Technology

Yes, They Can! No, They Can't: Charges Fly in Nanobot Debate

By KENNETH CHANG
Published: December 09, 2003

It wasn't quite Dan Aykroyd and Jane Curtin tossing insults at each other while ostensibly debating a serious political issue. But an exchange between a Nobel laureate and a nanotechnology visionary last week was reminiscent of that old ''Saturday Night Live'' sketch.

The magazine Chemical & Engineering News, which published the exchange in its Dec. 1 issue, even labeled it ''Point/Counterpoint,'' just like the ''60 Minutes'' debates that Mr. Aykroyd and Ms. Curtin lampooned.

This time, though, the subject of debate was whether it is possible to build a nanobot -- a robot the size of a bacterium or a virus or even smaller.

Dr. K. Eric Drexler, chairman of the Foresight Institute, which promotes this vision, took the pro-nanobot view. Dr. Drexler, indeed, invented the word ''nanotechnology'' a couple of decades ago. The word comes from nanometer, a billionth of a meter, which is a convenient unit for expressing the sizes of atoms and molecules.

In ''Engines of Creation'' (1986), Dr. Drexler proposed his idea of ''molecular assemblers,'' nanobots that would be able to build almost anything, including copies of themselves. Swarms of nanobots may one day be able to perform tasks like breaking down pollutants into harmless molecules or repairing damage in individual cells, perhaps even reversing the effects of aging.

If swarms of nanobots were capable of such miraculous feats, they could also conceivably multiply out of control: a microscopic mechanical cancer that pushed biological life to extinction. Drawing on Dr. Drexler's work, Bill Joy, chief scientist of Sun Microsystems, argued in April 2000 in Wired magazine that humanity was on the technological road to ruin and that scientists should voluntarily give up research that could lead to nanobots.

Taking the anti-nanobot view was Dr. Richard E. Smalley, a Nobel Prize-winning professor of chemistry at Rice University. He wrote that while the broader field of nanotechnology held great promise, a nanobot was impossible -- and so, by corollary, was extinction by runaway nanobots.

The two first skirmished in September 2001 in two articles in Scientific American. More recently, Dr. Drexler heard that Dr. Smalley had again dismissed the prospect of nanobots, so this year he posted an open letter on his Web site, www .foresight.org/, accusing his rival of trying ''to dismiss my work by misrepresenting it.''