1951-2: Belousov, Turing, Hodgkin&Huxley 48 years ago these three made discoveries that still interest lots of people today in contexts remote from the original intent. As with Aristotle, Galileo, Copernicus, Curie, and so on, their novel contributions have been told from one writer to the next over so many generations that one needs to read the originals to find out what they actually said. Here's my version, adapted as best I can to present context: Alan Turing's reaction-diffusion instability of 1952 was an immediate hit with theorists. [ I didn't read the original with care until 1971. By this time it had already started getting Citations, and these continued doubling very 9 years up to the current 100 per year. This is roughly the exponential inflation rate of journal literature in the biophysical-biomedical areas I read: 9%/year in the 5000+ titles I have filed since 1980. For comparison, the overall USA scientific literature has grown 2.7%/year since 1980.] The first Turing-pattern example was contrived in the lab 2 decades later: in 1974 Flicker and Ross interpreted Liesegang patterns in such terms (see Ross et al 1995). Two more decades later Castets et al (1990) then Lengyel et al (1993) contrived more convincing laboratory illustrations of the Turing mechanism. In these a 2-dimensional array of concentration peaks about 1/4 mm apart arises over several hours, starting from uniformity. Ouyang and Swinney (1991) first showed that this chemical reaction really is showing a Turing bifurcation in the sense that no threshold kick is needed to get it started: the pattern arises just as Turing foresaw, spontaneously from infinitesimal 'noise' in a uniformly featureless area. This occurs when and only when conditions are made permissive (a certain temperature range). Bumps fade back into uniformity when conditions are made non-permissive. The only technicality left unchecked, that could finish confirming this as an example of Turing's mechanism, is that when the diffusion coefficients become equal, pattern should not spontaneously arise. No one doubts this, so far as I know, so chemistry now has its long-sought example. I think there is still no confirmed biological example. Turing's 1952 contribution was two-fold: a surprisingly counter-intuitive concept, and its demonstration by numerical example and by mathematical analysis. He showed that the uniform state can be unstable to infinitesimal perturbations. He illustrated this using the general non-linear reaction-diffusion equation, in the special case that in the absence of diffusion, its reaction rests at an attracting steady state, and that each rate of synthesis and degradation additionally depends in a certain way on the local concentrations of those species, and that their diffusion coefficients are unequal in a certain way. Then spatial inhomogeneity can arise spontaneously from prior uniformity, needing no finite kick. He thus made us aware that molecular diffusion can power not only the intuitively expected trend toward homogeneity: in certain situations it also powers the opposite trend, toward spatially periodic bunching up of concentrations. There are, by the way, plenty of other kinds of spatial instability known today, e.g., the reaction-diffusion instabilities of the complex Ginsberg-Landau model representing continuous fields of coupled oscillators. These can spontaneously go turbulent in instructive ways, as Yoshiki Kuramoto pointed out in the mid 1970s. Well before Turing's paper, the reaction-diffusion equation was accepted by physiologists as the key dynamical principle underlying electrical propagation in nerve cells. Hodgkin and Huxley based their work in this tradition. Does Turing's discovery about that equation's behavior mean we might expect spontaneous pattern- formation in nervous tissue? In nerve membrane the diffusion coefficients do indeed differ, as required. But in the right way? In nerve membrane all the diffusion coefficients but one are zero. That alone precludes Turing patterns. Moreover that one is the diffusion of activating electric potential, not of any of the nominal inhibitors: the wrong ones are zero, presenting the starkest possible opposite to Turing's requirements. Correspondingly, nothing like Turing's instability has turned up in context of action potential propagation, neither theoretically nor in reality, so far as I recall. This does not preclude the apparition of Turing patterns in nervous tissue on the basis of some other kinds of interaction ... for example maybe ocular dominance columns in the visual cortex could be analyzed in such terms ... but a lot of wiring and the chemical properties of synapses would have to be invoked, not just the ion channel kinetics and electric potential diffusion that underlie action potential propagation. Now here is a curious twist on