It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Nanotech Doomsday

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 06:47 PM
link   
Im sure many of us have heard of the future benifits of Nanotechnology. Future use of nanotech is predicted to change medical science in undreamed of ways for the better of mankind.The list of good things nanotech can do goes on and on pretty much without limits.

But there might be a darkside of nanotech that might kill off all life on earth.

The Grey Goo scenario

First suggested by nanotech researchers some 20 years ago, back when nanoscience was mostly theory. Now that same theory is reaching a tipping point from theoretical possibility to economic reality.

This scenario is about out-of-control nanotech replicators that wipe out all life on Earth. The risk that self-replicating nanorobots capable of functioning autonomously in the natural environment could quickly convert that natural environment (e.g., "biomass") into replicas of themselves(e.g., "nanomass") on a global basis

Though masses of uncontrolled replicators need not be gray or gooey, the term "gray goo" emphasizes that replicators able to obliterate life might be less inspiring than a single species of crabgrass. They might be superior in an evolutionary sense, but this need not make them valuable.

So do you think a scenario like this is possible? It seems we are on the verge of a Nano revolution that will be as important if not more as the Industrial revolution was to mankind. Thirty countries now have state-sponsored nanotech programs, all tilting for a slice of a market estimated to be worth $1 trillion by 2015.

Gray goo would surely be a depressing ending to human life on Earth.


www.kurzweilai.net.../articles/art0142.html?[/ur l]

[url=http://www.time.com/time/europe/magazine/article/0,13005,901030512-449458,00.html]http://www.time.com/time/europe/magazine/article/0,13005,901030 512-449458,00.html




posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 07:05 PM
link   
I am curious about this but any time I take the plunge and try to read up on it I usually get frustrated by the way the article is written.

I clicked on the link, and frankly it was a bitch to plod through. It's not that I lack the intellectual accuity to grasp what is being said, rather it seems it was written in a purposely obtuse manner with an overabundance of links designed to cast an aura of credibility over an agenda.

While I'm not saying the article is BS, it is kind of showy. And BS baffles brains.



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 07:16 PM
link   
Check out Engines of Creation deevee, its very well writen even though its an old book(writen in the 80s) it is still good.

www.foresight.org...

This chapter is entitled Engines of Destruction, title says it all....

also check out this link as Drexler is now an skeptic not proponent of the idea of "Grey Goo". An all the other types of Goos there are, but "Grey Goo" is the most popular as they deal with wholesale death and destruction .

www.iop.org...

www.betterhumans.com...

[edit on 24-1-2005 by sardion2000]



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 07:21 PM
link   
I came across a BBC article on it and it seems Sardion2000 is right the man many consider the father of nanotechnology has back away from his grey goo theory. I did not not know that very interesting.

news.bbc.co.uk...

He makes a good point IMHO "he was concerned the excitement at the potential benefits of nanotechnology would overshadow the inherent risks and dangers."

He stopped short of saying the scenario was impossible, adding that it "is well within the realm of physical law".



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 07:26 PM
link   
Thanks for the reading lists. The only thing I've really read on the subject is "Prey" (I was in an airport ok?)



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 07:31 PM
link   
Shadow did you check out this thread I posted yesturday about Nanoenergetics? Pretty cool IMO, but also kinda scary....

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 24-1-2005 by sardion2000]



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 07:37 PM
link   
Sounds a bit like the replicator scenario in Stargate SG1, they are also nanotech started evolved and out of control criters that have only one goal and thats to replicate.

Lets hope it never comes to this, but since we all too came from single cell organisms that only had 1 purpouse and that was to reproduce and stay alive and then turned into highly sophisticated biomechanical thinking machines over the millenia, that are we.

So same could go for robots, at any scale. If you alow them to evolve by themselves, it can spell serious trouble.



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 07:38 PM
link   
Very interesting sardion I wonder what good this might do for future space travel. Your right making weapons with this would be very scary though.

I watched a show on Nanotech last night "Microbots" and it peeked my interest in it again. They had a Nanotech arm that could pick things up and a Motor that used a bio cells poweplant amazing stuff. They even made a working nano guitar with strings only 15 atoms thick.



