In Antiquity and the Middle Ages, all sciences were together, they were united by metaphysics and natural philosophy. In modern times, with the advent of Newton's physics, the sciences were divided, and the distance between them was constantly increasing. In between, interdisciplinary trends arose that, like cement, held together the expanding edifice of scientific knowledge.

In our time, the sciences are converging at the nanoscale. going on convergence various fields of knowledge: chemistry, biology, physics. At the level of atoms, there is no difference between them, since they obey the universal laws of nature. The convergent connection of nanotechnology with bio-, info- and especially cognitive technologies leads to the problem of their mediative-network comprehension in the context of integration with socio-humanitarian knowledge, perhaps within the framework of Bruno Latour's symmetrical anthropology program, social constructivism in the spirit of N. Luhmann or modern post-phenomenology of technology and technology.

The term "converging technologies" or "converging technologies" refers to one of the most recent and central developments not only in science, but also in the field of advanced technologies, obviously of decisive social importance: synergy or mergers from four main types modern technologies. This breakthrough will radically change our lives. It is no coincidence that the latest global scientific trend of convergence of NBIC technologies is developing in the largest nuclear physics center of the country - the Kurchatov Institute: a multidisciplinary technological infrastructure, many years of experience in various fields of science, interdisciplinary scientific schools - all this forms a powerful base for the development of breakthrough, innovative areas. , including in the field of biomedicine.

For the first time, the term "convergent technologies" in its modern sense appeared in the well-known report of the US National Science Foundation (2001), where the so-called NBIC initiative was put forward. The term "NBIC convergence" was introduced in 2002 by M. Roco and W. Bainbridge. NBIC convergence is the mutual influence of nano- (N), bio- (B), information (I) and cognitive (C) technologies. It has two main points: 1) the unification of various sciences within the framework of an interdisciplinary project on a nanometer scale; 2) the problem of "human enhancement", "human functionality" (improving human performance), or "human enhancement" (human enhancement). The new concept includes in its scope the synergistic interaction between such fields of activity as nanoscience and nanotechnology, biotechnology and life sciences, information and communication technologies, and cognitive sciences.

The term refers to a "synergistic combination" of the four main NBICs: (N) nanoscience and nanotechnology, molecular manufacturing and nanoself-assembly; (B) biological sciences, biotechnology, biomedicine, proteomics, structural biology, integrative biology, genomics and genetic engineering; (I) information technology, artificial intelligence (AI) and social networks; (C) cognitive science and cognitive neuroscience. The report notes the pervasive nature of technological convergence. Basic elementary nano-objects, according to NBIC [(nano-(N), bio-(B), info-(1) and cognio-(C)]): atoms, genes, bits, neurons. This system of interconnected nano-objects underlies convergent processes of science and technology.This interdisciplinarity, correlated with objects, was called ontological interdisciplinarity 1 .

Even earlier, sociologist M. Castells drew attention to them, who emphasized that “technological convergence is increasingly spreading to the growing interdependence between the biological and microelectronic revolutions, both materially and methodologically” . In the mid-1990s, M. Castells noted "the growing convergence of specific technologies in a highly integrated system in which old isolated technological trajectories become literally indistinguishable" . M. Castells was the first to see the preconditions and genesis of the phenomenon of convergence in the information technology society.

Today, convergence has become a metascientific phenomenon. It unites not only natural sciences among themselves, there is a convergence of natural and human sciences. Consequently, convergence involves the merging and interpenetration of not only sciences and technologies, but also man. This formulation of the problem “singles out two centers, two attractors of our study. The first scientific and technological center focuses on convergence, synergistic association of sciences and technologies based on nanotechnological scale and information and communication technologies. The synergetic and network path of such convergence portends a host of technological innovations that globally transform the mechanism of development of the entire human civilization. The futurological potential of such transformations is huge and optimistic. The second center of study represents the communicative world of the convergence of human and technology".

Convergent technologies are the "big four" technologies, which include information and communication technologies, biotechnologies, nanotechnologies and cognitive technologies. Recent publications in the sociology of scientific knowledge and STS (Science and Technology Studies) have focused on the study of technological convergence using a variety of procedures, including case studies, supported by theoretical analysis. These studies have shown that convergence should be considered in relation to alternative forms of change in scientific knowledge (eg, divergence). Convergence manifests itself in the form of interdisciplinarity and cooperation of representatives of different scientific communities, individual experts, groups or institutions, which entails the emergence of new phenomena such as cultural assimilation, "epistemic culture" in the ecological field. Other authors believe that the concept of "convergence" is actually intended to describe the reduction of the gap or distance between vision and reality in various technical fields.

Interdisciplinarity plays a special role at the basic level of the convergence system. “At the present stage of the development of science, associated with the development of nanoscience and nanotechnologies, a special nanotechnological interdisciplinarity arises, which plays the role of a connecting thread or convergence interface. In the convergent process of the emergence of new scientific fields and new hybrid technologies, it is nanotechnology that plays the role of a synergistic order parameter. This is due to the fact that the specifics of nanotechnologies implicitly contain all the specifics of convergent technologies, which is determined, as already presented above, by systemicity, complexity, flexibility, and network nature.

A new understanding of interdisciplinarity is based on the specifics of nanotechnology. J. Schmidt

convergent technologies is the "big four" of technologies, which includes information and communication technologies, biotechnology, nanotechnology and cognitive technologies. Representatives of the natural sciences believe that the future lies in the development of these technologies and in interdisciplinary research in the field of chemistry, physics and biology.

D. Medvedev points out the distinguishing featuresNBIC-convergence:

– “intense interaction between the indicated scientific and technological fields;

– significant synergistic effect;

- the breadth of coverage of the subject areas under consideration and subject to influence - from the atomic level of matter to intelligent systems;

- identifying the prospects for a qualitative growth in the technological capabilities of individual and social development of a person - thanks to NBIC convergence" .

These include Key words: nanotechnology and nanoscience; biotechnology and biomedicine, including genetic engineering; information and communication technologies; cognitive sciences, including neurosciences.

The result of the fusion of these four technologies should lead to the unification of the four global directions of today's science and technology: - "nano- a new approach to the design of materials "to order" by atomic-molecular design; - bio -, which will make it possible to introduce a biological part into the design of inorganic materials and thus obtain hybrid materials; - cognitive technologies based on the study of consciousness, cognition, the thought process, the behavior of living beings, and of man in the first place, both from a neurophysiological and molecular biological point of view, and with the help of humanitarian approaches.

The development of convergent technologies may lead to life world change person. The first such changes can be clearly traced in the example of success in deciphering the human genome. Gene analysis not only helps to calculate the risks of the onset of the disease and select individual therapy, but also is a source of new fears and discrimination of people: their stigmatization, exclusion or infringement of rights.

The quality of life is ultimately determined the amount of energy consumed. That is why today in the world the closest attention is paid to the development of energy. Along with traditional hydrocarbon energy, new energy technologies are actively developing, nuclear energy is experiencing a renaissance, most developed countries are implementing a global project to create an international thermonuclear reactor ITER - a prototype of the energy of the future.

Along with the development and improvement of existing technologies in front of mankind is a difficult task– the creation of fundamentally new technologies and systems for the use of energy, that is, the replacement of today's final energy consumer with systems that reproduce objects of wildlife. Today it is already obvious that this can be done by “launching the future” on the basis of convergent nano-, bio-, info-, cogno-, socio-humanitarian (NBICS) technologies.

Comment. Dear readers. By popular demand, we are posting the text of an article about NBIC (NBIC) technologies and their convergence. Please note that this is a preliminary version of the article. The final text is published in the book "New technologies and the continuation of human evolution?". Soon the book version will also be published on our website. Site editorial.

The process of development of science - if you describe it in the most general terms - begins with the emergence of many separate, unrelated areas of knowledge, for example: zoology and botany, mechanics and what was later called chemistry, etc. Later, the unification of areas of knowledge into larger complexes, and as they expanded, the trend towards specialization again manifested itself.

The development of technologies is initially different: technologies have always developed in an interconnected manner, and most of the improvements were based on advances in other areas of technology.

1. The concept of technology convergence. Description of NBIC convergence in light of the latest advances in technology. Technological perspectives.

In the distant past, most often such "catalysts" of technical progress were achievements in the creation of new materials (the appearance of bronze, steel, glass ...). This trend has continued to the present day, and more recently, for example, the spread of composite materials has made cheap and reliable private space launches possible. Also, the appearance of long (centimeter) carbon nanotubes will make it possible to build a space elevator in the near future.

