Notes

1. Mario Carpo, ed., The Digital Turn in Architecture, 1992–2012 (London: Wiley, 2013). See also Antoine Picon, Digital Culture in Architecture (Basel: Birkhauser, 2010).

2. Google image searches for “generative architecture” and “parametric architecture” offer a number of visual examples that simply demonstrate this resemblance.

3. Philip Galanter, “Complexism and the Role of Evolutionary Art,” in The Art of Artificial Evolution: A Handbook on Evolutionary Art and Music, ed. Juan Romero and Penousal Machado (New York: Springer Books, 2007), 317.

4. Karl Chu, “Metaphysics of Genetic Architecture and Computation,” in Genetic Architectures II, ed. Alberto T. Estévez (Santa Fe, N.M.: SITES Books / ESARQ-UIC, 2005), 170.

5. Alberto Estévez, “Appendix for a Definition of Genetic Architecture and Other Related Terms,” in Genetic Architectures II, ed. Alberto T. Estévez (Santa Fe, N.M.: SITES Books / ESARQ-UIC, 2005), 78.

6. Alberto Estévez, “Genetic Architecture: New Ecologic-Environmental Architectural Design and New Cybernetic-Digital Architectural Design,” in Genetic Architectures, ed. Alberto T. Estévez (Santa Fe, N.M.: SITES Books / ESARQ-UIC, 2003), 17.

7. Michael Hansmeyer and Benjamin Dillenburger, Digital Grotesque II, described at http://digital-grotesque.com/concept/ and http://www.michael-hansmeyer.com/.

8. Michael Weinstock, “Morphogenesis and the Mathematics of Emergence,” in “Emergence: Morphogenetic Design Strategies,” special issue of AD, ed. Michael Hensel, Achim Menges, and Michael Weinstock, 74, no. 3 (May–June 2004): 11–15.

9. Christina Cogdell, Eugenic Design: Streamlining America in the 1930s (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004).

10. See Wendy Gunn, Ton Otto, and Rachel Charlotte Smith, eds., Design Anthropology: Theory and Practice (London: Bloomsbury Press, 2013); Keith Murphy, Swedish Design: An Ethnography (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2015); as well as two other groups, the Experimental Collaborations project for Ethnography beyond Participant Observation, available at http://xcol.org/, and the New School’s Graduate Institute for Design, Ethnography & Social Thought, available at http://www.gidest.org/.

11. Albena Yaneva, Made by the Office for Metropolitan Architecture: An Ethnography of Design (Rotterdam: 010 Publishers, 2009).

12. Bruno Latour and Steve Woolgar, Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts (Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications, 1979).

13. Stefan Helmreich, “Nature/Culture/Seawater,” American Anthropologist 113 (2011): 134; in his article, he here cites his book Alien Ocean: Anthropological Voyages in Microbial Seas (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2009), 23–25.

14. Helmreich, “Nature/Culture/Seawater,” a slightly different version available at http://dspace.mit.edu/openaccess-disseminate/1721.1/61766.

15. Helmreich, “Nature/Culture/Seawater,” American Anthropologist, 134.

16. Paul Edwards, A Vast Machine: Computer Models, Climate Data, and the Politics of Global Warming (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2010), 352, 428–30.

17. Harry Collins, “We Cannot Live by Scepticism Alone,” Nature 458, no. 30 (March 5, 2009): 31.

18. Collins, 31.

19. Edwards, Vast Machine, 352, 428–30.

20. See http://architecture2030.org/buildings_problem_why/, which cites data from a 2012 study by the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

21. Michael Hensel and Achim Menges, eds., Morpho-Ecologies: Towards Heterogeneous Space in Architecture Design (London: AA Publications, 2007); and Hensel and Menges, eds., “Versatility and Vicissitude: Performance in Morpho-Ecological Design,” special issue of AD, 78, no. 2 (March–April 2008): 80–87.

22. Steen Rasmussen, Mark Bedau, Liaohai Chen, David Deamer, David Krakauer, Norman Packard, and Peter Stadler, eds., Protocells: Bridging Nonliving and Living Matter (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2009), xvii; Peter Stadler and Bärbel Stadler, “Replicator Dynamics in Protocells,” in Protocells: Bridging Nonliving and Living Matter, ed. Steen Rasmussen, Mark Bedau, Liaohai Chen, David Deamer, David Krakauer, Norman Packard, and Peter Stadler (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2009), 327.

23. See Rachel Armstrong’s TED talk “Architecture that Repairs Itself,” July 2009, at http://www.ted.com/talks/rachel_armstrong_architecture_that_repairs_itself.

24. Estévez, “Genetic Architecture,” 9, 17.

25. The author was part of the EmTech Emergence seminar led by Weinstock in Fall 2011, where he clearly stated this opinion using these words.

26. Farshid Moussavi and Alejandro Zaera-Polo, “Types, Styles, and Phylogenesis,” in “Emergence: Morphogenetic Design Strategies,” special issue of AD, ed. Michael Hensel, Achim Menges, and Michael Weinstock, 74, no. 3 (May–June 2004): 37.

27. Martin Bressani and Robert Jan van Pelt, “Crystals, Cells, and Networks: Unconfining Territories,” in The Gen(H)ome Project, ed. Peter Noever and Open Source Architecture (Los Angeles: MAK Center for Art and Architecture, 2006), 66–73.

28. Eric Mennel, “Payments Start for N.C. Eugenics Victims, but Many Won’t Qualify,” National Public Radio, October 31, 2014, http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2014/10/31/360355784/payments-start-for-n-c-eugenics-victims-but-many-wont-qualify/. See also Genevieve Plaster, “North Carolina Eugenics Victims Still Seeking Justice due to Compensation Technicality,” Charlotte Lozier Institute, May 4, 2015, https://lozierinstitute.org/north-carolina-eugenics-victims-still-seeking-justice-due-to-compensation-technicality/.

29. Elizabeth Cohen and John Bonifield, “California’s Dark Legacy of Forced Sterilizations,” CNN, March 15, 2012, http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/15/health/california-forced-sterilizations/. The recent PBS news story by Lisa Ko, “Unwanted Sterilization and Eugenics Programs in the United States,” January 29, 2016, states that in December 2015, “the U.S. Senate voted unanimously to help victims of forced sterilization. North Carolina has paid $35,000 to 220 surviving victims of its eugenics program. Virginia agreed to give surviving victims $25,000 each.” Available at http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/blog/unwanted-sterilization-and-eugenics-programs-in-the-united-states/.

30. Corey Johnston, “Female Inmates Sterilized in California Prisons without Approval,” Center for Investigative Reporting, July 7, 2013, http://www.geneticsandsociety.org/article/female-inmates-sterilized-california-prisons-without-approval; Bill Chappell, “California’s Prison Sterilizations Reportedly Echo Eugenics Era,” National Public Radio, July 9, 2013, http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2013/07/09/200444613/californias-prison-sterilizations-reportedly-echoes-eugenics-era/.

31. See “California Bans Sterilization of Female Inmates without Consent,” NBC News, September 26, 2014, http://www.nbcnews.com/health/womens-health/california-bans-sterilization-female-inmates-without-consent-n212256; and Misty Rojo, “Gov. Jerry Brown signs SB 1135, Prison Anti-Sterilization Bill,” San Francisco Bay View, September 26, 2014, http://sfbayview.com/2014/09/gov-jerry-brown-signs-sb-1135-prison-anti-sterilization-bill/.

32. Mark Waller, “LaBruzzo Considering Plan to Pay Poor Women $1,000 to Have Their Tubes Tied,” Times-Picayune, September 23, 2008, http://www.nola.com/news/index.ssf/2008/09/labruzzo_sterilization_plan_fi.html.

33. Aida Edemariam, “A Matter of Life and Death,” The Guardian, March 27, 2008, https://www.theguardian.com/science/2008/mar/27/stemcells.medicalresearch/; and Gerard Porter and Malcolm Smith, “Preventing the Selection of ‘Deaf Embryos’ under the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008: Problematizing Disability?” New Genetics and Society 32, no. 2 (2013): 171–89.

34. Keith Besserud and Joshua Ingram, “Architectural Genomics,” in Silicon + Skin: Biological Processes and Computation, ed. Andrew Kudless, Neri Oxman, and Marc Swackhamer (Morrisville, N.C.: Lulu Press, 2008), 239–40. Josh Ingram is the same person as Joshua Cotton, the name under which this article was originally published.

35. Besserud and Ingram point to these architectural features as common for optimization: “construction cost, structural efficiency, carbon footprint, daylighting quality, acoustic quality, programmatic compliance, view quality, etc.” (240).

36. Amanda Modell, “Mapping the Music Genome: Imaginative Geography in Pandora Internet Radio and the Genographic Project,” Media Fields Journal, November 14, 2015, http://mediafieldsjournal.squarespace.com/mapping-the-music-genome/.

37. Pengcheng Fu, “Biomolecular Computing: Is It Ready to Take Off?” Biotechnology Journal 2 (2007): 91–101.

38. D’Arcy Wentworth Thompson, On Growth and Form (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1917); Alan Turing, “The Chemical Basis of Morphogenesis,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B 237, no. 641 (1952): 37–72.

39. Agoston Eiben and Jim Smith, “From Evolutionary Computation to the Evolution of Things,” Nature 521 (May 28, 2015): 476–82.

40. Sarah Richardson and Hallam Stevens, eds., Postgenomics: Perspectives on Biology after the Genome (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 2015).

41. See Anthony Dunne and Fiona Raby, Speculative Everything: Design, Fiction, and Social Dreaming (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2013); and http://www.dunneandraby.co.uk/content/bydandr/13/0/.

42. Rasmussen et al., Protocells, xvii.

43. See http://www.mycoworks.com/; in particular, see the video “Built with the Cleanest Technology on Earth: Nature” on this website.

1. First studio brief handed out in Boot Camp at the Emergent Technologies and Design program at the Architectural Association (Fall 2011).

2. I applied to EmTech with full disclosure about my professional role at UC Davis, my funding through the Andrew Mellon New Directions Fellowship, and my intent to write a book about generative architecture. I am very grateful that Michael Weinstock graciously accepted me into the program.

3. Melany Mitchell, Complexity: A Guided Tour (Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press, 2009), 13.

4. Scott Camazine, Jean-Louis Deneubourg, Nigel R. Franks, James Sneyd, Guy Theraula, and Eric Bonabeau, eds., Self-Organization in Biological Systems (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2001), 8.

5. See also Stuart Kauffman, At Home in the Universe (Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press, 1995), 24.

6. Camazine et al., Self-Organization in Biological Systems, 8.

7. “Never” is used as an exaggeration here for expressive purposes, but not by much. The only place I have seen the rules specifically addressed is Philip Ball, Shapes (Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press, 2009), 222–23, where he discussed stigmergy and the creation of termite mounds. He writes, “In this view, it could be said, the future is determined not by relentlessly following a single set of rules, but by responding to what has been done up to that point. The question is, of course: what are the rules?” He is not, however, questioning their existence or origin in complexity theory, but simply asking in this case what they could be.

8. Evelyn Fox Keller, “Organisms, Machines, Thunderstorms . . . Part One,” Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences 38, no. 1 (2008), 71, citing W. R. Ashby, “Principles of the Self-Organizing System,” in Principles of Self-Organization, ed. Heinz von Foerster and George W. Zopf (New York: Pergamon Press, 1962), 267, 269.

9. In the title and argument of J. Scott Turner’s book The Tinkerer’s Accomplice: How Design Emerges from Life Itself (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2007), design—which is often based on rules or is recognized because of patterns—emerges from life itself, and life itself, he argues, is based on homeostasis (or what he calls Bernard machines, after Claude Bernard).

10. Charissa Terranova, ed., “Complexism: Art + Architecture + Biology + Computation, a New Axis in Critical Theory?” double issue of Technoetic Arts 14, nos. 1–2 (June 2016): 3–8; Philip Galanter “Complexism and the Role of Evolutionary Art,” in The Art of Artificial Evolution: A Handbook on Evolutionary Art and Music, ed. Juan Romero and Penousal Machado (New York: Springer Books, 2007), 311–32; Alan Dorin, “Generative Processes and the Electronic Arts,” Organised Sound 6, no. 1 (2001): 47–53; Jon McCormack, Alice Eldridge, Alan Dorin, and Peter McIlwain, “Generative Algorithms for Making Music: Emergence, Evolution and Ecosystems,” in The Oxford Handbook of Computer Music, ed. Roger Dean (Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press, 2009), 355–79.

11. See George Katsiaficas, “Comparing Uprisings in Korea and Burma,” Socialism and Democracy 23, no. 1 (2009): 58–76; Walter C. Clements Jr., “Complexity Theory as a Tool for Understanding and Coping with Ethnic Conflict and Development Issues in Post-Soviet Eurasia,” International Journal of Peace Studies 7, no. 2 (Autumn–Winter 2002): 1–15; Kai Lehman, “Crisis Foreign Policy as a Process of Self-Organization,” Cambridge Review of International Affairs 24, no. 1 (March 2011): 27–42; Devan Rosen, Jang Hyun Kim, and Yoonjae Nam, “Birds of a Feather Protest Together: Theorizing Self-Organizing Political Protests with Flock Theory,” Systemic Practice and Action Research 23 (2010): 419–41; Christian Fuchs and John Collier, “A Dynamic Systems View of Economic and Political Theory,” Theoria: A Journal of Social and Political Theory (August 2007): 23–52; Christopher G. Hudson, “From Social Darwinism to Self-Organization: Implications for Social Change Theory,” Social Service Review 74, no. 4 (December 2000): 533–59; R. Keith Sawyer, “Emergence in Sociology: Contemporary Philosophy of Mind and Some Implications for Sociological Theory,” American Journal of Sociology 107, no. 3 (November 2001): 551–85; Glenn D. Walters, “Developmental Trajectories, Transitions, and Nonlinear Dynamical Systems: A Model of Crime Deceleration and Desistance,” International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 46 (2002): 30–44; Glenn D. Walters, “Crime and Chaos: Applying Nonlinear Dynamic Principles to Problems in Criminology,” International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 43 (1999): 134–53; Athina Karatzogianni and George Michaelides, “Cyberconflict at the Edge of Chaos: Cryptohierarchies and Self-Organisation in the Open-Source Movement,” Capital and Class 33 (2009): 143–57.

12. Manuel de Landa, A Thousand Years of Nonlinear History (New York: Swerve, 2000); David Hancock, “Organizing Our Thoughts: ‘Global Systems’ and the Challenge of Writing a More Complex History,” Journal of the Historical Society 10, no. 3 (September 2010): 319–35; Jia Yi Chow, Keith Davids, Robert Hristovski, Duarte Araújo, and Pedro Passos, “Nonlinear Pedagogy: Learning Design for Self-Organizing Neurobiological Systems,” New Ideas in Psychology 29 (2011): 189–200; Isabela Granic and Gerald Patterson, “Toward a Comprehensive Model of Antisocial Development: A Dynamic Systems Approach,” Psychological Review 113, no. 1 (January 2006): 101–31; Edward Selby and Thomas Joiner, “Cascades of Emotion: The Emergence of Borderline Personality Disorder from Emotional and Behavioral Dysregulation,” Review of General Psychology 13, no. 3 (September 2009): 219–38.

13. Paul Krugman, The Self Organizing Economy (Cambridge, Mass.: Wiley-Blackwell, 1996).

14. Karen Ward, The World in 2050: Quantifying the Shift in the Global Economy (London: HSBC, 2015), http://www.hsbc.ca/1/PA_ES_Content_Mgmt/content/canada4/pdfs/business/hsbc-bwob-theworldin2050-en.pdf.

15. Venkat Venkatasubramanian, “Fairness Is an Emergent Self-Organized Property of the Free Market for Labor,” Entropy 12 (2010): 1514–31.

16. Michael Weinstock, “Morphogenesis and the Mathematics of Emergence,” in “Emergence: Morphogenetic Design Strategies,” special issue of AD, ed. Michael Hensel, Achim Menges, and Michael Weinstock, 74, no. 3 (May–June 2004): 11.