this story. Going back to chemistry, there are reactions whose dynamics resembles the electric events in nerve membranes. One such reaction that has been familiar for centuries already is the burning of a gunpowder fuse. Another (which brings in lots more physics than just local reaction and diffusion) is the burning of a candle (see Presentation 9), and another the flame front in a combustible gas mixture. Others, in gelled water solution, have two additional nice features: the only transport mechanism is diffusion (there is no convective motion, for example, nor radiation), and a restorative reaction behind the front regenerates excitability, much as happens in cell membranes. Such reaction-diffusion media are remarkably similar to nerve membrane in their dynamics and intheir support for propagating wave patterns. The oxalate/permanganate example mentioned by Luther in 1906 seems not one such. That experiment seems nowhere described in adequate detail; no one living today seems sure what people saw at Luther's lecture. The reaction has been studied with care in well-stirred reactors, but the phenomena Luther reported in unstirred liquid have never been confirmed. Contemporary attempts to obtain propagation from the published recipe produce only a sharp color transition between the top and bottom layers of liquid. This creeps a short way briefly, and not at a steady speed, then the colors all become the same all over. Possibly something better could be developed along these lines with modern techniques, but no one has yet reported success. Forty-five years after Luther, Belousov reported the beginnings of a reaction that would propagate in homogeneous liquid solution... but that behavior wasn't discovered in it until yet another nineteen years passed. In 1951 it only oscillated, like Bray's peroxide oscillator of 1921. Referee objection to Belousov's 1951 and 1958 attempts to report on this oscillation has been variously remembered, sometimes unkindly. Another possible interpretation of establishment reluctance at that time is that the objection may have been just the same as voiced in the prior literature of the Bray reaction. The issue was not so much whether a reaction can oscillate, because there were accepted examples, and Alfred Lotka had even made simple theoretical models in 1920 showing that it could happen in homogeneous solution if certain idealized conditions were met. But does this particular instance oscillate by the mechanisms claimed, i.e., by homogeneous chemical reaction alone, with no spatial gradients or particulate nuclei suspended in the solution? Both Bray's and Belousov's in fact do, but in the absence of clear laboratory proof, that seemed hard to swallow in 1951 and 1958. In any case, this reaction could only be said to support "pattern formation" in the sense that oscillations were not quite synchronous everywhere unless it was well stirred. This is nothing like Turing's instability. Then in early 1970 Zaikin and Zhabotinsky showed in modified Belousov soup a propagating chemical pulse strikingly similar to the action potential. Here again, there were similar precedents, e.g., the gas-phase propagating 'action potentials' of phosphorous oxidation explored by Lord Rayleigh in 1921. But like many things that appear before the audience has been prepared for them, that was forgotten until Z+Z's aqueous version emerged in a more favorable climate of interest. A further twist: it was discovered in Belousov-Zhabotinsky soup later in 1970, then understood by computing from the reaction-diffusion partial differential equations of nerve membrane in 1972, that there is another kind of reaction-diffusion mechanism for pattern formation, independent of Belousov's oscillations and of Turing's instability. This new mechanism works even if all diffusion coefficients but the excitor's are zero or equal to the excitor's, impossible conditions for Turing patterns. And the reaction need not oscillate, an impossible condition for Kuramoto's instability. Moreover, this new kind of pattern formation does not occur spontaneously: it requires a finite starter kick with a particular spatial structure. Its immediate result is, like Turing's, a pattern in space, but it is not initially periodic in space. It is periodic in time, but not because of any pre-existing oscillation. It is a rotation of concentration gradients in a tiny disk (1/4 mm diameter in the first laboratory case) located anywhere within a wide area of mostly uniform concentrations with no periodic aspect, initially. Its period is about 100 times longer than it takes the chemical (or neural) medium to excite. A heart cell, for example, excites electrically in about 1 msec, so this mode of behavior in a sheet of heart cells has a period near 100 msec, the characteristic period of fibrillation onset just before