Nanotechnology and the Ultimate Individual

A number of articles have appeared in SFR about nanotechnology.  The nano realm is 1 billionth of a meter.  A cube one nanometer on a side would hold about 100 atoms.  Operational nanotechnology will be able to manipulate matter at that level with individual atoms serving as discrete components.  Extremely pure forms of any known substances could be produced including biological materials.  Nanoscale machines will be constructed including computers and robots that may even operate inside living systems.  In theory, nanomachines could take apart and analyze anything and then duplicate it quickly and inexpensively.   

Many scientist and engineers in such fields as electronics and biology are approaching the nanoscale in their work.  K.  Eric Drexler has published articles and books, given lectures and classes, and conducted seminars and conferences on the possibilities of nanoscale engineering.  He has established a foundation to promote research and public debate on the subject.  

Drexler claims that he is merely extrapolating from known principles of chemistry, physics, biology and engineering.  He says that it is much easier to project future engineering than future science because you do not have to anticipate breakthroughs.  There have been some theoretical challenges leveled at nanotechnology already.  The usefulness of pure materials produced by nanotechnology may be marred by the unanticipated appearance of "emergent properties" which interfere with the intended use.  It has been suggested that much of the predicted manipulation of biological systems will not materialize because of the complexity and statistical nature of biological processes. 

If we manage to overcome these problems and demonstrate nanoscale devices and processes in the lab, it still may not be economically feasible to scale up production for industrial use.  There is the potential problem of resistance of trade unions and industries, which would suffer if the new materials and devices were produced and released into the market.  The international trade balance also plays a big role in policy decisions.  Powerful lobbies may resist the production of nanomaterial in the US and/or their importation into this country.

The foundation of economics is scarcity.  People who control access to scarce resources have a lot of power and wealth.  And there is the ever-present temptation to make resources scarce by restricting their production and/or distribution.  In this country, we now have the capacity to give everybody adequate food, clothing, housing, education, and health care but somehow it just isn't happening.  Looking into the future of what nanotechnology is going to bring, theoretically everybody could enjoy material abundance.  On the other hand, social and political realities tend to suggest that this probably will not occur. 

With respect to the individual consumer's access to the fruits of nanotechnology, there will be psychological, social and political constraints.  There will probably be many consumer products that are created with nanotechnology and may contain nanotechnological components.  Such products will have fantastic capabilities and be inexpensive.  However, there will also be limitations in what is made available to the general public.  One consideration could be a reluctance of major corporations to manufacture and distribute nanotechnology tools and products that increase personal self-sufficiency and reduce future market demand for their products.  The odds are also great that governments will move to restrict access to the full range of nanotechnology in self-defense.  However, there is a good chance that they will not be sufficiently wise to appreciate the potentially adverse impact of consumer use of what the authorities perceive to be "safe" nanotechnology.

The long range predictions for nanotechnology are incredible; material abundance and unlimited amounts of energy without human effort or environmental impact, large scale reversal of environmental damage, small computers approaching the power of the human brain, cures for most diseases and even possibly halting and reversing the aging process.  For some of the reasons discussed above, these miraculous things may not come to pass because they are not possible, their development may be inhibited or their access restricted.  On the other hand, we cannot assume that the optimistic visions of nanotechnological development and distribution will not eventually be fully realized. 

An interesting conversation, which illuminated the public discussion about nanotechnology, took place at Norwescon 11, in Tacoma, Washington during March of 1989.  Some of people who had attended Nanocon I, a conference that took place in Seattle, Washington in February of the same year, were having dinner.  One woman said that the people who were enthusiastic about nanotechnology were behaving more like missionaries looking for converts than citizens involved in a debate on a new technology.  A man whose family were Seventh Day Adventists agreed saying he had heard many glowing testimonies to the glorious future of nanotechnology, which certainly resembled the "witnessing to the Holy Spirit", in church services he had seen as a child.  At that point, one of the "true believers" got up and heatedly denied that he and his fellow enthusiasts were on a "religious" crusade.  In the November 29, 1991 issue of Science magazine, there is a special section on nanotechnology in which one scientist observed that Drexler was involved in more of a "nanoreligion" than science or engineering. 

When highly vocal and enthusiastic support appears on one side of a complex issue such as the potential social impact of a new technology, the automatic social response seems to be the spontaneous appearance of vocal and derogatory opposition.  The more extreme supporters of nanotechnology claim that it will bring an era of peace and plenty.  The opposition is faint and unorganized at present but there is no doubt that it will become more outspoken and coherent as functional nanotechnology appears.  The danger of a possible nanotechnological "Armageddon" called the "grey goo" is already being debated.  The concern is that runaway nanodevices could literally dissolve the entire biosphere.  Fortunately, Drexler is working through his Foresight Institute to lay the foundation for a broad and reasonable public discussion of the potential benefits and dangers of nanotechnology before it has arrived in full force.  

There are people who believe that technology will bring utopia.  Others believe that we may create Hell on Earth if we don't move cautiously in our embracing of technological revolutions.  I personally believe that the future will be more complex than these simplistic visions.  Looking beyond being saved or savaged, I see the very real possibility that we will fuse with our technology in a sort of strange symbiosis.  Our bodies and brains will incorporate and be changed forever by such technologies as nanoscale engineering.

