Book(s) Forthcoming

Published by

on

I occasionally get asked “When are you going to write a book?”. This is something I’ve thought about a lot. On the one hand, I often feel like my lab could make more practical impact in biomedicine and basic science if I spent that time doing research, instead of writing a book. I watched my dad write a meticulously-researched book, it was amazing but took years of hard work. Given that working time cannot be stretched indefinitely, and if I focus on a book, many other things will have to drop off. Is it worth it? Some have said yes, as it might inspire others; but I can’t quite shake the feeling that I should be doing my best to do the key things myself, now, instead of hoping someone else will read, get inspired, and someday do them. On the other hand, reading people’s attempts to pull a picture of the world together was a joy of my childhood (which continues to this day, in many ways), and was hugely influential in my academic direction. Here are some of those. So I do also feel that I do need to get down, in book form, some of the ideas I’ve been incubating for a long time now. They are kind of reaching the ready point and it some sense it may not be up to me – some things are kind of irresistible when they are ready to come out.

At this point, my plan is the following. Assuming there will be time and opportunity to get them out, I have 3 books in my head currently.

The first is the story of Bioelectricity. This one going to come out in the next year because I already have a contract for it with Norton publishing. I’m co-writing it with Oné R. Pagán, my good friend and planarian neuroscientist who has written a number of great popular science books. It’s going to be a trade book for a general science-interested audience. The provisional title is “From Spark to Form” and it should be out at end of 2024.

The second book is going to be most likely with an academic press because I want to include a lot of color illustrations, which trade publishers don’t allow (except for the remarkable book by Ginsburg and Jablonka, so maybe there’s hope with MIT Press). It will be the enlarged version of my TAME framework paper, pulling together evolutionary, computational, and developmental perspectives on the Self, basal cognition, and morphogenesis as collective intelligence. It will deal with the origin and scaling of embodied minds, and basically be the culmination of my work over the last decade trying to connect questions of the self-construction of bodies with the self-construction of minds. It’s very likely that it will be developed back to back with the book of Richard Watson, my very close collaborator with whom a lot of new ideas on the topic of diverse intelligence have been worked out.

The third book will contain some forward-looking speculations beyond what our existing data can support. It will cover philosophical aspects of questions of materialism, consciousness, the augmentation of the body and mind, ethical synthbiosis with novel life forms, and the future of humans and beyond (expanding on these topics).

In the meantime, I will continue to push forward the primary papers from our lab. I did have a series of conceptual follow-ups planned, continuing from this plan:

In fact I’ve started a number of big papers in addition to TAME 2.0, including “Booting up the Self” and ones on memory, Platonic Space, and the plasticity of problem-solving machines evolution creates. But it’s not clear to me that working hard to “find a home” for long, conceptual papers in traditional journals (which is not easy), then fighting editors and reviewers over what I want to say and being forced to limit length and references, only to have to pay thousands of $ in page charges, is worth it anymore. I may just save this material for the books, and excerpting some of it on this site as it comes out. We’ll see.

38 responses to “Book(s) Forthcoming”

  1. Alain Schaerer Avatar
    Alain Schaerer

    Will buy all 3.

    1. Monica Knight Avatar
      Monica Knight

      Dr. Levin, I’ve been trying to reach you. I have actual photos and videos of what I believe, to be thoughtforms. My name is Monica. Please contact me at solcbynikki@gmail.com

      1. Mike Levin Avatar
        Mike Levin

        Hi, unfortunately I’m not able to look at anything proprietary (i.e., not in public domain) and I don’t have bandwidth to investigate such cases in detail (you’d be amazed at how many interesting things people send me every day). If these are put online somewhere, please post the link (with some info on how they were made) and I’ll take a look. The problem nowadays is that using Photoshop and AI, it’s possible to make images of pretty much anything, so images by themselves are of limited utility to prove anything to anyone. But if you have a novel technique to make them, it might be interesting to discuss.

