NationStates Jolt Archive


Eeek! Can you say "gray goo" boys and girls???

Eutrusca
12-05-2005, 18:06
New Robot Reproduces on Its Own (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/05/0511_050511_robots.html)

James Owen
for National Geographic News

May 11, 2005
Scientists have created a robot that can replicate itself in minutes. The team behind the machine says the experiment shows that self- reproduction is not unique to living organisms

The researchers add that the ability could be harnessed to drive major advances in nanotechnology, the science of the very small, and may even lead to space colonization by robots.

Developed by researchers at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York, the machine was constructed from cube-shaped robotic units (modules) that functioned independently. A four-module robot could assemble an exact replica of itself in just two and a half minutes.

Writing for tomorrow's issue of the science journal Nature, the researchers say the plastic robotic cubes each contained a microprocessor, a motor, and electromagnets. The cubes were split diagonally into two halves, allowing the cubes to swivel to change position or move objects.

Each cube was preprogrammed with building instructions, says Hod Lipson, an assistant professor at Cornell's department of mechanical and aerospace engineering and department of computing and information science.

"The cubes are aware of contact and release events [with other cubes] and of the order in which they were assembled," he said.

Lipson says the robot can do little but self-reproduce. But he notes that it would be fairly easy to add modules with grippers, cameras, or other specialized equipment.

The researcher adds that, while the robot is a relatively simple device, it strengthens the case of scientists who believe self-reproduction isn't unique to living organisms and that in the future machines will be able to clone themselves.

If so, the implications for some fields, including nanotechnology and space exploration, could be huge.

"Consider a robotic mission to a remote planet," Lipson said. "If a traditional robot is sent and it breaks, the mission is over. But if modular robots are sent over with a supply of materials, and a fault happens, they may be able to self-repair."

Recycling Robots

The researcher suggests such robots could adapt to solve problems.

"If a new, unforeseen task emerges, a robot might construct a new, more suitable robot from scratch, and then the new robot will dismantle the old robot," he said. "These kinds of scenarios, where machines sustain themselves and adapt by consuming and recycling components, get a little closer to the way biology works."

The prevailing view holds that self-replication is an ability that organisms or objects either have in full or lack entirely. But Lipson's team theorizes that self-replication isn't a yes-or-no proposition, but exists at varying degrees.

The researchers present their new robot as an example of this theory.

The team says the extent to which something is self-replicating depends on many factors. For example, mineral crystals build exact replicas of themselves, but only in a solution. By contrast, rabbits reproduce themselves less accurately than crystals do but are less dependent on a specific environment.

Through understanding the principles of self-replication in nature, the team aims to make robots that are more robust and adaptive.

"We are interested in making a practical robot that can self-reproduce but also do something useful," Lipson said. "We are also interested in making these machines at microscale."

Nanotechnology involves the precise manipulation of atoms and molecules to create structures around the scale of one billionth of a meter. Proponents say this fast-expanding field, seen by some as the next industrial revolution, could potentially change the way almost everything is manufactured, from medicines to automobiles.

More advanced nanotechnology could see the creation of nanomachines. For instance, so-called nanobots could be programmed to attack and reconstruct the cells of cancer patients or perform surgeries a thousand times more precise than currently possible.

Low-Cost Production

A crucial objective of nanotechnology is to make products inexpensively, says Ralph Merckle, a professor at the Georgia Institute of Technology's College of Computing in Atlanta.

"While the ability to make a few very small, very precise molecular machines very expensively would clearly be a major scientific achievement, it would not fundamentally change how we make most products," he said.

What's needed, he says, are huge numbers of robots working together at a molecular scale. Self-replication is seen as a way of achieving this, using nanobots that can create copies of themselves to form vast numbers of microscopic assemblers.

Such a scenario has sparked fears among environmentalists and others who have warned of an apocalyptic "gray goo" event, with self-replicating nanobots possibly running amok and consuming the planet in a matter of days.

Indeed, researchers at Rice University in Texas recently reported that nanosize buckyballs (soccer ball-shaped carbon molecules) are water soluble and can interfere with the respiration of soil microbes.

And last year scientists at Southern Methodist University, also in Texas, reported that those same molecules, often used in nanotechnology, cause brain damage in certain fish.

Prince Charles, heir to the British throne, is one of the more visible public figures to voice concerns over the potentially "enormous environmental and social risks" of nanotechnology.

However, proponents counter that the risks associated with self-replicating machines have been much exaggerated.

"Artificial self-replication is already a risk when it comes to computer viruses and genetically modified crops," Lipson, the Cornell researcher, said. "I think that mechanical self-replication is far down the priority list. There are plenty of other things to worry about before this."
Carnivorous Lickers
12-05-2005, 18:11
nanotechnology will be the end of us
Riverlund
12-05-2005, 18:23
Hmmm...I'm thinking one good, localized EMP and the threat of nanobots overrunning the world gets nipped neatly in the bud.
Carnivorous Lickers
12-05-2005, 21:14
Hmmm...I'm thinking one good, localized EMP and the threat of nanobots overrunning the world gets nipped neatly in the bud.