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 07:46 PM
link   
They have also made Nano-Conveyor belts, they have also found out how to pick up molecules with lasers and do all sorts of stuff to them. Check out that betterhumans.com link it has pretty much every Nanotech breakthrough that has happened over the last 2-3 years so thats alot of material heh.

BTW I am in the market to get a used AFM(Atomic Force Microscope) Does anyone know where I could go to check out some prices. I know brand new one of these things go for multi millions of $$$ but a used one from say a couple of years ago which would make it old and obsolete now(Microscopes now have a resolutions of 0.1 angstroms.) wouldn't be that expensive, or so one would think.



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 07:54 PM
link   
In the last few decades the net has exploded and what exploded with it? The virus that effects machines.

Nanotech may go places we never dreamed, but you can bet your behind someone will create the nanovirus....

Thats what could get scary.

Love and light,

Wupy



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 07:59 PM
link   
I found a Atomic force Microscope control unit (Topo Metrix ECU Plus Unit ) on Ebay for $1,499.95 org cost over $24,000. Never came across a actual AFM though perhaps there are some older ones surplus. Im sure they dont hold their price that long after better tech comes out.

cgi.ebay.com... y=4660



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 08:05 PM
link   
Micheal Crichton's "Prey" hypothisized such a scenario back in 2002.
Another proposal someone knowledgable in the field told me about was a weaponized nano sized machine manufactured by the trillion, released into the atmosphere, inhaled, and triggered to expand by coded microwave emissions directed at a specific target area, causing strokes and embolisms. The manufacturer of such a particle could enslave or extort whole countries or small nieghborhoods, at will.



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 08:16 PM
link   


BTW I am in the market to get a used AFM(Atomic Force Microscope) Does anyone know where I could go to check out some prices. I know brand new one of these things go for multi millions of $$$ but a used one from say a couple of years ago which would make it old and obsolete now(Microscopes now have a resolutions of 0.1 angstroms.) wouldn't be that expensive, or so one would think.

I wouldn't count on ANY AFM coming cheaply. I am not sure why you think a used AFM is obselete after only a couple of years. This is not the case. Resolution in the AFM is gained via effective tip pulling. The ideal tip is 'atomically sharp,' having only one atom/molecule at the very tip. Yuri, the guy who runs the AFM lab at my institution claims he can get tips that sharp, but I think its BS. I wouldn't tell him this though. Tip pulling technology advances will only enhance existing AFMs, not render them obselete. The other thing about an AFM, is having an appropriate facility. You can't just set these suckers up in your apartment, or even your basement. You can imagine with the resolution these things have, you can't have ANY vibrations around. There's tons of science equipment I'd love to have around the house. My wife would kick my A#@, but it might be worth it. I don't know what kind of money you make, but I do okay, and I can't even afford a used ultracentrifuge, not to mention, rotors, brushes, service etc. I do have a couple of optical 'scopes, some basic staining apparatus, burners, autoclave, and a small 'sterile' space. But an AFM is pretty much out of the question. But hey, if you've got to have it, more power to you! I personally, and for my lab and for the company have purchased science equipment on eBay. In fact, we just traded a guy a whole bunch of partitions for cubicle construction for a brand new, in-the-box, oligonucleotide synthesizer.... Christmas in January!!! So, it just goes to show you it's out there. You also may want to head down to your local University LIbrary and peruse the classifieds of your favorite Life Science/Biotech oriented journals. I am sure AFM has lots of other applications, and the journals associated with those would be good places to look too. Good Luck,

Oh and BTW, IMO, without having read any of the links posted in this thread, it seems to me that nanobots would only be capable of world domination if they were organic, and designed to break down organics to perpetuate themselves. In my understanding of nanotech, there are currently no systems even close to doing something like this. Biotech, to my knowledge, has nothing like this.



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
I found a Atomic force Microscope control unit (Topo Metrix ECU Plus Unit ) on Ebay for $1,499.95 org cost over $24,000. Never came across a actual AFM though perhaps there are some older ones surplus. Im sure they dont hold their price that long after better tech comes out.

cgi.ebay.com... y=4660


That just looks like some AFM accessory. AFMs look at least similiar to regular microscopes in that they have an eyepiece to observe, but there the similiarities end. I can't really explain right now so I'll try and find a pic.

