Tag Archives: nanotechnology

A mechanical insect with metal legs and two large barrel-shaped eyes resembling gun barrels.

Will the United States Use Nanoweapons to Resolve the North Korean Crisis?

Unless you’re working in the field, you probably never heard about U.S. nanoweapons. This is intentional. The United States, as well as Russia and China, are spending billions of dollars per year developing nanoweapons, but all development is secret. Even after Pravda.ru’s June 6, 2016 headline, “US nano weapon killed Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, scientists say,” the U.S. offered no response. Earlier this year, May 5, 2017, North Korea claimed the CIA plotted to kill Kim Jong Un using a radioactive nano poison, similar to the nanoweapon Venezuelan scientists claim the U.S. used to assassinate former Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. All major media covered North Korea’s claim. These accusations are substantial, but are they true? Let’s address this question.

 

Unfortunately, until earlier this year, nanoweapons gleaned little media attention. However, in March 2017 that changed with the publication of my book, Nanoweapons: A Growing Threat to Humanity (2017 Potomac Books), which inspired two articles. On March 9, 2017, American Security Today published “Nanoweapons: A Growing Threat to Humanity – Louis A. Del Monte,” and on March 17, 2017, CNBC published “Mini-nukes and mosquito-like robot weapons being primed for future warfare.” Suddenly, the genie was out of the bottle. The CNBC article became the most popular on their website for two days following its publication and garnered 6.5K shares. Still compared to other classes of military weapons, nanoweapons remain obscure. Factually, most people never even heard the term. If you find this surprising, recall most people never heard of stealth aircraft until their highly publicized use during the first Iraq war in 1990. Today, almost everyone that reads the news knows about stealth aircraft. This may become the case with nanoweapons, but for now, it remains obscure to the public.

 

Given their relative obscurity, we’ll start by defining nanoweapons. A nanoweapon is any military weapon that exploits the power of nanotechnology. This, of course, begs another question: What is nanotechnology? According to the United States National Nanotechnology Initiative’s website, nano.gov, “Nanotechnology is science, engineering, and technology conducted at the nanoscale, which is about 1 to 100 nanometers.” To put this in simple terms, the diameter of a typical human hair equals 100,000 nanometers. This means nanotechnology is invisible to the naked eye or even under an optical microscope.
If the U.S. chooses to use nanoweapons covertly, they most likely will use:

 

  • Toxic nanoparticles – These are toxic particles a nanoscale diameter, which means their surface area to volume ratio is enormous. What makes them extremely effective as a poison is that they are able to cross biological membranes that their bulk counterparts are unable to cross. Therefore, they can be readily absorbed. They are more toxic than their due to the large surface area to volume ratio, which allows them to be extremely chemically reactive.

 

If the U.S. chooses to use nanoweapons in open conflict with North Korea, it will likely be:

 

  • Nanoelectronic Weapon Systems – Nanoelectronics are integrated circuits with features in the nanoscale. Intel is shipping nanoelectronic microprocessors for use in commercial computer applications. Because of their nanoscale features, they are smaller, faster, and use less power to operate. This makes them ideal for military weapon systems, like guided missiles.

 

The U.S. has a formidable nanoweapons arsenal. Even as they use them covertly and in open conflict, it may not be apparent that the technology that underpins the weapons is nanotechnology, thus making them by definition nanoweapons.

 

When will that change? It will change when something big happens. Imagine billions of toxic nanoparticles released on an adversary’s army, causing death and chaos. This would significantly reduce the adversary’s military effectiveness. In all likelihood, it may take weeks or months for the adversary to determine the cause. Imagine millions of nanobots attacking an adversary’s army, again causing death and chaos. In effect, killer insect-like nanobots would be a technological plague.

 

Ironically, the next big thing in military weapons is small. Barely mentioned in the media, nanoweapons are as effective and lethal as their larger more visible counterparts. In time, a nation’s military might will be a measure of its nanoweapons capabilities, as well as it nuclear and more conventional capabilities. In fact, by the second half of this century, nanoweapon capabilities are likely to determine the superpowers.
A futuristic, sleek turbine engine with a conical front and illuminated blue accents in a dark setting.