But there are enough other examples where fundamental discoveries (the advent of radio), more efficient engines (heavier-than-air aircraft and the internal combustion engine) or developments in another, unrelated field (the spread of looms with control of perforated tapes for sewing shawls with complex patterns) served as catalysts. led to the appearance of counting machines on punched cards and modern computers).

However, in general, the development of technology in the past was usually determined over long periods by any one key discovery or progress in one area. So, we can single out the discovery of metallurgy, the use of steam power, the discovery of electricity, the invention and introduction into production of machines, the advent of computers, etc. Today, thanks to the acceleration of scientific and technological progress, we are witnessing the intersection in time of a number of waves of the scientific and technological revolution . In particular, one can single out the revolution in the field of information and communication technologies that has been going on since the 80s of the 20th century, the biotechnological revolution that followed it, and the revolution in the field of nanotechnologies that has recently begun. Also, one cannot ignore the rapid progress in the development of cognitive science that has taken place in the last decade, which is regarded by many scientists as an emerging revolution. Each of these areas is able to bring (and is already bringing) a lot of important theoretical and practical new results. At the same time, the results obtained have, as shown below, a noticeable impact not only on the development of their industry, but also accelerate the development of technologies in other areas of knowledge. The mutual influence of information technologies, biotechnologies, nanotechnologies and cognitive science seems to us especially interesting and significant.

This phenomenon, recently noticed by researchers, is called NBICconvergence(by the first letters of the regions: N-nano; B-bio; I-info; C-cogno). The term was introduced in 2002 by Mikhail Roko and William Bainbridge, the authors of the most significant work in this direction at the moment, the report Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance, prepared in 2002 as part of the World Technology Assessment Center (WTEC). The report is devoted to revealing the features of NBIC convergence, its significance in the general course of the technological development of world civilization, as well as its evolutionary and culture-forming significance.

Convergence (from the English convergence - convergence at one point) means not only mutual influence, but also the interpenetration of technologies, when the boundaries between individual technologies are erased, and many interesting results arise precisely in the framework of interdisciplinary work at the intersection of areas. With regard to NBIC convergence, one can even talk about the expected partial merger of these areas into a single scientific and technological field of knowledge.

Such an area will include in the subject of its study and action almost all levels of the organization of matter: from the molecular nature of matter (nano), to the nature of life (bio), the nature of the mind (cogno) and information exchange processes (info).

In the context of the history of science, the emergence of such a meta-field of knowledge will mean the "beginning of the end" of science, approaching its final stages. In this connection the works and speeches of John Horgan may be noted.

Of course, this statement should not be interpreted as an indirect argument in favor of spiritual, religious and esoteric "knowledge", that is, the transition from scientific knowledge to some other. No, "exhaustibility of scientific knowledge" means the completion of the organized human activity in studying the foundations of the material world, classifying natural phenomena, identifying the basic patterns that determine the processes going on in the world. The next step may be the study of complex systems (including much more complex than those that currently exist). Activities in this direction can develop from such areas of knowledge as cybernetics, systems analysis, synergetics, etc.

Given the interconnection of all human knowledge, the question of the structure of the totality of this knowledge is of interest. Ideally, such a structure should include all areas of knowledge: from everyday life to cultural, religious, scientific and technical. We will focus on scientific knowledge. Technological knowledge, as we will see, largely repeats the structure of scientific knowledge, and in a sense, is even built into the general system of science.

Figure 1. Map of intersections
the latest technologies.

Based on the analysis of scientific publications and using a visualization method based on mutual citation and cluster analysis, a map of the intersections of the latest technologies was created. The resulting picture is highly rigorous and internally logical. In this scheme (see Figure 1 - Source:Author'srecyclingMapping the Structure and Evolution of Science, Katy Borner, 2006, Knowledge in Service to Health: Leveraging Knowledge for Modern Science Management) reflects the nature of NBIC convergence.

Located on the periphery of the scheme, the main areas of the latest technologies form spaces of mutual intersections. At these junctions, the tools of one area are used to advance another. In addition, scientists sometimes reveal the similarity of the studied objects belonging to different areas. Of the four areas described (nano-, bio-, info-, cogno-), the most developed (information and communication technologies) at the moment most often supplies tools for the development of others. In particular, this is the possibility of computer simulation of various processes.

The second (historically and by the degree of development) area - biotechnology - also provides tools and a theoretical basis for nanotechnology and cognitive science, and even for the development of computer technology.

Indeed, the interaction of nano- and biotechnologies (as well as other components of the scheme, and this will be shown below) is two-way. Biological systems have given a number of tools for building nanostructures. For example, the possibility of synthesizing DNA sequences that fold into the necessary two-dimensional and three-dimensional structures. In the future, the possibility of synthesizing proteins that perform the specified functions of manipulating a substance at the nanolevel is visible (however, this requires solving a complex problem of studying the principles of protein folding) . The opposite possibilities have already been demonstrated, for example, modification of the shape of a protein molecule using mechanical action (fixation with a “nano-clamp”)

In the future, nanotechnology will lead to the emergence and development of a new industry, nanomedicine (and then nanobiology): a set of technologies that allow you to control biological processes at the molecular level. As this field develops, new tools (nanosensors, etc.) will be created to study biological structures at the molecular and cellular level. Currently, work in the field of nanomedicine is mainly theoretical. Of the most significant areas, the study of the possibility of creating respirocytes should be indicated.

In general, the relationship between nano- and bio-fields of science and technology is extremely deep and fundamental. When considering living (biological) structures at the molecular level, their chemical-mechanical nature becomes apparent. If at the macro level the combination of living and non-living (for example, a person and a mechanical prosthesis) leads to the emergence of a creature of mixed nature (cyborg), then at the micro level this is not so obvious. For example, ATP synthase (biological structure) is essentially a conventional electric motor. Therefore, hybrid systems already being developed (a microrobot with a bacterial flagellum as an engine) do not fundamentally differ from natural (virus) or artificial systems. Thus, this feature of both nanotechnologies and biotechnologies leads to a particularly pronounced convergence.

As can be seen from Figure 1, nanotechnologies and cognitive science are the most distant from each other, since the opportunities for interaction between them are limited. In addition, as noted above, nanotechnology and cognitive science are the most recently developed areas, and therefore their development and interaction is largely in the future. Of the prospects that are already visible, first of all, the use of nanotools for analyzing the brain and its computer simulation should be singled out. Existing external methods of brain scanning do not provide sufficient depth and resolution. Of course, there is a huge potential for improving their characteristics (terahertz scanners, more efficient computer algorithms for processing, etc.). But nanotechnologies (nanorobots) seem to be the most technically simple way to study the activity of individual neurons and even their intracellular structures. So, for example, Korchmaryuk Ya.I. writes about the use of nanotechnological intracellular "spy sensors" to analyze the work of a neuron and build a model of its work.

The interaction between nanotechnologies and information technologies is bilateral synergistic and, what is especially interesting, recursively mutually reinforcing. On the one hand, information technologies are used to simulate nanodevices (being, in some way, a “stepping stone” for the development of nanotechnologies). On the other hand, even today there is an active use of (still primitive) nanotechnologies to create more powerful computing and communication devices. As nanotechnology advances, accelerated advances in computer technology (perhaps in line with Moore's Law) will become possible, supporting the accelerated growth of nanotechnology. Such a synergistic interaction is very likely to ensure a relatively rapid (only 20-30 years) development of nanotechnologies to the level of molecular production (one of the two main expected technological achievements of the 21st century, the second is “strong” artificial intelligence (see below)), which, in turn, lead to computers powerful enough to simulate the human brain.

There are various approaches to further increasing the computing power of computers, but they all, of course, involve miniaturization and compaction. Nanotechnology will make it possible to create nanoelectronic devices with the atomic size of elements, as well as nanomechanical systems (gears and rods systems).

Simulation of molecular systems is still at the beginning of its development, but impressive progress has already been achieved, proving the fundamental possibility of simulating complex nanodevices. It was possible to simulate (with atomic accuracy, taking into account thermal and quantum effects) the operation of molecular devices up to 20 thousand atoms in size. It was possible to build atomic models of viruses and some cellular structures several million atoms in size. Significant advances have been made in modeling the process of protein folding. It is interesting to note that as computing technology advances, the number of atoms required for a computer simulation of a single atom will decrease. This is another example of convergence.

It is also important to note that in the last decade there has been a final formation of a new scientific field: cognitive science, which marked the beginning of the last, fourth wave of the modern scientific and technological revolution. Cognitive science or cognitology (“the science of the mind”) combines the achievements of cognitive psychology, psychophysics, research in the field of artificial intelligence, neurobiology, neurophysiology, linguistics, mathematical logic, neurology, philosophy, and other sciences.