I hope that would do it, if need be. Unless they already infect the people who would be able to initiate an EMP.
Super-power
12-05-2005, 21:21
nanotechnology will be the end of us
I welcome our nanotechnological overlords.
Shadowstorm Imperium
12-05-2005, 21:25
...the researchers say the plastic robotic cubes each contained a microprocessor...Each cube was preprogrammed with building instructions...

I don't think this would be possible at nanoscopic scale. I challenge anyone to build a microprocessor using only one atom.

Besides, a far as I see, there's no need to make self-replicating nanobots. It would be more efficient to create them on a production line, and one would probably want the nanobots to self destruct after finishing their job, not just reproduce indefinitely.
Sdaeriji
12-05-2005, 21:26
nanotechnology will be the end of us

You have to admit it's definately one of the more interesting doomsday scenarios.
Cogitation
12-05-2005, 21:33
One of the things that I've wondered about is this: Energy is required to manipulate matter. If a nanomachine is going to function, then where does it get it's power from? How do you supply energy to it? The "gray goo" scenario isn't going to happen if the nanomachines can't get enough energy to sustain the process.

--The Democratic States of Cogitation
Syniks
12-05-2005, 21:34
nanotechnology will be the end of us
Just like crossbows/gunpowder/dynamite/nukes were the end of us.
Taldaan
12-05-2005, 21:43
Gay groo....
Grey groo....
Grey glue...

Curses. I can't say grey goo. Ah well...
The Tribes Of Longton
12-05-2005, 21:47
One of the things that I've wondered about is this: Energy is required to manipulate matter. If a nanomachine is going to function, then where does it get it's power from? How do you supply energy to it? The "gray goo" scenario isn't going to happen if the nanomachines can't get enough energy to sustain the process.

--The Democratic States of Cogitation
One theory wa they would be photosythetic, I think i.e. like plants but probably through an entirely different process. Of course, they'd need a good supply of light then...
Happy Servants
12-05-2005, 21:52
the evil nanobots before they take over our society
Phylum Chordata
13-05-2005, 01:30
It is impossible for self replicating molecules to take over the planet. But I don't have time to explain why because I need to have sex with my wife now so we can have a baby.
CSW
13-05-2005, 01:37
It is impossible for self replicating molecules to take over the planet. But I don't have time to explain why because I need to have sex with my wife now so we can have a baby.
Well done.
Karas
13-05-2005, 01:37
Sorry Grey Goo, from the looks of it we're all going to be killed by a child's toy blocks.
Nasferatu
13-05-2005, 01:41
Its not just nano technology it could be used on large robots how you like that for a doomsday scenario the word taken over by giant self reproducing robots. I bow to either our nanotechnological overlords or are giant robotic overlords.
Disganistan
13-05-2005, 01:51
I don't think this would be possible at nanoscopic scale. I challenge anyone to build a microprocessor using only one atom.

Besides, a far as I see, there's no need to make self-replicating nanobots. It would be more efficient to create them on a production line, and one would probably want the nanobots to self destruct after finishing their job, not just reproduce indefinitely.

It probably would be less efficient to build nanites on a production line. Simply because a small machine would be better able to manipulate the matter, rather than us trying to shoot it into place. And as for the one atom processor . . . Do you know how small atoms are? By using a nanoscopic scale, we can effectively have thousands of atoms (which are measured in picometers) strung together in order to create microprocessors. These processors don't have to be capable of the same things as a desktop, simply enough to be able to program. And the most probable size of a nanite would be the size of a red blood cell, but it doesn't even have to be that big. The size of a platelet would be large enough to fit thousands of pieces in order to make one nanite.
The Eagle of Darkness
13-05-2005, 02:09
The thing about making nanobots on a production line is that you make them one at a time, 1 -> 2 -> 3 -> 4 etc. If you make them self-replicating, 1 -> 2 -> 4 -> 8 etc. A /lot/ more efficient. And if you're going to need thousands of them to do a job, efficiency is necessary.

As for the EMP suggestion -- only works if they're electrical. At that sort of scale, they'll probably be using internal energy of the atoms for power. It's a whole new world down there in atomland.

So what do we do in a Grey Goo scenario? Well, if we're sensible, we've designed these things to have a weakness. But these are human scientists we're talking about, so they probably wouldn't. All that's left is to either isolate the things -- tricky -- nuke them to dust -- not a good idea -- or send in another type of nanobot specifically and solely designed to kill them. But to keep up, that would have to be self replicating too... perhaps if you make it so it can only replicate from a specific mixture, which you pour over the infestation?

Of course, an easier solution would be to design the 'bots around a radioactive atom with a known, reasonably short half-life, which isn't found in nature. Drop your first machine into a vat of the atoms, let it replicate, use it, and then wait a few days and they'll all die of their own accord. No chance of escape.
Non Aligned States
13-05-2005, 03:19
The problem of predesigned shelf lifes is that if the system is combined with self replication capabilities and learning algorithms, short term shelf lifes might be removed at later levels for greater efficiency. Its sort of the way weaknesses are removed from the gene pool with each successive generation.

