Tag Archives: nanoweapons

human extinction

Will Humanity Survive the 21st Century?

In my last post, I stated, “In making the above predictions [about the singularity], I made one critical assumption. I assumed that humankind would continue the “status quo.” I am ruling out world-altering events, such as large asteroids striking Earth, leading to human extinction, or a nuclear exchange that renders civilization impossible. Is assuming the “status quo” reasonable? We’ll discuss that in the next post.

Let’s now discuss if humanity will survive the 21st century.

The typical events that most people consider as causing humanity’s extinction, such as a large asteroid impact or a volcanic eruption of sufficient magnitude to cause catastrophic climate change, actually have a relatively low probability of occurring, in the order of 1 in 50,000 or less, according to numerous estimates found via a simple Google search. In 2008, experts surveyed at the Global Catastrophic Risk Conference at the University of Oxford suggested a 19% chance of human extinction over the next century, citing the top five most probable to cause human extinction by 2100 as:

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

All other existential events were below 1%. Again, doing a simple Google search may provide different results by different “experts.” If we take the above survey at face value, it would suggest that the risk of an existential event increases with time. This has led me to the conclusion that human survival over the next 30 years is highly probable.

It is interesting to note in the 2008 Global Catastrophic Risk Conference survey, super-intelligent AI equates with molecular nanotechnology weapons for number one. In my view, molecular nanotechnology weapons and super-intelligent AI are two sides of the same coin. In fact, I judge that super-intelligent AI will be instrumental in developing molecular nanotechnology weapons. I also predict that humanity, in some form, will survive until the year 2100. However, I predict that will include both humans with strong artificially intelligent brain implants and organic humans (i.e., no brain implants to enhance their intelligence). However, each may have some artificially intelligent body parts.

Let me summarize. Based on the above information, it is reasonable to judge humanity will survive through the 21st century.

human extinction

Will Humanity Survive The 21st Century?

Examples of typical events that most people think could cause humanity’s extinction are a large asteroid impact or a volcanic eruption of sufficient magnitude to cause catastrophic climate change. Although possible, these events actually have a relatively low probability of occurring, in the order of one in fifty thousand or less, according to numerous estimates found via a simple Google search.

However, there are other events with higher probabilities that may cause human extinction. In 2008, experts surveyed at the Global Catastrophic Risk Conference at the University of Oxford suggested a 19 percent chance of human extinction over this century, citing the top five most probable to cause human extinction by 2100 as:

  1. Molecular nanotechnology weapons (i.e., nanoweapons): 5 percent probability
  2. Superintelligent AI: 5 percent probability
  3. Wars: 4 percent probability
  4. Engineered pandemic: 2 percent probability
  5. Nuclear war: 1 percent probability

All other existential events were below 1 percent. There is a subtle point the survey does not explicitly express, namely, the risk of human extinction increases with time. You may wonder, Why? To answer this question, consider these examples:

  • Nanoweapons and superintelligence become more capable with the development of each successive generation. In the 2008 Global Catastrophic Risk Conference survey, superintelligent AI equates with molecular nanotechnology weapons as the number one potential cause of human extinction. In my view, molecular nanotechnology weapons and superintelligent AI are two sides of the same coin. In fact, I judge that superintelligent AI will be instrumental in developing molecular nanotechnology weapons.
  • In my new book, War At The Speed Of Light, I devoted a chapter on autonomous directed energy weapons. These are weapons that act on their own to take hostile action, resulting in unintended conflicts. Unfortunately, current autonomous weapons don’t embody human judgment. This being the case, wars, including nuclear wars, become more probable as more autonomous weapons are deployed.
  • Lastly, the world is currently facing a coronavirus pandemic. Although most researchers believe this is a naturally occurring pandemic, it still infected 121,382,067 people and caused 2,683,209 deaths to date on a worldwide basis. This suggests the death rate is a little over 2 percent. However, if the virus was more infectious and more deadly, it could render the Earth a barren wasteland. Unfortunately, that is what an engineered pandemic might do.