17. Weinstock, 15.

18. Weinstock, 17.

19. Michael Weinstock, “Self-Organisation and Material Constructions,” in “Techniques and Technologies in Morphogenetic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Michael Hensel, Achim Menges, and Michael Weinstock, 76, no. 2 (March–April 2006): 35.

20. Weinstock, 34, 36, 39.

21. Weinstock, “Morphogenesis and the Mathematics of Emergence,” 15.

22. Weinstock, 14–15.

23. Weinstock, 15.

24. Weinstock, 17.

25. Weinstock, 13.

26. Weinstock, 14.

27. Biological systems at equilibrium are considered “dead,” so to say that organisms maintain equilibrium must mean that balance in and out is achieved, but that equilibrium is in flux constantly, until the point of death.

28. See physicist Philip Ball’s three-part book series, Shapes (cited above); Branches (Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press, 2009); Flow (Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press, 2009). Also, these phrases are basic tenets in the canon of complexity theory.

29. Weinstock, “Morphogenesis and the Mathematics of Emergence,” 14.

30. Weinstock, 16–17, citing Francis Heylighen, “Self-Organisation. Emergence and the Architecture of Complexity,” Proceedings of 1st European Conference on System Science (Paris: AFCET, 1989).

31. Weinstock, 15.

32. Michael Weinstock, The Architecture of Emergence: The Evolution of Form in Nature and Civilisation (Chichester, U.K.: Wiley, 2010), 9.

33. Weinstock, 12.

34. Weinstock, 14.

35. Weinstock, 12.

36. Ionat Zurr and Oron Catts, “Are the Semi-Living Semi-Good or Semi-Evil?” Technoetic Arts 1, no. 1 (2003): 51, quoting Stephen Jay Gould: “Much of evolution is downward in terms of morphological complexity, rather than upward. We’re not marching toward some greater thing.” See Gould, “The Pattern of Life’s History,” The Third Culture (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1995), 52.

37. Weinstock, Architecture of Emergence, 29.

38. Weinstock, 239–40.

39. Weinstock, 240.

40. Weinstock, 267.

41. This information is gathered from conversations Michael Weinstock and I had during my time at EmTech in the Fall 2011 semester.

42. Weinstock, Architecture of Emergence, 245.

43. Weinstock, 269.

44. Michael Weinstock and Mehran Gharleghi, “Intelligent Cities and the Taxonomy of Cognitive Scales,” in “System City,” special issue of AD, ed. Weinstock, profile no. 224 (July–August 2013): 57.

45. Weinstock, “Morphogenesis and the Mathematics of Emergence,” 17.

46. Weinstock and Gharleghi, 58.

47. Weinstock and Gharleghi, 57.

48. Weinstock and Gharleghi, 57.

49. Evan Greenberg and George Jeronimidis, “Variation and Distribution: Forest Patterns as a Model for Urban Morphologies,” in “System City,” special issue of AD, ed. Michael Weinstock, profile no. 224 (July–August 2013): 24–31, also describe cities as homeostatic organisms.

50. Weinstock, Architecture of Emergence, 60.

51. Weinstock, 65.

52. Weinstock, 65.

53. Weinstock does state that after collapse and reorganization, some systems return to a simpler organization, but this is not the usual state of affairs.

54. Weinstock’s short biography of himself, in print since the early 1990s, reinforces this characterization of Weinstock as an intrepid yet wary adventurer facing the unruly whims of nature. He describes himself as a man of the world since he was a child, born in Germany, having lived in “the Far East and then West Africa, and attended an English public school. He ran away to sea at the age of 17 after reading Conrad. After many years at sea, in traditional wooden sailing ships where he gained shipyard and shipbuilding experience, he studied architecture at the AA and has taught at its School of Architecture since 1989.” He also was a member of the “London Fire Brigade (K. 23 Battersea)” and a lifeguard. See “About the Guest Editor Michael Weinstock,” in “System City,” special issue of AD, ed. Michael Weinstock, profile no. 224 (July–August 2013): 7. See also “Intermediate Unit 4,” Architectural Association School of Architecture Prospectus, 1991–92, 1991, 33.

55. For more information about the Sustainable Environmental Association, see http://www.sustainableenvironmentassociation.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=frontpage&Itemid=1.

56. Michael Hensel and Achim Menges, “Morpho-Ecologies: Towards an Inclusive Discourse on Heterogeneous Architectures,” in Morpho-Ecologies: Towards Heterogeneous Space in Architecture Design, ed. Hensel and Menges (London: AA Publications, 2007), 53, 58.

57. Achim Menges, “Morpho-Ecologies: Approaching Complex Environments,” in “Emergence: Morphogenetic Design Strategies,” special issue of AD, ed. Michael Hensel, Achim Menges, and Michael Weinstock, 74, no. 3 (May–June 2004): 81, 83.

58. Hensel and Menges, Morpho-Ecologies, 43.

59. Hensel and Menges, 51.

60. Michael Hensel and Achim Menges, “Designing Morpho-Ecologies: Versatility and Vicissitude of Heterogeneous Space,” in “Versatility and Vicissitude: Performance in Morpho-Ecological Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Hensel and Menges, 78, no. 2 (March–April 2008): 105.

61. Achim Menges, “Manufacturing Performance,” in “Versatility and Vicissitude: Performance in Morpho-Ecological Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Michael Hensel and Achim Menges, 78, no. 2 (March–April 2008): 43.

62. Menges, 46.

63. See http://www.esf.edu/efb/turner/.

64. J. Scott Turner, “Evolutionary Architecture? Some Perspectives from Biological Design,” in “Material Computation: Higher Integration in Morphogenetic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Menges, 82, no. 2 (March–April 2012): 32–33.

65. Michael Hensel, “Towards Self-Organisational and Multiple-Performance Capacity in Architecture,” in “Techniques and Technologies in Morphogenetic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Michael Hensel, Achim Menges, and Michael Weinstock, 76, no. 2 (March–April 2006): 6, 10–11.

66. Michael Hensel, “Computing Self-Organisation: Environmentally Sensitive Growth Modelling,” in “Techniques and Technologies in Morphogenetic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Michael Hensel, Achim Menges, and Michael Weinstock, 76, no. 2 (March–April 2006): 13.

67. Helen Castle, editor of AD, describes how they dislike using the word “green” (she also uses the words “ecological” and “sustainable” but wrongly claims that Hensel and Menges “steer away” from using these latter two terms). See Helen Castle, “Editorial,” in “Versatility and Vicissitude: Performance in Morpho-Ecological Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Michael Hensel and Achim Menges, 78, no. 2 (March–April 2008): 5.

68. Michael Hensel and Achim Menges, “Versatility and Vicissitude: An Introduction to Performance in Morpho-Ecological Design,” in “Versatility and Vicissitude: Performance in Morpho-Ecological Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Michael Hensel and Achim Menges, 78, no. 2 (March–April 2008): 7.

69. Michael Hensel, “(Synthetic) Life Architectures: Ramifications and Potentials of a Literal Biological Paradigm for Architectural Design,” in “Techniques and Technologies in Morphogenetic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Michael Hensel, Achim Menges, and Michael Weinstock, 76, no. 2 (March–April 2006): 23.

70. Achim Menges and Steffen Reichert, “Material Capacity: Embedded Responsiveness,” in “Material Computation: Higher Integration in Morphogenetic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Menges, 82, no. 2 (March–April 2012): 52–59.

71. Castle, “Editorial,” 5.

72. Achim Menges, “Material Resourcefulness: Activating Material Information in Computational Design,” in “Material Computation: Higher Integration in Morphogenetic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Menges, 82, no. 2 (March–April 2012): 42.

73. Michael Hensel, Defne Sunguroğlu Hensel, Mehran Gharleghi, and Salmaan Craig, “Towards an Architectural History of Performance: Auxiliarity, Performance, and Provision in Historical Persian Architectures,” in “Iran: Past, Present and Future,” special issue of AD, ed. Michael Hensel and Mehran Gharleghi, 82, no. 3 (2012): 26–37. 

74. Michael Hensel, “Performance-Oriented Design Precursors and Potentials,” in “Versatility and Vicissitude: Performance in Morpho-Ecological Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Michael Hensel and Achim Menges, 78, no. 2 (March–April 2008): 50; see also Menges, “Material Resourcefulness,” 50.

75. See http://www.sustainableenvironmentassociation.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=53&Itemid=61. These projects were published in Hensel et al., “Towards an Architectural History of Performance,” 26–37.

76. Hensel, “Performance-Oriented Design Precursors and Potentials,” 49, italics added.

77. Hensel, 49, 53.

78. Hensel, “(Synthetic) Life Architectures,” 18.

79. Hensel, 19.

80. See also Hensel and Menges’s essay “Morpho-Ecologies,” 24–28.

81. Hensel and Menges, 24, 26.

82. At the AA, Menges and Hensel worked with Eiichi Matsuda, in 2003–4, on an aggregated structure project; in 2004, they worked with Anne Hawkins and Catie Newell on another at Rice University. See Achim Menges, “Aggregates,” in “Versatility and Vicissitude: Performance in Morpho-Ecological Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Michael Hensel and Achim Menges, 78, no. 2 (March–April 2008): 86–87. See also Karola Dierichs and Achim Menges, “Aggregate Structures: Material and Machine Computation of Designed Granular Substances,” in “Material Computation: Higher Integration in Morphogenetic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Menges, 82, no. 2 (March–April 2012): 74–81 (esp. image of robotic construction, p. 80); as well as Karola Dierichs and Achim Menges, “Granular Morphologies: Programming Material Behaviour with Designed Aggregates,” in “Fusing the Physical and Computational,” special issue of AD, ed. Menges, 85, no. 5 (September–October 2015): 86–91 (esp. image of granular arch, p. 90).

83. Philip Ball, “Pattern Formation in Nature: Physical Constraints and Self-Organising Characteristics,” in “Material Computation: Higher Integration in Morphogenetic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Achim Menges, 82, no. 2 (March–April 2012): 22–27.

84. See http://architecture2030.org/buildings_problem_why/.

85. Michael Hensel and Christian Hermansen Cordua, “Relating Perceptions of Constructions, Experimental and Local,” and Hensel, “Rural Studio: Incarnations of a Design-and-Build Programme,” both in “Constructions: An Experimental Approach to Intensely Local Architectures,” special issue of AD, ed. Hensel and Hermansen Cordua, 85, no. 2 (March–April 2015): 8–15, 40–47.

86. Or, is it the other way around, that computers have made complexity theory possible?

87. Thanks to my colleague James Housefield for suggesting the need to reference Marc-Antoine Laugier’s primitive hut.

88. For a very interesting study of the fractal patterns in the architecture of different cultures in Africa, see the work of Ron Egash, namely, his TED talk “The Fractals at the Heart of African Design,” 2007, available at http://www.ted.com/talks/ron_eglash_on_african_fractals; and his book African Fractals: Modern Computing and Indigenous Design (New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1999). Egash is very clear that Africans creating these designs are very self-conscious and self-aware of their mathematical strategy.

89. Skylar Tibbits, “Design to Self-Assembly,” in “Material Computation: Higher Integration in Morphogenetic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Achim Menges, 82, no. 2 (March–April 2012): 72.

90. Saskia Sassen, Expulsions: Brutality and Complexity in the Global Economy (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2014).

91. Weinstock, “Morphogenesis and the Mathematics of Emergence,” 15.

92. Hensel and Menges, “Morpho-Ecologies,” 59.

93. Hensel and Menges, 51.

94. Patrik Schumacher, “Hegemonic Parametricism Delivers a Market-Based Urban Order,” in “Architectural Design Parametricism 2.0,” special issue of AD, ed. Schumacher, 86, no. 2 (March–April 2016): 115.

95. Schumacher, 118.

96. Schumacher, 118, 120.

97. Schumacher, 119.

98. Schumacher, 120.

99. Schumacher, 120, 123.

100. Schumacher, 123.

101. Christina Cogdell, “Breeding Ideology: Parametricism and Biological Architecture,” in The Politics of Parametricism: Digital Technologies in Architecture, ed. Matthew Poole and Manuel Shvartzberg (London: Bloomsbury, 2015), 123–37.

102. On Teague, see Jeffrey Meikle, Twentieth-Century Limited: Industrial Design in America, 1925–1939 (1979; repr., Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2001), esp. chap. 6, “Everything from a Match to a City.”

103. See Christina Cogdell, Eugenic Design: Streamlining America in the 1930s (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004), esp. chap. 4, “Flow Is the Word: Biological Efficiency and Streamline Design.”

104. Email to the author supposedly from Barack Obama, July 2, 2016, “paid for by Organizing for Action.”

105. Cogdell, Eugenic Design, xi.

106. Thanks to Kristin Koster for texting me the photo of a bottle of Emergent White IPA in June 2016. See http://boulderbeer.com/emergent-white-ipa/.

1. I am not referring to something like a creator (much less Creator) in what is referred to in Christian circles as “intelligent design,” at least not for “nature.” But since I am writing about design and architecture, I think making agency clear is important, since programmers script and architects and designers both design and script. On this, see J. Scott Turner, The Tinkerer’s Accomplice: How Design Arises from Life Itself (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2007).

2. For a description of the journal Natural Computing, see http://link.springer.com/journal/11047. The journal website states, “Natural computing includes evolutionary algorithms, neural networks, molecular computing, and quantum computing.” Topics that the journal focuses on include theory of computation, evolutionary biology, processor architectures, artificial intelligence including robotics, statistical physics, dynamical systems complexity, and related subjects (one of which is evolutionary and developmental biology).

3. Achim Menges, “Polymorphism,” in “Techniques and Technologies in Morphogenetic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Michael Hensel, Achim Menges, and Michael Weinstock, 76, no. 2 (March–April 2006): 79; Achim Menges, “Material Computation: Higher Integration in Morphogenetic Design,” in “Material Computation: Higher Integration in Morphogenetic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Achim Menges, 82, no. 2 (March–April 2012): 17; Achim Menges, “Material Resourcefulness: Activating Material Information in Computational Design,” in “Material Computation: Higher Integration in Morphogenetic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Achim Menges, 82, no. 2 (March–April 2012): 35–36.

4. On LIPHE, see http://www.mcgill.ca/architecture/facilities/liphe.

5. Menges, “Material Resourcefulness,” 42.

6. Achim Menges and Steffen Reichert, “Material Capacity: Embedded Responsiveness,” in “Material Computation: Higher Integration in Morphogenetic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Achim Menges, 82, no. 2 (March–April 2012): 53.

7. Menges, “Material Resourcefulness,” 40–42.

8. Menges, 37.

9. Menges’s analysis of the use of wood compared to steel does not take into account the embedded energy of the digital tools used to design and manufacture wood versus steel structures, perhaps because they are likely very similar. Adding this into the overall analysis of a structure made from either material significantly increases its overall embedded energy.

10. Menges and Reichert, “Material Capacity,” 54, 58.

11. Menges, “Material Resourcefulness,” 36–37.

12. Menges, “Material Computation,” 21, citing Sanford Kwinter, “The Computational Fallacy,” in Computational Design Thinking, ed. Achim Menges and Sean Ahlquist (London: John Wiley & Sons, 2011), 211.

13. Menges, “Material Computation,” 16.

14. Menges, 16–17.

15. Toni Kotnik and Michael Weinstock, “Material, Form, and Force,” in “Material Computation: Higher Integration in Morphogenetic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Achim Menges, 82, no. 2 (March–April 2012): 111; Achim Menges, “Introduction: Fusing the Computational and the Physical—Towards a Novel Material Culture,” in “Fusing the Physical and Computational,” special issue of AD, ed. Menges, 85, no. 5 (September–October 2015): 15.

16. Santiago Huerta, “Structural Design in the Work of Gaudi,” Architectural Science Review 49, no. 4 (2006): 324–39, available at http://oa.upm.es/703/1/Huerta_Art_002.pdf.

17. Michael Hensel and Achim Menges, “Membrane Spaces,” in “Versatility and Vicissitude: Performance in Morpho-Ecological Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Hensel and Menges, 78, no. 2 (March–April 2008): 75.

