What is nanotechnology?
How can we manipulate something we can't see or touch?
Can nanotech be used as a weapon?
What's good about nanotech?
Does nanotechnology exist?
Who's working on nanotechnology?
Will nanotech really happen?
How long will it be before nanotech gets here?
Should we try to stop nanotechnology?
Can nanotechnology be used to turn lead into gold?
What is Marlow's Paradox?
What is the Singularity?
Is Mitchell Swain's character based on Bill Gates?
What are the chances of a nanoaccident, and how bad would it be?
We haven't had any accidents with nuclear weapons—doesn't that mean we can handle nanotech?
Didn't a Nobel prize-winning scientist say that nanotech isn't a threat?
What is a "nanointelligence?"
Will there be a nanosequel?
Will there be a nanomovie?
Is ECHELON real?
Is there really an Aurora Black spy plane?
Come on; this Nano novel is pretty wild—isn't some of that stuff impossible?
Is there anything I can do about nanotechnology?
What is nanotechnology?
Nanotechnology is the means to manipulate individual atoms at will—to treat the world and everything in it as
"digital matter." First proposed by Nobel laureate physicist Richard Feynman in 1959
[1], nanotechnology will allow us to reduce any substance on earth or elsewhere to its constituent
atoms (this process is called "disassembly"), and to rearrange those atoms ("assembly") in any manner
permitted by the laws of physics. Any physical object in existence can be disassembled, and its atoms used to assemble any
other physical object which it is possible to construct using those elements. For all practical purposes, such
assembly/disassembly is instantaneous. [2]
back to top
How can we manipulate something we can't see or touch?
Human hands are millions of times too large to manipulate individual atoms. Submicroscopic devices called
"nanites" will do this work instead, assembling and disassembling whatever their programming code tells them to.
A single nanite might be no larger than 250 nanometers across (a nanometer is one billionth of a meter). By comparison,
a single red blood cell—which can be seen only under a microscope—is 5,000 nanometers across.
back to top
Can nanotech be used as a weapon?
Nanotech is the last killer app. As a weapon, it will make hydrogen bombs obsolete. Infinitely programmable for varying
scenarios, nanites can be instructed to seek out and disassemble a single human being (identified by his DNA), or an army
of 200 million; to disassemble every nuclear weapon on earth—or build five billion more in a single night.
In a recent speech to the Foresight Institute (established to help the world prepare for the advent of nanotechnology),
Admiral David E. Jeremiah, former Vice-Chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff (the second highest-ranking military man
in the nation), had this to say: "Molecular manufacturing [another term for nanotechnology] has even greater potential
than nuclear weapons to change the balance of power." [3]
back to top
What's good about nanotech?
Nanites can be used to eliminate pollution, achieve a 100% recycling rate, repair the environment, and restore extinct species
whose DNA survives. Nanites can provide enough food and clean water to support many times the earth's present population, and
enough electrical power and other resources to raise the entire world to an American standard of living—with low to no
pollution.
"Nanocomputers" will be billions of times more powerful than today's best supercomputers, billions of times
faster, and billions of times smaller. Nanites can employed to cure all known illnesses and genetic defects, to make space
travel and colonization literally dirt-cheap, and to extend the human lifespan indefinitely. [2]
back to top
Does nanotechnology exist?
Nanotechnology is in its infancy. Very crude prototypes of nanodevices have been created, and many large, extremely
well-funded companies and government agencies as well as several Nobel laureates are now pursuing a comprehensive,
working nanotechnology. We know that it is possible to build nanites (also called molecular assemblers)—pioneering
nanoscientist K. Eric Drexler's book Nanosystems [4] demonstrates this—we're just not
quite able to pull it off yet.
back to top
Who's working on nanotechnology?