Stephen Hawking Proposes Nanotechnology Spacecraft to Reach ‘Second Earth’ in 20 years

Renowned physicist Stephen Hawking is proposing a nanotechnology spacecraft that can travel at a fifth of the speed of light. At that speed, it could reach the nearest star in 20 years and send back images of a suspected “Second Earth” within 5 years. That means if we launched it today, we would have our first look at an Earth-like planet within 25 years.

Hawking proposed a nano-spacecraft, termed “Star Chip,” at the Starmus Festival IV: Life And The Universe, Trondheim, Norway, June 18 – 23, 2017. Hawking told attendees that every time intelligent life evolves it annihilates itself with “war, disease and weapons of mass destruction.” He asserted this as the primary reason why advanced civilizations from another part of the Universe are not contacting Earth and the primary reason we need to leave the Earth. His advocates we colonize a “Second Earth.”

Scientific evidence appears to support Hawking’s claim. The SETI Institute has been listening for evidence of extraterrestrial radio signals, a sign of advanced extraterrestrial life, since 1984. To date, their efforts have been futile. SETI claims, rightly, that the universe is vast, and they are listening to only small sectors, which is much like finding a needle in a haystack. Additional evidence that Hawking may be right about the destructive nature of intelligent life comes from experts surveyed at the 2008 Global Catastrophic Risk Conference at the University of Oxford, whose poll suggested a 19% chance of human extinction by the end of this century, citing the top four most probable causes:

  1. Molecular nanotechnology weapons – 5% probability
  2. Super-intelligent AI – 5% probability
  3. Wars – 4% probability
  4. Engineered pandemic – 2% probability

Hawking envisions the nano-spacecraft to be a tiny probe propelled on its journey by a laser beam from Earth, much the same way wind propels sailing vessels. Once it reaches its destination, Hawking asserts, “Once there, the nano craft could image any planets discovered in the system, test for magnetic fields and organic molecules, and send the data back to Earth in another laser beam.”

Would Hawking’s nano-spacecraft work? Based on the research I performed during my career and in preparation for writing my latest book, Nanoweapons: A Growing Threat to Humanity (Potomac Books, 2017), I judge his concept is feasible. However, it would require significant engineering, as well as funding, to move from Hawking’s concept to a working nano-spacecraft, likely billions of dollars and decades of work. However, in Nanoweapons, I described the latest development of bullets that contain nanoelectronic guidance systems that allow the bullets to guide themselves, possibly to shoot an adversary hiding around a corner. Prototypes already exist.

Hawking’s concept is compelling. Propelling a larger conventional spacecraft using a laser would not attain the near light speed necessary to reach a distant planet. Propelling it with rockets would also fall short. According to Einstein’s theory of relativity, a large conventional spacecraft would require close to infinite energy to approach the speed of light. Almost certainly, Hawking proposed a nano-spacecraft for just that reason. Its mass would be small, perhaps measured in milligrams, similar to the weight of a typical household fly.

Hawking’s concept represents a unique application of nanotechnology that could give humanity its first up-close look at an inhabitable planet. What might we see? Perhaps it already harbors advanced intelligent life that chose not to contact Earth, given our hostile nature toward each other. Perhaps it harbors primitive life similar to the beginning of life on Earth. We have no way of knowing without contact.

You may choose to laugh at Hawking’s proposal. However, Hawking is one of the top scientists on Earth and well aware of advances in any branch of science he speaks about. I judge his concerns are well founded and his nano-spacecraft concept deserves serious consideration.

A digital globe surrounded by floating smartphones and computer screens with binary code and circuit board background.

Are Advancements in Artificial Intelligence Sowing the Seeds of Humanity’s Annihilation?

In the past two decades, we have watched the United States military engage in three wars, two in Iraq and one in Afghanistan, and posture itself as the most technically advanced fighting force on Earth. For example, during this period, we witnessed the deployment of many new weapons, most notably:

  • Stealth Aircraft – from the F-117 Nighthawk (1981–2008), dubbed the “bat plane,” to the latest addition, the F-35 Lightning II
  • Smart bombs – bombs guided precisely to targets via a laser or geographic coordinates
  • The GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast Bomb – a conventional bomb with a 8-ton warhead capable of delivering a 11-ton TNT equivalent destructive blast, which some analysts attribute to its nano-catalysts, as discussed in my recently publish book, Nanoweapons: A Growing Threat to Humanity
  • Computer Technology/Artificial Intelligence – the inclusion of computers, as well as artificial intelligence (AI), in almost every aspect of warfare and by every branch of the US military
  • Cyber Warfare – the United States, like other nations employing professional hackers as “cyber soldiers,” sees cyberspace as a battlefield and established a new cyber strategy in April 2015