18. Hensel and Menges.

19. Karola Dierichs and Achim Menges, “Aggregate Structures: Material and Machine Computation of Designed Granular Substances,” in “Material Computation: Higher Integration in Morphogenetic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Achim Menges, 82, no. 2 (March–April 2012): 76.

20. Geo-engineering software can mathematically model granulate behavior using different methods: “molecular dynamics,” “discrete element method,” and “event-driven molecular dynamics,” as well as “rigid body dynamic” from animation software. See Dierichs and Menges, 79–80.

21. Dierichs and Menges, 79.

22. P. Bak, C. Tang, and K. Wiesenfeld, “Self-Organized Criticality: An Explanation of 1/f Noise,” Physical Review Letters 59, no. 4 (1987): 381–84.

23. Dierichs and Menges, “Aggregate Structures,” 80–81.

24. Dierichs and Menges, 79–80.

25. Neri Oxman, “Programming Matter,” in “Material Computation: Higher Integration in Morphogenetic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Achim Menges, 82, no. 2 (March–April 2012): 92.

26. Oxman, 95.

27. Oxman, 92.

28. Skylar Tibbits, “Design to Self-Assembly,” in “Material Computation: Higher Integration in Morphogenetic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Achim Menges, 82, no. 2 (March–April 2012): 69.

29. Tibbits, 69.

30. Tibbits, 69.

31. Tibbits, 69–70.

32. Tibbits, 70.

33. Tibbits, 70.

34. Images of Logic Matter are available at http://selfassemblylab.mit.edu/logic-matter/, including the ones with hands that show the components being manipulated.

35. Tibbits, 70, italics added.

36. Images of Biased Chains are available at http://www.selfassemblylab.net/BiasedChains.php.

37. Tibbits, “Design to Self-Assembly,” 71.

38. Tibbits, 71.

39. Tibbits, 72.

40. Benjamin and I met when I spoke at Columbia University’s Graduate School of Architecture, Planning, and Preservation in 2009 about the current work of LabStudio at the University of Pennsylvania. LabStudio is a team comprising architect Jenny Sabin (now at Cornell University) and molecular biologist Peter Lloyd Jones (now at the Medical College of Thomas Jefferson University). I mention this because the project Benjamin and Federici tackled in 2011 is very similar to the work of Sabin and Jones of two years before, which is discussed in chapter 5.

41. David Benjamin and Fernan Federici, “Bio Logic,” in Synthetic Aesthetics: Investigating Synthetic Biology’s Designs on Nature, ed. Alexandra Daisy Ginsberg, Jane Calvert, Pablo Schyfter, Alistair Elfick, and Drew Endy (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2014), 143–54; Pablo Schyfter, “Scale and Metaphor,” in Synthetic Aesthetics: Investigating Synthetic Biology’s Designs on Nature, ed. Alexandra Daisy Ginsberg, Jane Calvert, Pablo Schyfter, Alistair Elfick, and Drew Endy (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2014), 155–64.

42. Tom Knight’s “biobricks” are not the same thing as designer Ginger Krieg Dosier’s BioBrick, a brick made from bacteria, urea, calcium ions, and sand, featured in William Myers, BioDesign: Art, Science, Creativity (New York: Museum of Modern Art, 2012), 78–79, 258–59.

43. “Biobricks” is the name given to the “parts” available for purchase from the Registry of Standard Biological Parts; see http://parts.igem.org/Catalog.

44. Benjamin and Federici, “Bio Logic,” 144.

45. Benjamin and Federici, 144–47.

46. In the same chapter, Federici and Benjamin conducted other experiments as well, which I am not covering here.

47. Pengcheng Fu, “Biomolecular Computing: Is It Ready to Take Off?” Biotechnology Journal 2 (2007): 91.

48. Fu, 91–92.

49. Fu, 92, referring to Leonard Adleman’s work of 1994.

50. Leonard Adleman, “Molecular Computation of Solutions to Combinatorial Problem,” Science 266 (1994): 1021–24.

51. Fu, “Biomolecular Computing,” 92–93.

52. Fu, 94–95.

53. See also Ted Sargent, “Nanotechnology: Design in the Quantum Vernacular,” in Design and the Elastic Mind, ed. Paola Antonelli (New York: Museum of Modern Art, 2008), 82–83.

54. David Depew, “From Heat Engines to Digital Printouts: A Tropology of the Organism from the Victorian Era to the Human Genome Project,” in Memory Bytes: History, Technology, and Digital Culture, ed. Lauren Rabinowitz and Abraham Geil (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 2003), 47–75. Depew traces the history of the idea that DNA is a “code of life”—meaning, like a computational programming code.

55. Fu, “Biomolecular Computing,” 98.

56. Alexis Courbet, Franck Molina, and Patrick Amar, “Computing with Synthetic Protocells,” Acta Biotheoretica 63 (2015): 309–23.

57. Myers, BioDesign, 124–25, 186–87.

58. Aspects of Benjamin and Federici’s methods are vaguely similar to aspects of computational mechanics, which uses information recorded through observation of a system over time to deduce its structure in the form of an epsilon-machine. Benjamin and Federici do not observe the same system through time but rather compare one set of data from one system to that of another system to ascertain a correlating mathematical expression of pattern.

59. J. P. Crutchfield and D. P. Feldman, “Regularities Unseen, Randomness Observed: Levels of Entropy Convergence,” Chaos 13, no. 1 (2003): 25–54, written in 2001 as Santa Fe Institute Working Paper 01-02-012.

60. James P. Crutchfield, PowerPoint slides for Lectures 1 and 21, PHY 256A and B, Natural Computation and Self-Organization, UC Davis, Winter and Spring semesters, 2012. The ongoing class website can be found at http://csc.ucdavis.edu/~chaos/courses/ncaso/.

61. James P. Crutchfield, “Between Order and Chaos,” Nature Physics 8 (2012): 22, available at http://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Between-Order-and-Chaos-Odell/2574b6d1802716f5b95dfbf39d438e4ef953b189/pdf.

62. Crutchfield, 22–23.

63. James T. Crutchfield, J. Doyne Famer, Norman H. Packard, and Robert S. Shaw, “Chaos,” Scientific American 254, no. 12 (December 1986): 49.

64. Steven Strogatz, Nonlinear Dynamics and Chaos: With Applications to Physics, Biology, Chemistry, and Engineering (Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 2001).

65. Crutchfield et al., “Chaos,” 51.

66. Crutchfield et al., 51.

67. Crutchfield, “Between Order and Chaos,” 17.

68. Crutchfield, 17.

69. Crutchfield, 17.

70. Crutchfield, 18.

71. Crutchfield, 18.

72. Crutchfield, 18.

73. Cosma Shalizi and James Crutchfield, “Computational Mechanics: Pattern and Prediction, Structure and Simplicity,” Santa Fe Institute Working Paper 99-07-044 (January 4, 2011), 2, available at http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/9907176, published as “Computational Mechanics: Pattern and Prediction, Structure and Simplicity,” Journal of Statistical Physics 104 (2001): 819–81.

74. Robert Payne and Claire Grierson, “A Theoretical Model for ROP Localisation by Auxin in Arabidopsis Root Hair Cells,” PLoS ONE 4, no. 12 (2009): e8337; Hironori Fujita, Koichi Toyokura, Kiyotaka Okada, and Masayoshi Kawaguchi, “Reaction-Diffusion Pattern in Shoot Apical Meristem of Plants,” PLoS ONE 6, no. 3 (2011): e18243.

75. Crutchfield and Feldman, “Regularities Unseen, Randomness Observed”; Shalizi and Crutchfield, “Computational Mechanics”; C. C. Strelioff, J. P. Crutchfield, and A. Hubler, “Inferring Markov Chains: Bayesian Estimation, Model Comparison, Entropy Rate, and Out-of-Class Modeling,” Santa Fe Institute Working Paper (March 2007), available at http://arxiv.org/abs/math.ST/0703715.

76. Susanne Still, James Crutchfield, and Christopher Ellison, “Optimal Causal Inference” (August 2007), available at http://arxiv.org/abs/0708.1580v1.

77. On the need to reduce dimensions, see Pengcheng Fu and Cliff Hooker, “Outstanding Issues in Systems and Synthetic Biology,” in Systems Biology and Synthetic Biology, ed. Pengcheng Fu and Sven Panke (London: John Wiley & Sons, 2009), 611–42.

78. Byung-Chul Choi, Hang-Sik Shin, Su-Yol Lee, and Tak Hur, “Life Cycle Assessment of a Personal Computer and Its Effective Recycling Rate,” International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 11, no. 2 (March 2006, online 2004): 122–28.

79. On CRT and LCD screens, see Vikrant Bhakar, Aashray Agur, A. K. Digalwar, and Kuldip Singh Sangwan, “Life Cycle Assessment of CRT, LCD, and LED Monitors,” Procedia CIRP 29 (2015): 432–37, available at http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212827115000414. CIRP is the International Academy for Production Engineering. See also Paul Teehan and Milind Kandlikar, “Sources of Variation in Life Cycle Assessments of Desktop Computers,” Journal of Industrial Ecology 16, no. S1 (2012): S182–94, available at https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1530-9290.2011.00431.x; and Madison Crain, Riyaz Merchant, and Felix Le, three individual papers covering the “General Life Cycle of a Silicon Wafer MOSFET Transistor,” March 2016, available at http://www.designlife-cycle.com/mosfet/.

80. One meaning of the word “sand” refers to particle sizes (between 0.6 and 2 millimeters), so technically, the text in the marketing brochure referring to “sand” is accurate, as the chips do begin with crushed quartz particles. See Intel, “From Sand to Circuits: How Intel Makes Integrated Circuit Chips,” 2008, available at http://web.archive.org/web/20170110155945/http://www.intel.com/Assets/PDF/General/308301003.pdf.

81. Felix Le, “Waste Products of MOSFETs: There’s a Lot,” March 2016, 3, available at http://www.designlife-cycle.com/mosfet/.

82. Madison Crain, “MOSFET Transistors: Materials,” March 2016, 4, available at http://www.designlife-cycle.com/mosfet/; see also “How Do They Make Silicon Wafers and Computer Chips?” March 5, 2018, 8:42 video, available at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWVywhzuHnQ.

83. Crain, 2; Michael Welland, “Sand to Chips: What’s the Real Story?” August 7, 2009, available at http://throughthesandglass.typepad.com/through_the_sandglass/2009/08/sand-to-chips-whats-the-real-story.html.

84. Welland.

85. Eric Williams, Robert Ayres, and Miriam Heller, “Energy and Chemical Use in the Production for Microchips,” IEEE, February 2002, 186.

86. Riyaz Merchant, poster diagram and his text “The Energy Story,” March 2016, available at http://www.designlife-cycle.com/mosfet/.

87. Le, “Waste Products of MOSFETs,” 4.

88. Le, 4.

89. Crain, “MOSFET Transistors,” 6; Le, “Waste Products of MOSFETs,” 4.

90. “How Do They Make Silicon Wafers and Computer Chips?”; and Wikipedia, s.v. “Transistor Count,” last modified March 29, 2018, available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/transistor_count.

91. See Eric Williams, “Environmental Impacts of Microchip Manufacture,” Thin Solid Films 461 (2004): 5. Riyaz Merchant writes, “When all stages of the lifecycle of these wafer based transistors are accounted for, the iceberg of energy weighs in at 1890 billion kWh per year, enough power to keep 173 million US residential households running. This enormous amount of energy comes mainly from electricity, which is a secondary source derived from the burning of fossil fuels. With the amount of semiconductor devices predicted to double by the year 2030, society is faced with a daunting task of being able to continue to supply the massive energy required to produce one of the physically smallest innovations in human history” (“Energy Story,” 8–9). His calculation is based on the number of transistors made in 2013.

92. Williams, 2.

93. Williams, Ayres, and Heller, “Energy and Chemical Use,” 188.

94. Eric Williams, “Energy Intensity of Computer Manufacturing: Hybrid Assessment Combining Process and Economic Input−Output Methods,” Environmental Science and Technology 38, no. 22 (2004): 6166. See also Philip Ball, “Heavy Computing,” Nature Materials 3 (May 2004): 287.

95. Alastair Iles, “Mapping Environmental Justice in Technology Flows: Computer Waste Impacts in Asia,” Global Environmental Politics 4, no. 4 (November 2004): 76, 78.

96. Iles, 86.

97. Iles, 84–87.

98. Iles, 88.

99. For example, see Giulio Boccaletti, Markus Loffler, and Jeremy Oppenheim, “How IT Can Cut Carbon Emissions,” McKinsey Quarterly, October 2008; and Kris de Decker, “The Monster Footprint of Digital Technology,” Energy Bulletin, June 16, 2009, available at http://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2009/06/embodied-energy-of-digital-technology.html.

100. Andreas Manhart, Matthias Buchert, Daniel Bleher, and Detlef Pingel, “Recycling of Critical Metals from End-of-Life Electronics,” in Electronics Goes Green, 2012 (Piscataway, N.J.: IEEE, 2012), 2.

101. Eelco Smit, Jan Scheijgrond, and Jan Severin, “Resource Scarcity: An OEM Perspective,” in Electronics Goes Green, 2012 (Piscataway, N.J.: IEEE, 2012), 1–5; Mario Schmidt, “Resource Efficiency: What Are Critical Metals and How Scarce Are They?” (paper presented at the Electronic Displays Conference, February 29–March 1, 2012, Nuremberg, Germany), available at http://www.hs-pforzheim.de/fileadmin/user_upload/uploads_redakteur/Forschung/INEC/Dokumente/Team__Publikationen_/Electronic_Displays_2012_Schmidt.pdf. Other critical metals used in personal computers, in addition to those listed above, include antimony and magnesium.

102. See http://www.statista.com/statistics/269049/global-pc-shipment-forecast-since-2009/; and http://www.worldometers.info/computers/, which as of May 2018 when the study was done, estimated the number of personal computers sold this year at about eighty-six million. It forecasts 256.3 million for 2018 and 248.4 million for 2022.

103. Smit, Scheijgrond, and Severin, “Resource Scarcity,” 2–3.

104. Smit, Scheijgrond, and Severin, 3.

105. Schmidt, “Resource Efficiency,” Table 1, 2.

106. Schmidt, 3–4.

107. Manhart et al., “Recycling of Critical Metals,” 3.

108. de Decker, “Monster Footprint of Digital Technology.”

109. Stefan Helmreich, “Nature/Culture/Seawater,” American Anthropologist 113 (2011): 132–44.

1. Achim Menges and Sean Ahlquist, eds., introduction to D’Arcy Thompson, “On the Theory of Transformations, or the Comparison of Related Forms,” in Computational Design Thinking (West Sussex, U.K.: Wiley, 2011), 32.

2. Sanjeev Kumar and Peter Bentley, “Biologically Inspired Evolutionary Development,” in Evolvable Systems: From Biology to Hardware, ed. Andy Tyrrell, Pauline Haddow, and Jim Torresen (New York: Springer, 2003), 57.

3. On Evo DeVO at LIPHE, see http://www.mcgill.ca/architecture/resources/liphe; and Aaron Sprecher and Chandler Ahrens, “Adaptive Knowledge in Architecture,” in “Digital Property: Open-Source Architecture,” special issue AD, ed. Wendy W. Fok and Antoine Picon, 86, no. 5 (September–October 2016): 25–35.

4. Helene Furjàn and Peter Lloyd Jones, “Epigenesis: Bio-Architectures,” in The Gen(H)ome Project, ed. Peter Noever and Open Source Architecture (Los Angeles: MAK Center for Art and Architecture, 2006), 82–89.

5. Aspects of Haeckel’s theory of recapitulation bear some resemblance to what we now know from evo-devo in that very distantly related organisms share a common set of homeotic genes that affect organismal development. Differences in gene activation, rather than differences in gene sequences or numbers, account for many of the major morphological differences between species.

6. Snait Gissis and Eva Jablonka, eds., Transformation of Lamarckism: From Subtle Fluids to Molecular Biology (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2011).

