|
The Los Angeles Times Magazine
August 31, 2003
IN THE FUTURE, EVERY MOLECULE WILL HAVE 15 MINUTES OF FAME
CHAT ROOM: VICTORIA VESNA
By Andrew Vontz
Just because a discipline still exists largely in science fiction is no reason it can't have its own university department. The California NanoSystems Institute at UCLA and UC Santa Barbara means to take us beyond the computer chip to a world where molecules themselves can be controlled, with revolutionary implications for medicine, engineering and, well, fashion. If all of this is tough to envision, look no farther than UCLA, where professor Victoria Vesna, media arts department chairwoman, is mounting a series of ambitious nano-themed art installations in collaboration with nano- scientist James Gimzewski and others. The Zero@ wavefunction art show is online at www.notime.arts.ucla.edu/zerowave; the next project debuts at LACMALab in December. We asked Vesna to go molecular on us.
Leonardo DaVinci was a scientist and an artist, but these days someone can dump the contents of their closet on the floor and have an award-winning installation on their hands. What do nanotechnology and art have to do with each other?
Nanoscientists more than any other scientists needs to talk to creative people because they cannot use the same paradigm that has been used in scientific research. It’s a completely new way of thinking that will create a context so something new can emerge. If you think of us not being in 2003 but being in 1903, you and I are sitting in front of a gas lamp and you tell me you heard about electricity and you and I can’t imagine what that’s going to mean in 100 years. We’re sitting here talking on our cell phones and we think we’re so cool, but we have no idea where we’re going to be in 100 years. The genome was just decoded. There are satellites orbiting our planet. It’s such a complicated and complex world.
Will the nano-future be like the Jetson’s come to life?
Ultimately it will be more about how we perceive the world. It will radically shift our perception of the world and the approach to medicine and healing will shift radically. The way we build things will shift radically but most of all the way we experience our material world will shift.
How far out is life really going to get in a nano world?
I think it’s impossible for us to imagine but I really believe we’re going to have very different needs and you will have smart materials and smart clothes that won’t require you to have a huge wardrobe. You can move through different parts of the planet without feeling that you have to own the property and communicate with people without any technology as we know it now. The world we live in now is full of technological crutches that help us communicate and we’ll be able to not have any of that.
What are 'nanobots'—and is there any chance they’ll pay our bills, take out the trash, and cut our lawns for us?
If you’re talking about a molecular scale, nanobots are imaginary beings that do not exist. The most classic example of this is an imaginary being on a molecular scale that’s a nanobot that repairs cells. You would have your body repaired with this nanobot. This is a figment of your imagination and science fiction. It basically does not exist.
It sounds like Dr. Evil better not got his hands on this stuff. The Matrix paints a disastrous picture of humanity’s interface with technology. How deep does the nanotechnology rabbit hole go? Are we headed for a future where are bodies are covered in data ports?
We are the ultimate nanomachines. It’s much closer to biological systems and structures. It’s about molecules. What should be thought about is how nature works and in order for us to get closer to what this technology has to offer we have to look closer into natural systems because nature builds with molecules. It doesn’t build with machines.
Wow. Sounds complicated. Why do scientists and artists need to work together to create this future?
Nanoscience by its very nature cannot be a specialized discipline. A nanoscientist has to work with biologists, chemists, engineers, you name it. They cannot be a separate discipline. The same is true for the art that I’m pursuing. It cannot exist in a cultural realm like art did up to this point where it’s confined to the museum in the usual way. The kinds of collaborations that happen take on a very different form. You have to talk to scientists who are having the same issues and scientists like Jim who are trying to address molecular scale and moving molecules and how to address this creatively gravitate toward artists and writers who are visionary.
In the future will drawing and sculpture go the way of the cave painting?
It already has in my mind. It really depends on what you think of drawing and sculpture. When you think of virtual reality, you’re really talking about a cave painting. You’re enacting a scene and you’re in it and you believe it’s real. It’s really about where your mind is. It’s not about this linear progression of what is in the future. It’s more about the way a person’s mind reacts.
Your Zero@Wavefunction project allows mere mortals to witness the power of nanotechnology. How does it work?
The idea is to take the Buckminster Fullerine molecule, blow it up out of proportion on large buildings and allow people to manipulate it with their shadows. When people move these molecules with their shadows they are enacting what happens on a molecular scale. There’s a playful and beautiful movement and if you don't know anything about nanotech you still have a great experience and if you do you see it’s very close to what they see on a molecular scale. We also started a large project on the web where we have cameras on scanning microscopes and you can look through it and walk through the lab and it creates access to nanotech that no one has. It’s called Windows to Nanotechnology. The windows are the streaming videos that are on the web. We’re planning on not only going to Jim’s lab but other labs. Anyone can look into the microscope and it’s such a privilege to be able to do that.
Is there any reason we should be afraid of nanotechnology? Is it going to let Big Brother get us?
There’s a lot to be said about any new technology bringing fear with it, and fear is about change. Things like Michael Crichton’s book Prey continue this image of these swarms attacking people. I’m not sure this is a positive way to create dialogue. Basically it’s creating paranoia in the general public around science. The images projected out there are far from what’s possible. Nanotech at this point is very much in the imagination.
So do androids dream of electric sheep or what?
Absolutely. Why not? They can dream anything they want.
|