The key technological advance that made cognitology possible was new methods of brain scanning. Tomography and other methods for the first time made it possible to look inside the brain and obtain direct, rather than indirect, data on its work. Increasingly powerful computers also played an important role.

The study of brain activity was carried out not only at the level of the entire system, but also at the level of individual elements. It became possible to study in detail the functions of neurotransmitters and their distribution in the brain, as well as the work of individual neurons and their parts.

Information technology is also used to model biological systems. A new field of bioinformatics (computational biology) has emerged. There was even a new type of biological / medical experiments insilico(in computer simulation) in addition to the well-known invivo and invitro. To date, a wide variety of models have been created that simulate systems from molecular interactions to populations. The integration of such simulations of various levels is handled, in particular, by systems biology. A number of projects, such as IUPS Physiome, FAS Digital Human, DoE ORNL Virtual Human, NASA Digital Astronaut, DoD DARPA Virtual Soldier, NIH NLM Visible Human and others, are integrating models of various human levels. An important modeling parameter is the depth of model development and its accuracy. At present, models of large biological systems describe them approximately. At the same time, it is theoretically and practically possible to implement full simulation with up to atomic accuracy. At the moment, as we have already said (see above), virus models (including those created using scanning microscopy) containing several million atoms and models of intracellular structures (RNA, etc.) of similar complexity have been demonstrated.

Increasing the scale of modeling requires a further increase in the computing power of computers. As it continues, detailed and accurate modeling of bacteria, whole cells of the human body, and in the future even the human brain and the whole organism will become possible. International scientific projects have already begun, setting themselves precisely such goals. Project e. ColiAlliance working on modeling the bacterium E. coli. Project Bluebrain(a joint project between IBM and Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne) was created to work on modeling the human cerebral cortex.

The most important task for understanding the principles of the work of living systems is the study of the work of proteins. The problem is compounded by the extreme complexity of protein folding during synthesis. Considerable accuracy is required in modeling, which is possible only with high computing power. Currently, supercomputers or distributed computing systems such as Folding @ Home and others are usually used for this. As computing power grows and computer parallelization advances, our ability to simulate biological systems will also grow.

In the future, full modeling of living organisms will become possible, from the genetic code to the structure of the organism, its growth and development, to the evolution of the population. The creatures obtained on a computer can in principle be created in reality using DNA synthesis and artificial cultivation, or even with the help of nanotechnology.

Not only computer technologies have a great influence on the development of biotechnology. The reverse process is also observed, for example, in the development of so-called DNA computers. One of the most interesting areas of computer science is the theory of cellular automata. To date, the parallels between cellular automata and DNA have been well studied. There are also first practical results. The practical possibility of computing on so-called DNA computers has been demonstrated. It turned out that DNA computers have high parallelism and can solve a number of problems no less efficiently than traditional electronic computers. In addition, they can be used as interfaces between electronic and biological devices.

It is also worth noting that the organism as a whole has certain characteristics characteristic of cybernetic devices. For example, the development of an organism during growth has a number of parallels with such mathematical constructions as the same cellular automata. Some researchers involved in the study of the laws of the structure of living systems, such as Stephen Wolfram, talk about their original mathematics.

The interaction between the very first in time of occurrence and the last waves of scientific and technological revolution (computer and cognitive) is of an interesting nature and is, perhaps, the most important "point of scientific and technological growth" in the future.

First, information technology has made it possible to study the brain much better than before. All existing brain scanning technologies require powerful computers and specialized computer algorithms to reconstruct a three-dimensional picture of the processes occurring in the brain from many individual two-dimensional images and other processes.

Secondly, the development of computers makes it possible (and, as we have seen, there are some successes along the way) to simulate the brain. Even in managed to create computer models of individual neurons. Then more complex models of individual systems were created. The fundamental possibility of recreating in a computer model with an accuracy of 95% the process of functioning of a part of the rat hippocampus was demonstrated. A chip that implements these functions, created specifically for the purposes of the experiment, in principle, can be implanted in the brain, replacing part of it. Work in progress (project) Bluebrain) on the creation of complete computer models of individual neocortical columns, which are the basic building block of the cerebral cortex. In the future (according to experts, by 2030-2040), it is possible to create complete computer simulations of the human brain, which means simulating the mind, personality, consciousness and other properties of the human psyche (the transfer of the human mind to a computer medium is called "loading" or "uploading". It is interesting that, according to experts, even before the possibility of a complete simulation of the human brain will be created (since they do not require such high computing power) and virtual reality technologies will become widespread, that is, an accurate simulation of the physical world.

Thirdly, the development of "neuro-silicone" interfaces (combining nerve cells and electronic devices into a single system) opens up wide opportunities for cyborgization (connecting artificial body parts, organs, etc. to a person through the nervous system), the development of interfaces "brain -computer" (direct connection of computers to the brain, bypassing the usual sensory channels) to provide highly efficient two-way communication. A remarkable experiment in developing such an interface was carried out by the Cyberkinetics research group in 2004. As a result of the experiment, an almost completely paralyzed person was able to control the cursor on the monitor screen, drawing, switching programs, etc. The number of such experiments is growing.

Fourthly, the rapid progress observed now in cognitive science will soon, as scientists believe, make it possible to “unravel the riddle of the mind”, that is, to describe and explain the processes in the human brain responsible for the higher nervous activity of a person. The next step is likely to be the implementation of these principles in general artificial intelligence systems. Generalized artificial intelligence (also known as “strong AI” and “human-level AI”) will have the ability to self-learn, be creative, work with arbitrary subject areas, and communicate freely with a person. The creation of "strong AI" will be one of the two major technological advances of the 21st century.

The reciprocal impact of information technology on the cognitive realm has been shown to be quite significant, but it is not limited to the use of computers in the study of the brain. ICTs are also (already) being used to enhance human intelligence. In such areas of human activity as searching and processing information, structuring knowledge, planning activities, organizing creative thinking, etc., specially created computer tools play a significant role. As the capabilities of “weak AI” expand (that is, various computer agents, contextual search systems, data analysis systems, etc.), they increasingly complement the natural abilities of a person to work with information. As this area develops, the formation of the “external cortex” (“exocortex”) of the brain will occur, that is, a system of programs that complement and expand human thought processes. It is natural to assume that in the future elements of artificial intelligence will be integrated into the human mind using direct brain-computer interfaces. Many scientists believe that this can happen in the 2020-2030s. In the longer term, such an expansion of human capabilities may lead (in parallel with the development of “strong AI” systems) to the formation of the so-called overmind: enhanced human intelligence, the limit of which is difficult to determine.

In general, we can say that the phenomenon of NBIC convergence, which is developing before our eyes, is a radically new stage in scientific and technological progress and, in terms of its possible consequences, is a new, most important evolutionary determining factor.

Distinctive features of NBIC convergence are:

• intensive interaction between the specified scientific and technological fields
• significant synergistic effect
• breadth of consideration and influence - from the atomic level of matter to intelligent systems
• qualitative growth of technological possibilities of individual and social development of a person

2. Philosophical and ideological problems generated by NBIC convergence. Erasure of borders or a new frontier?

NBIC convergence is not only of great scientific and technological importance. Technological opportunities revealed in the course of NBIC convergence will inevitably lead to serious cultural, philosophical and social upheavals. In particular, this concerns the revision of traditional ideas about such fundamental concepts as life, mind, man, nature, existence.

Historically, these categories were formed and developed (starting from the level of everyday understanding and ending with philosophical understanding) within the framework of human life, human society. Therefore, these categories correctly describe only phenomena and objects that do not go beyond the familiar and familiar. It is impossible to try to use them in their former quality, with the same content to describe the new world being created before our eyes with the help of convergence technologies - just like the indivisible, unchanging atoms of Democritus do not allow us to scientifically reliably describe thermonuclear fusion on the Sun or explain the mechanical properties of nitride boron.

It is possible that humanity will have to move from certainty based on everyday experience to understanding that in the real world there are no clear boundaries between many previously considered dichotomous phenomena. First of all, in the light of recent research, the usual distinction between living and non-living things loses its meaning.

Natural scientists have long faced this problem. Thus, viruses are usually not classified as either living or non-living systems, considering them as an intermediate level in terms of complexity. After the discovery of prions - complex organic molecules capable of reproduction - the boundary between living and non-living became even more blurred. The development of bio- and nanotechnologies threatens to completely erase this line. The construction of a whole range of functional systems of a continuously more complex design - from simple mechanical nanodevices to living intelligent beings - will mean that there is no fundamental difference between living and non-living things, there are only systems that, to varying degrees, have characteristics traditionally associated with life.

Moreover, from a psychological point of view, the idea of ​​the existence of a living-non-living dichotomy may disappear in the very near future, with the advent of efficient autonomous robots. The human brain tends to consider any object that behaves as it should be alive.