In the United States, the following government agencies:
The U.S. Air Force; U.S. Army; U.S. Navy; Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency; Department of Energy; Department of Commerce; NASA; National Institutes of Health; National
Institute of Standards and Technology; National Science Foundation; National Science and Technology Council. [5]
In the United States, the following national laboratories:
Aames Laboratory Condensed Matter Physics Group; Argonne
National Laboratory; Center for Advanced Research in Biotechnology; Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory; Idaho
National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory; Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory; Los Alamos National
Laboratory; Nadrian C. Seeman's Laboratory; NanoStructure Laboratory; NanoStructures Laboratory; Sandia National
Laboratories; Thermal Spray Lab. [5]
In the United States, the following companies:
Bell Labs Innovations (Lucent Technologies); California Molecular Electronics Corp.; DEAL International, Inc.; Hewlett-Packard
Company; IBM; Intel; MITRE Corporation; Molecular Manufacturing Enterprises, Inc.; Nanogen, Inc.; Nanologic, Inc.; Nanophase Technologies
Corporation; Nanopowder Industries; Nanotechnology Development Corporation; Oxford Nanotechnology; UHV Technologies, Inc.;
XEROX PARC; Zyvex. [5]
(Partial listing)
back to top
Will nanotech really happen?
As Nobel laureate physicist Richard Feynman noted in 1959 [1], nanotechnology is "a development which I think cannot be
avoided." Consider: From the instant it was realized that nuclear weapons were possible, their development became
inevitable for one reason only: military dominance. The development of nanotechnology is a hundred thousand times
more inevitable because its applications are limitless. There is no government, industry, or individual who cannot
benefit enormously from nanotech.
A frequently-cited example is the computer industry, where major chip manufacturers must invest several billion dollars in
new fabrication plants (called "fabs") every two years, knowing full well that the chip-making process now being
used (photolithography) will yield no further benefit past 2010 or so. This industry needs an alternative manufacturing
process and has billions of dollars to spend on what seems the only viable long-term solution: nanotechnology.
A single nanofab, once built, will itself be reprogrammable to deal with future manufacturing requirements; there will be
no need to build another—as it will not be possible to create chips smaller or better than those created in the nanofab.
A better question might be: With the agencies, laboratories, and companies listed above (and many others as well) all working
on development—can nanotechnology not happen?
back to top
How long will it be before nanotech gets here?
No one knows. The answer will depend largely upon the amount of money spent on research, and also upon political policies which
encourage, discourage, or prohibit research in this area. Estimates of a "start date" for full-fledged nanotech vary widely;
different NASA scientists have suggested as little as five years, and as many as fifty.
Bill Joy, co-founder and (until recently) chief scientist of computer goliath Sun Microsystems, and original co-chairman of the
Presidential Information Technology Advisory Committee, said in April of 2000 that "the enabling breakthrough to assemblers
[nanites] seems quite likely within the next 20 years," and feels that "the last chance to assert control—the
fail-safe point—is rapidly approaching." [6]
back to top
Should we try to stop nanotechnology?
As Nobel laureate physicist and Manhattan Project scientist Richard Feynman noted in 1959 [1], nanotechnology
cannot be stopped. It must not be stopped. We must not even try, for to do so ensures our destruction. The first nation or
individual to gain full control of a working nanotechnology will have the power to crush any nation on earth, or all of
them—and to keep all others from attaining that power. The first nanopower will be, if it so chooses, the last
nanopower. Because of this, any nation which chooses not to pursue nanotechnology may well exist at the whim of the first
nanopower—or not at all.
back to top
Can nanotechnology be used to change lead into gold?
No. Nanotechnology operates at the level of the atom, and gold atoms differ from lead atoms at the subatomic level. To transmute
atoms of one element into atoms of another element is possible only by interfering with the forces which bind the atom's
parts—protons, neutrons, and electrons—together. So far as is known, this is beyond the capability of nanotechnology to
achieve directly. Nanotechnology can quite easily be used to turn coal into diamonds, however—because both diamonds and coal
are composed of carbon atoms; whether the atoms form diamonds or coal depends solely upon their arrangement. The irony of this is
that diamonds will become relatively worthless as gemstones.
back to top
What is Marlow's Paradox?
Marlow's Paradox refers to the idea, proposed by some—most notably nanotech pioneer K. Eric
Drexler—that humans should place decisions vital to their survival as a species in the hands of a non-human intelligence
(an NI or "nanointelligence," for example). It has also been proposed that such non-human intelligences be given
emotions in order to make them more like humans. [7]
The paradox arises from the fact that we will soon confront "Singularity:" a world in which faster-than-human decisions and
actions will be required for our survival—and yet "We cannot entrust our fate to machines without emotions, for
they have no compassion; we cannot entrust our fate to machines with emotions, for they are unpredictable." Basically,
the paradox states that there seems to be no way out of the situation, because machines cannot be trusted to act in the best
interests of humans [8].
back to top
What is the Singularity?