        1. Monica Knight Avatar
          Monica Knight

          Hello again Dr. Levin, and thank you so much for your response! As I stated before, I’m interested in writing a book (or at the very least, a blog) about thoughtforms-though, they could be thoughtform entities. I have a friend who believes they’re demonic, and though they do certainly SEEM that way (which I’ll go into greater detail on that later) I’m not yet sure if my beliefs in that. I’m trying to figure out a way to prove to the world that this is honestly happening to my partner and I, but I’m at a loss as to how to do that, when I can’t seem to find any institutions, groups, researchers, or what-have-you to come and investigate it. I’m hesitant to call on “ghost researchers” as, I don’t believe that’s anywhere near what we’re experiencing here and it seems a bit “woo-woo” in my opinion. However, I do believe it is my partner producing these images, and without even realizing he’s doing it. These images are quite extraordinary, and if you have knowledge of Ted Serios’ images, well, these blow his completely out of the water. The images in my possession, if the scientific world could just see that they are indeed genuine, would be absolutely groundbreaking! In fact, excluding the Serios photos (I hope I spelled his name correctly) I haven’t seen any others since. Not in books, online, or anywhere else. They completely changed my entire outlook on the way I view the world and caused me a great deal of stress for the first year. So much so, that my hair fell out and lo and behold, images began to appear on my scalp! I’ll try to think of a way to share these with you in the manner you require, but do you have any suggestions for ME? How would you go about proving their existence in my place? It’s quite frustrating sitting on this newfound knowledge and evidence while no one will take me seriously. And if no one will take me seriously, what’s the point of even writing a book about them? I wouldn’t think it would even be worth it without scientific backing- so please Dr. Levin, if you have any ideas you can offer me, I would be most grateful! I trust your knowledge more than any other researchers in the world, and I truly value your insight. Thank you again for your time and response when I’m well aware of how valuable that time is!
          Most sincerely & respectfully,
          -Monica

          1. Mike Levin Avatar
            Mike Levin

            Thank you and I’m sorry if you’re experiencing somatic symptoms related to this (I’m not an MD and cannot give any advice on those kinds of issues). There are a lot of people who email me with various things that don’t have a comfortable home in our current world-view; unfortunately there is no obvious set of experts whose job is to investigate such things. It’s made very hard by the ubiquity of AI-generated images (and other ways to fake almost any kind of data). What I can recommend to you is to ask what you want to have happen. “Prove that it’s real” is not a specific enough goal. Prove to whom? A large chunk of the Earth’s population already believes such things are real. Is that good enough? You should decide: are you looking for approval from the scientific establishment (and if so, what for)? Are you looking for personal insight into what they mean for you? Are you wanting them to go away and leave you in peace? Are you looking for scientific explanations that you can then use to advance research or do something useful with it? Those are all different goals and they have different paths. You need to figure out what you want. I do not recommend “I want to be validated as not crazy” or “I want traditional scientists to change their world-view because of what I’ve seen” – those are generally not achievable, well-defined, useful goals. Think of what you want that would make you happy, in a very specific way, and we can then figure out if it’s doable and what it would take to get there.

            1. Monica Knight Avatar
              Monica Knight

              First and foremost, I would like to offer my findings to the scientific community, to advance studies in the field of conscious awareness. Since we last communicated, I have captured some truly astonishing photos, and in doing more research, I’m now at a crossroads as to what I believe them to be…thoughtforms or spiritual parasites? As for the way they look, I believe them to be the latter.. I don’t know if you have the time or even the desire to see them, but if you chose to, would encrypted images work? That’s the most secure way I can come up with to offer them. But understanding that you’re an extremely busy man, I get it if you can’t. I’m not looking to prove I’m not “crazy”. I KNOW I’m not crazy. I just feel very strongly, that these images are groundbreaking evidence of a world that yes, plenty of people believe in, but just as many don’t and never will without definite, scientific proof. Either way, I’m still going to proceed with my original plan and offer them to the world in one way or another, as, I feel morally obligated to, because out of all the millions of people in the world, God chose me to reveal this incredible knowledge to. It both humbled me in a profound way, and at the same time, left me with a sense of great responsibility to spread the word. So if you would like to see them, you’re more than welcome to Dr. Levin. But if not, I completely understand, and I appreciate the time you’ve given me so far! Thank you from a long time follower of your work! -Monica