I might check out some Bankrupsy Auctions as I heard of a guy who got an Elelctron Force Microscope with graphite tips with a resolution down to 10 angstroms, which is around 100x bigger then what Nanotechnologists are using today but it is still capable of observing and manipulating matter at the nanoscale. He got it for like 80 grand US which is still a bit out of my pricerange for what basically amounts to a big toy to fool and tinker around with.


mattison, I thought most people were using EFM's nowadays
And I know its a serous piece of equipment thats why I wanna fool aroudn with it
Just fer fun. I make a pretty good living and if its within say 20,000 bucks USD I could easily scrape that together(better that then a car). I'm not a scientist, heck I'm not even an engineer I just like to tinker around and I will take your comments to heart as it is quite clear you know what you are talking about. I know how big they are seen em in use they look complicated but I'm sure I can figure some of it out. I am sure I've seen them on some websites going for like 30k - 150k.



Oh and BTW, IMO, without having read any of the links posted in this thread, it seems to me that nanobots would only be capable of world domination if they were organic, and designed to break down organics to perpetuate themselves. In my understanding of nanotech, there are currently no systems even close to doing something like this. Biotech, to my knowledge, has nothing like this.


We were talking Potential not current. Just theorizing and hypothesising
It's why I come here.

[edit on 24-1-2005 by sardion2000]

[edit on 24-1-2005 by sardion2000]



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 08:53 PM
link   


mattison, I thought most people were using EFM's nowadays
And I know its a serous piece of equipment thats why I wanna fool aroudn with it

I hear you. Not sure about the EFM vs AFM thing. I do know that AFM is still totally valid and has its place, at least in life science/biotech. Yuri, still believes it's the greatest thing in the world, and I do have to admit that he gets some sweet pics of DNA structure.

I know that our newest instrument is pretty sweet...



It actually has a magnetic field mode that is apparently capable of visualizing 'weakly bound' chemical species. I am not sure how similar this 'mode' is to actual MFM, which I know very little about. Do you know about it?


Just fer fun. I make a pretty good living and if its within say 20,000 bucks USD I could easily scrape that together(better that then a car).

Good for you. I wish I could get my wife to let me spend that kind of dough on something like that. She get's pissed when I do gram stains in the kitchen sink



I'm not a scientist, heck I'm not even an engineer I just like to tinker around and I will take your comments to heart as it is quite clear you know what you are talking about.

You certainly don't need to be a scientist to mess with one. Good for you for being so willing to indulge your hobbies in an extravagant manner
Also, I appreciate your comment, as we've not always seen eye-to-eye.


I know how big they are seen em in use they look complicated but I'm sure I can figure some of it out. I am sure I've seen them on some websites going for like 30k - 150k.

You can definitely figure it out. The only thing I think you would run into difficulties with, aside from pratical issues like space, etc, is the maintenance. I can dink around with my electronics, I've even managed to fix things I've got no business fixing, like my VCR, printer etc. But man when it comes down to taking apart complex science equipment, I get a little nauseous. I can handle changing the brushes on a centrifuge, or replacing a board here or there, but the last time I had the mass spec guy on the phone helping me with the N2 generator, I just about had a heart attack.

But apparently, I stand corrected. I had NO idea you could pick up a used AFM for that amount of money. I've got to search to auctions more often.


We were talking Potential not current. Just theorizing and hypothesising
It's why I come here.


Certainly no offense intended.



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 09:55 PM
link   
Saying nanotech is safe because Drexler has abandoned his grey goo theory, is like saying Frankenstein is safe because Dr. Frankenstein says so. Drexler wants to be a billionaire, and nanotech is his ticket. If we all whine about safety, he dies poor like the rest of us (oops, if we give him carte blanche, same outcome).



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 11:17 PM
link   
A few years back THE OUTER LIMITS did an awesome episode regarding this...My opinion...Nano Technology can be great..but we cant let them be self replicating...its as simple as that...



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join