Also, the distinction between a thinking system that has a mind and free will and a hard-coded one is gradually being erased. Neuroscientists, for example, have long had an understanding that the human brain is a biological machine: a flexible yet programmed cybernetic system. The development of neurophysiology made it possible to show that human abilities (such as face recognition, goal setting, etc.) are localized and can be turned on or off due to organic damage to certain areas of the brain or the introduction of certain substances into the body.

The emergence of strong artificial intelligence will mean that certain behavioral algorithms, on the one hand, can be hard-coded and fully understood by the programmer, and on the other hand, can implement intelligent behavior in computers and robots.

As noted above, the blurring of the boundaries between living and non-living can deprive the “absolutist” understanding of life of meaning. And if there is nothing "absolutely" alive, then many values ​​that have grown on this soil also lose their significance. So, already now living beings are created "artificially": with the help of genetic engineering. The day is not far off when it will become possible to create complex living beings (including with the help of nanotechnologies) from individual elements of molecular dimensions. In addition to expanding the boundaries of human creativity, this will inevitably mean a transformation of our ideas about birth and death.

One of the consequences of such opportunities will be the spread of the “informational” interpretation of life, when the main value is not a material object (including a living being) as such, but information about it. This will lead to the implementation of scenarios of the so-called "digital immortality": the restoration of living intelligent beings from the preserved information about them. Such a possibility, until recently considered only by science fiction writers and partly by everyday tradition (immortality embodied in deeds and creativity), is already acquiring its first features. So, in 2005, Hanson Robotics created a robotic double of the writer Philip Dick, reproducing the writer's appearance with all the writer's works loaded into a primitive brain-computer. You can talk to the robot about Dick's creativity.

The development of cognitive science and information technology, in particular artificial intelligence technologies, will also show that intelligent systems operate on the basis of simple rules. A sufficiently complex system of simple rules can not only appear reasonable (when assessed by behavior), but also be reasonable, as far as it is generally possible to judge

The complex behavior of bacteria, insects, animals, humans consists of many simple rules. On the example of bacteria, some of which have vision (!), smell and other senses, we can observe the mechanistic nature of their behavior. An increase in the concentration of such a substance or a stream of photons triggers a complex cascade of chemical reactions that causes the body to react. Likewise, the whole complexity of the human mind is perhaps amenable to a reductionist approach. Light-sensitive cells respond to the number of photons that enter the eye after reflecting off the fragments of letters on this sheet of paper. Groups of several neurons in the visual zone of the brain, through simple mathematical manipulations, select vertical and horizontal lines. Level by level, a complex of reactions is formed in the human brain, which ends with the understanding and creative understanding of the text.

And no matter how much some would like to revive the idea of ​​some ideal essences (life, mind, etc.), there are no convincing grounds for this. And it is possible that the living is just a very complex inanimate, and the intelligent is just a very complex non-intelligent.

An example of the arbitrary attribution of objects to the class of intelligent ones are the arguments that a “machine” (computer, artificial intelligence) cannot think. Arguments based on the fact that the human mind has some unique quality are difficult to refute today, when there is no working strong AI, but as artificial intelligence develops and, in particular, gradually merges with the human mind, these arguments will lose their strength.

It is also necessary to reconsider the nature of man himself. This is not the first time in human history that this has happened. Prior to this, the attitude towards individual cohorts changed in a similar way: women, children, other races, followers of different religions, etc. Some classes of people were either included in the concept of a person, or excluded from it. In the 20th century, in some countries, the question arose about the moment of the origin of human life in connection with the development of abortion technology. As the restructuring of man, the question of the boundaries of "humanity" will arise more than once.

Relatively simply, this issue is resolved when we improve the present human nature (medicine, prosthetics, glasses, etc.). Historically, there is no upper limit of "humanity". It is possible that due to its irrelevance until recently, little attention was paid to the topic of defining the boundaries of “humanity”.

The situation is somewhat more complicated with the transformation, modification of a person. If a person consciously acquires something that was not characteristic of people before (gills, for example) and refuses what is characteristic (lungs in this case), is it possible to speak of a “loss of humanity”? The only reasonable solution to such questions seems to be the conclusion that "man" is just a convenient label that we have come up with for the world we are familiar with.

As we can see, just as with the traditional dichotomies of living-non-living, sentient-nonsentient, the existence of a boundary between human and non-human can also be questioned. And it is modern science that brings us to this, NBIC convergence - in the first place.

As an example of the relativity of the concept of reason, one can cite ideas and plans for the so-called "elevation" of animals. It is known that the abilities of a modern person are mainly determined by the upbringing and education that he receives. Without this, his intellectual and psychological level would correspond to the level of a caveman. There is a lot of evidence that, with adequate upbringing, some animals (first of all, higher primates, possibly dolphins) show unusually high abilities. Providing animals with appropriate upbringing and education may become ethically necessary for a person at a certain stage of his development. In addition, other tools (regulation of metabolism, amplification of the brain of animals using direct interfaces, genetic engineering, etc.) can also be effective in this work.

With such a development of events, such animals can be considered reasonable, which means that the line between a person (reasonable) and animals will become less obvious.

Similarly, the development of humanoid robots and endowing them with artificial intelligence will lead to blurring the boundaries between humans and robots.

Equally ambiguous is the question of what will be called nature in the future. The idea of ​​man as a small, weak being in a large, hostile and dangerous world inevitably changes as man gains more and more control over the world. With the development of nanotechnology, humanity can potentially take control of any processes on the planet. What will happen in this case is “nature”, where will “nature” be located, and in general - does nature exist on the planet, where there is no place for large-scale random phenomena, where each atom is in its place, where everything is controlled - from global weather to biochemical processes in a single cell? Here, the erasure of another dichotomy is visible: “artificial” - “natural”.

The naive idea that nature can "revenge", that more advanced technologies bring more risks and more negative consequences, has no basis. Now the question of creating fault-tolerant systems with guaranteed reliable operation is already being raised. The creation of such systems will inevitably include the development of control systems and algorithms for fail-safe operation.

In addition to the disappearance of spontaneity, an important difference between the controlled world will be the artificiality (in the modern sense of the word) of its content. The planet (however, we can also talk about a space station or a virtual world) will no longer be a place where a person ended up, it will be an artifact created by a person.

Equally unusual in the light of the development of NBIC convergence is the concept of existence some object. The first step towards the transformation of the philosophical category of existence will be an "informational" view of objects (somewhat similar to Platonism). This means that if, from the point of view of outside observers, there is no difference between the physical existence of an object and the existence of information about it (as is the case with a computer simulation or restoration of an object from indirect information about it), then the question becomes: should physical existence be given special importance? carrier of information? If not, then how much information should be stored and in what form, so that we can talk about the existence of information? Inevitably, consideration of these questions will lead to the disappearance of certainty even about what existence is.

3. Possible impact of NBIC convergence on the evolution of civilization.

The development of NBIC technologies means the beginning of a new stage in human evolution. As you know, the first stage of the evolution of the Universe was the formation of matter and stable systems (atoms and molecules), the second - cosmic evolution (the formation of galaxies, stars and planets), the third - biological evolution (the origin and development of life), the fourth - the social and technological evolution of intelligent creatures. Now the stage of directed conscious evolution begins.

Peculiarity directed evolution, as the name implies, is the presence of a goal. The usual evolutionary process, based on the mechanisms of natural selection, is blind and is guided only by local optima. Artificial selection carried out by man is aimed at the formation and consolidation of the desired traits. However, the lack of effective evolutionary mechanisms has so far limited the scope of artificial selection. In place of a long and gradual process of accumulation of favorable changes (whether it be changes that increase survival and offspring, or approaching the ideal chosen by breeders), there is an engineering process of setting holistic goals and their systematic achievement. At the same time, if today the scope of goals is limited by their practical achievability, then under conditions of direct control over the genotype and phenotype of a living organism, as well as the structure of non-biological complex systems, a variety of goals can be achieved.

If we talk about biological systems, then the path to directed evolution lies, in particular, through understanding the functions of the genome and proteins. The first significant step has already been taken - in 2006, the successful completion of the Human Genome Project was officially announced. The genomes of a number of other organisms have also been fully deciphered. Some progress has been made in understanding the mechanism of genetic programs (genetic markers, etc.). The next important task is to understand the functions of each individual gene, which is directly related to the problem of protein folding in particular and understanding of protein biochemistry in general. This, as well as complex modeling of the human body, will make it possible to study biological systems as a whole, providing a complete understanding of the processes of growth, metabolism and functioning of the body. Upon completion of this work, it will be possible to make desirable changes to existing organisms, as well as to create completely new ones in accordance with the goals and objectives set, which is partly already being done.