"Singularity" is a term originally defined by science fiction author and mathematician Vernor Vinge in 1993
[9]. Since that time, the term has come to have several closely-related meanings. All refer,
in one way or another, to what seems an inevitable consequence of the ever-increasing pace of technological change:
at some point, a critical mass will be attained—a single instant at which the pace of technological change outstrips
the ability of the human mind to comprehend, keep up with, or manage.
That point in time—that event—is the Singularity. If it has not occurred by the time nanotechnology arrives, the
development of nanotechnology will trigger Singularity. What happens after that is, by definition, impossible to predict.
back to top
Is Mitchell Swain's character based on Bill Gates?
No; Bill Gates isn't rich enough to be Mitchell Swain.
back to top
What are the chances of a nanoaccident, and how bad would it be?
The chances of an accident are high, for a variety of reasons. These include: lack of experience with the technology; containment
difficulties (the known laws of physics do not allow for a "nanite-proof" substance which will act as a barrier against
nanite disassemblers), and; the probability that the promise of unprecedented military and/or commercial nanoapplications will
cause the development process to become a headlong "nanorace" with little regard for the extreme caution necessary to
ensure our survival.
The damage inflicted by a nanoaccident would depend upon the nature of the accident. A limited-scale accident might result in a
toy factory and its employees being disassembled and their constituent atoms used to build Pokemon dolls. In a worst-case
scenario, the earth itself could be disassembled. [10]
back to top
We haven't had any accidents with nuclear weapons—doesn't that mean we can handle nanotech?
We've had scores of accidents with nuclear weapons; the general public is unaware of this because many, if not most, remain
classified. As explained elsewhere in this faq (see Will Nanotech Really Happen?), the forces
driving the development of nanotechnology are immeasurably greater than those which drove the development of nuclear weapons.
The safety with which we've handled nuclear weapons is, however, perhaps the best guide we have regarding the level of
competence which can be expected of governments when dealing with nanoweapons—and that record is abysmal.
In 1957 alone, for example, the U.S. Air Force dropped a 10-megaton nuclear bomb outside Albuquerque, New Mexico.
In 1967, two, 24-megaton bombs in North Carolina; five of six failsafes were tripped on the bomb with the
working parachute. The other bomb entered the soil and was, apparently, never recovered. (For purposes of comparison, the
weapon detonated over Hiroshima was a mere 20 kilotons, or 1/50 of one megaton.) Three more nuclear bombs were dropped
into the Atlantic off the coast of Delaware, and two in Texas, the same year. Yet another was dropped off the coast of Georgia
the following year—and this is but the tip of the classified iceberg [11].
The Soviet/Russian Federation safety record is likely worse. Lake Karachay, located in the former
Soviet Union, has been rendered so radioactive that anyone standing on the shoreline for one hour will die of
radiation sickness [11].
back to top
Didn't a Nobel prize-winning scientist say that nanotech isn't a threat?
Richard Smalley (Nobel laureate, chemistry) has referred to the the earth-devouring grey goo scenario (in which
out-of-control or weaponized nanites reduce the planet to a pile of atoms) as a "fuzzy-minded nightmare dream."
It is important to realize that Dr. Smalley made this public statement while seeking approval of a half-billion dollar
nanotechnology funding bill [12] from Congress—which could easily have denied the funding or
attempted to pass a research moratorium in the face of widespread public concern over safety issues. His actual comment
was: "We should not let this fuzzy-minded nightmare dream scare us away from nanotechnology...NNI [the National
Nanotechnology Initiative] should go forward." [13]
Had he said, instead, that nanotechnology might destroy the planet, it is somewhat less likely that the NNI funding bill would
have passed. Interestingly, a provision of the more recent bill which became the $3.7 billion 21st Century Nanotechnology
Research and Development Act [14]—A provision which would have provided funding for molecular
assemblers (the villains in the grey goo scenario)—was removed from the bill prior to passage. Dr. Smalley is no stranger
to the federal-funding game; much of his own research has been funded by the U.S. Department of Energy.