7. In Germany in the 1930s and 1940s, Hollerith punch cards and tabulating machines designed, leased, and maintained by IBM Germany (Dehomag) were used keep track of large amounts of census data, including location of Jews, ethnicity, economic status, as well as scientific trait survey data, food and labor supplies, human transportation, and death records throughout the Holocaust. See Edwin Black, IBM and the Holocaust (Rockville, Md.: Dialog Press, 2012). This is the earliest historical overlap between the uses of computation and biological theories of evolution for highly unethical statistical and political purposes.

8. This is the focus of Lily Kay’s Who Wrote the Book of Life? A History of the Genetic Code (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2000). Her argument is summarized and added on to by David Depew in “From Heat Engines to Digital Printouts: A Tropology of the Organism from the Victorian Era to the Human Genome Project,” in Memory Bytes: History, Technology, and Digital Culture, ed. Lauren Rabinowitz and Abraham Geil (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 2003), 47–75. Kay cites Watson and Crick’s second Nature article as the publication where they use the word “code”: “It therefore seems likely that the precise sequence of the bases is the code which carries the genetical information” (59). She also recounts earlier ideas of Erwin Schrödinger on the likely existence of a “code-script” at the root of life (60–62).

9. Agoston Eiben and Jim Smith, “From Evolutionary Computation to the Evolution of Things,” Nature 521 (May 28, 2015): 476, citing A. M. Turing, Machine Intelligence 5, ed. B. Meltzer and D. Michie (Edinburgh, U.K.: Edinburgh University Press, 1969). See also Thomas Back, Ulrich Hammel, and Paul Schwefel, “Evolutionary Computation: Comments on the History and Current State,” IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 1, no. 1 (April 1997): 3–17.

10. Alan Turing, “The Chemical Basis of Morphogenesis,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B 237, no. 641 (1952): 37–72; Philip Ball, Shapes (Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press, 2009), 154.

11. Turing, 41, also quoted in Ball, 155.

12. Ball, 155.

13. Turing, in “Chemical Basis of Morphogenesis,” 38, suggests that morphogens are similar to Conrad Waddington’s “evocators” or that they may be hormones or even genes as a specific subset.

14. Ball, Shapes, 156.

15. See Ball’s footnote on page 156 regarding Turing’s wish for a computer to compute the reaction-diffusion equations.

16. Ball, 157. See also Florian Maderspacher, “Colour Patterns: Channeling Turing,” Current Biology 22, no. 8 (April 2012): R266–68; Jonathon Howard, Stephan Grill, and Justin Bois, “Turing’s Next Steps: The Mechanochemical Basis of Morphogenesis,” Nature Reviews in Molecular and Cell Biology 12 (June 2011): 392–98; Siegfried Roth, “Mathematics and Biology: A Kantian View on the History of Pattern Formation Theory,” Development, Genes, and Evolution 221, no. 5 (December 2011): 255–79; Shigeru Kondo and Takashi Miura, “Reaction-Diffusion Model as a Framework for Understanding Biological Pattern Formation,” Science 329 (24 September 2010): 1616–20; Philip Maini, “The Impact of Turing’s Work on Pattern Formation in Biology,” Mathematics Today, August 2004, 140–41.

17. Eiben and Smith, “From Evolutionary Computation to the Evolution of Things,” 477, 479; see also Melanie Mitchell, An Introduction to Genetic Algorithms (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1996), 2.

18. Eiben and Smith, 480.

19. Mitchell, Introduction to Genetic Algorithms, 181–82.

20. Eiben and Smith, “From Evolutionary Computation to the Evolution of Things,” 478–79.

21. Mitchell, Introduction to Genetic Algorithms, 4–5, 181.

22. Mitchell, 181–82.

23. Kay, Who Wrote the Book of Life?; Depew, “From Heat Engines to Digital Printouts.”

24. Depew, 58–61.

25. Francis Crick, “Central Dogma of Molecular Biology,” Nature 227 (August 8, 1970): 561–63. In this article he qualifies and revises some of his earlier claims about the unidirectionality of flow from DNA to RNA to proteins, owing to discoveries by other scientists that showed this was not always the case; see also Francis Crick, “On Protein Synthesis,” Symposia of the Society for Experimental Biology 12 (1958): 138–63.

26. Depew, “From Heat Engines to Digital Printouts,” 61.

27. Depew, 61.

28. Depew, 67–69.

29. Depew, 68.

30. Depew, 70.

31. Depew, 69, italics added. Depew is also coauthor, along with Bruce Weber, of Darwinism Evolving: Systems Dynamics and the Genealogy of Natural Selection (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1995).

32. Hallam Stevens, “Networks: Representations and Tools in Postgenomics,” in Postgenomics: Perspectives on Biology after the Genome, ed. Sarah Richardson and Hallam Stevens (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 2015), 103.

33. Stevens, 104.

34. Depew, “From Heat Engines to Digital Printouts,” 68.

35. Sarah Richardson and Hallam Stevens, “Approaching Postgenomics,” in Postgenomics: Perspectives on Biology after the Genome, ed. Sarah Richardson and Hallam Stevens (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 2015), 237.

36. John Frazer, An Evolutionary Architecture (London: Architectural Association, 1995), 10–11.

37. Alberto Estévez, “Biomorphic Architecture,” in Genetic Architectures II: Digital Tools and Organic Forms, ed. Estévez (Santa Fe, N.M.: SITES Books / ESARQ-UIC, 2005), 78.

38. See Michael Weinstock, “Evolution and Computation,” in Michael Hensel, Achim Menges, and Michael Weinstock, Emergent Technologies and Design: Towards a Biological Paradigm for Architecture (New York: Routledge, 2010), 25–41.

39. Achim Menges, “Biomimetic Design Processes in Architecture: Morphogenetic and Evolutionary Computational Design,” Bioinspiration and Biomimicry 7, no. 1 (2012): 015003. The most recent works on evolutionary theory included in his sources are Stephen Jay Gould, The Structure of Evolutionary Theory (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2002); and Gerd Müller and Stuart Newman, Origination of Organismal Form (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2003). Otherwise, his references point to Julian Huxley, Evolution: The Modern Synthesis (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1942); Ernst Mayr, “Typological Versus Population Thinking,” Darwin and the Evolutionary Theory in Biology (Washington, D.C.: Anthropological Society of Washington, 1959), 409–12; Walter J. Bock, “Preadaptation and Multiple Evolutionary Pathways,” Evolution 13 (1959): 194–211; and Mary C. McKitrick, “Phylogenetic Constraints in Evolutionary Theory,” Annual Reviews in Ecological Systems 24 (1993): 307–30.

40. The entry for neo-Darwinism in Wikipedia claims that the modern synthesis and neo-Darwinism are still the “current evolutionary theory” without note of all the changes since the turn of the twentieth century. This points to the power of this theory overall. See Wikipedia, s.v. “Neo-Darwinism,” last modified April 14, 2018, available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Darwinism.

41. Depew and Weber, Darwinism Evolving, 299–301.

42. Depew asserts this in “From Heat Engines to Digital Printouts,” 64.

43. Depew and Weber, Darwinism Evolving, 346.

44. Depew and Weber, 342; see also Wikipedia, s.v. “One Gene–One Enzyme Hypothesis,” last modified September 29, 2017, available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_gene-one-_enzyme_hypothesis. See also Mark Hickman and John Cairns, “The Centenary of the One-Gene One-Enzyme Hypothesis,” Genetics 163, no. 3 (April 2003): 839–41, which cites predecessors to Beadle and Tatum.

45. Alexander Palazzo and T. Ryan Gregory, “The Case for Junk DNA,” PLoS Genetics 10, no. 5 (May 2014): e1004351, available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4014423/.

46. Richard Dawkins, The Selfish Gene (Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press, 1976).

47. Mitchell, Introduction to Genetic Algorithms, 2.

48. Mitchell, 5.

49. Mitchell, 5.

50. Mitchell, 5.

51. Mitchell, 6.

52. Mitchell, 6.

53. Mitchell, 6.

54. Mitchell, 6.

55. Depew, “From Heat Engines to Digital Printouts,” 67–69.

56. The roof was for Coventry Preparatory School and published first in John Frazer, “Reptiles,” AD 4 (1974): 231–39; and later in Frazer, Evolutionary Architecture, 23.

57. Email from John Frazer to the author, June 20, 2016.

58. Frazer, Evolutionary Architecture, 11, 58.

59. See one listing of their holdings from the Yokohama Terminal project at http://www.moma.org/collection/works/95093, which refers to a C-print of the geometry of the girders. When I visited MoMA in 2008, I saw some of the Yokohama design prints on display in the design section of the museum’s permanent collection. I remember a plaque on the wall that described how the girders were designed using genetic algorithms, but I cannot find pictures of the text and am not sure my memory is accurate on this point. See also David Langdon, “Yokohama International Passenger Terminal, Foreign Office Architects (FOA),” AD Classics, October 7, 2014, available at http://www.archdaily.com/554132/ad-classics-yokohama-international-passenger-terminal-foreign-office-architects-foa, for a description of the difficulty and uniqueness of the girder design.

60. FOA, “Phylogenesis: FOA’s Ark,” in Phylogenesis: FOA’s Ark, ed. Michael Kubo, Albert Ferre, Farshid Moussavi, and Alejandro Zaera-Polo (Barcelona: Actar, 2003), 8–9.

61. FOA, 11.

62. Michael Weinstock, “Morphogenesis and the Mathematics of Emergence,” in “Emergence: Morphogenetic Design Strategies,” special issue of AD, ed. Michael Hensel, Achim Menges, and Michael Weinstock, 74, no. 3 (May–June 2004): 16.

63. Weinstock, “Evolution and Computation,” 29.

64. Weinstock, 34, 38.

65. Benjamin recommended this website on his course brief and I participated in a critique in the Spring 2009 semester for this studio.

66. See Marek Obitko’s website about genetic algorithms, available at http://www.obitko.com/tutorials/genetic-algorithms/biological-background.php.

67. Keith Besserud and Joshua Ingram, “Architectural Genomics,” in Silicon + Skin: Biological Processes and Computation, ed. Andrew Kudless, Neri Oxman, and Marc Swackhamer (Morrisville, N.C.: Lulu Press, 2008), 239–40.

68. Besserud and Ingram, 243.

69. Besserud and Ingram, 240.

70. Besserud and Ingram, 240–41. Eiben and Smith write, “Nevertheless, it is important to understand that evolutionary algorithms are not optimizers, but approximators, and they are not optimal since we might not know whether the fitness of the best evolved solution is in fact the highest value possible” (“From Evolutionary Computation to the Evolution of Things,” 478).

71. Other examples of fitness criteria for architectural GAs are mentioned in Menges, “Biomimetic Design Processes in Architecture,” 4.

72. Weinstock, “Morphogenesis and the Mathematics of Emergence,” 12.

73. Eiben and Smith, “From Evolutionary Computation to the Evolution of Things,” 477.

74. Depew, “From Heat Engines to Digital Printouts,” 68.

75. Christina Cogdell, Eugenic Design: Streamlining America in the 1930s (2004; repr., Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2010), 46.

76. See Sean Carroll’s summary of this history in Endless Forms Most Beautiful: The New Science of Evo Devo (New York: Norton, 2005), 6–7.

77. Evelyn Fox Keller, “The Postgenomic Genome,” in Postgenomics: Perspectives on Biology after the Genome, ed. Sarah Richardson and Hallam Stevens (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 2015), 14.

78. Depew and Weber, Darwinism Evolving, 351.

79. Depew and Weber, 351.

80. Jyoti Madhusoodanan, “Human Gene Set Shrinks Again,” The Scientist, July 8, 2014, available at http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/40441/title/Human-Gene-Set-Shrinks-Again/.

81. Although publications proposing the realignment of evolutionary and developmental biology based on evidence that led to evo-devo began before 2000, that was the year that the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences was devoted to pursuing the theory of evo-devo, with its resulting publication (97, no. 9 [2000]).

82. Frazer, Evolutionary Architecture, 20.

83. Carroll, Endless Forms Most Beautiful, 15, 64.

84. Some of these scientists worked with Carroll in the same lab—he mentions Allen Laughon in addition to himself, as well as scientists in Basel, Switzerland, Bill McGinnis and Mike Levine working in Walter Gehring’s lab. See Carroll, 63–64.

85. Carroll, 62–63.

86. Carroll, 9.

87. Carroll, 29.

88. Carroll, 19–28.

89. On broken symmetries, see Ian Stewart, “Broken Symmetries and Biological Patterns,” in On Growth, Form, and Computers, ed. Sanjeev Kumar and Peter Bentley (San Diego: Elsevier Press, 2003), 181–202; see also Ball, Shapes, 23–25 and throughout.

90. Carroll, Endless Forms Most Beautiful, 33–34.

91. Carroll, 64, 71.

92. Carroll, 88.

93. Carroll, 65.

94. Ball, Shapes, 275.

95. Carroll, Endless Forms Most Beautiful, 89–98.

96. Carroll, 44–45.

97. Email from Sean Carroll to the author, August 18, 2016.

98. Ball, Shapes, 163, 176, 189, 242–45, 266–71, esp. 277–80.

99. Carroll, Endless Forms Most Beautiful, 11.

100. Carroll, 11.

101. Carroll, 106.

102. Kumar and Bentley, “Biologically Inspired Evolutionary Development,” 58.

103. Kumar and Bentley, 61.

104. Kumar and Bentley, 60; see also Eva Jablonka and Marion Lamb, Evolution in Four Dimensions: Genetic, Epigenetic, Behavioral, and Symbolic Variation in the History of Life (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2005), 33. They write, “The discoveries in molecular biology inevitably led to a partial revision of the Modern Synthesis version of Darwinian evolution: The gene, the unit of heredity in the Modern Synthesis, became a DNA sequence, which codes for a protein product or an RNA molecule.” On page 67, they recount how the definition of a “gene” is in question, a fact echoed by Carl Zimmer in “Now: The Rest of the Genome,” New York Times, November 10, 2008, available at http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/11/science/11gene.html.

105. For example, see Paul Myers, “Hox Genes in Development: The Hox Code,” Nature Education 1(1), no. 2 (2008), available at http://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/hox-genes-in-development-the-hox-code-41402.

106. Zimmer.

107. Kumar and Bentley, “Biologically Inspired Evolutionary Development,” 61.

108. Kumar and Bentley, 62.

109. Kumar and Bentley, 63.

110. Weinstock, “Evolution and Computation,” 40.

111. Weinstock, 40. Although Carroll’s book Endless Forms Most Beautiful was on the reading list for the 2011 EmTech class, in Weinstock’s 2010 essay “Evolution and Computation” he does not cite Carroll anywhere, despite drawing heavily on Carroll’s book for his description of the history and ideas of evo-devo.

112. Weinstock, “Evolution and Computation,” 40; see also Carroll’s explanation that “differences in form arise from evolutionary changes in where and when genes are used, especially those genes that affect the number, shape, or size of a structure” (Endless Forms Most Beautiful, 11).

113. Weinstock, “Evolution and Computation,” 40.

114. Weinstock, 40.

115. See Sprecher and Ahrens, “Adaptive Knowledge in Architecture”; and http://www.mcgill.ca/architecture/resources/liphe. From these sources, it is not possible to discern how the Evo DeVO Project uses the theory of evo-devo as a model; most of Sprecher’s references are to information technology rather than biology.

116. Menges, “Biomimetic Design Processes in Architecture,” 2.

117. Menges, 4, 6, 9.

118. Menges, 4–7.

119. For example, see James Shapiro, “Revisiting the Central Dogma in the 21st Century,” paper presented at a symposium on Natural Genetic Engineering—Natural Genome Editing, July 2–6, 2008, available at http://shapiro.bsd.uchicago.edu/Shapiro2009.AnnNYAcadSciMS.RevisitingCentral%20Dogma.pdf.

