Injecting Electro-reactive Nanites

[sciwiz12]

I'm aware that electrical stimulation of certain regions of the brain can insight various reactions, and I have recently seen work done with nano machines so small that they could not contain internal electrical components and so were piloted by magnets outside of the human body.

 

Here is my query, what are your thoughts on the potential of piloting injected nanites to various regions of the brain and generating an external field which would cause the nanite to produce a small charge and stimulate regions of the brain through non-invasive means?

 

I mean you still could theoretically run into the problem of getting magnetic fields through the resistant human skull, so maybe the specific approach I just suggested is infeasible, but what is the possibility of having nano machines pass small currents through blood vessels to brain regions.

 

I guess it wouldn't necessarily make much sense considering that the aqueous blood plasma could conduct the charge away from the brain possibly(or I'm showing off my ignorance). Alternatively it is difficult to pass nano-machines through the blood-brain barrier without causing internal hemmoraging.

 

Is it maybe possible to have the machines pass through in parts and assemble chemically on the other side of the barrier?

 

Like have the various components of a machine hitch a ride on chemicals accepted through the blood brain barrier and then react forming bonds to assemble itself?

 

No, that's just stupid and dangerous.

 

Although what if you could use certain chemicals in the blood stream to form a sort of battery, no, I'm being stupid, I'll shut up now.

[TheGeckomancer]

You seem very interested in ways to manipulate and control brain functions. This is a very unethical field of study so it's a good thing there is not much progress on any front to accomplish this kind of thing. Nanites do not exist. Nanotechnology is still hypothetical and there are a lot of scientists who have given solid reasons why it may never be possible. Even assuming it ever is it would not function the way you think. We will almost certainly never be able to make all purpose mini robots that move through the body doing whatever with programmable functions. They expect that most real nanotechnology will be microscopic injections of metamaterials or highly complex chemical structures that only interact with specific things. I read an article about 6 months ago about the air force experimenting with a gold nanoparticle they could inject into the eye that can increase light receptivity and magnification several fold, but I can't seem to find it right now. That's a good example of what nanotechnology will most probably be.

Edited November 30, 2015 by TheGeckomancer

[swansont]

I'm aware that electrical stimulation of certain regions of the brain can insight various reactions, and I have recently seen work done with nano machines so small that they could not contain internal electrical components and so were piloted by magnets outside of the human body.

 

Here is my query, what are your thoughts on the potential of piloting injected nanites to various regions of the brain and generating an external field which would cause the nanite to produce a small charge and stimulate regions of the brain through non-invasive means?

 

I mean you still could theoretically run into the problem of getting magnetic fields through the resistant human skull, so maybe the specific approach I just suggested is infeasible, but what is the possibility of having nano machines pass small currents through blood vessels to brain regions.

 

 

Do you have a link to this work?

 

The human skull is not much of a barrier to magnetic fields.

You seem very interested in ways to manipulate and control brain functions. This is a very unethical field of study so it's a good thing there is not much progress on any front to accomplish this kind of thing. Nanites do not exist. Nanotechnology is still hypothetical and there are a lot of scientists who have given solid reasons why it may never be possible. Even assuming it ever is it would not function the way you think. We will almost certainly never be able to make all purpose mini robots that move through the body doing whatever with programmable functions. They expect that most real nanotechnology will be microscopic injections of metamaterials or highly complex chemical structures that only interact with specific things. I read an article about 6 months ago about the air force experimenting with a gold nanoparticle they could inject into the eye that can increase light receptivity and magnification several fold, but I can't seem to find it right now. That's a good example of what nanotechnology will most probably be.

 

While nanites are sci-fi (Star Trek: TNG and possibly others), nanotechnology exists and has been around for a while. The problem is that it evoke different mental images in different people. In the broadest sense, nanotechnology merely involves structures that are measured on the nm scale. I was doing nanofabrication in the early 90s. The processor in your computer or phone was manufactured using nanotechnology. That's how they can be made small and powerful. If you think "microscopic autonomous robot" then it doesn't exist, but that may not be what some other person means by the term.

[sciwiz12]

Sorry, when I said nanite I wasn't referring to microscopic robots, which is why I tried to avoid saying nanobots.

 

I'm no nano tech expert but I'm at least up to speed on advances in nano tech and also the problems with programmable matter, which I know is kind of a separate thing.