[14a]
This and other comments made by Dr. Smalley (a chemist) have been publicly challenged by the world's foremost nanotechnologist, K.
Eric Drexler [15], who accuses Smalley of consistent misrepresentation of the
facts and of failure to present scientific support for his arguments. A four-part public debate [16] between
the two scientists is the cover story of a recent issue of Chemical & Engineering News, whose editor-in-chief Rudy Baum
had this to say: "Smalley's objections to molecular assemblers go beyond the scientific. He believes that speculation about
the potential dangers of nanotechnology threatens public support for it."
Drexler, author of the the primary text on nanotechnology (Nanosystems), published the first scientific paper on
nanotechnology over twenty years ago, and coined the term nanotechnology. His arguments are supported by scientific
fact. Dr. Smalley's, for whatever reason, are not [17].
back to top
What is a "nanointelligence?"
A nanointelligence is an artificial, nannite- or nanocomputer-based intelligence. Such an intelligence, properly structured, will
operate independently of any human input, and at a speed in excess of one million times the speed of human thought processes. The
possibility exists that such a nanointelligence, or "NI," will become sentient, or self-aware. [18]
back to top
Will there be a nanosequel?
Of course.
back to top
Will there be a nanomovie?
Probably. Four-time Oscar-nominated writer/director/producer Lawrence Kasdan
(writer of The Empire Strikes Back, Return of the Jedi, Raiders of the Lost Ark, and The Bodyguard and
writer/director of Body Heat, Silverado, Accidental Tourist, Continental Divide, The Big Chill, Grand Canyon, Wyatt Earp
and other films) has approached Nano author John Marlow with an offer to acquire the rights to the Nano screenplay,
also by John Marlow. Though no agreement was reached, Nano seems tailor-made for Hollywood. In the words of author Vernor
Vinge: "Could make a spectacular movie. Wachowski brothers, watch out!" [19] (Andy and Larry
Wachowski wrote and directed The Matrix films.)
back to top
Is ECHELON real?
Yes. ECHELON is a global surveillance system established by the United States National Security Agency, and monitors 80-95%
(estimates vary) of the world's electronic communications. When you speak on the telephone, ECHELON hears you; when you send a
fax or an email, ECHELON reads it; when you visit a web site that mentions ECHELON (or anything else), ECHELON knows it.
ECHELON recently made front-page headlines throughout Europe, and the European Parliament has undertaken a full-scale
investigation into alleged American spying on European nations and corporations via ECHELON. [20]
back to top
Is there really an Aurora Black spy plane?
Unknown; the Aurora Black prototype which appears in the novel is an extrapolation of existing and theoretical technologies
applied to the hypersonic surveillance/strike aircraft known as "Aurora." The United States Air Force denies the
existence of the Aurora aircraft, as well as that of the Groom Dry Lake test facility where the 'nonexistent' plane 'isn't
being tested.' The United States Air Force also denied the existence of the F-117A Nighthawk stealth fighter, the B-2 Spirit
stealth bomber, the SR-71 Blackbird reconnaissance aircraft, the U-2 Dragon spyplane, etc. ad infinitum.
Older readers will recall that the United States Air Force and the President himself denied the existence of Air Force Colonel
Francis Gary Powers and the U-2 he was shot down in until he and pieces of the plane he wasn't flying were paraded before news
cameras in Moscow. The truth may be out there, but you won't hear it from the Air Force. [20]
back to top
Come on; this Nano novel is pretty wild—isn't some of that stuff impossible?
No. [2]
back to top
Is there anything I can do about nanotechnology?
Absolutely. Make your voice heard; influence government policy by writing, calling, or emailing your representatives in the
U.S. Congress and the White House if you are a citizen of the United States. Few if any legislators are familiar with
leading-edge technology issues, and most lack the relevant and detailed information necessary to make informed policy
decisions. Whatever your nation of residence, urge your government representatives to read
Nano, and to visit this site's
nanofaq,
nanotech, and
nanolinks pages, the
Foresight Institute, and the
Center for Responsible Nanotechnology.
Nanotechnology is the single most important development in the history of the human race. It is also the greatest
promise—and the greatest peril—facing us today, and into the foreseeable future. Despite this, there has been
no national or international debate regarding the proper course to pursue in developing this technology. This must change.