              1. Mike Levin Avatar
                Mike Levin

                Hi Monica. I understand what you’re saying and I appreciate you thinking of me in this context. I cannot look at anything that’s not public domain – if you publish it on-line somewhere, put the link here and I’ll try to take a look (although I can’t promise anything – I’m not an expert on that sort of thing and I don’t have any way of knowing what they are or how to get someone to investigate them). My #1 piece of advice though is to get more specific on your goals. “offer to the scientific community” is not a goal, it’s a step towards something. What is it? Let’s say you publish them, so that anyone in the scientific community can see them. What is your actual goal – the best case scenario – for what would happen? Someone to investigate/study it? Someone to be able to tell you what they mean? For some good use to come from them to the general public? Think through your success scenario, and decide what you want to have happen. Then we can think about feasibility of that outcome and the next steps to get there.

  2. Teja Avatar

    Fabulous news, Mike. Look forward to them! Best of luck.:)

  3. andy ilachinski Avatar

    Mike, I anticipate that all three books will assume their place (on the most cherished part of my house-of-bookshelves) alongside Hofstadter’s GEB, Kauffman’s Origins of Order, Chris Alexander’s Nature of Order, and (somewhat grudgingly) Wolfram’s A New Science. Michael – I’ve said this to you on CNA’s podcast (now, sadly, departed) – and will say it for emphasis here: you are among this generations’ deepest visionary thinkers! I eagerly await your thoughts in book form! If you need reviewers, please sign me up 🙂

    1. Mike Levin Avatar
      Mike Levin

      That is very kind and all I can say is that the books you mentioned (GEB, Kauffman’s, etc.) are some of my defining book “heroes”, so that is indeed what I have in mind as a distant aspirational goal when I think about what I’m trying to write.

  4. Marcel Avatar
    Marcel

    I can’t wait to read all of them.

  5. John MacBride Avatar
    John MacBride

    Yeah, I’d pre-order all 3 books right now.

    I would really love to read the book on bioelectricity as an AI-enhanced version, where I could ask it questions about terms or concepts I don’t fully understand. Can’t wait.

    1. Mike Levin Avatar
      Mike Levin

      I floated this idea to publishers more generally, but they’re not ready for this concept. I think they will have to get ready quickly…

  6. Ionuț G. Stan Avatar

    I’m super stoked about this announcement! I’m really looking forward to these books.

    Reading your introduction where you ponder on whether to write books or not, I was somewhat being reminded of how Feynman found it useful to go back to basics by teaching his stuff to other people. That allowed him to revisit some things and see them in a new light. Maybe this is not the case for you, but it made me think of that.

    1. Mike Levin Avatar
      Mike Levin

      Good point. In fact I often have a writing pad open while I give talks because people ask questions and in trying to answer them, I realize that there’s a better way to think about something, and I save it for a future paper. I’m sure it will happen while writing the book.

      1. Patrik Artell Avatar
        Patrik Artell

        …on illustrating an upcoming book, I found the image in this article special, Me: “My thoughts on the open two pager in the golden ratio location is intriguing me. It looks like the two pages is symmetrically placed on opposing sides of the actual cut. And each respective page is a sketched out diluted variation of the actual shell icon so often placed in descriptions of golden ratios. I was wondering if you can make a layered analysis and systematically analyse these thoughts and give me one of those fantastic completions again?