The first practical results of directed evolution can already be observed (the appearance of genetically modified plants and animals, early abortions of fetuses with Down syndrome, etc.). As our capabilities expand, new results will appear. From genetically modified bacteria, plants and animals (today) to virus-based molecular machines (one of the ways to create molecular machines). Then - to artificially created biological systems to perform industrial, medical and other functions (bacteria that collect harmful substances from the environment, new elements of the artificial immune system, etc.), to the elevation of animals, the creation of complex chimeric and artificial organisms.

The final stage of development of this direction is difficult to describe in the usual terms, which is also true for forecasts in other areas of NBIC convergence. The descriptive problem is that traditional terms, categories and images were formed by human culture in conditions of limited material, technical and intellectual resources, which imposed significant restrictions on our descriptive capabilities. Therefore, suffice it to say that the biological systems of the distant future will be ideally suited to the current needs of their creators, whatever they may be.

Biological systems based on proteins and DNA are just one of the known approaches to the development of an extremely promising industry - nanotechnology. Another well-known approach is nanomechanical devices (“Drexler approach”), which are currently being developed in many countries, primarily in the USA. However, both of these approaches (and some others proposed today) implicitly assume their own limitations. The DNA approach is limited by the chemical potential of proteins and the chemistry of aqueous solutions. The nanomechanical approach is limited by the available complexity of systems (relatively simple systems understandable within the traditional engineering approach). As the potential of these approaches is realized and the capabilities of tools (simulations, nanomanipulators, AI designers) are increased, directed evolution will increase. New systems will be both extremely complex (10 30 atoms or more and optimized at the atomic level (principle: every atom in its place). Note that the expression "every atom in its place" is often used to describe positioning accuracy, but can also have the second It is important to note that in mature nanotechnological systems, additional features provided by greater complexity will be optimally balanced with reliability (due to duplication, verification, etc.) Theoretical work in this direction is also underway.

The existence of living beings can theoretically be based on a new nanotechnological substrate. Part of this existence will be simulated in computers, partly implemented in real physical functional systems. The complexity of reproducible systems will continuously increase up to the level of "society" or "humanity". The existing concept of the noosphere can, with some reservations, be used to describe the result of such transformations. Of course, the authors of the idea of ​​the noosphere, being within the framework of the paradigm of human development traditional for the level of knowledge of the middle of the 20th century, could not adequately reflect the real complexity of the resulting systems, just as we cannot definitively do this either. But the idea of ​​transition from physical and material development to informational (cybernetic) development of complex structures seems to be generally correct.

Another existing concept, the Kardashov civilization scale model, evades the description of complexity and speaks of the resulting scale of systems. Therefore, there are some doubts about its applicability. It is possible that it describes the development of “generally human” systems and is not adequate to describe the universal supercomplex functional systems, the emergence of which, given the NBIC convergence, we can expect. It is not clear why qualitative changes in the organization of systems must necessarily be tied to astronomical changes in the amount of energy consumed.

The systems described above will naturally strive for an optimal physical state where safety and efficient operation could be considered assured. This is fundamentally different from the development of life on Earth and the development of mankind until today, where the main focus of activity was connected precisely with ensuring safety and functioning. An extremely interesting question is where the focus of attention of complex systems like the ones described will shift. Possible alternative: Increasing internal complexity. At the same time, increasing complexity will not be an end in itself, but the result of achieving certain goals set by the system.

The growth in the complexity of systems is described within the framework of info- (as well as cogno-) directions. Now one of the urgent problems of informatics is precisely to ensure the possibility of developing complex systems, such as operating systems, etc. Probably, those developments that will appear in the next decade (programming without errors, systems with guaranteed reliability, methods for designing complex programs, new evolutionary algorithms and etc.) will form the basis of the first steps towards supercomplex systems.

It is interesting to note that the increase in complexity is one of the trends that characterize technological progress throughout the history of mankind. It suffices to compare such technological objects as a car, a telephone, or a prosthetic hand made at the beginning of the 20th century and at the beginning of the 21st century.

Thus, the changes caused by convergence can be characterized as revolutionary in terms of the breadth of the phenomena captured and the scale of future transformations. In addition, there is every reason to believe that, due to the action of Moore's law and the growing influence of information technology on NBIC convergence, the process of transforming the technological order, society and man will (by historical standards) not be long and gradual, but quite fast and short.

It is difficult to give any characteristics of a situation in which all aspects of a person's life will become the object of transformations. Whether some favorable stable state will be reached, whether growth and complication will continue indefinitely, or whether such a path of development will end in some kind of catastrophe, is still impossible to say. But it is possible to try to make some assumptions about the social evolution of mankind in the new conditions.

The evolution of society has been going on for millennia. There has been a gradual transformation from biologically (ethologically) conditioned packs into complex social structures. Today, social structures are already quite complex. In particular, thanks to the development of communication technologies, the number of contacts for each person actively using the Internet has increased significantly and can reach thousands of people. And thanks to the use of information technology, information about all these contacts and connections is stored and constantly available. Online social networks such as "My Circle" or orkut replace part of the human social intelligence and memory with a computer system. It can be expected that as penetrating computer systems ( pervasivecomputing- "penetrating" and wearable computers) social information will be increasingly available to a person and more and more in demand and used.

Moreover, given the development of information and communication technologies and artificial intelligence, we have the right to expect serious progress in studying the laws governing the existence of social structures. In the last decades of the 20th century, the active use of mathematical methods in the social sciences began. The development of these areas can eventually lead to the emergence of a detailed and very complete knowledge about the patterns of development of social structures of different levels of complexity, as well as tools for purposeful management of society. The appearance of such a science will mean the end of spontaneous evolution and the transition to the conscious management of society.

Of course, the first attempts in this area were made a long time ago, starting with the first utopias and ending with large-scale experiments in the field of social management in the 20th century (the institute of public relations and methods of manipulating consciousness in the United States, building a communist society in socialist countries, the totalitarian system of the North Korea, etc.). However, all these attempts were based on a very imperfect understanding of the mechanisms of functioning and development of society.

Over time, the results of social construction will be much more consistent with the goals. It should be noted, however, that the element of spontaneity may be preserved due to the existence of competing interests on the part of the various parties.

How will civilization develop with the advent of effective tools for social construction and as technology converges? Let us briefly consider five different levels of organization of society: technological, economic, social, cultural and biological.

The emergence of Homo sapiens is inextricably linked with the emergence of tools, and hence the technologies for their use and manufacture. As noted above, the interconnection of various technological areas up until the 20th century was not very high. Breakthrough innovations took a long time to emerge and spread (in some cases, hundreds of years). Science was not yet a direct productive force, so a long period of time passed from the emergence of new scientific knowledge to the creation of a technological solution based on it and its implementation. Accordingly, the consequences in the development of society also followed with a large interval (several generations). Even the industrial revolution lasted for several generations.

With the development of convergence, for the first time we are seeing a parallel accelerated development of a number of scientific and technological areas that directly affect society. Let us consider what is the impact of convergence on the economy in the future. Of particular interest are the likely qualitative changes in the economic system under the influence of the technologies described above.

In the long term, the development of the economy is determined, in particular - and the further, the more so - by the development of technology. This refers to the fact that the average productivity of labor - a key indicator of economic development - is determined precisely by technology. This includes technologies for the manufacture and use of tools, production processes and business processes.

The development of NBIC technologies will lead to a significant leap in the capabilities of the productive forces. With the help of nanotechnologies, namely, molecular production, it is possible to create material objects with an extremely low cost. Molecular nanomachines, including nanoassemblers, can be invisible to the eye and distributed in space, waiting for a production command. Such a situation can be characterized as the transformation of nature into a direct productive force, that is, the elimination of traditional production relations in society. Such a state of affairs could theoretically be characterized by the absence of a state, the absence of commodity-money relations, and a high level of people's freedom. It should be noted, however, that such a forecast still cannot be applied to describe the consequences of the introduction of molecular production, since such technologies will also be used to rebuild the person himself, depriving the question of industrial relations and the social system in the traditional formulation.

It is more correct, in our opinion, to speak - taking into account the predicted possibility of self-reproduction of nanoassemblers - about the appearance of virtually unlimited resources. This will be a radical break with the million-year historical and evolutionary tradition, when relations between people were built and developed in the context of the struggle for limited resources. In the new situation, traditional economics and even evolutionary theory in its current form cease to be applicable. The relationship between individual entities and the development of the system they compose will be described by other principles and patterns that we have yet to understand or even construct.

