visited.

We are all familiar with the ideas of hardware and software in the computers we currently use.

The somewhat eyebrow-raising term Dr. Jordan and others in the field use to refer to what they create is “wet programs.”

In simple terms, it involves creating neurons that are developed into groups called organoids, which in turn can be attached to electrodes – whereupon the process of trying to use them like microcomputers can begin.

Dr. Jordan admits that for many people, the concept of biocomputing is probably a bit foreign.

“In science fiction, people have been living with these ideas for a long time,” he said.

“When you start saying, ‘I’m going to use neurons like a little machine,’ it’s a different view of our brain and it makes you wonder what we are.”

For the finals, the process begins with stem cells derived from human skin cells, which you buy from a clinic in Japan. Actual donors are anonymous.

But, perhaps surprisingly, it’s no less than shows.

“We have a lot of people approaching us,” he said.

“But we only choose stem cells coming from official suppliers, because the quality of the cells is essential.”

In the lab, Dr. Flora Brozzi, a finalist cell biologist, handed me a dish containing many small white orbs.

Each microsphere is essentially a tiny microsphere, made of living stem cells that have been bred to become clusters of neurons and supporting cells—these are the “organs.”

They’re not anywhere near as complex as the human brain, but they have the same building blocks.

After undergoing a process that can last several months, the organs are ready to be bonded to an electrode and are then required to respond to simple keyboard commands.

This is a means of sending and receiving electrical signals, with the results recorded on a regular computer hooked to the system.

It’s a simple test: You press a switch that sends an electrical signal through the electrodes, and if it works (it doesn’t always), you can see a little activity on the screen.

What is displayed is an animated graph that looks a bit like an EEG.

I hit the key several times in quick succession, and the responses suddenly stopped. Then there is a short, distinct burst of energy on the chart.

When I asked what happened, Dr. Jordan said there are many who still don’t understand what Organic does and why. Maybe I upset them.

The electrical stimulations are important first steps toward the team’s larger goal of stimulating learning in neurons in biological computers so they can eventually adapt to perform tasks.

“For AI, it’s always the same thing,” he said.

“You give some input, and you want some output used.

“For example, you give an image of a cat, you want the output to say whether it is a cat.”

Maintaining a regular computer is straightforward – it just needs a power supply – but what happens with critical computers?

It’s a question scientists don’t have an answer yet.

“The organoids don’t have blood vessels,” said Simon Schultz, professor of neurotechnology and director of the Center for Neurotechnology at Imperial College London.

“The human brain has blood vessels that run through it at multiple scales and provide nutrients to keep it functioning well.

“We don’t know yet how to get it right. So that’s the biggest ongoing challenge.”

One thing is for sure though. When we talk about the death of the computer, with “wetware” that is literally it.

Finalspark has made some progress in the past four years: it can now survive for up to four months.

But there are some strange consequences associated with her eventual death.

Sometimes they notice a flurry of activity from organs before they die—similar to the increased heart rate and brain activity observed in some humans at the end of life.

“There were some incidents when we had a very rapid increase in activity only in the last minutes or 10 seconds [of life]Dr. Jordan said.

“I think we’ve recorded about 1,000 or 2,000 of these individual deaths over the last five years.”

“It’s sad because we have to stop the experiment, understand why he died, and then do it again,” he said.

Professor Schultz agrees with this unemotional approach

“We shouldn’t be afraid of them, they are just computers made from a different substrate of a different material,” he said.

Finalists are not the only scientists working in the field of biocomputers.

Australian company Cortical Labs announced in 2022 that it had managed to get artificial neurons to play the early computer game Pong.

In the US, researchers at Johns Hopkins University are also building “microgates” to study how information is processed – but in the context of developing drugs for neurological conditions such as Alzheimer’s and autism.

The hope is that AI will soon be able to supercharge this kind of work.

But, for now, Dr. Lena Smirnova, who is leading the research at Johns Hopkins University, thinks wetware is scientifically exciting — but it’s early days.

She said there was little prospect of it replacing key materials currently used for computer chips.

“Biocomputing should complement—not replace—artificial intelligence, as disease models advance and reduce the use of animals,” she said.

Professor Schultz agrees: “I think they won’t be able to compete with silicon in many things, but we will find a place.”

Although the technology is getting closer to real-world applications, Dr. Jordan remains fascinated by its science fiction origins.

“I’ve always been a fan of science fiction,” he said.

“When you have a science fiction movie, or a book, I always felt a little sad that my life wasn’t in the book. Now I feel like I’m in the book, writing the book.”

Additional reporting by Francesca Hashemi