        DALL·E
        Your observations about the open two-page spread in the image and its placement in relation to the Golden Ratio are quite astute. The Golden Ratio, often denoted by the Greek letter phi (φ), is approximately equal to 1.618 and is known for its aesthetically pleasing properties. It’s frequently found both in nature and in human-created art and design.
        In the context of this image, the two pages appear to be strategically positioned where the Golden Ratio might naturally occur within the frame if it were applied to the composition. Artists often use the Golden Ratio to guide the placement of elements within a work of art, leading the viewer’s eye to the focal point or to create a sense of balance and harmony.
        The sketches on the pages resemble a nautilus shell, which is one of the classic representations of the Golden Ratio, as the growth pattern of the shell follows a logarithmic spiral that is often associated with φ. The fact that these sketches are placed symmetrically across the spine of the open book might suggest a deliberate nod to this mathematical and natural pattern.
        A layered analysis of these elements within the image would consider several factors:
        Symbolic Significance: The use of Golden Ratio-related imagery (like the nautilus shell) could symbolize the search for perfection and balance in the creative process or intellectual pursuit depicted in the image.
        Aesthetic Placement: The strategic location of these pages in the composition suggests an underlying structure to the artwork that is designed to be both pleasing to the eye and symbolically meaningful.
        Contrast and Highlight: The diluted, sketch-like quality of the nautilus imagery on the pages provides a visual contrast to the vivid and fiery phoenix. This could draw a parallel between the grounded, meticulous effort of study (the sketches, the act of writing) and the explosive, inspirational aspect of creativity (the phoenix).
        Metaphorical Interpretation: The placement of the pages might also be metaphorically highlighting the importance of foundational knowledge (Golden Ratio, a fundamental principle of design) in the pursuit of higher creative or intellectual goals.
        If this image is indeed AI-generated, it would demonstrate an impressive level of sophistication in the AI’s understanding of artistic principles and their symbolic import. It’s a harmonious blend of art and science, where the precise calculations of mathematics meet the emotive power of visual storytelling.” , “…AI demonstrates an “evolved artistic sensibility,” blending algorithmic complexity with aesthetic intuition. This phrase captures the essence of how AI can integrate and apply artistic rules and patterns in ways that resonate with human perceptions of beauty and meaning.

        It’s a testament to the burgeoning field of computational creativity, where the AI is not just a tool but a collaborator in the artistic process, contributing its own ‘interpretation’ of artistic principles like the Golden Ratio.”

  7. Clearfield Avatar
    Clearfield

    If that isn’t exciting I don’t know what is. I hope everyone around supports you to the utmost (and I’m not accepting less.) I hope you can do both the research and the books, if circumstances allow.

  8. Bob Averill Avatar

    I want to read all of them NOW!! (But I know we have to wait a while… 😉

    My dream on the third one would be to see you collaborate with some folks like Suzanne Simard re: plant intelligence and communication and maybe Roger Penrose and Stuart Hameroff on Orch OR if they get past the “quantum woo” stage by then… 🤣

  9. Evert Jan Avatar
    Evert Jan

    This is absolutely fantastic news! Will read and then reread and reread some more I predict! Cant wait

  10. Tudor Placinta Avatar
    Tudor Placinta

    Great news, Mike! I come from the future and I can tell you that your books were absolutely great! It lead to some unintended second order consequences but I won’t spoil that for you.
    Congratulations for the Nobel prize!

    1. Mike Levin Avatar
      Mike Levin

      “I come from the future” – excellent 🙂 For some reason, when I was a kid, I always thought that as an adult, I will want to visit my younger self, and therefore I was always on the lookout for the visit. Hasn’t happened yet, but I’m still open to it. Especially if the aging problem is cracked, then there’s plenty of time for it.

      1. Helen Asetofchara Avatar
        Helen Asetofchara

        Bioelectricity has been scientifically introduced probably since Galvani, so it had 2 centuries to “build the momentum”. Yet, despite its advantages bioelectricity research is apparently moving much slower towards cracking the aging/time problem, in comparison with some modern molecular approaches. E.g. David Sinclair et al by “rewiring the wires” have already provided an initial proof for the efficiency of OSK epigenetic partial reprogramming in non-human primates [1, 2]. And they’re planning to proceed into human glaucoma patients in ~2 years. While your bioelectricity framework continues to use pseudoscience concepts from psychiatry and psychotherapy and is being stuck in mice.