Even before molecular manufacturing radically changes the economic situation, some important consequences for the economy of the development of other areas can be noted.

Biotechnologies are unlikely to have such a radical impact on the economic aspects of human life, their main impact will be directed at the person himself. In the field of cognitive technologies, the development of artificial intelligence, which will guide many nanorobots in their productive work, can become a key achievement in relation to the economy.

Information technology is already beginning to radically change the usual economic realities. In particular, the principle of resource abundance is most evident in this area. The possibility of unlimited copying of information makes it possible to maximize the economic effect on the scale of the whole society (of course, if the problem of motivating producers of information products is adequately solved). On the example of information products like Wikipedia, Linux, we are already seeing the huge results of mass non-commercial work.

Here it should be noted that when they talk about increasing the share of information in manufactured products, it means that the main value is information about the product necessary for its reproduction, and not the resources directly used in production. As manufacturing capabilities evolve (robotics, affordable 3D printers, universal desktop production machines, etc. (all of which are already available), not to mention the promise of molecular manufacturing), the share of resource and labor costs will continue to decline. Already today, situations are not uncommon when information about material objects is freely distributed by interested parties, which leads to unexpected economic consequences.

In the future, information and communication technologies will be integrated into the global production system, enabling nanotechnology and artificial intelligence to operate with the greatest efficiency.

The development of society will be largely determined by changes in the productive forces. The transformation of work, the main trends of which are already manifesting themselves at the present time, will require the redirection of the released creative forces and energy and a change in people's priorities. The social networks mentioned above will expand the range of possible relationships. If the predictions about the movement towards "noospheric" development turn out to be correct, then relationships associated with creative and cognitive activity will develop. In general, regarding the social development of society in a few decades (exactly such terms are indicated by experts, predicting the emergence of nanoassemblers? There are still more questions than answers.

Nevertheless, it is likely that part of the existing social structures will remain for quite a long time with only minor changes. However, in the future, growing autonomy will lead to the emergence of new communities, new social norms within the old systems. Many subcultures, such as open source developers, multiplayer online role-playing game players, etc., now exist largely or entirely online.

What will be the culture of mankind in the process of transformation, it is difficult to say. But this process can be seriously affected by changes in moral and ethical standards, which will inevitably occur precisely as a result of the development of modern technologies. The development of cognitive technologies will make it possible to construct ethical systems. Ideas about ethical and unethical actions can be controlled. Similar technologies can be used first in relation to convicted criminals (the exclusion of aggressiveness), and then used more widely. The criterion of pleasure, one of the rather important ethical criteria since the time of Epicurus, is also being transformed - it will become possible to receive pleasure without being tied to specific actions or events.

How will civilization develop from the point of view of the biological level of its organization? Already today, many people owe their lives to modern medical technology. In the future, this phenomenon will manifest itself to an increasing extent: genetic engineering, artificial organs, and other medical technologies will be responsible for reducing mortality and increasing life expectancy. In addition, people modified and enhanced by convergent technologies will begin to make up an increasing proportion of the population. Gradually, the importance of the artificial component (created or controlled using bio- and cogno-technologies) will increase.

We can say that the biological evolution of man will resume.

Of course, this has already happened in the past. Hundreds of thousands of years ago, the ancestors of modern man underwent significant biological changes, eventually leading to the emergence of the mind. It so happened that, starting from a certain moment, increased intellectual abilities allowed people to radically increase the survival rate of their offspring, and adaptability allowed a person to continuously develop more and more new territories. This led to a gradual decrease in the importance of biological natural selection. Genetically modern man differs little from his prehistoric ancestors. But human biological changes are not a thing of the past.

In the near future, they will be implemented at a new level, with the help of direct intervention in the genetic code and in the processes of human life. Two key areas can be distinguished here: the restructuring of the human body and the restructuring of his mind.

Reshaping the body will use biotech, reshaping the mind will use cognitive technology. Of course, the restructuring mechanisms will be similar in many respects - deciphering the genetic year, cellular technologies, modeling biochemical processes, implanting electronic devices, using nanomedical robots, etc.

The difference lies in the fact that the restructuring of the human body from the point of view of many people (these points of view, of course, can change) does not radically change the nature of a person, while the restructuring of the mind, the work of the brain, does. It seems obvious that there is no fundamental difference between the possibilities obtained through body modification and the use of external tools. There are, of course, differences in accessibility, effectiveness, etc., but even with all these modifications, many will still consider the modified person to be still a person.

Also of interest is the scenario of the rejection of some human qualities (that is, the creation of not “more than a person”, but “less than a person” or “other than a person”). Examples today are amputators, voluntary eunuchs, anti-sex (asexuals), anti-children (childfree), and other modern subcultures whose members refuse body parts, some aspects of behavior or social activities. In the case of modification of consciousness and mind, the situation is radically different.

The problem of enhanced human intelligence is not yet sufficiently developed. Although some authors believe that there is no fundamental difference between any sufficiently complex creatures, this approach can hardly be directly applicable to comparing the intellectual capabilities of man and superintelligence.

The question of the limits of "humanity" may well become one of the main political issues in the future. At the same time, it must be clearly understood that the improvement of the human mind (his work) is already possible today within the framework of the approach called “completion of the mind” ( intelligence augmentation http://website/bazovaya-sistema-modeliro http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/09/15/wbionic15.xml

A functional system is a concept that includes living beings and machines of varying complexity.

First of all, at the level of system organization, the transition to hypothetical pico- and femto-levels is less interesting, although if it is possible, then it will also be implemented.

Science Matrix by Mikhail Kovalchuk

Over hundreds of years of development, humanity has built a highly specialized system of science and education. On the one hand, this system is unique, as it allowed the creation of a modern civilization. On the other - a dead end. The state that accepts the challenge of the interdisciplinary organization of science will be among the leaders of the 21st century. The future belongs to convergent technologies, says the director of the Kurchatov Institute Mikhail Kovalchuk .

Mikhail Kovalchuk: “We need to bet on the development of convergent technologies. This will allow Russia to take off in the same way as we once took off in nuclear energy or space.”

With the development of convergent technologies, many scientists associate the sixth wave of technological development, which is expected to begin in 2010. Forecasts of scientists were the basis of the famous report on convergent technologies NBIC (N - nano, B - bio, I - info and C - cogno) prepared several years ago by the US National Science Foundation and the US Department of the Economy. But even before the appearance of the American report, in 1998 Mikhail Kovalchuk proposed his own ideology of combining the same four areas of knowledge. Now the Kurchatov Institute headed by him is organizing Center for Convergent Technologies where this idea finds practical implementation: cognitive research will develop in close interaction with work in the field of cell and molecular biology, biotechnology, physics, chemistry, nano- and information technologies.

How to catch up with a departing train

Russian science and education fell out of the world development process for 15–20 years. While the train was moving, we stood. And in this sense, any attempts to catch up with the departing train, to cling to the last car, are absolutely meaningless, Mikhail Kovalchuk said at the MEPhI at the international conference "Innovative approaches and information technologies for the introduction of a new generation of state standards for higher professional education."

“We need to bet on the development of convergent technologies,” says the director of the Kurchatov Institute. “This will allow Russia to take off in the same way that we once took off in nuclear energy or space.”

The problem is that the development of such technologies requires an interdisciplinary approach, and science (both Russian and global) has been developing along a highly specialized path for many years. To solve such a problem as, for example, designing an artificial eye (an example, according to Mr. Kovalchuk, is populist and scientifically not entirely correct, but very specific and understandable), you need to gather a dozen and a half people of different specialties, put them in one room, give them money and set a common goal. And only in this case it will be possible to achieve the desired.

“The existing system is against an interdisciplinary approach,” Mikhail Kovalchuk is convinced. - For example, the Russian Academy of Sciences seems to be a multidisciplinary organization. But each department - physics, chemistry, biology, etc. fenced off by a tall wall one from the other. Everyone has their own money, their own institutions, their own conferences, journals… The whole system is set up to ensure that scientific areas do not mix.”

This is how it happened historically. More than 300 years ago, in Newton's time, there was only one science - natural science, and only one type of scientist - the natural scientist. As the tools of science and ideas about the world improved, people began to single out different sectors in a single nature that were easier to understand - physics, chemistry, biology, etc. As a result, over hundreds of years of development, humanity has built a highly specialized system of science and education.

• On the one hand, this system is unique, because modern civilization has been created with its help. On the other hand, it turned out to be a dead end. Therefore, it is no coincidence that the idea of ​​launching a collider appeared, which should simulate the big bang that occurred 14 billion years ago, when the Universe arose. Of the total amount of energy and matter that appeared at the time of the explosion, humanity understands and uses only five percent. This means that we live in a kind of illusory world, which is only five percent of the real world, notes Mikhail Kovalchuk.