To my eye, the top five potential causes surfaced by the Global Catastrophic Risk Conference at the University of Oxford in 2008 are all possible, and the probabilities associated with them appear realistic. This means that humanity has a 19 percent chance of not surviving the 21st century on our current course.

In the next post, I will suggest measures humanity can take to increase the probability they will survive into the 22nd century.

A close-up of a rope tied in a detailed knot next to a knife on a brown surface.

Will the United States Use Nanoweapons to Topple the Kim Regime?

Nanoweapons are the next and most deadly generation of military weapons the world has ever encountered. In fact, they promise to be even more deadly than nuclear weapons. A cloud of secrecy has kept most people from even knowing they exist. Given this fact, let’s define nanoweapons. Nanoweapons are any military technology that exploits the power of nanotechnology. This begs a 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.” In simple terms, the diameter of a typical human hair equals about 100,000 nanometers. Therefore, the largest nanotechnology 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.

North Korea’s leader, Kim Jung um, has already accused the United States of attempting to assassinate him using nanoweapons. In a 1,800 report issued on May 5, 2017, 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 report marks the second time the United States finds itself accused of using nanoweapons. Pravda, Russia’s state-run newspaper ran this headline on June 6, 2016: “US nano weapon killed Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, scientists say.” While both Russia and North Korea are widely known to issue fake news to support their political agendas, it is striking that they both mention the United States’ use of nanoweapons, specifically nano poisons.

 Is it true? It could be. The United States leads in the development of nanoweapons. Using nano poison to assassinate someone would be virtually untraceable. Unlike a conventional poison, it is nearly impossible to detect its use. What are nano poisons? A nano poison consists of toxic nanoparticles. Because of the size, less than a 100 nanometers in diameter, toxic nanoparticles are absorbed 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. Cancer-causing radioactive nanoparticles are particularly deadly and almost impossible to detect. Once a person ingests radioactive nanoparticles, they may die months or even years later, as was claimed regarding the death of Venezuela’s former president, Hugo Chavez.

Currently, the United States, China, and Russia are secretly spending billions of dollars to gain an asymmetrical advantage in nanoweapons. 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. NNI dedicates at least 20% of its budget to DOD programs. In addition, each branch of the US military has its own nanotechnology R&D facility. Nanoweapons are real. As I fully describe in my latest book, Nanoweapons: A Growing Threat to Humanity, the United States already secretly deploys them.

Nanoweapons are particularly attractive as military weapons since:

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

Ironically, the next big thing in military weapons will be small and almost invisible, nanoweapons. The United States is the world nanoweapons leader. Therefore, it’s logical that they would use this capability to defend the homeland. If we learn that Kim Jung un is dying from cancer, similar to Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, it may be the result of a nanoweapons attack. Science fiction? No! Science Fact.

Book cover titled 'Nanoweapons: Growing Threat to Humanity' by Louis A. Del Monte, featuring a small insect image.

AUSA Book Review of Nanoweapons: A Growing Threat To Humanity

The Association of the United States Army (AUSA) published this book review (for inclusion in the print version of their magazine). The full review is below and a link to the review is on the AUSA website at this URL: https://www.ausa.org/articles/august-2017-book-reviews

Here is the full review:

Nanoweapons: A Growing Threat to HumanityLouis A. Del Monte. Potomac Books. 244 pages. $29.95

By Scott R. Gourley
Contributing Writer

There are times when a book best serves as the starting point for new discussions or to broaden existing discussions on military technology. Ominous title aside, Nanoweapons: A Growing Threat to Humanity fulfills the role of starting the discussion.

Drawing on three decades of experience as a physicist and business executive leading the development of microelectronics and sensors key to the integrated circuit industry, author Louis A. Del Monte presents a broad look at the emergence of nanotechnology—the science of manipulating materials on an atomic or molecular scale—and the potential implications of “nanoweapons” in future warfare.

In defining the technology, Del Monte offers the criteria used by the U.S. National Nanotechnology Initiative, which calls for only one dimension of the macroscale product to be in the nanoscale of 1 to 100 nanometers.