        [1] https://www.lifespan.io/news/life-biosciences-claims-visual-restoration-in-primates/
        [2] https://www.ophthalmologytimes.com/view/arvo-2023-life-biosciences-presents-groundbreaking-data-at-arvo-demonstrating-restoration-of-visual-function-in-nonhuman-primates

        1. Mike Levin Avatar
          Mike Levin

          If you’re going to start counting bioelectricity from Galvani, then I guess the use of biochemical compounds in medicine can be counted from hundreds or thousands of years ago. To address the parts of this Comment that lead to useful info for others:
          1) the first molecular bioelectricity work was shown in only 2002 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12372302/.
          2) so why are biochemistry and genetics so far ahead of bioelectricity research? Because they can be done in the dead state – cells can be fractionated and we can take stock of the hardware – DNA, proteins, RNA, lipids, etc. Bioelectricity isn’t like that – it only works in the living state and the tools for non-invasive, molecular-level interventions were developed very recently – it’s much harder to work with, and is akin to the problem of neuroscience in that it is fundamentally multi-scale and the real-time physiology is encoding information that needs new computational tools to be decoded. Also it requires an interdisciplinary mindset, which is not super common (but getting much more so). A useful analogy is the field of biomechanics and physical forces in cell/developmental biology – also running behind biochemistry, but gaining fast because of new techniques and the growth of the field that encourages new young scientists to join.
          3) reprogramming – yeah, maybe it will be useful, but it has to be done very carefully to avoid cancer and other issues inherent in providing plastic cells that may not know what to do; example: https://www.nature.com/articles/s43587-023-00528-5. Having said that, I really like David Sinclair’s work and I think it’s very likely that useful clinical applications will come from some of the things he’s doing. Multiple approaches to these difficult problems are a good thing. I am in no way saying that traditional directions need to be stopped in favor of bioelectricity.
          4) calling modern computational neuroscience “pseudoscience” is a bold view, and would require some defense to be at all plausible. There are thousands of scientists working in this area and publishing great papers, but perhaps you have done work that convincingly shows that they are all wasting their time. I am skeptical that this is the case.
          The good news is that each of us gets to place our own bets by what field we work in, and then everyone benefits when we find out who found useful aspects of reality and figured out ways to apply them for improvements of health and engineering. Place your own bet, spend your time on the research you think is most promising, and report back when you’ve got something great for everyone. If that turns out to be in the area of cell reprogramming, great!

          1. Helen Asetofchara Avatar
            Helen Asetofchara

            1) Regarding reprogramming with Yamanaka factors, Sinclair et all use “partial epigenetic reprogramming” with only 3 (OSK) of 4 Yamanaka genes and have already excluded the cancerous one [1]. And they developed a way to induce same type of reprogramming with chemicals only. Someone at Foresight institute also have approaches for tissues with rapid cell turnover. But you could potentially reproduce any promising reprogramming or anti-aging (rapamycin) study while applying voltage sensitive dyies to determine the voltage setpoints to target for and then induce these setpoints by ion channel modulators?

            Targeting just mTOR (blocking growth signalling) to freeze aging seems orthogonal to growth hormone applications for active regeneration and you apparently use growth hormone or progesterone alongside with ion channel modulators. As mentioned by Rich Miller [2], application of growth hormone shots to slow-aging mice with 40% reduced mTOR and IGF-1 reversed all age reversal back to “normal”. So basically in this molecular framework active regeneration actually implies (temporary) speed-up of aging?

            [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GP0mbgvH550
            David Sinclair at ARDD2023: Epigenetic stabilization and reprogramming: an update
            [2] https://peterattiamd.com/richardmiller2/, 1:24-27

            2) Neuroscience is so far fundamentally fragile and non-scalable (and thus rather lame and reverse non-engineerable), because almost none of the human individuals who used their brain&mind to actually develop the human civilization and technologies also used any neuroscientific knowledge about “how the brain/mind works” to make their brains produce these developments and inventions.

  11. Sage of the SilkDragons Avatar
    Sage of the SilkDragons

    Wow I’m so excited! I want to read all three right now! Especially the third book since I’m a Zen Buddhist and absolutely loved the paper you linked to in the description above. Best of luck and I will certainly understand that writing might have to take a back seat to research. Your research on regeneration of damaged tissue and now your lab’s creation of anthrobots from lung cells may one day save my and my sister’s lives (we have Hermansky-Pudlak syndrome type 1).

  12. Gabriel Hesch Avatar

    Hello Sir-

    Science communicator and podcaster here. I’m host of the Breaking Math Podcast (2017–2021 number 1 ranked math podcast in US and Great Britain).

