A1. Yes. In chemlambda we work with certain graphs made of nodes (atoms) and bond (arrows), call such a graph a molecule. Then:
- (A) We work with individual molecules, not with populations of molecules. The molecules encode information in their shape, not in their number.
- (B) different from algorithmic chemistry, the application and abstraction are atoms of the molecules.
- (C) There are no variables in chemlambda and there is no need to introduce one species of molecules per variable, like in the previous models.
- (D) chemlambda and it’s associated computing model (distributed GLC) work well in a decentralized world, there is no need for having a global space or a global time for the computation.
There is a number of more technical differences, like (non exhaustively):
- (E) molecules are not identified with their functions. Technically, chemlambda rejects eta reduction, so even for those molecules which represent lambda terms, they are not identified (as happens when we use eta reduction) with their function. This calls for an “extreme” functional programming style.
- (F) only a small part of the chemlambda molecules correspond to lambda terms (there is a lambda calculus “sector”).
- (G) there is no global semantics.
Q2. is chemlambda a kind of computing with chemical reaction networks (CRNs)?
A2. No. Superficially, there are resemblances, and really one may imagine CRNs based on chemlambda, but this is not what we are doing.
Q3. Why do you think chemlambda has something to tell about the real or even about the living world?
A3. Because the real world, in it’s fundamental workings, does not seem to care about 1D language based constructs which we cherish in our explanation. The real and especially the living world seems to be based on local, asynchronous interactions which are much more like signal transductions and much less like information passing. (See How is different signal transduction from information theory? )
Everything happens locally, in nontrivial but physical ways, leading to emergent complex behaviours. Nature does not care about coordinates and names of things or abstractions, unless they are somehow physically embodied. This is the way chemlambda functions.
Q4. Why do you think chemlambda has something to say about the virtual world of the Net?
A4. Because it puts the accent on alife instead of AI, on decentralization instead of pyramidal constructs. A microbial ecology like internet is much more realistic to hope to realize than one based on benevolent pyramidal AI constructs (be them clouds, or other corporations constructs). Because real and virtual worlds are consistent only locally.
Q5. What about the Internet of Things?
A5. We hope to give to the IoT the role of the bridge which unites two kinds of computations real-virtual, under the same chemistry.
Q6. What would happen in your dream world?
A6. There are already some (fake) news about it here: what if