The United States, and other nations, uses supercomputers to design advanced weapons, including fledgling autonomous and semi-autonomous weapons. The process is termed “computer aided design” or CAD. In addition, the advanced weapon typically employ a computer to make it artificially intelligent. We term such a weapon as a “smart weapon.” The term “smart” in this context means “artificially intelligent.”

The weapons the United States deploys currently would have been the subject of science fictions just a few decades back. However, the relentless advance of computer technology, as well as artificial intelligence, brought them to fruition. This begs a question, What drives this relentless advance?

Moore’s law describes the driving force behind computer technology and artificial intelligence. In 1975, Gordon E. Moore, the co-founder of Intel and Fairchild Semiconductor, observed that the number of transistors in a dense integrated circuit doubles approximately every two years. The semiconductor industry adopted Moore’s law to plan their product offerings. Thus, it became a self-fulfilling prophecy, even to this day. In view of Moore’s law, Intel executive David House predicted that integrated circuit performance would double every 18 months, resulting from the combined effects of increasing the transistor density and decreasing the transistor size. This implies computer power will double every eighteen months, since integrated circuits are the lifeblood of computers. Since computers are a pillar of artificial intelligence (AI), capabilities in AI are also increasing exponentially.

On the surface, this may appear beneficial, advances in weapons increasing our security and computer advances enabling us to address complex problems. However, advances in computer technology are reaching critical milestones. Most researchers in AI expect computers will equate to human intelligence by approximately 2025. Those same researchers predict that computers will exceed the combined intelligence of all humans by 2050, which researchers term the “singularity.”

What will singularity-level computers think about humanity? Wars, nuclear weapons capable of destroying the Earth, and the malicious release of computer viruses, mar our history. Will singularity-level computers, alarmed by this information, seek to rid the Earth of humans? That is one possibility I discuss in my book, The Artificial Intelligence Revolution. By increasing our reliance on computers, in society and warfare, we are increasing their capability to eliminate us.

This frames the issue, namely that singularity-level computers may become adversarial and seek to annihilate humanity. However, being aware of this possibility allows us to guard against it. The most obvious path would be to build-in safeguards, such as “hardwired” circuitry, in addition to directives in software.

Given the deity-like intelligence of singularity computers, the task of controlling them will be difficult. However, if we fail to do so, we put the survival of humanity at risk.

A detailed pencil sketch of a dynamic humanoid robotic figure in an action pose.

The Second Technological Singularity: Self-replicating Nanobots

It is widely accepted that when artificial intelligence exceeds the sum total intelligence of the human race, we will have reached a technological singularity. It qualifies as a technological singularity because it represents the first time a machine is more intelligence that all humanity. In my book, The Artificial Intelligence Revolution, I project this will occur during the 2040s. My projection aligns with the prediction of most researchers in the field.

We will reach a second technological singularity with the development of self-replicating nanobots. This begs a question, What are self-replicating nanobots? Self-replicating nanobots are robots built using nanotechnology that are able to perform programmed functions and reproduce. This raises another question, What is nanotechnology? According to the United States National Nanotechnology Initiative’s website, nano.gov, “Nanotechnology is science, engineering, and technology conducted at the nanoscale, which is about 1 to 100 nanometers.” For comparison, a human hair diameter is 100,000 nm.

The development of self-replicating nanobots qualifies as a technological singularity because it represents the development of the first artificial life forms, having rudimentary intelligence to carry out programmed functions, along with the ability to reproduce. You can think of them as the technological equivalent of bacteria and viruses. Researchers working in the fields of nanotechnology have varied opinions when this will occur. I think the divergence in projecting this singularity comes from looking at it as an isolated occurrence. Many researchers in nanotechnology lack equivalent expertise in artificial intelligence. Having worked in both fields, and authored books in both fields (The Artificial Intelligence Revolution and Nanoweapons: A Growing Threat To Humanity), I assert from experience the second singularity (i.e., the development of self-replicating nanobots) is dependent on the first singularity (i.e., an intelligent machine that exceeds the cognitive intelligence of humanity). Let us discuss why this is the case.