 

Anyway, as far as sources I have a few in mind, I'm really lazy when it comes to citations so I'd have to work up the energy first and I'm not particularly motivated. I'm not going to say that I don't need to cite sources because I'm just right, that would be stupid of me.

 

However, please don't make me go find my sources, it'd be such a pain. Anyway I'm not saying magnetic fields can't penetrate the skull, but from both personal experience and subsequent reading the skull is slightly resistant to electromagnetic fields.

 

Obviously not so resistant that EEGs can't pick up brainwaves from inside the skull, nor so much so that MRI and fMRI can't penetrate the skull.

 

But it is resistant enough that small magnets and 9volt batteries won't get through.

 

Which is slightly disappointing, because I was really hyped to stimulate my PFC when I was younger, but alas and alack the current would rather travel across the skin than penetrate the skull.

 

At any rate, the reason I asked is because I was watching a documentary on nano-technology and one of the labs used magnets outside of the body to pilot a nano (I feel like machine would be the wrong word here) needle to deliver an injection to a very specific region of the eye, however at the time of filming they hadn't moved to living subjects.

 

I just imagined piloting nano electrodes to regions around key areas of the brain to stimulate those regions, and the likelihood that such a reaction would have a positive effect on "growth" in those regions. It's a tad pseudo-sciency to say the least, but a few experiments have suggested that electrical and magnetic stimulation of certain regions associated with mathematical skill, or certain regions of the PFC might correlate with higher test scores than the control group.

 

Again I will cite my sources if you twist my arm about it, I know it's the right thing to do, but the laziness is strong within me.

 

 

Also I really couldn't care less about ethics if I tried. People do whatever they want and other people who disagree try to stop them, that's all ethics is to me. I don't care if it's ethical to alter brains, or genes, etc... All that matters is do I feel like it, is it possible, do I have the resources, can I get away with it. If all of those boxes are checked of the rest is a moot point.

[Phi for All]

Again I will cite my sources if you twist my arm about it, I know it's the right thing to do, but the laziness is strong within me.

 

!

Moderator Note

Since that work is the basis of this thread, which is in a mainstream section, please overcome the laziness so the discussion can move from guesswork to solid footing.

[swansont]

Anyway I'm not saying magnetic fields can't penetrate the skull, but from both personal experience and subsequent reading the skull is slightly resistant to electromagnetic fields.

 

DC fields and AC fields behave differently, and for AC fields there will be a frequency dependence. You can't make a blanket statement about field penetration.

 

And as Phi has noted, the citation is critical, since it's possible (even likely) that if you're asking questions about this you didn't understand something in the article, and aren't adequately summarizing it for us. You can't have a discussion under such conditions.

[sciwiz12]

http://www.itis.ethz.ch/virtual-population/tissue-properties/database/low-frequency-conductivity/

 

Data base of tissue properties, in particular low frequency conductivity.

http://www.physlink.com/education/AskExperts/ae512.cfm

 

There, according to physics there are no magnetic field insulators, even weak magnetic fields penetrate the skull, my bad.

 

I didn't know it was even up for debate but fine, I was mistaken, there, magnets get through just fine.

 

Happy? Can we continue now?

[swansont]

http://www.itis.ethz.ch/virtual-population/tissue-properties/database/low-frequency-conductivity/

Data base of tissue properties, in particular low frequency conductivity.http://www.physlink.com/education/AskExperts/ae512.cfm

There, according to physics there are no magnetic field insulators, even weak magnetic fields penetrate the skull, my bad.

I didn't know it was even up for debate but fine, I was mistaken, there, magnets get through just fine.

Happy? Can we continue now?

As soon as you link to experiment you were talking about, since I am unfamiliar with the details.I didn't need a link confirming the stuff I mentioned.

 

Sorry if that wasn't clear.

[Nittany Jones]

The way nanotechnology is increasing , it is safe to say that in a few years we will be able to control our brain activities using external devices. Although it doesn't seem right to manipulate the natural process and by interrupting the natural process as it may cause damage to our body.

[CharonY]

I am pretty confident that it is way further off, unless you are talking about improvements of means we got today. There is still a large gap when it comes to practical uses of nanotechnologies, especially for medical applications.