If nanotech is first developed by the evil, the unbalanced, the careless—humanity and the very earth itself are
doomed beyond all hope of redemption.
Nanotechnology will be developed; the only question is by whom. Despite its many flaws, the United States has
kept a nuclear peace for half a century and has, perhaps, the best chance of avoiding a nanocatastrophe. Nevertheless, the
U.S. has a history of making crucial decisions in the total absence of public input—as was the case with the Manhattan
Project, which developed the first nuclear weapon.
There are differences this time: Nanotechnology will make nuclear weapons seem trivial by comparison; information regarding
the tech is freely available, and; individual citizens have the opportunity to act collectively to influence the direction
of public policy before critical and potentially suicidal decisions are made behind closed doors in the absence of informed
public debate. Nanotechnology is, in short, too important to be left to politicians.
Nano was written to bring the promise—and the peril—of nanotechnology to the widest possible audience in a
way that no technical treatise could. To drag the technology out of the labs and into the spotlight, where an informed public
can act in national and international concert to ensure that appropriate safeguards are devised and put into place before
the technology arrives—because there will likely be no second chance.
If Nano succeeds in accomplishing this, then author John Marlow will have succeeded in his purpose: "To have a hand in saving the world…"
"For there is no secret and there is no defense; there is no possibility of control except
through the aroused understanding and insistence of the peoples of the world. We scientists recognise our inescapable responsibility
to carry to our fellow citizens an understanding of the simple facts of atomic energy and its implications for society. In this
lies our only security and our only hope—we believe that an informed citizenry will act for life and not death..."
—Albert Einstein [22]
"Hydrogen bombs were children's toys; this, is a weapon."
—John Marrek (from Nano)
back to top
notes
[1] Richard P.
Feynman, There's Plenty of Room at the Bottom: An
Invitation to Enter a New Field of Physics (address to the 1959 Annual Meeting of the American Physical Society,
December 29, 1959 at the California Institute of Technology; first published in Caltech's Engineering and Science,
February, 1960).
back
[2] K. Eric Drexler's
Engines of Creation: The Coming Era of Nanotechnology
(Anchor Books, 1986; also available online) provides a nontechnical overview of nanotechnology's capabilities, as does his
follow-up book (co-written with Christine Peterson and
Gayle Pergamit), Unbounding the Future: The
Nanotechnology Revolution (William Morrow and Company, 1986; also available online). Further resources can be found
on this site's nanotech and nanolinks pages.
back
[3] Admiral David E.
Jeremiah, Nanotechnology and Global
Security (address to the Fourth Foresight Conference on Molecular Nanotechnology; November 9, 1995). Additional
readings on nanosecurity issues can be found on this site's nanolinks page. A fictional
portrayal of nanoweapons appears in the novel Nano, by John Robert Marlow.
back
[4] K. Eric Drexler,
Nanosystems: Molecular Machinery, Manufacturing,
and Computation (John Wiley & Sons; 1992).
back
[5] A more complete listing may be found on this site's nanolinks page.
back
[6]
Bill Joy,
Why The Future Doesn't Need Us
(article in Wired magazine, April 2000).
back
[7] The concept of active shields is outlined by its originator
K. Eric Drexler in
Engines of Creation: The Coming Era of Nanotechnology.
For an opposing point of view, see Nano, by John Robert Marlow.
back
[8] Marlow's Paradox first appeared in the novel Nano, by John
Robert Marlow.
back
[9] Vernor Vinge,
The Coming Technological Singularity:
How To Survive in the Post-Human Era (address to the VISION-21 Symposium, March 30-31, 1993; later published (in slightly
altered form) in Whole Earth Review, Winter 1993). (Note: "Vinge" rhymes with "dingy" and "stingy"—which, as Isaac
Asimov has pointed out, are the only two words in the Englsih language to hold this distinction.)
back
[10] A fictional worst-case scenario (or near-worst-case scenario; to reveal which would spoil the plot)
appears in the novel Nano, by John Robert Marlow. See also Robert A. Freitas, Jr.'s
Some Limits to Global Ecophagy by Biovorous
Nanoreplicators, with Public Policy Recommendations.