120. Yan Boucher, Christophe Douady, Thane Papke, David Walsh, Mary Ellen Boudreau, Camilla Nesbo, Rebecca Case, and Ford Doolittle, “Lateral Gene Transfer and the Origins of Prokaryotic Groups,” Annual Review of Genetics 37 (2003): 283–328; and Victor Kunin, Leon Goldovsky, Nikos Darzentas, and Christos Ouzounis, “The Net of Life: Reconstructing the Microbial Phylogenetic Network,” Genome Research 15 (2005): 954–59, available at http://genome.cshlp.org/content/15/7/954.full.

121. See John Dupre, “The Polygenomic Organism,” in Postgenomics: Perspectives on Biology after the Genome, ed. Sarah Richardson and Hallam Stevens (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 2015), 56–72. See also Sarah Williams, “Humans May Harbor More Than 100 Genes from Other Organisms,” Science, March 12, 2015, available at http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/03/humans-may-harbor-more-100-genes-other-organisms. The Wikipedia entry for “Horizontal Gene Transfer,” in the section on “Eukaryotes,” lists a number of instances of HGT between bacteria and eukaryotic organisms, including source citations; see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/horizontal_gene_transfer, last modified May 1, 2018.

122. Lynn Margulis and Dorion Sagan, Acquiring Genomes: A Theory of the Origin of Species (New York: Basic Books, 2003).

123. Dupre, “Polygenomic Organism,” 57–58; and David Riley, Karsten Sieber, Kelly Robinson, James White, Ashwinkumar Ganesan, Syrus Nourbakhsh, and Julie Dunning Hotopp, “Bacteria–Human Somatic Cell Lateral Gene Transfer in Cancer Samples,” PLoS Computational Biology 9, no. 6 (2013): e1003107, available at http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article/asset?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pcbi.1003107.pdf.

124. “Darwin Was Wrong: Cutting Down the Tree of Life,” cover of New Scientist, January 24–30, 2009; Ian Sample, “Evolution: Charles Darwin Was Wrong about the Tree of Life,” The Guardian, January 21, 2009, available at http://www.theguardian.com/science/2009/jan/21/charles-darwin-evolution-species-tree-life.

125. Michel Morange, “The Relations between Genetics and Epigenetics: A Historical Point of View,” in “From Epigenesis to Epigenetics: The Genome in Context,” special issue of Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, ed. Linda van Speybroeck, Gertrudis Van de Vijver, and Dani De Waele, 981 (December 2002): 51; and Eva Jablonka and Marion Lamb, “The Changing Concept of Epigenetics,” in “From Epigenesis to Epigenetics: The Genome in Context,” special issue of Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, ed. Linda van Speybroeck, Gertrudis Van de Vijver, and Dani De Waele, 981 (December 2002): 82.

126. Keller, “Postgenomic Genome,” 14; Morange, “Relations between Genetics and Epigenetics,” 55, italics added.

127. Morange, 52–53.

128. Morange, 52–53.

129. Morange, 51.

130. Jablonka and Lamb, “Changing Concepts of Epigenetics,” 88, citing C. Wu and J. R. Morris, “Genes, Genetics, and Epigenetics: A Correspondence,” Science 293 (2001): 1103–5, who cite V. Russo, R. Martienssen, and A. Riggs, eds., Epigenetic Mechanisms of Gene Regulation (Woodbury, N.Y.: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, 1996). See also Sarah Richardson, “Maternal Bodies in the Postgenomic Order: Gender and the Explanatory Landscape of Epigenetics,” in Postgenomics: Perspectives on Biology after the Genome, ed. Sarah Richardson and Hallam Stevens (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 2015), 212. Another definition is proposed by Adrian Bird in “Perceptions of Epigenetics,” Nature 447 (May 24, 2007): 396–98, available at http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v447/n7143/full/nature05913.html.

131. Pilar Cubas, Coral Vincent, and Enrico Coen, “An Epigenetic Mutation Responsible for Natural Variation in Floral Symmetry,” Nature 401 (September 9, 1999): 157–61; Michael Ronemus, “Flower Power,” Nature Genetics 23, no. 2 (1999): 132.

132. Morange, “Relations between Genetics and Epigenetics,” 56.

133. Jablonka and Lamb, Evolution in Four Dimensions, 127–28.

134. For different interpretations and definitions of the word “genome,” see Keller, “Postgenomic Genome,” 26–27.

135. Jablonka and Lamb, Evolution in Four Dimensions, 142.

136. Richardson, “Maternal Bodies in the Postgenomic Order,” throughout; Jablonka and Lamb, Evolution in Four Dimensions, 137–46.

137. Hugh Morgan, Heidi Sutherland, David Martin, and Emma Whitelaw, “Epigenetic Inheritance at the Agouti Locus in the Mouse,” Nature Genetics 23, no. 3 (1999): 314; Emma Whitelaw and David Martin, “Retrotransposons as Epigenetic Mediators of Phenotypic Variation in Mammals,” Nature Genetics 27 (April 2001): 361–65.

138. Jablonka and Lamb, Evolution in Four Dimensions, 144; Richardson, “Maternal Bodies in the Postgenomic Order,” 212, citing Moshe Szyf, Ian Weaver, Francis Champagne, Josie Diorio, and Michael Meaney, “Maternal Programming of Steroid Receptor Expression and Phenotype through DNA Methylation in the Rat,” Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology 26, nos. 3–4 (2005): 139–62.

139. Jablonka and Lamb, “Changing Concepts of Epigenetics,” 94–95; Gissis and Jablonka, Transformations of Lamarckism.

140. Jablonka and Lamb, Evolution in Four Dimensions, 128.

141. Bird, “Perceptions of Epigenetics,” 396.

142. See the ENCODE Project website at http://www.encodeproject.org/. The idea that there is one human genome—the human genome—when, in fact, variations occur between the genomes of individual people, should be recognized as a statistical concept based on the idea of a norm. The Human Genome Project only decoded the genomes of a few individuals pieced together by parts, and since then, the 1000 Genomes Project and 23andMe are adding a huge amount of data to the statistical averages.

143. Zimmer.

144. Keller, “Postgenomic Genome,” 17–18, 20.

145. Bradley E. Bernstein, John A. Stamatoyannopoulos, Joseph F. Costello, Bing Ren, Aleksandar Milosavljevic, Alexander Meissner, Manolis Kellis, Marco A. Marra, Arthur L. Beaudet, Joseph R. Ecker, Peggy J. Farnham, Martin Hirst, Eric S. Lander, Tarjei S. Mikkelsen, and James A. Thomson, “The NIH Roadmap Epigenomics Mapping Consortium,” Nature Biotechnology 28, no. 10 (October 2010): 1045–48. See also Jae-Bum Bae, “Perspectives of International Human Epigenome Consortium,” Genomics Information 11, no. 1 (March 2013): 7–14. The abstract collapses epigenetics into genetics, describing the work of the consortium as a “giant step toward the conquest of unexplored regions of the human genome.” A similar reabsorption of epigenetics into genetics is hashed out in Mark Ptashne, Oliver Hobert, and Eric Davidson in “Questions over the Scientific Basis of the Epigenome Project,” Nature 464, no. 487 (March 25, 2010), available at http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v464/n7288/full/464487c.html. For a general website of these projects, see http://www.roadmapepigenomics.org/.

146. “Time for the Epigenome,” Nature 463, no. 587 (February 4, 2010), available at http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v463/n7281/full/463587a.html.

147. “Time for the Epigenome.”

148. Jablonka and Lamb, “Changing Concepts of Epigenetics,” 89; Jablonka and Lamb, Evolution in Four Dimensions, 123.

149. Jablonka and Lamb, “Changing Concepts of Epigenetics,” 91–92.

150. Sathish Periyasamy, William Alexander Gray, and Peter Kille, “The Epigenetic Algorithm,” IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, 2008, 3228–30.

151. Periyasamy, Gray, and Kille, 3232. See also Steen Rasmussen, Mark Bedau, Liaohai Chen, David Deamer, David Krakauer, Norman Packard, and Peter Stadler, eds., Protocells: Bridging Nonliving and Living Matter (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2009), xx.

152. Periyasamy, Gray, and Kille, “Epigenetic Algorithm,” 3228.

153. Periyasamy, Gray, and Kille, 3228.

154. Periyasamy, Gray, and Kille, 3228.

155. Periyasamy, Gray, and Kille, 3230.

156. James Shapiro, “Genome Organization and Reorganization in Evolution: Formatting for Computation and Function,” in “From Epigenesis to Epigenetics: The Genome in Context,” special issue of Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, ed. Linda van Speybroeck, Gertrudis Van de Vijver, and Dani De Waele, 981 (December 2002): 113.

157. J. Scott Turner, “Evolutionary Architecture? Some Perspectives from Biological Design,” in “Material Computation: Higher Integration in Morphogenetic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Menges, 82, no. 2 (March–April 2012): 31, 33.

158. Frazer, Evolutionary Architecture, 83, 99.

159. Furjàn and Jones, “Epigenesis,” 87.

160. Frazer, Evolutionary Architecture, 102, citing Richard Dawkins, The Extended Phenotype (Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press, 1982); W. Katavolos, “Organics,” in Programmes and Manifestoes on 20th-Century Architecture, ed. Ulrich Conrads (London: Lund Humphries, 1970); Charles Jencks, Architecture 2000: Predictions and Methods (London: Studio Vista, 1971); Peter Cook, ed., Archigram 9 (1970); A. Graham Cairns-Smith, Genetic Takeover and the Mineral Origins of Life (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1982).

161. Eiben and Smith, “From Evolutionary Computation to the Evolution of Things,” 480.

162. Sara Shostak and Margot Moinester, “The Missing Piece of the Puzzle? Measuring the Environment in the Postgenomic Moment,” in Postgenomics: Perspectives on Biology after the Genome, ed. Sarah Richardson and Hallam Stevens (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 2015), 195.

163. Shostak and Moinester, 197.

164. Michelle Murphy, Sick Building Syndrome and the Problem of Uncertainty: Environmental Politics, Technoscience, and Women Workers (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 2006).

165. Besserud and Ingram, “Architectural Genomics,” 140.

1. The only other publication-documented generative architect–biological scientist duo, that of David Benjamin and synthetic biologist Fernan Federici, to work in a similar manner to Sabin and Jones possibly based their own approach on that of LabStudio. See the section on biocomputation addressing Benjamin and Federici’s work in chapter 2 for comparison.

2. See related images and study at Rene Chapados, Khotaro Abe, Kaori Ihida-Stansbury, David McKean, Adam Gates, Michael Kern, Sandra Merklinger, John Elliott, Anne Plant, Hiroaki Shimokawa, and Peter Lloyd Jones, “ROCK Controls Matrix Synthesis in Vascular Smooth Muscle Cells: Coupling Vasoconstriction to Vascular Remodeling,” Circulation Research 99 (September 21, 2006): 837–44. “TN1/green fluorescent protein (TN1-GFP)” revealed the extracellular matrix (ECM); “fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC)-conjugated goat anti-rabbit IgG” revealed the nucleus; and “For F-actin, cells were stained with AlexaFluor 594 phalloidin” (838).

3. Rosalind Franklin, Photograph 51, X-ray diffraction image of sodium deoxyribose nucleate (1952), in Franklin and Ray Gosling, “Molecular Configuration in Sodium Thymonucleate,” Nature 171, no. 4356 (April 1953): 740.

4. Celeste Nelson and Mina Bissell define the “microenvironment” as “local and systemic constituents surrounding a cell, including ECM, other cells, and soluble factors released locally or transmitted from other organs, such as hormones.” See Nelson and Bissell, “Of Extracellular Matrix, Scaffolds, and Signaling: Tissue Architecture Regulates Development, Homeostasis, and Cancer,” Annual Review of Cell and Developmental Biology 22 (2006): 288.

5. On cells as tensegrity structures, see Donald Ingber, “The Architecture of Life,” Scientific American, January 1998, 48–57; and more recently, Donald Ingber, Ning Wang, and Dimitrije Stamenovic, “Tensegrity, Cellular Biophysics, and the Mechanics of Living Systems,” Reports on Progress in Physics 77, no. 4 (2014): 046603, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4112545/.

6. See http://smartgeometry.org/.

7. Jenny Sabin and Peter Lloyd Jones, “LabStudio: Nonlinear Design Diagnostics and Tooling,” short fund-raising proposal shared with the author in 2009.

8. Donald Ingber and James Jamieson, “Cells as Tensegrity Structures: Architectural Regulation of Histodifferentiation by Physical Forces Transduced over Basement Membrane,” in Gene Expression during Normal and Malignant Differentiation, ed. Leif C. Andersson, Carl G. Gahmberg, and P. Ekblom (Orlando: Academic Press, 1985), 13–32.

9. Ingber, Wang, and Stamenovic, “Tensegrity, Cellular Biophysics, and the Mechanics of Living Systems,” 5.

10. Nelson and Bissell, “Extracellular Matrix, Scaffolds, and Signaling,” 297–98. They describe how cell rounding “leads to histone modifications,” which affect gene accessibility and regulation.

11. Ingber, Wang and Stamenovic, “Tensegrity, Cellular Biophysics, and the Mechanics of Living Systems,” 1.

12. Nelson and Bissell, “Extracellular Matrix, Scaffolds, and Signaling,” 288; Christy Hebner, Valerie Weaver, and Jayanta Debnath, “Modeling Morphogenesis and Oncogenesis in Three-Dimensional Breast Epithelial Cultures,” Annual Review of Pathology: Mechanisms of Disease 3 (2008): 313–39.

13. J. Scott Turner, “Evolutionary Architecture? Some Perspectives from Biological Design,” in “Material Computation: Higher Integration in Morphogenetic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Menges, 82, no. 2 (March–April 2012): 31, 33.

14. Valerie Weaver, Ole Petersen, Fei Yuan Wang, Carolyn Larabell, Per Briand, Caroline Damsky, and Mina Bissell, “Reversion of the Malignant Phenotype of Human Breast Cells in Three-Dimensional Culture and In Vivo by Integrin Blocking Antibodies,” Journal of Cell Biology 137, no. 1 (April 7, 1997): 231–45. See also Mina Bissell’s talk “Genes and the Microenvironment: Two Faces of Breast Cancer,” available about thirty minutes into this video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5H9NLjO-0E.

15. Bissell, “Genes and the Microenvironment.” Elsewhere, she rephrases this as follows: “Tissue architecture is both a consequence and a cause (the end and the beginning).” See Nelson and Bissell, “Extracellular Matrix, Scaffolds, and Signaling,” 289.

16. Two articles explaining the importance of three-dimensional cultures are Genee Lee, Paraic Kenny, Eva Lee, and Mina Bissell, “Three-Dimensional Culture Models of Normal and Malignant Breast Epithelial Cells,” Nature Methods 4, no. 4 (April 2007): 359–65; and Hebner, Weaver, and Debnath, “Modeling Morphogenesis and Oncogenesis in Three-Dimensional Breast Epithelial Cultures.”

17. David McKean, Lila Sisbarro, Dusko Ilic, Nihal Kaplan-Alburquerque, Raphael Nemenoff, Mary Weiser-Evans, Michael Kern, and Peter Lloyd Jones, “FAK Induces Expression of Prx1 to Promote Tenascin-C-Dependent Fibroblast Migration,” Journal of Cell Biology 161, no. 2 (April 28, 2003): 393–402.

18. Kaori Ihida-Stansbury, David McKean, Sarah Gebb, James Martin, Troy Stevens, Raphael Nemenoff, Ann Akeson, Jessica Vaughn, and Peter Lloyd Jones, “Paired-Related Homeobox Gene Prx1 Is Required for Pulmonary Vascular Development,” Circulation Research 94 (June 11, 2004): 1507–14. See also Peter Lloyd Jones, “Pulmonary Vascular Development,” in Endothelial Biomedicine, ed. William Aird (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 176–90.