Mankind now has serious knowledge in the field of living organic nature, as well as super-developed technologies. The combination of these possibilities is the next step in the development of science and technology.

.

Information and nanotechnologies - a supra-industry priority, a single foundation for the development of all sectors of the new science-intensive economy of a post-industrial society - From a presentation by Mikhail Kovalchuk

The state that accepts the challenge of the interdisciplinary organization of science and follows the path of creating a new system will be among the leaders of the 21st century.

Info and nano - the basis of association

The narrow sectoral principle of organizing science and education predetermined the sectoral nature of the economy. If we trace the stages of industrial development, then first branch technologies appeared (metallurgy, chemical industry, building materials, mining, etc.), then integrated ones began to develop (microelectronics, large-scale engineering, energy, etc.).

• A few decades ago, for the first time, fundamentally different technologies appeared for the first time - information technologies that affect the development of all other technologies and branches of knowledge. Nanotechnology has become another unifying element. Information and nanotechnologies return us to the unity of the picture of the world, to natural science. Nanotechnology is a supra-industry priority, a single foundation for the development of all sectors of the new science-intensive economy of a post-industrial society.

Among the main features of the current stage of development of the scientific sphere Mikhail Kovalchuk singled out:

• 1) transition to nanoscale, change in the development paradigm - from analysis to synthesis,
• 2) convergence and interpenetration of inorganic matter and the organic world of living nature,
• 3) an interdisciplinary approach instead of narrow specializations.

Supertech + Wildlife

• The path that is connected with the launch of the future implies the combination of the capabilities of modern technologies, primarily microelectronics, with "constructions" created by living nature. Its goal: the creation of anthropomorphic technical systems.

For the development of interdisciplinary research, convergent sciences, it is necessary to train specialists in a different way, we need people who are more widely educated, who can understand different sciences

.

A Center for Convergent Technologies is being organized at the Kurchatov Institute: cognitive research will be developed there in close cooperation with work in the field of cellular and molecular biology, biotechnology, physics, chemistry, nano- and information technologies

The main goal of the development of science and technology in an industrial society is to study the "device" and capabilities of a person and copy them in the form of model technical systems - audio, video, etc.

“We studied human capabilities, and then copied them in the form of models of technical systems,” says Mikhail Kovalchuk. - In this regard, microelectronics is a perfect example. 60 years ago the computer era began, semiconductor electronics. But what was and remains the most perfect computer? Human brain.

The elementary cell of a crystal of any protein contains tens, and more often hundreds of thousands of atoms, and in a silicon crystal, from which an integrated circuit is made, there are only eight atoms. 60 years ago, the biological part was not just incomprehensible, but inaccessible to understanding. And with silicon - more or less clear. And mankind, having spent trillions of dollars on the development of microelectronics, played with eight atoms in a unit cell.

• During this time, thanks to fundamental research, I want to emphasize this, the construction of synchrophasotron centers, nuclear magnetic resonance, supercomputers, etc., we have very deeply understood the structure of proteins. Mankind now has serious knowledge in the field of living organic nature, as well as super-developed technologies. The combination of these possibilities is the next step in the development of science and technology.”

The main goal of today's post-industrial stage of the development of society is the reproduction of wildlife systems. The first stage: combining the technological capabilities of modern microelectronics with achievements in the field of knowledge of wildlife (nano-biotechnology). We are talking about the creation of hybrid, anthropomorphic technical systems of the bionic type. The second stage is the integration of the nano-biosensor platforms created at the first stage. That is, the creation of technologies for atomic-molecular design and self-organization based on atoms and bioorganic molecules. And as a result - biorobotic systems.

Center of NBIK-technologies

The Center for Nano-Bio-Sciences and Convergent Technologies is currently being formed at the Kurchatov Institute (within the framework of FTP "Nanoindustry and Nanomaterials"). It includes: the Kurchatov Center for Synchrotron Radiation and Nanotechnologies, the Center for Nano-Bio-Sciences and Technologies, the IR-8 Research Neutron Reactor and the Data Processing Center.

• The synchrotron center was completely modernized in a year and instead of six thousand meters there are now almost 20 thousand - instead of ten stations now there can be 40. The total area of ​​the building of the scientific and technological center of nanotechnology exceeds 15 thousand square meters, clean rooms - almost six thousand square meters. A supercomputer center is being formed - now 30 teraflops, by the end of the year it will be 120, in 2010 - 300.

The Kurchatov Institute has a genetic engineering line - you can decipher the genome. The same turnkey system exists only in two leading US universities - Caltech and MIT. There is a division of cellular technologies, which will deal with, among other things, stem cells. We began to form a medical unit. Two years ago, the Institute for Cognitive Research was established. Now the center of neuroscience is being formed. A huge humanitarian department is being created, in which linguists, philosophers, psychologists, sociologists and other specialists will work.

“The issue of interdisciplinary training of personnel is of particular relevance,” Mikhail Kovalchuk. - In order for such NBIC centers to work, it is necessary to train specialists in a different way. For the development of interdisciplinary research, convergent sciences, people are needed, more widely educated, who can understand different sciences.”

Concrete steps are already being taken to solve this problem. For example, on the basis of the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, a faculty for the training of NBIC specialists is being created. In addition, the practice of selecting students after the fourth year is being introduced at Moscow State University and for two years they are taught according to interdisciplinary principles.

“I am not calling for the elimination of the highly specialized system of personnel training,” Mikhail Kovalchuk emphasized. - But in parallel with it, in each direction, it is necessary to organize the formation of supra-disciplinary specialists. This is an extremely important task for the formation of a new technological order.”

Over the past quarter century, we have witnessed the emergence and explosive development of new areas of science and technology that have transformed human life and the global economy. The rapid spread of the Internet, mobile communications, laptops and handheld computers, available to the general public, heralded the advent of the information age. Deciphering the human genome, the emergence of new methods for diagnosing and treating serious diseases (such as cancer, heart attack, AIDS, malaria, etc.) improves health. The creation of the latest construction materials, 3D printing technologies is changing the industry.

This list goes on. Literally now, before our very eyes, the development of private astronautics, which seemed fantastic a few years ago, is taking place, which will take away the monopoly on space flights from states. The mass distribution of electric vehicles begins, which promises to cause tectonic shifts in the energy market and, if not the end, then a reduction in oil consumption by mankind.

Most of these technological breakthroughs have taken place in the West, primarily in the US, where over 50% of the world's most highly cited scientists work (over 1,500 out of about 3,000, according to a 2015 Thomson Reuters list). Maybe the Russians just lack the entrepreneurial spirit? But here are statistics from a different field of activity dealing with a comparable numerical sample of participants. According to Forbes magazine at the end of 2015, out of the number of dollar billionaires in the world, slightly exceeding 1800, Russia accounts for 88. It's a shame, of course, for the state, because just a year ago there were more of them (111 people).

It is sad to state that over the same period, our country, which a quarter of a century ago was one of the world's leading scientific powers, fell out of the top, and possibly the second ten countries in the field of science and scientific technology. The same list of the most cited scientists in the world, according to Thomson Reuters, included only three people from Russia in 2015 (in 2014, this list included five scientists permanently working in Russia and four more indicated a secondary affiliation in Russia). Far ahead of Russia are not only the leading European countries, Japan and China with India, but even Saudi Arabia (still, most likely, due to highly paid legionnaire professors, but they are preparing young shoots at home). Even in Iran, despite decades of sanctions, there are twice as many - seven - highly cited scientists. The reasons for this state of science in Russia are well known, have been repeatedly discussed in the media, and we do not want to dwell on them now.

It is worth noting, however, that some of the actions taken in the country in recent years were intended to help science and are aimed at modernizing it. These include the creation of the Russian Science Foundation, a program to improve the competitiveness of Russian universities, attracting leading scientists (through mega-grants), an attempt to create a world-class technological university (Skoltech). Similar programs were previously implemented with great success in many countries - China, Singapore, South Korea and even Saudi Arabia, which in recent years has managed to attract a significant number of outstanding scientists to work and teach at their universities.

It is worth noting the efforts of the scientists themselves in Russian scientific institutes to protect the interests of genuine science (Commission for Public Control in the Sphere of Science, the Conference of Scientists, the July 1 Club) and the fight against pseudoscience and the spread of plagiarism in scientific works (the Dissernet public project) . It is hoped that these efforts will ultimately lead to an improvement in the state of science and technology in Russia and will contribute to the modernization of the country in the long term. In any case, there is serious and painstaking work to be done, which is becoming more difficult not only because of the unfavorable economic situation, but also because of the situation in which the Academy of Sciences finds itself.