sudden cardiac death. This little disk is called a "rotor". There may be many of them, located more or less randomly, each like an independent particle. As it spins, each rotor excites the nearby material so it radiates an outgoing wave in the shape of a spiral (in 2D; or a scroll ring in 3D). The medium thus eventually fills with spatially and temporally periodic patterns, but this is only a long-term byproduct of the fact that each independent rotor is spinning. Moreover this whole development is not the result of any instability, nor anything to do with Turing's principle. Nor do rotors ever arise spontaneously from near-uniform conditions. Their principle is entirely different, except that it does involve diffusion and reactions. (Rotors can, however, arise spontaneously from strongly patterned conditions, e.g., sufficiently high-frequency wavetrains can develop rotors, and so spiral waves, by an instability of propagation that results in patchy erasure of segments of wavefront.) Now what has any of this to do with Mind ? There seems to be a tradition since Max Delbruck's "Evolutionary Epistemology" that books on "consciousness" should present wide-ranging surveys of every mysterious and wonderful science (quantum mechanics, chaos, relativity, number theory, thermodynamics, non-linear partial differential equations ...) salted with allusions to cultural and intellectual history and especially to neuropsychology. Certainly biological and biochemical pattern-formation are poorly understood, seem counter-intuitive, and are often modelled in non-linear partial differential equations. But Al has better reasons that that for bringing them into Presentation 5. Is it because consciousness arises only in biological systems (so far as anyone can possibly know), especially in brains,which necessarily have spatial structure that arose from simpler antecedents? But here we encounter the problem that Turing-like mechanisms have never really been shown to occur in biological settings, as Al stresses. Notice that Al cites the Lotka (1925) discussion of consciousness, which stresses the pan-psychic notions of Spinoza (which in turn may have come from 18th-century European liberal understanding that every educated Chinese considered "God" to mean "the conscious spirit of the universe", the world being God's body.) I.e., maybe most spatio-temporal dynamics is associated with at least some sort of flicker of consciousness. Is that why we should first understand nonlinear dynamics and pattern formation? Lotka may have thought so: he disowned fixation on the baroque complications of vertebrate brains as necessarily the best way to discover the essence of consciousness. But most scientists today assume that only brains are aware. So maybe we have two reasons for putting non-linear dynamics of pattern formation in Presentation 5. It is especially suggestive that at least one PDE model of chemical pattern-formation seems related to another that describes neuroelectric propagation, that essential principle of brain dynamics without which verbalizable, memory-connected consciousness vanishes. Comparable reactions and propagations have been found in several kinds of brain tissue in recent years: these are the slow waves of calcium-induced calcium release in glial cells (and the like for "potassium" and for "nitrous oxide" in place of "calcium".) What role these play in consciousness, if any, no one knows. They are slow on the scale, not of thought processes, but of mood shifts. Rotors based on this particular biociemistry have been observed in single heart cells and in frog eggs but not yet in brain tissues so far as I know. Martin Boerlijst (1991, 1993) explored the pertinence of rotors and spiral waves to speculations about the origin of life in context of hypercycle theory, with some beautifully provokative illustrations of possibilities. Regarding Figure 5 and the attached 'homework problem', see data, discussion, and the figure originals. Some references mentioned: Boerlijst, M.C. and Hogeweg,P. (1991) Spiral wave structure in pre-biotic evolution, Physica D 48, 17-28; and (same year) in the Artificial Life II symposium proceedings ed. Chris Langton. Boerlijst,M.C. et al (1993) Evolutionary Consequences of Spiral Waves, Proc.Roy.Soc. B 353, 15-18 Castets,V. et al (1990) Experimental Evidence of a Sustained Standing Turing-Type Nonequilibrium Chemical Pattern, Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 2953-2956 Lengyel,I. et al (1993) Transient Turing Structures in a Gradient-Free Closed System, Science 259, 493-495 Ouyang,Q. and Swinney,H.L. (1991) Transition from a Uniform state to Hexagonal and Striped Turing Patterns, Nature 352, 610-612 Rayleigh, (1921) Proc. Roy. Soc. A 99, 372-384 Ross,J. et al (1995) Experimental Evidence for Turing Structures, J. Amer. Chem. Soc. 99, 10417-10419