19. Chapados et al., “ROCK Controls Matrix Synthesis in Vascular Smooth Muscle Cells.” See also Peter Lloyd Jones, “Move On! Smooth Muscle Cell Behavior Paired Down,” Circulation Research 100, no. 6 (March 30, 2007): 757–60; Agne Taraseviciute, Benjamin Vincent, Pepper Schedin, and Peter Lloyd Jones, “Quantitative Analysis of 3-D Human Mammary Epithelial Tissue Architecture Reveals a Role for Tenascin-C in Regulating C-Met Function,” American Journal of Pathology 176, no. 2 (February 2010): 827–38.

20. Sabin and Jones cite Marvin Cassman as the source of the epigraph on their course description; see Cassman, Adam Arkin, Frank Doyle, Fumiaki Katagiri, Douglas Lauffenburger, and Cynthia Stokes, WTEC Panel Report on International Research and Development in Systems Biology (Baltimore: World Technology Evaluation Center, 2005), 2, available at https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Adam_Arkin/publication/226941915_Data_and_Databases/links/09e415107356f39e6f000000/Data-and-Databases.pdf.

21. Jenny Sabin and Peter Lloyd Jones, “Nonlinear Systems Biology and Design: Surface Design,” in Silicon + Skin: Biological Processes and Computation, ed. Andrew Kudless, Neri Oxman, and Marc Swackhamer (Morrisville, N.C.: Lulu Press, ACADIA, 2008), 55; Eva Jablonka and Marion Lamb, Evolution in Four Dimensions: Genetics, Epigenetics, Behavioral, and Symbolic Variation in the History of Life (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2006), 113.

22. Sabin and Jones, 64.

23. Katharine Miller, “Seeing Science,” Biomedical Computation Review, Summer 2010, 26; Martin Krzywinski and Erica Savig, “Multidimensional Data,” Nature Methods 10, no. 7 (2013): 595.

24. See http://www.jennysabin.com/branching-morphogenesis/.

25. Another sculptural piece by Sabin, Jones, Andrew Lucia, and Annette Fierro, Ground Substance, was featured on the cover of the American Journal of Pathology, February 2010.

26. Sabin’s piece was featured as the opening photograph, by Byron Smith, in Ken Johnson, “Cooper Hewitt Triennial Offers a Bold Look at ‘Beauty,’” New York Times, February 11, 2016, available at http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/12/arts/design/cooper-hewitt-triennial-offers-a-bold-look-at-beauty.html.

27. See Beesley’s writings on the Hylozoic series, available at http://philipbeesleyarchitect.com/publications/digital-publications.php.

28. Sabin used a photo-luminescent yarn for this piece, per an email from her to the author, August 26, 2016.

29. Sabin and Jones, “Nonlinear Systems Biology and Design,” 56.

30. Jenny Sabin, Andrew Lucia, Giffen Ott, and Simin Wang, “Prototyping Interactive Nonlinear Nano-to-Micro Scaled Material Properties and Effects at the Human Scale,” in Proceedings of the Society and Modeling International (SimAud) (San Diego: Society for Computer Simulation International, 2014), 2.

31. Simin Wang, Andrew Lucia, and Jenny Sabin, “Simulating Nonlinear Nano-to-Micro Scaled Material Properties and Effects at the Architectural Scale,” in Proceedings of the Society and Modeling International (SimAud) (San Diego: Society for Computer Simulation International, 2014), 3.

32. See Michael Hansmeyer and Benjamin Dillenburger, “Dataflow,” n.d., at http://digital-grotesque.com/design/. “The geometry of the grottos consist of 260 million and 1.35 billion individual faces respectively. This large amount of data cannot be adequately processed by existing CAD software. Customized algorithms were therefore developed to calculate the construction details and to convert the form into printable data.” Given that they had thirty billion spatial data points, “such an enormous amount of information cannot be processed as a single entity in the computer; the geometry is loaded only where needed, streamed layer per layer.”

33. Wang, Lucia, and Sabin, “Simulating Nonlinear Nano-to-Micro Scaled Material Properties and Effects,” 7.

34. Wang, Lucia, and Sabin, 1.

35. Jenny Sabin, “Transformative Research Practice: Architectural Affordances and Crisis,” Journal of Architectural Education 69, no. 1 (March 2015): 66.

36. Hyung Chul Kim and Vasilis Fthenakis, “Life Cycle Energy and Climate Change Implication of Nanotechnologies; A Critical Review,” n.d., 1, posted on Center for Life Cycle Analysis at Columbia University website, available at http://www.clca.columbia.edu/244_Kim-Fthenakis-LCA-of-nanotech-revised-07-17.pdf. See also Kris de Decker, “The Monster Footprint of Digital Technology,” Low Tech Magazine, June 2009, available at http://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2009/06/embodied-energy-of-digital-technology.html.

37. Kim and Fthenakis, 1.

38. Sabin, “Transformative Research Practice,” 67.

39. Sabin, 63, 71.

1. William Myers, BioDesign: Nature, Science, Creativity (New York: Museum of Modern Art, 2012), 58–61.

2. For examples, see Myers, 22–61, which includes the projects Harmonia 57, Gutman Visitor Center, Root Bridges of Meghalaya, Cattedrale Vegetale, Baubotanik Tower, Lake Constance Footbridge, Bio Milano, Editt Tower, and Fab Tree Hab, among others; Bill Watts and Sean Affleck, “Living Buildings,” in “Neoplasmatic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Marcos Cruz and Steve Pike, 78, no. 6 (November–December 2008): 78–79; and Ton Venhoeven, “Wonderwall,” in “Neoplasmatic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Marcos Cruz and Steve Pike, 78, no. 6 (November–December 2008): 80–81.

3. Stewart Brand, “Review of Evolution and Design of the Plant Kingdom,” in The Last Updated Whole Earth Catalog, ed. Stewart Brand, 1974, 84.

4. Myers, BioDesign, 132–33.

5. John Schwartz, “Museum Kills Live Exhibit,” New York Times, May 13, 2008, available at http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/13/science/13coat.html.

6. Helen Castle, “Editorial,” in “Neoplasmatic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Marcos Cruz and Steve Pike, 78, no. 6 (November–December 2008): 4.

7. Marcos Cruz and Steve Pike, “Neoplasmatic Design: Design Experimentation with Bio-Architectural Composites,” in “Neoplasmatic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Marcos Cruz and Steve Pike, 78, no. 6 (November–December 2008): 8, 12.

8. Marcos Cruz, “Synthetic Neoplasms,” in “Neoplasmatic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Marcos Cruz and Steve Pike, 78, no. 6 (November–December 2008): 42.

9. See Dennis Dollens, Digital–Botanic Architecture (Santa Fe, N.M.: SITES Books / ESARQ-UIC, 2005), 57–67; Castle, “Editorial,” 4; Cruz and Pike, “Neoplasmatic Design,” 6, 12, 15; Oron Catts and Ionat Zurr, “Growing Semi-Living Structures: Concepts and Practices for the Use of Tissue Technologies for Non-Medical Purposes,” in “Neoplasmatic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Marcos Cruz and Steve Pike, 78, no. 6 (November–December 2008): 30–35; Oron Catts and Ionat Zurr, “The Vitality of Matter and the Instrumentalisation of Life,” in “The Innovation Imperative: Architectures of Vitality,” special issue of AD, ed. Pia Ednie-Brown, Mark Burry, and Andrew Burrow, 83, no. 1 (January–February 2013): 70–75.

10. Conversation between Oron Catts and the author, February 2011, Dublin.

11. Dollens, Digital–Botanic Architecture, 58.

12. If one synthesizes the DNA sequence from scratch using DNA synthesis, then usually the process is considered to fall under synthetic biology rather than genetic engineering. However, the new technique of CRISPR/Cas9 is used in both approaches.

13. Gretchen Reynolds, “Artificial Wombs: Will We Grow Babies outside Their Mother’s Bodies?” Popular Science, August 1, 2005, available at http://www.popsci.com/scitech/article/2005-08/artificial-wombs.

14. See their firm’s website, http://hwkn.com/. For Matthias Hollwich’s and Marc Kushner’s video Econic Design, see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AEx9U7x860.

15. Rachel Armstrong, “Artificial Evolution: A Hands-Off Approach for Architects,” in “Neoplasmatic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Marcos Cruz and Steve Pike, 78, no. 6 (November–December 2008): 83.

16. On sustainability as a goal, or partial goal, see Cruz and Pike, “Neoplasmatic Design,” 12–13.

17. Jennifer Doudna and Emanuelle Charpentier, “The New Frontier of Genome Engineering with CRISPR/Cas9,” Science 346, no. 6213 (November 28, 2014): 1077, available at http://science.sciencemag.org/content/346/6213/1258096; Henriette O’Geen, Abigail Yu, and David Segal, “How Specific Is CRISPR/Cas9 Really?” Current Opinion in Chemical Biology 29 (2015): 72–78; and Haifeng Wang, Marie La Russa, and Lei Qi, “CRISPR/Cas9 in Genome Editing and Beyond,” Annual Review of Biochemistry 85 (2016): 227–64.

18. Cruz and Pike, “Neoplasmatic Design,” 8–9.

19. Marcos Cruz, “Designer Surgeons,” in “Neoplasmatic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Marcos Cruz and Steve Pike, 78, no. 6 (November–December 2008): 46–51.

20. Oron Catts and Ionat Zurr, “Semi-Living Art,” in Signs of Life: Bio Art and Beyond, ed. Eduardo Kac (Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 2007), 231–48. See also Catts and Zurr, “Growing Semi-Living Structures,” 32.

21. Catts and Zurr, “Semi-Living Art,” 233–34.

22. Catts and Zurr.

23. They critique capitalism and extreme profit-taking in Ionat Zurr and Oron Catts, “Are the Semi-Living Semi-Good or Semi-Evil?” Technoetic Arts 1, no. 1 (2003): 60, and discuss Margulis’s theory of endosymbiogenesis and cooperative evolution, in contrast to Darwinian competitive “survival of the fittest” (51). Catts, in an email to the author (August 26, 2016), stated that the original logo he designed for SymbioticA in 1999 was a direct reference to endosymbiogenesis, where one cell swallows another to create a new cooperative function, which is how Margulis describes the origin of eukaryotic cells from the fusion of two prokaryotic cells.

24. For example, Catts has just been appointed as professor of contestable design at the Royal College of Art in 2016. Zurr and he describe their uneasiness in “Are the Semi-Living Semi-Good or Semi-Evil?” 58–60.

25. Catts and Zurr, “Semi-Living Art,” 237–43. They also discuss the in vitro meat piece in Zurr and Catts, “Are the Semi-Living Semi-Good or Semi-Evil?” 48.

26. Catts and Zurr, “Growing Semi-Living Structures,” 34.

27. Dollens, Digital–Botanic Architecture, 62.

28. Dollens, 62–63.

29. Dollens, 66.

30. Catts and Zurr, “Semi-Living Art,” 237–43.

31. On thickness of tissue and diffusability of oxygen and nutrients, see Hyun-Wook Kang, Sang Jin Lee, In Kap Ko, Carlos Kengla, James Yoo, and Anthony Atala, “A 3D Bioprinting System to Produce Human-Scale Tissue Constructs with Structural Integrity,” Nature Biotechnology 34, no. 3 (March 2016): 312.

32. On the sugar or carbohydrate glass method, see Jordan Miller, Kelly Stevens, Michael Yang, Brendon Baker, Duc-Huy Nguyen, Daniel Cohen, Estevan Toro, Alice Chen, Peter Galie, Xiang Yu, Ritika Chaturvedi, Sangeeta Bhatia, and Christopher Chen, “Rapid Casting of Patterned Vascular Networks for Perfusable Engineered Three-Dimensional Tissues,” Nature Materials 11, no. 9 (2012): 768–74. The other method uses “sacrificial Pluronic F-127 hydrogel”; see Kang et al., “3D Bioprinting System,” 312–19.

33. David Kolesky, Kimberly Homan, Mark Skylar-Scott, and Jennifer Lewis, “Three-Dimensional Bioprinting of Thick Vascularized Tissues,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 113, no. 12 (2016): 3179–84.

34. See William Harris, “How 3-D Bioprinting Works,” n.d., available at http://health.howstuffworks.com/medicine/modern-technology/3-d-bioprinting1.htm. Wei Sun of the Drexel University Computer-Aided Tissue Engineering (CATE) laboratory was an innovator in “direct cell writing”; conversation of Wei Sun with the author in early 2009.

35. Other methods exist as well; see Christian Mandrycky, Zongjie Wang, Keekyoung Kim, and Deok-Ho Kim, “3D Bioprinting for Engineering Complex Tissues,” Biotechnology Advances 34 (2016): 423. This article offers good overview of the state of current bioprinting technologies. See also Ibrahim Ozbolat and Monika Hospodiuk, “Current Advances and Future Perspectives in Extrusion-Based Bioprinting,” Biomaterials 76 (2016): 321–43; Kang et al., “3D Bioprinting System,” for their “integrated tissue-organ printer” approach; and Yin Yu, Kazim Moncal, Jianqiang Li, Weijie Peng, Iris Rivero, James Martin, and Ibrahim Ozbolat, “Three-Dimensional Bioprinting Using Self-Assembling Scalable Scaffold-Free ‘Tissue Strands’ as a New Bioink,” Scientific Reports 6, article no. 28714 (June 27, 2016), available at http://www.nature.com/articles/srep28714. Also, it is also common to use different types of stem cells and then cause them to differentiate post-printing via chemical cues into the desired cells rather than printing different types at the outset.

36. See Kang et al., “3D Bioprinting System,” 315.

37. Mandrycky et al., “3D Bioprinting for Engineering Complex Tissues,” 423.

38. Cor van der Weele and Johannes Tramper, “Cultured Meat: Every Village Its Own Factory?” Trends in Biotechnology 32, no. 6 (June 2014): 294–96.

39. On modular 3-D printing, see the work of Virginia San Fratello and Ronald Rael through their practice Rael San Fratello, available at http://www.rael-sanfratello.com/; and also Emerging Objects, available at http://www.emergingobjects.com/.

40. See “Creating a Beating Heart in a Lab,” December 22, 2009, available at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9XzN0-TQZc; also “New Heart Built with Stem Cells,” April 27, 2008, available at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9hEFUpTVPA.

41. Searches in the online academic database Biosis on August 27, 2016, for “tissue engineering” and “epigenetics” returned only seventy-four articles; searching for “genetic engineering” and “epigenetics” returned only seventy-one; and searches for “synthetic biology” and “epigenetics” returned only twenty-three. The deep significance of epigenetic factors as gene regulators and their important role in maintaining cellular architecture during the use of biotechnologies establishes a significant hurdle to be overcome, once it is acknowledged. It seems the process is only yet beginning. In tissue engineering, the use of stem cells with the goal of later differentiation requires knowledge of the epigenetic signals that lead to particular paths of differentiation. Also, when cells are being cultured in vitro, their epigenetic signals can destabilize over time, so the longer a tissue is being cultured, the greater the chance for epigenetic changes to cell identity and function prior to implantation. See Serena Redaelli, Angela Bentivegna, Dana Foudah, Mariorosaria Miloso, Juliana Redondo, Gabriele Riva, Simona Baronchelli, Leda Dalpra, and Giovanni Tredici, “From Cytogenomic to Epigenomic Profiles: Monitoring the Biologic Behavior of In Vitro Cultured Human Bone Marrow Mesenchymal Stem Cells,” Stem Cell Research and Therapy 3, no. 47 (2012): 17 pp.; Zhilong Li, Chenxiong Liu, Zhenhua Xie, Pengyue Song, Robert Zhao, Ling Guo, Zhigang Liu, and Yaojiong Wu, “Epigenetic Dysregulation in Mesenchymal Stem Cell Aging and Spontaneous Differentiation,” PLoS ONE 6, no. 6 (June 2011): e20526; Biao Huang, Gang Li, and Xiao Hua Jiang, “Fate Determination in Mesenchymal Stem Cells: A Perspective from Histone-Modifying Enzymes,” Stem Cell Research and Therapy 6, no. 35 (2015): 9 pp.; and Maggie Zi Chow, Kenneth Boheler, and Ronald Li, “Human Pluripotent Stem Cell-Derived Cardiomyocytes for Heart Regeneration, Drug Discovery, and Disease Modeling: From the Genetic, Epigenetic, and Tissue Modeling Perspectives,” Stem Cell Research and Therapy 4, no. 97 (2013): 13 pp.