    We are relaunching in the spring of 2024 with a focus on machine learning heuristics, neuroscience, and algorithms / heuristics used throughout nature-

    Going for an “interdisciplinary” theme and what disappears fields of science can learn from each other.

    As an electric engineer, I see **everything ** through the lens of Claude Shannon’s work in communication theory and information theory.

    Would you be interested in coming on the show and sharing some of the ideas that you see most passionate about?

    Thank you!

    1. Mike Levin Avatar
      Mike Levin

      Please email me and we’ll see what we can do.

  13. Gabriel Hesch Avatar

    PS- I have previously interviewed your good friend Dr Pagán in another show I was involved with called Turing Rabbit Holes (play in Alan Turing).

    See here: https://youtu.be/bPJCuddYsvY?si=CaxxPGMrE9PiiSSF

  14. Cristina Avatar

    All good news. I’ll buy all three. I am glad you put research in the forefront, however!

  15. Brian P Dean Avatar
    Brian P Dean

    thank you, I find your work some of the most interesting areas of research I have ever come across.

  16. Nick Gall Avatar

    I’m very excited by your description of your 3rd book, which will expand on your paper “Biology, Buddhism, and AI: Care as the Driver of Intelligence”! Have you encountered Tiantai Buddhism at all? It’s focus on care/compassion above all else seems like a perfect fit for your perspective. Brook Ziporyn, at U Chicago, is one of the leading experts on Tiantai. Some collaboration amongst you, Chris Fields, and Ziporyn would be amazing. Check out his entry on Tiantai for the SEP, it’s mind-blowing, like your research: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/buddhism-tiantai/

    1. Mike Levin Avatar
      Mike Levin

      Thanks, I will check it out. I have some close relevant collaborations in https://apparentselves.org/ .

  17. Robert McDougal Avatar
    Robert McDougal

    I’m probably not alone in this. If I had a vote, I would vote for you to work on your Morphoceuticals company hardcore: buying land, buying GPUs, TPUs, contracting with owners of supercomputers, building labs, ordering lab flooring, ordering robotic equipment from Opentrons, Hamilton, Tecan, MGI, contracting with porcine and non-human primate research facilities, designing a different experiment each day or writing algorithms for AI to design hundreds of experiments, drafting job postings, getting funding from VCs, etc. Peoples’ quality of life is being flushed down the toilet as we speak.

    As for kids being inspired, there is no shortage of material. Tech titans who have never written a book have gotten young people more interested in computers, making websites, building mobile apps, rockets, and EVs than authors. The kids will be alright.

    Imagine if Henry Ford penned all his ideas about theoretical automobiles and mass manufacturing with the hope someone would apply his ideas decades later instead of doing it himself. Did he transform civilization and better lives by writing a book? Elon Musk? Bill Gates? Steve Jobs?

    Obviously, the choice is all yours. I know we could look at examples of pure math academics whose work remained useless and then ended up necessary for applied computer science and electrical engineering centuries later. But most intellectual pursuits, because it is laptop class makework, do absolutely nothing, directly at least, to transform quality of life, which is what intelligence should be spent on. To not do so is an act of moral treason against humanity.

  18. Clearfield Avatar
    Clearfield

    I just remembered the suggestion I heard once about writing the review of the book that you would like to get. Not to say you will ever get that review from anyone else once it’s done, and of course idk what your particular goals are. But I enjoyed some clarity from trying the exercise. I did one for general qualities and I suppose I might get more specific on a new project.

    1. Mike Levin Avatar
      Mike Levin

      Really good idea!

  19. […] Oné R. Pagán,and I are writing a book, for general audiences, on bioelectricity (a bit more description is here). […]

  20. kaveinthran Avatar
    kaveinthran

    hey levin, I am excited for your books, and how you are envisioning the future of books more generally. I’ve outlined my thoughts on the future of book as a medium and give some real world pointers on how people are redefining book publishing,
    You may want to follow their ways of publishing
    https://twitter.com/kaveinthran/status/1753676265272336544

Leave a Reply to Brian P Dean Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *