All life is composed of nanotechnology. From the original molecular structures that developed the ability to replicate themselves a billion or more years ago to the most sophisticated life forms, we all have resulted from an evolutionary process that started with, and uses at every level, nanotechnology concepts.  Life started at nano-scale, and a huge majority of all life forms, the greatest bio-diversity, still exists at nano-scale.

Take a close look at a human hair, for instance. It wicks perspiration away from the skin very efficiently and allows it to evaporate into the air from the much greater surface of the hairs, removing excess heat from the air next to our skin when we are hot.  When we are cold it holds air near the skin and provides insulation to retain heat.  Its surface can wear from friction, which can change its surface area as well as other aspects of its mechanical behavior (link).  The research is only beginning, however, and many more questions are yet to be asked, let alone answered.  For instance, does hair have an especially large surface area at nano or very small scales? Does it have a molecular structure that mimics water molecules to the extent of using surface tension to wick perspiration out onto the hairs, or is there some other special affinity for sweat that makes hair more effective at helping to cool us?

Blood cells are another interesting aspect of nano-scale functionality in humans. Blood cells are essentially autonomous creatures that receive nutrients and chemical instructions from other parts of our bodies, and wander through our circulatory system and tissues doing specific jobs that keep us alive.  This strongly suggests that we, like jellyfish and all other life forms, are community organisms, made up of smaller scale entities that work together for the common survival.  We would not survive without the independent microorganisms that digest our food, remove or otherwise neutralize unfriendly intruders, and generally take care of every function by which we live.

Many of our cells have given up their mobility to better do their particular jobs. Nerve cells, for instance, can not move around at all, at least once they reach maturity.  They can, however, grow connections to other nerve cells and use them to exchange electrical and chemical signals without which we would not live, creating the incredibly complex network we use for everything from movement and sensing of ourselves and our surroundings to actual thought.

Cells can transform themselves, and have stages of life. Stem cells are generated in our bone marrow, and then travel through our blood stream until they receive signals or information that tells them to differentiate into other cell types, which may involve those cells losing their mobility and “settling down” to a more sedentary existence.  Each cell contains incredibly complex instructions for growth and function in its DNA, and specific signals activate chemical switches in that DNA that tell the cell how to grow and function.  At least one of those DNA instructions limits how many times a cell can divide to produce new cells of the same type, and if this particular instruction is broken it allows other cells, if also broken, to cause the cell to divide an unlimited number of times, a key aspect of cancer, the runaway division of cells.

We have only scratched the surface of the nanotechnology all around us. The human study of nanotechnology will need a lot more time and effort to catch up with a billion years of evolution.  At this point we might be like the early human who discovered the use of the lever.  That human had found a way to use knowledge that accomplished something useful, but a full understanding of why and how that function worked was still a long way off.  There is an incredible universe of knowledge and understanding out there which we are only becoming aware of now, and it will be an exciting future, but especially if we all support further research we need to control our destiny as a species and planet.  Please support basic scientific research (the kind that can’t say what it is expecting to find or promise specific results) when you communicate with your government and corporate representatives.  It is only through the pursuit and application of knowledge that we will have a chance of maintaining our great standards of living in the future, especially as we exhaust our natural resources and learn to control our population and ecological impact.

As always, I welcome your comments.

Nano-inspirations often hit first thing in the morning. A concept for nanobot application occurred to me when I awoke this morning that could revolutionize neurology. If nanobots can be built to receive radio signals, then they can also be engineered to detect weak electrical fields such as those that traverse our nervous systems. The proximity of nanobots in the bloodstream to the nerve cells would permit sensitivity to such weak fields, and if the nanobots could transmit weak, narrow-band radio signals to provide measurements of nerve activity, it is possible that much new information could be learned about the nervous system. Of course, the subject would need to be in an electrically quiet environment such as a Faraday cage (no cellphones allowed), and all equipment inside the cage would need to be carefully shielded and bypassed to further eliminate unwanted electrical fields, but the concept seems feasible. Since nano-scale radio receivers have already been demonstrated (link), it doesn’t seem far fetched to have them transmit as well, and, with enough sophistication and computing power, achieve the capability for Wi-Fi-like networking (link).  So how could this capability be applied?

A simple nanobot application involves nerve signal intensity measurement. A simple neurological application of nanobots would involve the nanobots emitting narrow band radio signals proportional to the electrical field they detect. The subject under evaluation would wear a suit containing elements that would emit light depending on the strength of the nanobot signals received, and high speed video cameras could record the intensity and duration of nerve signals by the intensity of light emitted by the suit. Any disconnects or aberrations in the nervous system would be immediately visible. A variety of improvements in sophistication could be achieved by applying concepts such as measuring the waveforms expressed in the light intensities of different emitters over time.

Self-identifying nanobots could be possible, with increasingly sophisticated applications. With increased sophistication (which could required larger nanobots, or “microbots”, to encompass the increased complexity) each nanobot could send a string of bits to identify itself followed by another string of bits (number) to indicate the intensity of the electrical field it was detecting. Larger and more sophisticated microbots (still microscopic but orders of magnitude larger than nanobots) could have the computing power to collect the digital signals from the nanobots near them, provide additional digital processing power, and help trace back the measurements to their physical origins. Such microbots could also be capable of identifying each other and networking. To avoid the potential mish-mash of thousands of simultaneous tiny narrowband signals and increase the ability to detect and record individual signals, data collection could be accomplished by having the subject wear a suit woven with a matrix of sensors that would acquire the microbots’ signals, and possibly communicate with them in Wi-Fi fashion to collect the data in an organized and traceable way or modify the processing they would perform.

Active stimulation of the nervous system could enable further research and treatments. To enable further study, microbots might eventually be used to actively stimulate nerve cells such that the interactions and pathways in the nervous system could be studied in more detail. Just as microprocessors are currently in use to help unscramble the nervous signals of patients suffering from a variety of neurological disorders, even more sophisticated forms of human-machine interface could be made possible through the use of radio and Wi-Fi-capable nanobots. I am sure I am only scratching the surface of the possibilities.

As always, I welcome your comments. – Tim

Will nanobots someday clean my teeth? In the future, will my dentist spray a fine mist of nanobots into my mouth? Then, will he activate the nanobots with a remote control, after which the nanobots will identify where plaque and other undesirable materials bond to the enamel of my teeth and dissolve those bonds? Some of the nanobots would also move into the space between the teeth and gums and break up bacteria and the acid molecules they excrete, and possibly even repair cell damage. Then, ten minutes later, will I just rinse my mouth, have an inspection from the dentist, make my appointment for next time, and leave?

Or will I brush my teeth with a toothpaste containing nanobots which will do the job automatically? I thought about that, but am not sure the technology will be ready for that soon, though perhaps eventually that will be possible. At first any new technology must be handled with care, and, as with other introductions of technology, it will need to be introduced carefully and managed by professionals, quite possibly under regulatory control.

Cavities may become a thing of the past. In a similar procedure, my dentist could signal the nanobots to detect molecules consistent with decay, dissolve their bonds with healthy tooth material, and perhaps even fill in any microscopic pits in the enamel with an identical or equally effective material that would not only repair the damage, but leave behind a coating resistant to the attack of acids produced by bacteria when they digest food particles. Then, a quick rinse completes the treatment.

The medical possibilities suggested by this scenario are stunning. When nanobots may be created to detect and act on specific molecules, the possibilities are almost endless. Chemical and biological processes of all kinds could be changed by nanotechnology. Nanotechnology radio receivers already exist and, while sophisticated computing capabilities are not in place yet at nano scale, it is just a matter of time.  In the meantime a radio connection could allow macro-scale computers to control nanobots. Once that is in place, I expect some big changes in our lifestyles, though it may take a decade or two for them to become common. I hope to be around to see at least the beginning of the new age of nanotechnology.

As always, I welcome your comments. They are usually well taken and constructive, and I learn from them. Thanks in advance.  – TIm

Many products in current use have risks that must be managed. Many products we use every day have risks, and their dangers are managed systematically, not infrequently by force of government regulation. Gasoline, for example, is a known carcinogen, so regulations govern its handling and the warnings we are consistently given about it. As recent research has shown, carbon nanotubes also have risks that must be managed (link). Science doesn’t move ahead smoothly, however, and one study shows that toxicity of certain carbon nanomaterials could appear to be proven by one test, while other tests would show no toxicity (link).

Scientists worldwide are taking action to protect us from nanomaterial toxicity. Not only have a number of studies been taking place, but an Institute of Life Sciences article (link) reported in 2005 that a Nanomaterial Toxicity Screening Working Group had been formed. That group met in February of 2005 and published a paper outlining a toxicity screening strategy for nanomaterials (link) in October of that year.

Nanotechnology’s high profile may make it less likely to have negative consequences for the public. It’s clear that, while new technologies often involve risks, the risks of nanotechnology are not being ignored.  While mistakes have been made in the development of other technologies, and safety practices and regulations were applied too late to prevent problems, it is possible that nanotechnology will be one of the most closely watched due to its high profile, reducing the risk of inadvertent negative consequences.  I can only hope I am right about that, given the amazing possibilities in nanotechnology development.

As always, I welcome your comments. – Tim

interesting reading:
Understanding Potential Toxic Effects of Carbon-Based Nanomaterials, July 10, 2006, Nanotech News, NCI Alliance for Nanotechnology in Cancer, National Cancer Institute, U.S. National Institutes of Health

Can a nanobot break a molecule and change the material’s characteristics? If a nanobot deconstructs a molecule, could the pieces, being atoms or smaller molecules, have different characteristics that were not characteristics of the previous form? Could a nanobot destroy a physical object by degrading its substance, converting it into a weaker substance, possibly even a liquid or gas?  I have many more questions.

Could toxic molecules be made non-toxic by the action of nanobots?  Could their use allow toxic pollution to be disposed of more easily, and allow polluted land, for instance, to be cleaned up with no digging or physical processing other than to pour the nanobots onto it and let them soak in?  Could non-toxic substances be made toxic, creating a potential for cancer therapies and military use, while in the bloodstream? Could drugs be changed into other drugs AFTER they are in the body?  Could nanobots convert materials into other materials by stages, each wave of bots making a certain molecular change, until the target material is decomposed into two or more other materials, or until larger molecules are assembled?

Since nanobots that would recognize and work on specific molecules might be fairly simple, could they be manufactured by other nanobots or microbots? Could nanobot factories by designed and turned loose to make specific types of nanobots using materials available in the environment, or introduced into the environment? Could the factorybots assess the need for the nanobots they make, and stop making them when there is no longer a need? Could factorybots make nanobots that would search for target molecules and report back to the factorybots when “cleanup” nanobots need to be made?

Although there are currently only a very small number of materials that nanobots can be made from, can nanobots create other materials via molecular-level assembly, including building nanobots with different capabilities based on the characteristics of the different materials?

These are some of the questions that ramble through my mind when I read up on nanotechnology advances.  I hope that asking my questions will inspire you to add a comment that will provide answers or new questions.   Future technologies are a lot of fun to speculate on, and speculations can be the first inspirations for valuable avenues of research.

I appreciate your comments.

I guess I just worry too much, but, lately, every time I take a paper towel from the dispenser at work or toss a bit of plastic wrap in the trash, I can’t help but have thoughts like “Here goes another cup of oil.”,  ”How can we handle 6+ billion people all doing this, every day?”, and ”Where will the energy and material come from to permit this in the future?”.  Then, in lieu of feeling depressed and more worried, I have to spur myself to think creatively about it, and sometimes I run to the computer to write another entry in this blog.  So … how ARE we going to handle 6 billion people who all want to have paper towels, electric lights, houses, cars and other modern conveniences when they actually get them?

Obviously, my first assumption is: We won’t be doing what we’re doing now.  We won’t be pulling paper towels from dispensers, or, if we are, they will be cheaply recyclable into new, clean paper towels or other needed items.  Who knows, perhaps we will merely flip buttons on a pocket device the size of a cellphone and a cloud or crowd of nano- or micro-bots will quickly move to where we would need a paper towel, where they would absorb or break down the spilled material or dirt and cart it quickly away as tiny particles to a hopper in the wall, from which it will later be collected for recycling, or composting, or some other even more sustainable process.

Perhaps even hand or dish washing would be like that.  You hold your hand, or the object you want to wash, over a sink, push a button, and a nearly-invisible cloud of microbots fall or fly to the object to be cleaned, where they quickly cover it, and break down and remove dirt and microorganisms, after which they fall into the sink carrying the broken down stuff, and leaving your hands or the dish clean, disinfected, and dry.

As some science fiction writers have written in the past, and since microbiology has already been proven by nature to be extremely viable and effective, the microbots in question might live on us symbiotically, working for us around the clock.  Our own cells and the many microorganisms that live on and in us do this now, it’s just that we don’t completely understand them, let alone have much ability to control them except through electrochemical “bludgeoning”, and mass extermination when they get out of order.

So, that addresses possibilities for the paper towel problem.  There are plenty of others, however.  People do need personal contact, and transportation is a necessity to accomplish that.  Does that mean that a billion nanobots would suddenly lift your shoes (or backside) a few microns off the floor, and suddenly you would be zooming along, seemingly without friction, across the land?  Or does it just mean that, with the aid of nanobots and specialized cells maintaining your body, you would get up and easily walk to the nearest transportation device, again possibly a biological entity with all the benefits of modern bio-nano-microtechnology … a bionic pony?

And, when the weather is uncomfortably cold or hot, would the bio-microbots form an insulating covering over the appropriate areas of your skin, effectively providing a completely dynamic and adaptable form of clothing?  If you were mountain climbing, and you fell, would your personal horde of microbots spin out webs a la spiderman, grabbing at the rocks until they slowed your fall to a safe velocity, bond your skin to the rocks to keep you in place, and then selectively grab and release the rocks as if your skin was equipped with a highly controllable superglue-like substance, while other nanobots released extra glycogen into your muscles to enable you to climb back to where you wanted to be?  Of course, if you sustained any injury in the fall, nanobots could fix the damage at the cellular level, though you might have to take calcium supplements they could use to rebuild damaged bone and eat appropriate foods to enable the healing process.

In any case, the basic theoretical thinking that could lead to such technological advances seems to only now be starting to gel, and, even at the current rapid pace of scientific advancement I estimate it will be one to two centuries before anything like the concepts I describe above might be possible, not the two to five decades in which we need major advancement to cope with the exploding human population and all the ramifications thereof.  The way to get there faster certainly leads through basic research, and it is possible that, if the electorate understood the benefits and established the legislative priorities, our rate of scientific and technological progress could be accelerated.  How this level of public understanding might be achieved is a topic for much discussion and conceptual development all by itself, and I won’t try to enter into that here, but the priority of doing so seems obvious.

In the meantime, the dream stands, the future is out there to be shaped as we are able, and the rewards and consequences are significant, if speculative at this point.

Here’s an interesting physicsworld article from 2004 — “Visions of self-replicating nanomachines that could devour the Earth in a “grey goo” are probably wide of the mark …”  link.  The article also points out that, due to physical realities like brownian motion and surface effects (friction or adhesion, for instance), “We should also stop worrying about grey goo, because it is going to be very hard to produce more highly optimized nano-scale organisms than nature has already achieved. “  The author points out that, since nature has optimized so many biological organisms at nano-scale, faster progress in nanotech development may be made in that realm, as opposed to the purely electromechanical.

The Institute for Molecular Manufacturing site at http://www.imm.org/ is also interesting, as is the related Nano-Medicine site at http://www.nanomedicine.com/, which links to a number of scholarly books and other on-line information.

More good info and a flood of links appears to be associated with http://nanularity.com/default.aspx, which I found through http://nanotech.physorg.com/.  There is lots of information there.

I didn’t intend this blog to be only about nanotechnology, so future entries may be on other aspects of the possible future.  Keep thinking, people, and creating — we’ll need a lot more of that in the future.