Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read.
Start by marking “Theory Of Self Reproducing Automata” as Want to Read:
Theory Of Self Reproducing Automata
Enlarge cover
Rate this book
Clear rating
Open Preview

Theory Of Self Reproducing Automata

4.12  ·  Rating Details ·  17 Ratings  ·  1 Review
More Details... edit details

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about Theory Of Self Reproducing Automata, please sign up.

Be the first to ask a question about Theory Of Self Reproducing Automata

This book is not yet featured on Listopia. Add this book to your favorite list »

Community Reviews

(showing 1-47)
filter  |  sort: default (?)  |  Rating Details
Jimmy Ele
May 29, 2015 Jimmy Ele rated it really liked it
Interesting especially when Neumann compares living organisms and how they self produce to synthetic organisms and how they would self reproduce.
Paul Cockshott
Paul Cockshott rated it really liked it
Jan 27, 2013
J.
J. rated it liked it
Apr 04, 2013
Alexander Curran
Alexander Curran rated it liked it
Jul 22, 2015
Kirti Dasu
Kirti Dasu rated it it was amazing
Feb 20, 2016
Sam
Sam rated it really liked it
Aug 31, 2015
Eric
Eric rated it it was amazing
Oct 02, 2011
Metod Rybár
Metod Rybár rated it really liked it
Apr 23, 2013
Dwayne
Dwayne rated it it was amazing
Apr 30, 2017
Alexandre
Alexandre rated it it was amazing
Aug 13, 2011
Ed Terrell
Ed Terrell rated it really liked it
Nov 30, 2014
Paul Vittay
Paul Vittay rated it it was amazing
Mar 16, 2017
zvold
zvold rated it it was amazing
Dec 25, 2013
Tom Rochette
Tom Rochette rated it really liked it
Oct 14, 2016
Jyoti
Jyoti rated it liked it
Sep 05, 2011
Peter Poole
Peter Poole marked it as to-read
Aug 24, 2011
Brian
Brian added it
Sep 10, 2011
Christoph
Christoph marked it as to-read
Sep 15, 2011
Gorana
Gorana marked it as to-read
Jan 10, 2012
Zack Reagin
Zack Reagin marked it as to-read
Apr 13, 2012
B Bennett
B Bennett marked it as to-read
May 10, 2012
Orphée Lafond-lummis
Orphée Lafond-lummis marked it as to-read
Jun 02, 2012
Chloe
Chloe marked it as to-read
Jun 14, 2012
Nadia
Nadia marked it as to-read
Jul 16, 2012
Samuel L
Samuel L marked it as to-read
Sep 20, 2012
Михаил Миб
Михаил Миб marked it as to-read
Oct 19, 2012
Rick Wedgeworth
Rick Wedgeworth marked it as to-read
Jan 17, 2013
Naspa Brown
Naspa Brown marked it as to-read
Feb 11, 2013
Andrew
Andrew marked it as to-read
Feb 24, 2013
Tom
Tom marked it as to-read
Apr 01, 2013
Andriy
Andriy marked it as to-read
Apr 07, 2013
Alex Carlman
Alex Carlman marked it as to-read
May 21, 2013
to'c
to'c marked it as to-read
Jul 25, 2013
Diego
Diego marked it as to-read
Aug 22, 2013
Alexander
Alexander marked it as to-read
Nov 02, 2013
Chris Bellin
Chris Bellin marked it as to-read
Jan 04, 2014
Ernesto Augusto
Ernesto Augusto marked it as to-read
Jun 05, 2014
Anton Soppelsa
Anton Soppelsa marked it as to-read
Jun 22, 2014
Sveatoslav Persianov
Sveatoslav Persianov marked it as to-read
Jul 15, 2014
Bill Wright
Bill Wright marked it as to-read
Aug 20, 2014
Simei Doblinski
Simei Doblinski marked it as to-read
Aug 29, 2014
There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »

Goodreads is hiring!

If you like books and love to build cool products, we may be looking for you.
Learn more »
205578
John von Neumann (Hungarian: margittai Neumann János Lajos) was a Hungarian American[1] mathematician who made major contributions to a vast range of fields,[2] including set theory, functional analysis, quantum mechanics, ergodic theory, continuous geometry, economics and game theory, computer science, numerical analysis, hydrodynamics (of explosions), and statistics, as well as many other mathem ...more
More about John von Neumann...

Share This Book



“The other line of argument, which leads to the opposite conclusion, arises from looking at artificial automata. Everyone knows that a machine tool is more complicated than the elements which can be made with it, and that, generally speaking, an automaton A, which can make an automaton B, must contain a complete description of B, and also rules on how to behave while effecting the synthesis. So, one gets a very strong impression that complication, or productive potentiality in an organization, is degenerative , that an organization which synthesizes something is necessarily more complicated, of a higher order, than the organization it synthesizes. This conclusion, arrived at by considering artificial automaton, is clearly opposite to our early conclusion, arrived at by considering living organisms.” 3 likes
“Furthermore, it's equally evident that what goes on is actually one degree better than self-reproduction, for organisms appear to have gotten more elaborate in the course of time. Today's organisms are phylogenetically descended from others which were vastly simpler than they are, so much simpler, in fact, that it's inconceivable, how any kind of description of the latter, complex organism could have existed in the earlier one. It's not easy to imagine in what sense a gene, which is probably a low order affair, can contain a description of the human being which will come from it. But in this case you can say that since the gene has its effect only within another human organism, it probably need not contain a complete description of what is to happen, but only a few cues for a few alternatives. However, this is not so in phylogenetic evolution. That starts from simple entities, surrounded by an unliving amorphous milieu, and produce, something more complicated. Evidently, these organisms have the ability to produce something more complicated than themselves.” 2 likes
More quotes…