“This interpretation opens the door for numerous scientific fields to engage in nanotechnology research and application, including the fields of surface science, organic chemistry, molecular biology, semiconductor physics and microfabrication,” he says, noting that the multidisciplinary research category brings with it “unprecedented optimism and serious concerns.”

The concerns in this book are focused on what he asserts to be the weaponization of the technology and specifically the risk of losing control of those weapons.

After combing through the available open-source literature, the author makes projections about the research, the leading countries involved and what some of those research directions might be. Because of the limited amount of information on nanoweapons research he could uncover, the author asserts it is ongoing classified work and then relies on a level of supposition and conjecture to spotlight hypothetical nanoweapon threats like self-replicating smart nanobots, able to build copies of themselves from raw materials and operating in ways similar to biological viruses.

The rough time frame of 2050 is presented as a possibility for when two “technological singularities” may occur—first, a point when artificially intelligent machines exist that exceed the combined cognitive intelligence of humanity, and then a point when the self-replicating smart nanobots will “have completely changed every aspect of human existence” and “have the potential to render humanity extinct.”

While some readers might dismiss the resulting vignettes as a cross between Terminator and Star Trek, the presentations are based on intriguing open-source threads that the author weaves into an interesting fabric based on his experience with the rapid evolution of integrated circuits. Common supporting caveats include: “My insight suggests,” “speculation on my part,” and “based on publicly available information.”

Those looking for hard data on weapons will not find it in this book. In fact, the author’s commercial background results in occasionally confusing statements that overlook current military realities, such as: “Nanoelectronics and nanosensors have the capability to make artillery projectiles ‘smart,’ meaning that they will have properties that resemble guided missiles.”

However, the author’s insight is founded on a broad technology background and does include many thoughtful suggestions on how categories of nanoweapons could be regulated as extensions of existing arms agreements.

The strength of the book is in establishing awareness and either starting or expanding discussions on some of the issues surrounding the potential of nanoweapons. If the author’s 2050 timeline is correct, this issue is not far in the future. That time frame is more than a decade prior to the planned U.S. retirement of its F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and likely a time when the Army will still employ upgraded models of many current combat systems.

Clearly, it’s not too soon to expand some of the discussion on the warfighting implications resulting from 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 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.

Close-up of a detailed human skull and crossed bones on a textured surface.

Are Nanoweapons Paving the Road to Human Extinction?

Nanotechnology researchers continue their relentless journey to develop nanobots and they are succeeding. Nanomedicine is using nanobots to cure to cancer. Military nanotechnologies, especially nanobots, will emerge as the defining weapons of the twenty first century.

The United States military already deploys nanoweapons, such as nanotechnology based lasers, toxic nanoparticles, nanoparticle catalysts, and nano electronics. These nanoweapons give the United States significant capabilities in asymmetrical warfare. However, the US military’s  greatest quest is the development of nanobots, tiny robots built with nanotechnology.

What is it about nanobots that make them the ideal weapons? Let us address this question by taking several examples. About a third of all US fighter planes today are drones. Today’s drones are approximately one-third the size of a manned fighter jet, like the F-35. However, a new class of drones is in development, bird and even insect size drones. For example, in 2014, the Army Research Laboratory announced the creation of a “fly drone” weighing only a small fraction of a gram. This drone could conceivable fly into an adversary’s command post and provide surveillance or into the adversary’s dining area to deposit a nano poison. An insect fly drone provides the military with both surveillance and assignation capabilities. This gives a completely new meaning to “fly on the wall.”

As electronic processors shrink into the nanoscale, becoming nanoprocessors, about 1/1000 the diameter of a human hair, conceivably they could provide the fly drone with artificial intelligence. In effect, it could autonomously carry out its programmed mission.

You may wonder, How does all of this threaten human extinction? To address this question, imagine a scenario where the US military releases millions of artificially intelligent fly drones within an adversary’s boarders, programmed to target the populace via commonalities in their DNA. If each fly drone had the capability to assassinate a few people, conceivably they could wipe out an entire nation.