In technologically advanced countries, computers play a role in the design of almost all products, from fighter jets to golf balls. The fabric of society in technologically advanced countries is dependent on computers. When an aeronautical engineer designs an aircraft or a civil engineer designs a bridge, computers are intimately involved. It is fair to assert that without computers, our society would not be viable.

Nanotechnology is also becoming an integral part of technologically advanced societies, from nanotechnology-based cosmetics to nano drugs that hold the promise to cure cancer. Nanotechnology is becoming critical to building the structures of society, making steel and concrete stronger, lighter, and even self-cleaning. The worldwide market for commercial nanotechnology products is a trillion dollars. Even though most people may not be aware of it, they are likely using nanotechnology-based products daily.

Intelligent machines and nanotechnology have a strong symbiotic relationship. Integrated circuits, with nanotechnology features, power modern computers. Modern computers play a critical role in developing integrated circuits. Computer processing power is doubling approximately every eighteen months. This trend, first observed by Intel co-founder Gordon More, is termed Moore’s Law. It has held for over five decades. By contrast, nanotechnology is relatively new, emerging as a science in the late 1980s. Its importance, however, quickly became evident. In 2000, President Clinton established the National Nanotechnology Initiative, a research and development initiative involving the nanotechnology-related activities of 25 Federal agencies. Since its inception, the United States government has allocated over $20,000,000,000 to developing nanotechnology.

This brings us to a critical question, When will self-replicating nanobots be developed? Given the strong symbiotic relationship between computer power and nanotechnology, we may see both technologies progressing faster than their historical trends. My rationale is that an advance in one technology fosters advances in the other. I judge this synergy may accelerate the advancement of both technologies. Further, when intelligent machines exceed the cognitive intelligence of humanity (i.e., the first technological singularity), humanity will have the computing power required to develop self-replicating nanobots (i.e., the second technological singularity). If my judgement is correct, humanity will develop self-replicating nanobots during the 2050s.

With the advent of self-replicating nanobots, we will have the potential to use them medically to treat diseases like cancer at the cellular level. In fact, we are already doing that with medical nanobots today. On May 15, 2015, Pfizer announced it is “partnering” with Dr. Ido Bachelet, manager of Bar-Ilan University’s robot laboratory, on DNA nanobots. Next Big Future reports, “Bachelet has developed a method of producing innovative DNA molecules with characteristics that can be used to ‘program’ them to reach specific locations in the body and carry out pre-programmed operations there in response to stimulation from the body.” In this case, the pre-programming involves detecting cancer cells and delivering an existing cancer drug treatment directly to a cancerous cell, bypassing healthy cells. This is currently going into human trials as I write. Although these are not self-replicating nanobots, it provide a solid conceptual framework to understand how self-replicating nanobot my revolutionize medicine. Unfortunately, there is also a dark side.

Self-replicating nanobots can become a weapon. For example, one adversary could program self-replicating nanobots to target another adversary’s populace. It would be the technological equivalent of biological warfare. In the 2008 film, The Day the Earth Stood Still, the alien robot “GORT” disintegrates into a swarm of self-replicating nanobots shaped like bugs that cover Earth and destroy all humans and artificial structures by seemingly devouring them within seconds. Although this is science fiction, it points out a significant issue with self-replicating nanobots, namely the potential to lose control over them. If that were to happen, it could write the last line in human history.

A scientist closely examining a sample through a microscope in a laboratory setting.

North Korea Accuses US/South Korea of ‘Nano Poison’ Plot to Kill Kim Jong Un

In a 1,800-word report Friday (May 5, 2017), which offered no evidence, the North Korean state news agency KCNA said a “terrorist group” conspired with the CIA and South Korea’s Intelligence Service (IS) to assassinate its leader Kim Jong Un using a “biochemical substances including radioactive substance and nano poisonous substance.”

This is the second time the United States has been accused of using a nanoweapon to kill a head of state. Pravda, Russia’s state run newspaper ran this headline on June 6, 2016: “US nano weapon killed Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, scientists say.”