42. Matias del Campo and Sandra Manninger, “Speculations on Tissue Engineering and Architecture,” in Silicon + Skin: Biological Processes and Computation, ed. Andrew Kudless, Neri Oxman, and Marc Swackhamer (Morrisville, N.C.: Lulu Press, 2008), 84.

43. del Campo and Manninger, 86.

44. To learn the techniques of engineering synthetic biology, design student Jonny Hoolko and I worked for six months in Marc Facciotti’s TEAM Molecular Prototyping and BioInnovation Laboratory at the University of California at Davis in 2015. Jonny is a lighting designer who studied LED color tuning for his undergraduate honors thesis; he wanted to understand biolumescence better as a lighting option because organisms emit almost zero heat with it. We inserted the genes of fireflies and Vibrio fischerii into Escherichia coli in order to learn the techniques of synthetic biology as a potential tool for bio-based lighting design. While we succeeded at producing colored light in many combinations, the light was so dim and short-lived that it was difficult to photograph. This does not bode well for simple translation into the lighting industry.

45. For more on the interrelation of tissue form and function, see the discussion in this book in chapters 3 and 4, particularly the work of Mina Bissell and Peter Lloyd Jones.

46. Developments in epigenomics are discussed in the latter part of chapter 3 of this book. On the NIH Roadmap Epigenomics Mapping Consortium, see http://www.roadmapepigenomics.org/.

47. Catts and Zurr, “Vitality of Matter and the Instrumentalisation of Life,” 72.

48. Catts and Zurr, “The Ethics of the Experiential Engagement with the Manipulation of Life,” in Tactical Biopolitics: Art, Activism, and Technoscience, ed. Beatriz da Costa and Kavita Philip (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2008), 141n19. See also Zhanqiu Yang and Hai-Rong Xiong, “Culture Conditions and Types of Growth Media for Mammalian Cells,” in Biomedical Tissue Culture (London: Intech, 2012), 4–5, available at http://cdn.intechopen.com/pdfs/40247/InTech-Culture_conditions_and_types_of_growth_media_for_mammalian_cells.pdf. They write under the section “Natural Medium,” in the list of requirements for nutrient media, that “today, serum is still the widely used natural medium. . . . Serum can derive from different animals. Current serum used in tissue culture is cattle serum. Human serum, horse serum is used for some specific cells. Cattle serum has several advantages as used in cell culture: adequate resource, mature preparation technique, long application time. Cattle serum includes bovine calf serum, newborn calf serum, and fetal bovine serum. Take sample for cattle serum from Gibco Life Technologies Company, fetal bovine serum derives from caesarean section fetal bovine; newborn calf serum comes from newborn calf born within 24h; bovine calf serum comes from calf with 10 to 30 days. Fetal bovine serum has highest quality because the fetal bovine doesn’t expose to outside environment and has lowest antibodies and complement.”

49. Alok Jha, “Synthetic Meat: How the World’s Costliest Burger Made It to the Plate,” The Guardian, August 5, 2013, http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/aug/05/synthetic-meat-burger-stem-cells, quoting “Julian Savulescu, professor of practical ethics at the University of Oxford.” The scientist creating the synthetic meat featured in this article is Dr. Mark Post at Maastricht University in the Netherlands.

50. Daniel Grushkin, “Meet the Woman Who Wants to Grow Clothing in a Lab,” Popular Science, February 17, 2015, available at http://www.popsci.com/meet-woman-who-wants-growing-clothing-lab; on Zoa and their process of engineering yeast cells to produce collagen, see Astrid Wendlandt, “Fashion’s Interest in Alternative Fabrics Keeps Growing,” New York Times, November 12, 2017, available at http://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/12/style/alternative-fabrics-sustainability-recycling.html; and Mary Page Bailey, “Protein Engineering Yields Animal-Free Leather,” Chemical Engineering, May 1, 2018, available at http://www.chemengonline.com/protein-engineering-yields-animal-free-leather/.

51. Catts and Zurr, “Ethics of the Experiential Engagement with the Manipulation of Life,” 135.

52. See “First Self-Replicating Synthetic Bacterial Cell,” J. Craig Venter Institute, May 20, 2010, at https://www.jcvi.org/first-self-replicating-synthetic-bacterial-cell-constructed-j%C2%A0craig-venter-institute-researchers; Ewen Calloway, “‘Minimal’ Cell Raises Stakes in Race to Harness Synthetic Life,” Nature 531, no. 7596 (March 24, 2016), available at http://www.nature.com/news/minimal-cell-raises-stakes-in-race-to-harness-synthetic-life-1.19633; Catts and Zurr, “Vitality of Matter and the Instrumentalisation of Life,” 72–73.

53. Paul Rothemund, “Casting Spells with DNA,” October 18, 2007, available at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yn1snjEtk54.

54. Paola Antonelli, Design and the Elastic Mind (New York: Museum of Modern Art, 2008), 115.

55. Zurr and Catts, “Are the Semi-Living Semi-Good or Semi-Evil?” 47–49.

56. Zurr and Catts, 51.

57. Zurr and Catts, 51.

58. Email from Catts to the author, August 26, 2016.

59. Zurr and Catts, “Are the Semi-Living Semi-Good or Semi-Evil?” 51.

60. Giorgio Bernardi, “Chromosome Architecture and Genome Organization,” PLoS ONE 10, no. 11 (November 30, 2015): e0143739; Diego Cattoni, Alessandro Valeri, Antoine Le Gall, and Marcelo Nollmann, “A Matter of Scale: How Emerging Technologies Are Redefining Our View of Chromosome Architecture,” Trends in Genetics 31, no. 8 (August 2015): 454–64; Jerod Ptacin and Lucy Shapiro, “Chromosome Architecture Is a Key Element of Bacterial Cellular Organization,” Cellular Microbiology 15, no. 1 (January 2013): 45–52.

61. For more information about ENCODE and epigenetics, see chapter 3 of this book. The review is that of O’Geen, Yu, and Segal, “How Specific Is CRISPR/Cas9 Really?” 76.

62. See the discussion of this in chapter 4 of this book; and Evelyn Fox Keller, “The Postgenomic Genome,” in Postgenomics: Perspectives on Biology after the Genome, ed. Sarah Richardson and Hallam Stevens (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 2015), 18–20.

63. Conversation between Matthias Hollwich and the author, February 2009, Philadelphia.

64. Hollwich and Kushner, Econic Design.

65. See http://architecture2030.org/buildings_problem_why/, which cites data from a 2012 study by the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

66. Hollwich and Kushner, Econic Design.

67. Regarding the name MEtreePOLIS, take note of the emphases, lest you think Hollwich and Kushner are playing it straight. They could have spelled it “meTREEpolis,” but that would conform to the text and image of most “sustainability” marketing campaigns, suggesting a specious reformed humility in light of newfound recognition of the dominance of nature over the self and the fabric of the city. Rather, they hold firmly to their initial claim that since humans won’t change their habits to be in touch with the environment, architects and other designers of the future “will use technology to change nature to be in tune with us.” They therefore accentuate the “ME” and the “POLIS,” since all trees are actually gone, and nature has been replaced with “enhanced” nature, seemingly dictated and controlled by the economic and environmental needs of a self-centered city-state.

68. See http://www.uic.es/en/esarq/studies.

69. Alberto Estévez, “Genetic Architecture: New Ecologic-Environmental Architectural Design and New Cybernetic-Digital Architectural Design,” in Genetic Architectures, ed. Alberto T. Estévez (Santa Fe, N.M.: SITES Books / ESARQ-UIC, 2003), 17.

70. Estévez, 11.

71. Alberto Estévez, “Biomorphic Architecture: First History of Genetic Architecture or, Is Genetic Architecture Biomorphic?” in Genetic Architectures II, ed. Alberto T. Estévez (Santa Fe, N.M.: SITES Books / ESARQ-UIC, 2005), 74.

72. Estévez, “Genetic Architecture,” 17, 7.

73. Estévez, “Biomorphic Architecture,” 74.

74. Estévez, “Genetic Architecture,” 9, 17.

75. Alberto Estévez, “Genetic Architectures: New Bio and Digital Techniques,” in Genetic Architectures III: New Bio and Digital Techniques, ed. Alberto Estévez (Santa Fe, N.M.: SITES Books / ESARQ-UIC, 2009), 26.

76. On digital topology, see chapter 4; as well as David Depew, “From Heat Engines to Digital Printouts: A Tropology of the Organism from the Victorian Era to the Human Genome Project,” in Memory Bytes: History, Technology, and Digital Culture, ed. Lauren Rabinowitz and Abraham Geil (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 2003), 47–75.

77. See http://www.uic.es/en/research-groups/genetic-architecture.

78. See http://www.uic.es/en/research-groups/genetic-architecture.

79. Agustí Fontarnau, “Genetics Fundamentals,” in Genetic Architectures III: New Bio and Digital Techniques, ed. Alberto Estévez (Santa Fe, N.M.: SITES Books / ESARQ-UIC, 2009), 121.

80. See the brochure at http://www.uic.es/sites/default/files/Folletos/university_masters_degree_in_biodigital_architecture.pdf; and the website, under the section “More” where the section “Labs” only contains information about the “Equipment and Digital Manufacturing Lab,” at http://www.biodigitalarchitecture.com/labs.html.

81. Estévez, “Genetic Architecture,” 15, 17.

82. Estévez, 17.

83. Estévez, 5.

84. Estévez, “Biomorphic Architecture,” 56.

85. del Campo and Manninger, “Speculations on Tissue Engineering and Architecture,” 86.

86. Alberto Estévez with Maria Serer, Genetic Barcelona Pavilion (2007), in Genetic Architectures III: New Bio and Digital Techniques, ed. Alberto Estévez (Santa Fe, N.M.: SITES Books / ESARQ-UIC, 2009), 20.

87. Estévez, “Genetic Architecture,” 15, 17.

88. Estévez, “Biomorphic Architecture,” 71–72.

89. Estévez, 56–57. He also wrote, in 2003, “Who will be the new Christopher Columbus? Who will be the first to achieve manmade software identical to natural software, to DNA, cloning software that architects can use to simulate, graphically, the design of genetic houses with the same strings of information, the same ones and zeros, that nature uses?” See Estévez, “Genetic Architecture,” 17.

90. Estévez, “Genetic Architecture,” 11, 17; Estévez, “Biomorphic Architecture,” 74.

91. Steve Pike, “Manipulation and Control of Micro-Organic Matter in Architecture,” in “Neoplasmatic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Marcos Cruz and Steve Pike, 78, no. 6 (November–December 2008): 18.

92. On the involuntary sterilization of Native American women in the 1960s and 1970s, see Jane Lawrence, “The Indian Health Service and the Sterilization of Native American Women,” American Indian Quarterly 24, no. 3 (Summer 2000): 400–419; Gregory Rutecki, “Forced Sterilization of Native Americans: Later Twentieth Century Physician Cooperation with National Eugenic Policies?” Ethics and Medicine 27, no. 1 (Spring 2011): 32–43.

93. For a lengthier analysis of Econic Design, see Christina Cogdell, “Tearing Down the Grid,” Design and Culture 3, no. 1 (2011): 75–84.

94. Joseph Strauss, “Patents on Biomaterial: A New Colonialism or a Means for Technology Transfer and Benefit-Sharing?” in Bioethics for a Small World, ed. Felix Thiele and Richard Ashcroft (Berlin: Springer, 2005), 45–72; John Merson, “Bio-Prospecting or Bio-Piracy: Intellectual Property Rights and Biodiversity in a Colonial and Postcolonial Context,” Osiris—Nature and Empire: Science and the Colonial Enterprise, 2nd ser., 15 (2000): 282–96; Stuart Newman, “The Role of Genetic Reductionism in Biocolonialism,” Peace Review 12, no. 4 (2000): 517–24; and Katy Moran, Steven King, and Thomas Carlson, “Biodiversity Prospecting: Lessons and Prospects,” Annual Review of Anthropology 30 (2001): 505–26.

95. Statistics and quote from Wikipedia, s.v. “Kudzu,” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/kudzu, last modified April 26, 2018.

96. All quotes come from the narrative in the video; see Hollwich and Kushner, Econic Design.

97. Zurr and Catts, “Are the Semi-Living Semi-Good or Semi-Evil?” 51.

98. Zurr and Catts, 59. They continue: “There are many issues that have to be resolved by humanity as a whole before we can proceed with large-scale exploitation of modified/designed living biological systems. This is of grave concern as decisions which are being made now will determine the directions in which exploitation of living systems take. It is of particular concern as we are entering an era of conflict and intolerance to the other, coupled with an extreme form of capitalism and profit taking” (60). On this theme, see also James Shapiro, “Bacteria Are Small but Not Stupid: Cognition, Natural Genetic Engineering, and Socio-Bacteriology,” Studies in the History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Science 38 (2007): 807–19.

99. Cruz and Pike, “Neoplasmatic Design,” 13.

100. Cruz and Pike, 14.

101. Catts and Zurr, “Growing Semi-Living Structures,” 32–33, italics added.

102. Catts and Zurr, “Vitality of Matter and the Instrumentalisation of Life,” 75, italics added.

103. Zurr and Catts, “Are the Semi-Living Semi-Good or Semi-Evil?” 59.

104. On the love of dinosaurs in the synthetic biology community and company known as Ginkgo Bioworks, see Luis Campos, “Jurassic Ark: Or, A Menagerie of Methods for Thinking Historically about De-Extinction,” paper presented at the NeoLife 2015 Conference of the Society for Literature, Science, and Art, Perth, Australia, October 2, 2015.

105. E. M. Meyerowitz, “Plants Compared to Animals: The Broadest Comparative Study of Development,” Science 295, no. 5559 (2002): 1482–85. Scientists even hotly debate whether naturally occurring chimeras are the fusion of two animal species. See Donald Williamson, “The Origins of Larvae,” American Scientist 95, no. 6 (November–December 2007): 509; and rebuttals by Michael Hart, Richard Strathmann, and Jonathan Allen, “Whence Larvae,” American Scientist 96, no. 2 (March–April 2008): 91.

106. Sean Carroll, Endless Forms Most Beautiful: The New Science of Evo Devo (New York: Norton, 2005).

107. T. J. Clark, Picasso and Truth: From Cubism to Guernica (Princeton, N.J.; Princeton University Press, 2013), 116–17.

108. Castle, “Editorial,” 4. This was also a problem with the Museum of Modern Art exhibition Design and the Elastic Mind (2008) in my opinion. See my review, Christina Cogdell, “Design and the Elastic Mind, Museum of Modern Art (Spring 2008),” Design Issues 25, no. 3 (Summer 2009): 92–101.

1. On the pursuit of protocells characterized as the creation of “wet artificial life,” see Steen Rasmussen, Mark Bedau, Liaohai Chen, David Deamer, David Krakauer, Norman Packard, and Peter Stadler, eds., Protocells: Bridging Nonliving and Living Matter (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2009), xvii. Here also the authors claim, “The holy grail of wet artificial life is the construction of protocells.”

2. Peter Stadler and Bärbel Stadler, “Replicator Dynamics in Protocells,” in Protocells: Bridging Nonliving and Living Matter, ed. Steen Rasmussen, Mark Bedau, Liaohai Chen, David Deamer, David Krakauer, Norman Packard, and Peter Stadler (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2009), 317, 327; Rasmussen et al., Protocells, xvii.

3. Ewen Calloway, “‘Minimal’ Cell Raises Stakes in Race to Harness Synthetic Life,” Nature 531, no. 7596 (March 24, 2016), available at http://www.nature.com/news/minimal-cell-raises-stakes-in-race-to-harness-synthetic-life-1.19633.