Although this may sound like science fiction, the United States is within a decade of having the capability. The US Army is already testing a fly drone. As for poisons, as little as 100 nano grams of  botulism H will kill a human. That quantity of poison is too small to see or taste, yet lethal and small enough for a fly drone to carry. In my book, Nanoweapons: A Growing Threat To Humanity, I classify this type of weapon as a strategic nanoweapon. This classification parallels strategic nuclear weapons that have the capability to destroy nations.

While artificially intelligent insect drones are already a scary proposition, the next step in their development is even more frightening, namely self-replicating insect drones, or more generically self- replicating nanobots. Given the exponential advance in nano electronics and artificial intelligence, characterized by Moore’s law, it is likely we will see the emergence of self-replicating nanobots in the 2050s.

Self-replicating nanobots are the ultimate invention. In medicine, they will flow through our blood preventing diseases and curing injuries. In military applications, they will have the capability to completely destroy an adversary, from its populace to its structures. This scenario was depicted in the sci-fi movie, The Day the Earth Stood Still.

Strategic nanoweapons, like their nuclear counterparts, pose a threat to humanity. The major issue is control. Will we be able to deploy strategic nanoweapons and maintain control over them? If, for example, we lost control of self-replicating nanobots, we would face a technological plague, one that we currently have no way of stopping.

In a decade, we will see the emergence of nanobots. In medicine, they will cure cancer. In warfare, they may kill millions. In the 2050s, we will see the emergence of self-replicating nanobots. In medicine, they will offer immortality. In warfare, they will pose a threat to humanity.

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 blue fighter jet on a carrier deck under a dramatic cloudy sky with the sun partially visible.

North Korea Blames US for Hostile Tensions – Pyongyang Vows Response

The Korean Central News Agency released a commentary Friday titled, “Who Is Chiefly to Blame for Plagued Situation on Korean Peninsula,” in which blames the US with bringing the region to the brink of nuclear war. It also vows to continue its preparations for a nuclear war.

A nuclear war between the US and North Korea would be a worldwide nightmare, which could open the door to a larger theater conflict with China and Russia. Even if the US refrains from using nuclear weapons, analysts project that a war between North Korea and the United States, along with its allies, could take months to conclude. In those months, North Korea is likely to respond in a number of ways. To understand their potential responses, we need to examine their military capabilities.

Nuclear Weapons and Missiles  

North Korea has between 13-21 nuclear weapons, similar to the atom bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the end of World War II. In other words, their nuclear weapons are physically large, unlikely to fit on a missile, and measured in kilotons of TNT, not megatons like those of the United States and Russia. Nonetheless, US nuclear weapons during World War II killed 250,000 Japanese. Therefore, if they find any way to deliver their nuclear weapons, millions could die.

One way that North Korea may attempt to deliver its nuclear weapons is by ballistic missiles. North Korea’s missile arsenal includes artillery rockets, derived from World War II designs, to medium-range missiles, of questionable reliability, able to strike targets in the Pacific Ocean. While this appears relatively crude by US military standards, it still presents a threat to the Asian region, even if the missiles only use conventional explosives. Some analysts suggest that North Korea may be intentionally making small atomic bombs, similar to the tactical nuclear weapons of the United States and Russia, to enable deployment in their medium range missiles. Tactical nuclear weapons have a multi-kiloton punch that could devastate cities like Seoul and Tokyo, killing millions.

In 2012, North Korea began parading its intercontinental ballistic missiles, the KN-08 and KN-14, carried and launched by specifically built truck. The missiles are in the early development stage and analysts question if North Korea has the capability to target them accurately. However, there is little doubt that North Korea is focusing on building reliable long-range missiles with the capability to reach the mainland United States.

A second way North Korea could deliver its nuclear weapons is by smuggling them out of North Korea in containers on cargo ships. Using this method, North Korea could inflict serious damage and casualties to ports anywhere in the world. Crime syndicates currently use shipping containers to smuggle narcotics, weapons, stolen property, and humans to countries around the world. With over 17 million shipping containers in circulation, it would be hard to detect those that contain a nuclear weapon, especially if the detonation occurs while the container is still aboard the ship.

