Humans are incredibly complex machines. Our biology dictates an innumerable quantity of events every second, from the creation of red blood cells in our bone marrow to the rhythmic beating of our hearts. At the lowest level, these processes are driven by DNA. Functioning as the equivalent of computer programs, DNA passes instructions to components within the cells that comprise our bodies.

Realizing the potential encapsulated by DNA, scientists are intent on programming with the language of life. In essence, the technology is a programmable, systematic way of combining computers and chemistry.

“Programming chemical systems needs to be thought about,” said Erik Winfree, a professor of computer science at the California Institute of Technology. “The meeting of computer science and chemistry hasn’t happened yet, but is right around the corner. There’s nothing logically, chemically or physically impossible about computing with molecular systems.”

When computers were first developed in the late 1940s, they were ungainly, power intensive and capable of processing basic mathematical functions. Their electronics-filled rooms and were composed of capricious components. Transistors, the electrically controlled switches that comprise the foundation for electronic devices, were large and unstable. In the 50 years since then, research and development have increased their efficiency and decreased their size. An average cell phone has trillions of transistors in its circuitry.

While silicon-based computing continues to develop at exponential rates, computing with chemistry is still in its infancy. Just as transistors began as awkward, precarious devices, programming with DNA is currently possible using only basic complexity. However, it marks a change in the scale and manner of computing.

“Programming in a DNA world offers a variety of applications,” said Winfree, speaking at a computer science and engineering colloquium Tuesday. “We can design a range of structures capable of creating complex patterns, circuits, and motors.”

Winfree’s research group has produced research that created patterns and structures out of DNA in test tubes. Shapes such as squares, stars and smiley faces were obtained by programming DNA sequences. The sequences are passed into a strand of DNA that is heated and cooled, causing it to self-assemble into the prescribed shape. The chemistry and methods are efficient, producing correctly formed molecules 60 to 90 percent of the time.

“It’s probably the most concentrated happiness ever,” said Winfree, considering billions of nanometer scale smiley faces created. “I’m not sure about the units.”

Levity aside, the implications of greater understanding are immense.

“Imagine a new virus that infects the world’s agricultural crops,” said Eric Klavins, a UW professor of electrical engineering. “If we understand the language, we could develop a biological response through reprogramming, no different than a remedy pushed out by Norton AntiVirus on a computer.”

Scientists are still faced with an array of challenges. Cells and DNA don’t behave as nicely as electronic systems. Improving reliability is paramount in scaling chemical computing to higher levels and increased complexity.

“Right now we can build new devices with roughly ten components,” Klavins said. “The questions that remain involve how to scale that number up and how to build in robustness. We need to experiment with new contexts.”

Computing is an abstract notion. It can be done on a multitude of scales by a number of methods. Life is fully capable of addressing these complexities. Klavins said that if scientists understand the manner in which such computing operates, it will mark a revolution in science. Winfree agreed.

“Besides pushing traditional ideas of computing, we’re finding another place for creativity in programming and innovation in designing things,” Winfree said. “Chemical computing is attractive to a completely different sort of person.”

While scientists’ creative dreams haven’t been fully realized, they continue undeterred by convention. Both Klavins and Winfree see the paradigm advancing rapidly into the future.

“The 20th century was the age of information,” Klavins said. “The 21st century is going to be the age of life.”

[Reach reporter Brian Smoliak at news@thedaily.washington.edu.]