back
[11] For more detailed coverage of accidents involving nuclear weapons, nuclear power, and radioactive
materials, see this site's nukes page.
back
[12] The bill, which was signed into law by President Clinton, was the National Nanotechnology Initiative, or NNI.
back
[13] Dr. Smalley's comments appear in the
Final Report of the NSET Workshop on Societal Implications of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology,
section 6.3
(Focus on Science and Education Implications). NSET is the National Science and Technology Council, Committee on Technology, Subcommittee on Nanoscale Science, Engineering and Technology.
back
[14] Public Law 108-153: 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act
(signed into law on December 3, 2003).
back
[14a] Department of Energy Smalley page.
back
[15] Foresight Institute chairman and co-founder
K. Eric Drexler, is the world's leading authority on nanotechnology. Details may be found in his
biography and
curriculum vitae.
back
[16] The published debate may be found in its entirety here:
Point/Counterpoint—Nanotechnology: Drexler and Smalley Make the Case For and Against Molecular Assemblers
(from Chemical & Engineering News, December 1, 2003).
back
[17] See also the
Foresight Institute press release of December 1, 2003:
Nobel Winner Smalley Responds To Drexler's Challenge: Fails To Defend National Nanotech Policy,
and FI's Is the Revolution Real? Debating the Future of
Nanotechnology. Dr. Drexler's arguments are both factual and scientific; Dr. Smalley prefers phrases like "fuzzy-minded,"
"fat fingers," "scared our children," "pretend world," and "monster."
back
[18] A fictional NI appears in the novel Nano, by John Robert
Marlow.
back
[19] This and other review quotes may be found on this site's
Nano novel page.
back
[20] More information on high-level surveillance technologies (which play a crucial role in the
Nano novel) may be found on this site's spytech page.
back
[21] Readings on nanosecurity issues can be found on this site's
nanolinks page. A fictional portrayal of a nanocatastrophe appears in the novel
Nano, by John Robert Marlow.
back
[22] Albert Einstein,
letter written on behalf of the Emergency Committee of
Atomic Scientists; January 27, 1947 (Einstein Archive 70-918).
back
[2] K. Eric Drexler's
Engines of Creation: The Coming Era of Nanotechnology
(Anchor Books, 1986; also available online) provides a nontechnical overview of nanotechnology's capabilities, as does his
follow-up book (co-written with Christine Peterson and
Gayle Pergamit), Unbounding the Future: The
Nanotechnology Revolution (William Morrow and Company, 1986; also available online). Further resources can be found
on this site's nanotech and nanolinks pages.
back
[1] Richard P.
Feynman, There's Plenty of Room at the Bottom: An
Invitation to Enter a New Field of Physics (address to the 1959 Annual Meeting of the American Physical Society,
December 29, 1959 at the California Institute of Technology; first published in Caltech's Engineering and Science,
February, 1960).
back
[1] Richard P.
Feynman, There's Plenty of Room at the Bottom: An
Invitation to Enter a New Field of Physics (address to the 1959 Annual Meeting of the American Physical Society,
December 29, 1959 at the California Institute of Technology; first published in Caltech's Engineering and Science,
February, 1960).
back
[20] More information on high-level surveillance technologies (which play a crucial role in the
Nano novel) may be found on this site's spytech page.
back
[2] K. Eric Drexler's
Engines of Creation: The Coming Era of Nanotechnology
(Anchor Books, 1986; also available online) provides a nontechnical overview of nanotechnology's capabilities, as does his
follow-up book (co-written with Christine Peterson and
Gayle Pergamit), Unbounding the Future: The
Nanotechnology Revolution (William Morrow and Company, 1986; also available online). Further resources can be found
on this site's nanotech and nanolinks pages.
back
back to top
Website question, problem, or comment? Contact
gorgon@johnrobertmarlow.com
Except where otherwise noted, the entire content of this website is copyright © by John Robert Marlow,
and all rights are reserved. Permission is granted to reproduce the summary, bio, and cover image above
provided the user includes a link to this page and does not edit, alter, or shorten the text or image
being used (image size may be changed).
Concept, visual aspect, site design and content management by John Robert
Marlow. Site maintained by gorgon.
A Penguin on Every Page.
|
|
|