Military and Conventional Weapons

North Korea has the world’s largest army, the Korean People’s Army (KPA) with 1,106,000 active and 8,389,000 reserve troops, including the world’s largest Special Forces unit. In short, almost every able-bodied male has extensive military training.

However, beyond the military training, a former defector claims that every North Korean soldier spends 60% of their time exposed to a form of “brainwashing.” Most North Koreans join the KPA when are 17 to 18 years old and serve a mandatory 10 years if they are male, 6 years if they are female. At that age, they are highly impressionable and just beginning to form their values and opinions of the world. North Korea tightly controls all communications and they learn protecting their leader, Kim Jung-un, is their sacred duty, and they must obey all commands. This suggests that any invasion of North Korea will meet staunch resistance and may degrade into guerrilla warfare.

North Korea’s diverse conventional weapons arsenal includes approximately 3,700 tanks, 2,100 armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles, 17,900 artillery pieces, 11,000 anti-aircraft guns, 10,000 shoulder-launched surface-to-air missiles and anti-tank guided missiles, 1,600 fighter aircraft, and 1,000 warships, among them 70 submarines, making it the world’s largest submarine fleet.

Given the sheer numbers of their conventional weapons, even a preemptive strike would be unlikely to destroy North Korea’s entire capability. Inevitably, they would strike back. South Korea, Japan, and US forces in the region would be their high priority targets. Since Soul, the capital of South Korea, and its 24 million inhabitants, is less than 40 miles south of the North Korean border, even conventional artillery and rockets have the potential to kill millions.

Asymmetrical Weapons

In 2014, the South Korean Defense Ministry estimated that North had stockpiled 2,500 to 5,000 tons of chemical weapons and had a capacity to produce a variety of biological weapons.

North Korea’s tons of chemical weapons include nerve, blister, blood, and vomiting agents, as well as some biological weapons, including anthrax, smallpox, and cholera. North Korea could deliver the chemical and biological weapons via artillery and missiles. They have missiles capable of reaching targets in South Korea and Japan.

It is also possible that North Korea has already smuggled biological weapons into the countries they consider adversarial. Given the “brainwashing” of their soldiers, North Korea could launch “kamikaze” style attacks, sending infected agents to mingle with the adversary’s populace.

North Korea is a signatory to the Geneva Protocol, which prohibits the use of chemical weapons in warfare, and to the Biological and Toxins Weapons Convention (BTWC), which prohibits the development, production and stockpiling of bacteriological (biological) and toxin weapons. However, there is already evidence they will not adhere to either treaty. For example, evidence suggests North Korea is responsible for the assassination of Kim Jong-un’s half-brother Kim Jong-nam, who was critical of Kim Jong-un’s regime. Authorities allege that North Korean agents sprayed VX nerve agent in Kim Jong-nam’s face, causing his death.

The Geneva Conventions, which establish the standards of international law for humanitarian treatment in war, does not cover nanoweapons. In my book, Nanoweapons: A Growing Threat To Humanity (Potomac Books 2017), I made the observation that China’s offensive nanoweapons capabilities may benefit from their alliance with North Korea and vice versa. Therefore, North Korea could deploy the simplest of nanoweapons, such as toxic nanoparticles, which mimic chemical weapons, and still be within the standards of international law.

Conclusions

Any conflict with North Korea is likely to trigger them to use all weapons at their disposal. Such a conflict would leave a million dead.

Efforts to unify the North and South would face extreme ideological barriers. All communication in the North vilifies its adversaries and raises Kim Jung-un to the level of a deity.

Any war with North Korea may open the door to a wider conflict. The Sino-North Korean Mutual Aid and Cooperation Friendship Treaty bind China and North Korea, which includes provisions for either country to come to the aid of the other in the event of an attack.

 

 

 

 

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.