That being said, I think we're still a long way of from creating nano-assemblers capable of that. In either case, I think they'd do a world of good. Imagine having air borne variants designed to target and seperate carbon monoxide molecules.

EDIT: The potential for abuse is enormous though.
Incenjucarania
13-05-2005, 03:23
Fire can be scary too.

It really comes down to keeping it away from idiots and nutjobs.
[NS]Simonist
13-05-2005, 05:34
Actually, for all of us out there trying to figure out just how to effectively destroy the world (not just all life on it, oh no......the planet itself offends me to the core), this is a joyous day! This opens up doors for the most wonderful scenario one can hope for: von Neumann machines! Those of you with Arthur C. Clarke are probably already somewhat familiar with this information, but here's a little bit of the lowdown if you're not.

A von Neumann machine subsists almost entirely on iron, magnesium, aluminium and silicon, the major elements found in Earth's mantle and core. A von Neumann machine is any device that is capable of creating an exact copy of itself given nothing but the necessary raw materials.

This totally beats the possibility of creating a massive solar sail and navigating the Earth over to Jupiter and letting Jupiter's tidal forces rend asunder the entirety of the planet.....
This United State
13-05-2005, 05:47
Oh for the love of ... -.-

From here (http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200505/s1366579.htm) ...US scientists create self-replicating robot

Self-replicating robots are no longer the stuff of science fiction, with scientists creating small robots that can build copies of themselves.

Scientists at the Cornell University in New York say each robot consists of several 10-centimetre cubes, which have identical machinery, electromagnets to attach and detach to each other and a computer program for replication.

The robots can bend and pick up and stack the cubes.

"Although the machines we have created are still simple compared with biological self-reproduction, they demonstrate that mechanical self-reproduction is possible and not unique to biology," Hod Lipson said in a report in the science journal Nature.

He and his team believe the design principle could be used to make long term, self-repairing robots that could mend themselves and be used in hazardous situations and on space flights.

The experimental robots, which do not do anything else except make copies of themselves, are powered through contacts on the surface of the table and transfer data through their faces.

They self-replicate by using additional modules placed in special "feeding locations".

The machines duplicate themselves by bending over and putting their top cube on the table.

Then they bend again, pick up another cube, put it on top of the first and repeat the entire process. As the new robot begins to take shape it helps to build itself.

"The four-module robot was able to construct a replica in 2.5 minutes by lifting and assembling cubes from the feeding locations," Mr Lipson said.

-ReutersEgads, no sensationalist O.M.F.G. nanotech horror ... :rolleyes:

Also, isn't there some " thing " against just blindly pasting a news-story with-out actually making an attempt to discuss it your-self in you're own post ?
Santa Barbara
13-05-2005, 06:01
One of the things that I've wondered about is this: Energy is required to manipulate matter. If a nanomachine is going to function, then where does it get it's power from? How do you supply energy to it? The "gray goo" scenario isn't going to happen if the nanomachines can't get enough energy to sustain the process.

--The Democratic States of Cogitation

Easy. It'd get it's energy by cybernetically enslaving humanity and using human bodies heat to produce energy. Of course it would work!
Vaitupu
13-05-2005, 07:05
so...um...everyone know that little movie trilogy The Matrix?



I don't wanna be a human battery :(
Karas
13-05-2005, 07:12
Simonist']Actually, for all of us out there trying to figure out just how to effectively destroy the world (not just all life on it, oh no......the planet itself offends me to the core), this is a joyous day! This opens up doors for the most wonderful scenario one can hope for: von Neumann machines! Those of you with Arthur C. Clarke are probably already somewhat familiar with this information, but here's a little bit of the lowdown if you're not.

A von Neumann machine subsists almost entirely on iron, magnesium, aluminium and silicon, the major elements found in Earth's mantle and core. A von Neumann machine is any device that is capable of creating an exact copy of itself given nothing but the necessary raw materials.

This totally beats the possibility of creating a massive solar sail and navigating the Earth over to Jupiter and letting Jupiter's tidal forces rend asunder the entirety of the planet.....


Grey goo is for puppies. My advice to you is to put gold ions in your purse. This far better to create a metastable strange quark in a heavy ion colision. Such a quark could devower any mater it touches reducing the entirity of the Earth into the galaxy's largest atom. That's something to aspire to.
[NS]Simonist
13-05-2005, 07:18
Grey goo is for puppies. My advice to you is to put gold ions in your purse. This far better to create a metastable strange quark in a heavy ion colision. Such a quark could devower any mater it touches reducing the entirity of the Earth into the galaxy's largest atom. That's something to aspire to.
Actually I've considered the strangelets possibility, but it just seems like too much work for me, y'know? Especially because I have no real background in any sciences other than biological, so um....I'd have to rely on minions. Minions.....are a liability.