Obviously, nanoweapons (also spelled nano weapons) are beginning to become part of the international vocabulary. Unfortunately, most in the US have never heard of nanotechnology, let alone nanoweapons. Therefore, let us define terms.

According to the United States National Nanotechnology Initiative’s website, nano.gov, “Nanotechnology is science, engineering, and technology conducted at the nanoscale, which is about 1 to 100 nanometers.” To put this in simple terms, the diameter of a typical human hair equals 100,000 nanometers. Therefore, the largest nanotechnology has a dimension that is over a thousand times smaller than the diameter of a human hair. This means nanotechnology is invisible to the naked eye or even under an optical microscope.

Nanoweapons are any military technology that exploits the power of nanotechnology. To be clear, the weapon itself may be large, but as long as it has one or more components in the nanoscale, it is a nanoweapon.

You may wonder, Why would someone use nano poisons? The size of nanoparticles, the components of a nano poison, allows living tissue to absorb them more readily than other known toxins. Nanoparticles are able to cross biological membranes and access cells, tissues and organs that their larger counterparts cannot. Therefore, nano poisons are more deadly than their bulk counterparts are.

Currently, the United States, China, and Russia are in a frantic nanoweapons arms race. Each country is spending billions of dollars, as they vie for an asymmetrical advantage in nanoweapons. However, each country is keeping its thrusts in nanoweapons secret. For example, in 2000, the United States government launched the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI), a research and development initiative involving the nanotechnology-related activities of 25 Federal agencies with a range of research and regulatory roles and responsibilities. To date, the US has invested over $20 billion in NNI programs. If you review the NNI website, nano.gov, you will not find the word nanoweapons. However, NNI’s dedicates 15-20% of its budget to DOD programs. In addition, each branch of the US military has its own nanotechnology R&D facility.

While the front-runners in the nanoweapons arms race are the US, China, and Russia, many other nations, even impoverished countries like North Korea, are also taking part. Nanowek.com, the leading nanotechnology portal about nanotechnologies, reports, “All major powers are making efforts to research and develop nanotechnology-based materials and systems for military use.”

You may ask, What fuels the nanoweapons arms race? A new paradigm fuels this race, namely the superpowers of the future will be those nations with the most capable nanoweapons. Five facts support this assertion.

  1. Unlike nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons, no international treaties limit the development and deployment of nanoweapons or their use in warfare
  2. Nanoweapons, for example toxic nanoparticles, have the potential to be weapons of mass destruction
  3. Developing nanoweapons is less costly than developing nuclear weapons
  4. Detecting nanoweapons manufacturing facilities is difficult
  5. Detecting the source of a nanoweapons attack is difficult

This suggests the nanoweapons arms race is more problematic than the nuclear arms race. In fact, in my book, Nanoweapons: A Growing Threat To Humanity, I pose a critical question: Will it be possible to develop, deploy and use nanoweapons in warfare, without rendering humanity extinct?

In 2008, experts surveyed at the Global Catastrophic Risk Conference at the University of Oxford cited molecular nanotechnology weapons as having a 5% probability of rendering humanity extinct by the end of this century. By comparison, they rated nuclear war as having a 4% probability. It is natural to wonder, What is it about nanoweapons that makes them even more problematic than nuclear weapons? The simple answer is “control.” Controlling nanoweapons is as problematic as controlling biological weapons.

Let’s illustrate the control issue with a simple example. In the third quarter of the 21st century, self-replicating nanobots, nearly invisible robots able to replicate themselves, will dominate the nanoweapons arsenals of the most capable countries. These self-replicating nanobots will be programmable, among other functions, to attack the populace of another country, via the DNA similarities of the populace. However, what if there is a programming glitch. The self-replicating nanobots could become the equivalent of a biological plague and begin killing all humans indiscriminately.

Nanotechnology is an enabling technology. It enables a trillion dollar worldwide market in commercial products. It also enables nanoweapons, which are being deployed now in the form of integrated circuits that guide missiles, lasers capable of “shooting” down a cruise missile, nano-enhanced explosives with ten time the punch of conventional explosives, to name a few.

Given the potential of nanoweapons to become the ultimate weapons of mass destruction, we need the United Nations and its member countries to enact measures to assure that nanoweapons do not become our final invention.