Nanotechnology could help us crack the information processing codes used in the human brain and then give us ultraminiaturized signal detectors and signal generators to plate on the inside of the skull or even integrate into the neural architecture of the brain itself.  This should give us the ability to add extra memory capacity, computer graphics and sound generation, and enhancements for human thought processes.  Such implanted computers should be able to amplify the power and the range of human intelligence and memory. 

A great deal of subjective personal experience is driven by, shaped by and given significance by relative levels of brain biochemicals.  Nanotechnology offers the possibility of direct control and enhancement of brain biochemistry.  Aside from effects on levels of awareness and intelligence, this will permit the personal control of emotional states.  Desirable emotional experiences could be triggered on demand and undesirable experiences could be suppressed.

It should also be possible to improve on the natural human sensory systems.  Visual capability could be extended into the ultraviolet and infrared portions of the spectrum.  Manipulation of the lenses of the eyes could permit increased visual acuity.  Hearing could be expanded beyond the 20 to 20,000 cycles of the current range.  Smell could be made highly accurate for wide ranges of chemical compounds.  In general, sophisticated pattern recognition and enhancement software could be brought to bear on objects of perception. 

Nanotechnology will allow us to directly interface the brain with computers and communication systems.  Text and graphics could be fed directly to the visual centers and the output of the human language generation centers could be converted directly to text.  Perhaps it will even be possible to externalize "mental images".  The human brain already absorbs and emits microwave radiation in the billion-cycle range.  If these natural frequencies were amplified for broadcast and reception, it would not be necessary to physically connect to external systems.  Access to the global communication and information net will be effortless and instantaneous.  The technological equivalence of telepathy becomes a real possibility where we could talk to each other with thought alone.  It is likely that we will speak more of "linking up" than the "jacking in" that the cyberpunks talk about.

Muscle strength could be enhanced by nanotechnology in a number of ways including actual incorporated nanoengines.  The skeleton would need to be made stronger, the ligature would have to be tougher and metabolic systems would require greater efficiency for that to be practical.  It would probably be a good idea if the skin were made tougher as well.  General endurance could be improved including the ability to withstand greater acceleration and impact as well as resistance to the elements such as temperature and radiation variation.  With accelerated time sense and increase in control, the modified human should have much greater manual dexterity than the "normal" person should. 

With all of these sophisticated additions, it may be necessary to increase available energy.  Implanted rechargeable batteries, generators using special concentrated fuels and/or broadcast powers received from external sources are possible solutions.  Fundamental changes might be made in the way a human body processes energy and matter such as incorporation of photosynthesis in the skin and a "closed" oxygen/carbon dioxide cycle.

Nanotechnological modifications might even change the shape of the human body.  Some shape changes will be demanded by the internal modifications mentioned above.  Other changes may be the arbitrary result of fad or fancy.  The need to adapt to currently inhospitable environments may drive still other, more profound, shape changes.  Real mermen may eventually appear with a shape especially suited to life under the sea with the ability to extract oxygen directly from the water.  Dwellers in zero gravity may decide to dispense with legs in favor of an extra set of arms and hands, maybe even a tail.  Perhaps one of the most radical departures would be to a shape adapted to the rigors of naked space itself.  Radiation resistant skin, valves to close all orifices, electromagnetic senses and some form of propulsion would be required.  And finally, such changes may not necessarily be permanent.

The repercussions of such radical alteration of the individual are almost incomprehensible.  Among other probabilities, we have to consider the effect on human institutions such as the family, community, economy and political entities.  Maslov has divided human motivations into a series of levels.  After personal security, shelter, food, health, etc have been provided for, then individuals need productive work, public acceptance and appreciation, personal growth and finally, transcendence.  Society evolved to provide a framework in which the individual is able to cooperate with other people to achieve these things. 

The end of sexual diseases and unwanted pregnancies, coupled with increased personal choices, longer life spans and communication intimacy not requiring physical proximity, may doom traditional family and marriage structures.  Already over one fourth of the households in the U.S. consist of one individual.  If each person has an army of nanorobots responding to his or her thoughts, then the basics of shelter, food, medicine and transportation are readily available.  This will have a shattering impact on all economic activity and institutions.  When a person can manipulate his or her own brain chemistry to achieve desired psychological states without the necessity for the present social activities which now trigger them, then many social organizations will vanish.  Self sufficiency and global net access will undermine the rational and support for current political institutions at all levels.  One of the main driving forces of major world religions will be seriously undercut by the possibility of immortality in (of?) the flesh offered by nanotechnology.  

With the removal of the motivation for, and support of, major family, societal, economic and political institutions, civilization as we have known it for thousands of years will disappear.  Since reading the "Engines of Creation" in 1986, I have tried, unsuccessfully, to envision a possible constellation of institutional structures that could withstand the corrosive impact of full-scale nanotechnology.  Only time will tell if the human race will be able to adapt to a permanently fluid and highly attenuated societal framework.

If nanotechnology makes even some of the things I have discussed possible, the very definition of what it is to be human will have to change.  With the divergence of form may come a divergence of basic nature.  The human race may branch into a number of subspecies, some of which will have only one member.  We may be on our way to encountering true aliens, and they will turn out to be the people we will become.