4. Clyde Hutchison III, Ray-Yuan Chuang, Vladimir Noskov, Nacyra Assad-Garcia, Thomas Deerinck, Mark Ellisman, John Gill, Krishna Kannan, Bogumil Karas, Li Ma, James Pelletier, Zhi-Qing Qi, R. Alexander Richter, Elizabeth Strychalski, Lijie Sun, Yo Suzuki, Billyana Tsvetanova, Kim Wise, Hamilton Smith, John Glass, Chuck Merryman, Daniel Gibson, and J. Craig Venter, “Design and Synthesis of a Minimal Bacterial Genome,” Science 351, no. 6280 (March 25, 2016): 1414.

5. Rasmussen et al., Protocells, xvii.

6. Rasmussen et al., xv.

7. Rachel Armstrong, “Self-Repairing Architecture,” June 24, 2010, Next Nature Network, available at https://www.nextnature.net/2010/06/self-repairing-architecture/.

8. See Rachel Armstrong’s TED talk “Architecture that Repairs Itself,” July 2009, at http://www.ted.com/talks/rachel_armstrong_architecture_that_repairs_itself.

9. Philip Beesley and Rachel Armstrong, “Soil and Protoplasm: The Hylozoic Ground Project,” in “Protocell Architecture,” special issue of AD, ed. Neil Spiller and Rachel Armstrong, 81, no. 2 (March–April 2011): 86.

10. Armstrong, “Self-Repairing Architecture.”

11. Armstrong.

12. Armstrong.

13. David Benjamin and Fernan Federici, “Bio Logic,” in Synthetic Aesthetics: Investigating Synthetic Biology’s Designs on Nature, ed. Alexandra Daisy Ginsberg, Jane Calvert, Pablo Schyfter, Alistair Elfick, and Drew Endy (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2014), 143–54.

14. Williams Myers’s interview with David Benjamin in Myers, BioDesign: Nature, Science, Creativity (New York: Museum of Modern Art, 2012), 257.

15. On Benjamin’s Hy-Fi, see http://momaps1.org/yap/view/17. See also Blaine Brownell, “David Benjamin’s Building Blocks,” Architect 103, no. 3 (2014): 22; and “Organic BioBrick Made from Mushrooms Make for Cool Construction,” American Ceramic Society Bulletin 93, no. 8 (August 28, 2014): 6–7.

16. See Phil Ross’s website, http://www.mycoworks.com.

17. Rasmussen et al., Protocells, xv.

18. Timothy Gardner, Charles Cantor, and James Collins, “Construction of a Genetic Toggle Switch in Escherichia coli,” Nature 403 (January 20, 2000): 339–42. In the same issue, see Michael Elowitz and Stanislas Leibler, “A Synthetic Oscillatory Network of Transcriptional Regulators,” 335–38.

19. Alexandrine Froger and James Hall, “Transformation of Plasmid DNA into E. coli Using the Heat Shock Method,” Journal of Visualized Experiments 6 (2007): 253, available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2557105/. This was also the process that Jonny Hoolko and I used in a lab at UC Davis when I learned basic techniques of engineering synthetic biology by inserting the genes for bioluminescence from fireflies and Vibrio fischerii into E. coli (Spring 2015).

20. Luis Campos, “The BioBrick Road,” BioSocieties 7, no. 2 (2012): 115–39. Campos critiques the imprecision of the definition, methodology, and actuality of BioBricks, the fundamental gene sequences available through the Registry of Standard Biological Parts. He shows that, at least as of 2012, they are anything but “standard” (standardized), as the precursor and following sequences before and after the desired gene sequence are not standardized, and therefore actually function differently in different organisms to which they are inserted.

21. A “part” has a promoter, ribosome binding site, start codon, DNA protein coding sequence, stop codon, and terminator. These are the six major parts of a “transcriptional unit.” For websites on the parts registry, see http://parts.igem.org/Help:An_Introduction_to_BioBricks and http://parts.igem.org/Catalog. There is also now a BioBricks Foundation, whose history is outlined at http://biobricks.org/biobricks-history/.

22. Alistair Elfick and Drew Endy, “Synthetic Biology: What It Is and Why It Matters,” in Synthetic Aesthetics: Investigating Synthetic Biology’s Designs on Nature, ed. Alexandra Daisy Ginsbert, Jane Calvert, Pablo Schyfter, Alistair Elfick, and Drew Endy (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2014), 19.

23. Elfick and Endy, 19.

24. Elfick and Endy, 19–20.

25. Alexandra Daisy Ginsberg, “Design as the Machines Come to Life,” in Synthetic Aesthetics: Investigating Synthetic Biology’s Designs on Nature, ed. Alexandra Daisy Ginsberg, Jane Calvert, Pablo Schyfter, Alistair Elfick, and Drew Endy (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2014), 41, 52.

26. On the growing national and international bioeconomy, see the White House, National Bioeconomy Blueprint (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 2012), available at http://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/national_bioeconomy_blueprint_april_2012.pdf; Manfred Kircher, “The Emerging Bioeconomy: Industrial Drivers, Global Impact, and International Strategies,” Industrial Biotechnology 10, no. 1 (February 2014): 11–18.

27. These are critiqued in Campos, “BioBrick Road.”

28. Two notable exhibitions including these works, cited throughout this book, are Paola Antonelli’s Design and the Elastic Mind (New York: Museum of Modern Art, 2008); and Myers’s BioDesign. More recently, the Synthetic Aesthetics research project (2009–12) funded by the National Science Foundation (United States) and the Engineering and Physical Science Research Council (United Kingdom), and its resultant book—Alexandra Daisy Ginsberg, Jane Calvert, Pablo Schyfter, Alistair Elfick, and Drew Endy, eds., Synthetic Aesthetics: Investigating Synthetic Biology’s Designs on Nature (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2014)—features collaborative projects between designers and scientists exploring the potentials of synbiodesign.

29. Alexandra Daisy Ginsberg, “Transgressing Biological Boundaries,” in Synthetic Aesthetics: Investigating Synthetic Biology’s Designs on Nature, ed. Alexandra Daisy Ginsberg, Jane Calvert, Pablo Schyfter, Alistair Elfick, and Drew Endy (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2014), 299.

30. See http://design-interactions.rca.ac.uk/studio/explore/synthetic-biology.

31. Michael Burton, Nanotopia and Future Farm, 2006–7, available at http://www.michael-burton.co.uk/HTML/nanotopia.htm and http://www.michael-burton.co.uk/HTML/future_farm.htm. See also Antonelli, Design and the Elastic Mind, 107–8. Burton’s work is also discussed in Anthony Dunne, “Design for Debate,” in “Neoplasmatic Design,” special issue of AD, ed. Marcos Cruz and Steve Pike, 78, no. 6 (November–December 2008): 90–93.

32. See http://design-interactions.rca.ac.uk/studio/alexandra-daisy-ginsberg/designing-for-the-sixth-extinction-2013-15.

33. Alexandra Daisy Ginsberg, “Design Evolution,” in Synthetic Aesthetics: Investigating Synthetic Biology’s Designs on Nature, eds. Alexandra Daisy Ginsberg, Jane Calvert, Pablo Schyfter, Alistair Elfick, and Drew Endy (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2014), 130.

34. See “Design Fictions,” 2011, available at http://natsaiaudrey.co.uk/DESIGN-FICTIONS-Posthumanity-in-the-Age-of-Synthetics; Myers, BioDesign, 176.

35. Myers, 172.

36. See Amy Congdon, Biological Atelier, n.d., at http://postextiles.com/?p=372.

37. Myers, BioDesign, 267. See Sawa’s own website at http://algaeprinting.com/.

38. Although Sawa employs the term “artificial cell,” which could perhaps be something other than a protocell, her use of the past tense likely is based on confusion raised by Armstrong’s use of “protocell” to describe pre-protocells in her work.

39. On kill switches for use by design, see Ginsberg, “Design Evolution,” 113–14.

40. Myers, BioDesign, 267.

41. Myers, 68, 123.

42. Myers, 186.

43. Myers, 126.

44. Olga Zhaxybayeva and W. Ford Doolittle, “Lateral Gene Transfer,” Current Biology 21, no. 7 (April 12, 2011): R242–46, available at http://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822(11)00101-1.

45. Ginsberg, “Design as the Machines Come to Life,” 54; Ginsberg, “Transgressing Biological Boundaries,” 288.

46. Rasmussen et al., Protocells, xiv, caption for figure I.1.

47. Pablo Razeto-Barry, “Autopoiesis 40 Years Later: A Review and a Reformulation,” Origins of Life and Evolution of Biospheres 42 (2012): 543–67; Pier Luigi Luisi, “Autopoiesis: A Review and a Reappraisal,” Naturwissenschaften 90 (2003): 49–59.

48. Luisi states, “An autopoietic unit is a system that is capable of self-sustaining owing to an inner network of reactions that re-generate all the system’s components” (51).

49. Luisi, 52.

50. Tibor Gánti first proposed the chemoton concept in “Organization of Chemical Reactions into Dividing and Metabolizing Units: The Chemotons,” BioSystems 7 (1975): 15–21. Quote here from Eors Szathmary, Mauro Santos, and Chrisantha Fernando, “Evolutionary Potential and Requirements for Minimal Protocells,” Top Currents in Chemistry 259 (2005): 170. The editors of Rasmussen et al., Protocells, xiv, use Gánti’s chemoton concept as their basic definition of a protocell.

51. Frank Harold, “Molecules into Cells: Specifying Spatial Architecture,” Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews 69, no. 4 (2005): 544.

52. Alicja Dzieciol and Stephen Mann, “Designs for Life: Protocells Models in the Laboratory,” Chemical Society Reviews 42 (2012): 80.

53. Dzieciol and Mann, 80. The authors specify the characteristics of living cells as sharing a “semi-permeable membrane . . . genetic information . . . template polymerization to copy hereditary information . . . transcription of the genetic information stored in DNA into RNA, and translation of RNA into proteins (the ‘central dogma’) . . . metabolism . . . [and] homeostasis.”

54. Ricard Sole, Andrea Munteanu, Carlos Rodriguez-Caso, and Javier Macia, “Synthetic Protocell Biology: From Reproduction to Computation,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 362 (2007): 1727–39. See also Daniel Hammer and Neha Kamat, “Towards and Artificial Cell,” Federation of European Biochemical Societies Letters 586 (2012): 2882–90.

55. Ian Sample, “DNA Alternative Created by Scientists,” The Guardian, April 19, 2012, available at http://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/apr/19/dna-alternative-xnas-science-genetics; Ginsberg, “Design as the Machines Come to Life,” 54.

56. John Maynard Smith and Eors Szathmary, The Major Transitions in Evolution (Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press, 1995), 100–101.

57. A founding text on “The Origin of Protocells” is chapter 7 in Smith and Szathmary, 98–118. See also See Irene Chen and Peter Walde, “From Self-Assembled Vesicles to Protocells,” Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology 2, no. 7 (July 2010): a002170, available at http://cshperspectives.cshlp.org/content/2/7/a002170.full.

58. Rasmussen et al., Protocells; Mark Bedau, John McCaskill, Norman Packard, and Steen Rasmussen, “Living Technology: Exploiting Life’s Principles in Technology,” Artificial Life 16 (2010): 89–97.

59. Martin Hanczyc, “Structure and the Synthesis of Life,” in “Protocell Architecture,” special issue of AD, ed. Neil Spiller and Rachel Armstrong, 81, no. 2 (March–April 2011): 31.

60. Bedau et al., “Living Technology,” 91.

61. Bedau et al., 91.

62. Bedau et al., 91.

63. Bedau et al., 91.

64. Bedau et al., 91.

65. Philip Beesley, ed., Near-Living Architecture: Works in Progress from the Hylozoic Ground Collaboration, 2011–2013 (Toronto: Riverside Architectural Press, 2014).

66. Rasmussen et al., Protocells, xvii.

67. Beesley, Near-Living Architecture, 113.

68. Hanczyc, “Structure and the Synthesis of Life,” 31.

69. Rachel Armstrong, “How Protocells Can Make ‘Stuff’ Much More Interesting,” in “Protocell Architecture,” special issue of AD, ed. Neil Spiller and Rachel Armstrong, 81, no. 2 (March–April 2011): 77.

70. The waste barge in the waterways could remove the excess oil by dragging something absorbent through the area afterward; see Jessica Griggs, “Creating Buildings That Repair Themselves,” Enniodufour (blog), February 23, 2012, available at http://enniodufour.typepad.com/blog/2012/02/creating-buildings-that-repair-themselves.html. This is a classic example of technofix thinking.

71. Rachel Armstrong, “Future Venice: Growing and Artificial Reef under the City,” En Vie / Alive, 2013, available at http://thisisalive.com/future-venice-growing-an-artificial-reef-under-the-city/; Ben Hobson, “Growing a ‘Giant Artificial Reef’ Could Stop Venice Sinking,” Dezeen, May 30, 2014, available at http://www.dezeen.com/2014/05/30/movie-rachel-armstrong-future-venice-growing-giant-artificial-reef/; Steve Tooze, “Rachel Armstrong: Grow Your Own City,” Future Laboratory, March 15, 2010, available at http://www.lsnglobal.com/opinion/article/1626/rachel-armstrong-grow-your-own-city; Rachel Armstrong, “How Protocells Will Create the Next Wonders of the World,” in The Technology of Us, e-book available at http://technologyofus.com/armstrong-protocells/.

72. Paul Preissner, “Back to the Future,” in “Protocell Architecture,” special issue of AD, ed. Neil Spiller and Rachel Armstrong, 81, no. 2 (March–April 2011): 108.

73. Rachel Armstrong, “Living Buildings: Plectic Systems Architecture,” Technoetic Arts 7, no. 2 (2009): 92.

74. Bruce Sterling, “Architecture Fiction: Rachel Armstrong” Wired, December 21, 2011, available at http://www.wired.com/2011/12/architecture-fiction-rachel-armstrong/.

75. Rachel Armstrong and Neil Spiller, “A Manifesto for Protocell Architecture: Against Biological Formalism,” in “Protocell Architecture,” special issue of AD, ed. Spiller and Armstrong, 81, no. 2 (March–April 2011): 25.

76. Simon Sellars interview with Rachel Armstrong, “Living Architecture,” Australian Design Review, December 2011, available at http://www.australiandesignreview.com/features/15151-interview-rachel-armstrong. I am also reminded of Parul Sehgar’s editorial “The Profound Emptiness of Resilience,” New York Times Magazine, December 1, 2015, available at http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/06/magazine/the-profound-emptiness-of-resilience.html.

77. Armstrong, “Living Buildings,” 82.

78. Armstrong, “Self-Repairing Architecture.” This is like her self-repairing shoe—see Bruce Sterling, “Architectural Fiction: Rachel Armstrong, Protocell Shoe,” Wired, January 2, 2012, available at http://www.wired.com/2012/01/architecture-fiction-rachel-amstrong-protocell-shoe/.

79. Lisa Iwamoto, “Line Array: Protocells as Dynamic Structure,” in “Protocell Architecture,” special issue of AD, ed. Neil Spiller and Rachel Armstrong, 81, no. 2 (March–April 2011): 112–21.

80. Iwamoto, 113, 121, italics added.

81. Griggs, “Creating Buildings That Repair Themselves”; Petra Bogias, “Living Agents in Construction: Protocells and Natural Computing with Rachel Armstrong,” Bridge, January 10, 2014, available at http://waterlooarchitecture.com/bridge/blog/2014/01/10/living-agents-in-construction-protocells-and-natural-computing-with-rachel-armstrong/.

82. Armstrong and Spiller, “Manifesto for Protocell Architecture,” 25, italics added.

83. Armstrong, “Living Buildings,” 80.

84. Armstrong, “How Protocells Can Make ‘Stuff’ Much More Interesting,” 72.

85. Armstrong, 77.

86. Armstrong, 72.

87. Hanczyc, “Structure and the Synthesis of Life.”

88. See Leroy Cronin, “Defining New Architectural Design Principles with ‘Living’ Inorganic Materials,” in “Protocell Architecture,” special issue of AD, ed. Neil Spiller and Rachel Armstrong, 81, no. 2 (March–April 2011): 36–37.

89. Cronin, 41.