And against this background, the draft concept of the Strategy for the Development of Convergent Technologies, developed at the National Research Center "Kurchatov Institute" and vigorously lobbied by him in various government bodies, sounds dissonant. Moreover, the implementation of this strategy seems to be proposed to allocate a significant part of the scientific budget of Russia, which is already rapidly declining due to the depreciation of the ruble (after all, Russian scientists have to buy reagents and instruments abroad). At the same time, there were proposals for "consolidation", that is, the concentration of scientists and their management under one "roof". What is hidden behind the term "convergent technologies", behind this project and these conversations?

It must be said that the term "converged technologies" is by no means new. The draft strategy itself contains a reference to American authors William Sims Bainbridge and Michael C. Roco, who used the term as early as 2001. It is significant that neither of them are actively working scientists, but rather popularizers (or even lobbyists) of science.

Dr. Rocko was an active promoter of nanotechnology in the early 2000s and played a role in organizing a campaign around this area with the participation of prominent scientists, politicians and officials. This eventually led to the US National Nanotechnology Initiative (21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act) in 2003.

W. Bainbridge's specialty is the sociology of religion. From his pen came out many books for a wide audience with catchy titles: "The Theory of Religion" ("A Theory of Religion"), "The Power of Satan: The Devil's Cult of Psychotherapy" ("Satan's Power: A Deviant Psychotherapy Cult"), "An Information Technology Surrogate for Religion" and the like.

Be that as it may, the idea of ​​Bainbridge and Rocko involved the unification of nano-, bio-, info- and cognitive technologies, leading to the emergence of a new convergent discipline - NBIC, in terms of the Strategy for the Development of Convergent Technologies proposed in Russia.

That interdisciplinary research is important and that new discoveries often form at the intersection of sciences is a well-known fact. The universalism and encyclopedic nature of the great scientists of the past in the post-Newtonian period became practically inaccessible - this is how the constantly branching tree of science grew. Scientific creativity has become forced to lock itself into an increasingly narrowing framework within individual disciplines. But in order to compensate for the narrowing of these limits and overcome emerging barriers, scientists from different specialties and schools have learned to cooperate, engage in co-creation at the intersection of various scientific disciplines.

Moreover, it is not uncommon for scientists of a particular specialty to migrate from one area to another during their active creative life. All together, this creates the conditions for mutual creative "cross" interdisciplinary fertilization. As an example, we can cite the contribution to the formulation of the question and the first step towards unraveling the genetic code, made by our outstanding compatriot theoretical physicist Georgy Antonovich Gamow. More recently, the authors of this article participated in the scientific conference of the RASA (Russian-speaking diaspora in the United States), dedicated to the creative heritage of Gamow.

Back in the late 1920s and early 1930s, before leaving Russia, Gamow made a fundamental contribution to the theory of nuclear reactions (in particular, this led to an understanding of the role of thermonuclear reactions and made it possible to calculate their rates). In the United States in the 1950s, he plunged headlong into molecular genetics, collaborated with leading biochemists (the enormous role of Gamow in this interdisciplinary collaboration was written in detail in his memoirs by Nobel laureate Francis Crick, co-discoverer of the structure of the DNA molecule). It should be noted that Gamow, Crick and their colleagues, like many other real scientists who are actively working today, did not need the permanent roof of any common institution in order to cooperate fruitfully.

Of course, when it comes to specific problems that require interdisciplinary cooperation to develop and create a specific product within a given time frame, the mobilization of scientists, engineers and manufacturers of various profiles and their work “under one roof” can be dictated by life. So it was with the Manhattan project in the USA and with the work on the atomic project in the Soviet Union. However, today we are witnessing the rapid development of various formats of interdisciplinary research, which, as a rule, do not require confinement of participants under one roof, even if it was the famous Kurchatov Institute in the past.

Moreover, such a single roof can even turn out to be harmful, since “walls” are usually attached to it, separating the participants in the scientific process. After all, it is impossible to predict in advance which scientist from area A will have an idea that requires cooperation with a scientist from area B. If you choose 10 out of 100 scientists from area A and 10 out of 100 scientists from area B in advance, put them under the same roof and say: “Cooperate ”, then there may be 100 (10 x 10) possible collaborations instead of 10,000 (100 x 100). That is, with such a “consolidation”, the probability of a big success decreases by 100 times! In reality, there are not two such areas, but much more, so the damage will not be 100 times, but much more. In addition, getting under one roof, scientists begin to stew in their own juice, calm down on what has been achieved and inevitably lose their creative potential.

Another example comes from the well-known pharmaceutical industry. Giant pharmaceutical companies that emerge from the consolidation of very large companies are well equipped to manage and diversify risk. However, they lose their ability to innovate to some extent and need to coexist and interact with much smaller biotech companies, which are usually not profitable, but risk-averse and have great potential for innovation. A similar situation has developed in other areas of science and technology.

In the same way, "academic" science is being organized today in the leading countries. On the one hand, they maintain a system of powerful universities, national laboratories and other similar institutions that maintain the infrastructure for scientific and educational activities. On the other hand, various and, as a rule, not too large interdisciplinary centers and projects are being created at the same time, uniting scientists around new promising areas and having significant independence in the distribution of allocated funds and resources.

At the same time, the idea of ​​creating such centers and projects is precisely to overcome barriers not only between disciplines, but also between various departments, institutions, and within universities - faculties and departments. It is precisely such centers that are sometimes called centers of excellence (in English, centers of excellence). They are always created for a finite period (5-6 years, in rare cases up to 10 years) on the basis of competitive (grant) funding, independent expertise and subsequent annual monitoring by independent experts. These centers may extend their activities if appropriate, or be closed if they are not performing satisfactorily. They are almost never created by government decision, but are sponsored by national science foundations.

But when, as a result of the innovative activity of many scientists, a really important, understandable and clear direction of science appears, requiring the allocation of huge resources to a kind of "Manhattan project", then it becomes necessary to turn to the president and government for special funding. This was the case with nanotechnologies about a decade ago, when national nanotechnological programs were formed first in the USA and then in other leading countries.

A number of scientists have already received several Nobel Prizes for their scientific contribution to the development of nanotechnologies. In Russia, significant efforts and material resources in this area were concentrated in Rosnano, which implements the state policy for the development of the nanoindustry. The scientific and engineering, as well as the financial and economic community of our country has yet to take stock of the first almost ten years of work of the entire chain of organizations in this area.

As for convergence, in order to assess the current state of affairs, it is worth referring to the report “Convergence. Facilitating the interdisciplinary integration of life sciences, physical sciences, engineering and beyond” (“Convergence. Facilitating Trans-disciplinary Integration of Life Sciences, Physical Sciences, Engineering and Beyond”), which was prepared in 2014 by an authoritative commission created by the National Council for research - NRC (National Research Council) under the leadership of an outstanding scientist, a member of all three US national academies Joseph De Simone (Joseph DeSimone), a colleague of one of the authors.

The report emphasizes the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration and the fact that at the current stage
In the development of science, the interpenetration of disciplines is fundamentally enhanced and leads to the accelerated emergence of new discoveries and innovations. Quite specific interdisciplinary programs in various fields are cited as successful examples: for example, Cancer Nanotechnology or Brain Research through the Promotion of Innovative Neurotechnologies.

This comprehensive report concludes with recommendations for further organization of work and cooperation between various agencies, scientific foundations, universities and laboratories in order to facilitate the interpenetration of scientific fields and create the most favorable conditions for creative interdisciplinary cooperation.

As a strategy to achieve this goal, the De Simone Commission proposes self-organization around common themes, problems or complex scientific problems, the creation of interdisciplinary educational programs, the recruitment of researchers and professors at universities to work in interdisciplinary areas, and coordination at the national level to support such work. There is no talk in this report about any NBIC as a separate discipline, let alone the creation of a national program with the allocation of significant funding for some “converging technologies” and the concentration of these resources in one hand.

All the more incomprehensible is the desire in Russia in an incredible haste to elevate the idea of ​​the NBIC, which was and still remains an absolutely speculative theory (or even a fantasy) and, 15 years after its appearance in the United States, has not won either the support of prominent scientists or the attention of the American government. . Why is the theory that originated in the United States and has not received any development there, is today offered as the locomotive of Russian science with the allocation of appropriate significant funds, which are proposed to be taken away from this same science?

It is difficult for skeptics to avoid comparing the proposed approach with some new method of sharing resources under the roof of the National Research Center “Kurchatov Institute”, the current leaders of which claim that in Russia “fundamentally expanded and enriched the American theory” of W. Bainbridge and M. S. Roko. Indeed, the Strategy for the Development of Convergent Technologies states that the NBIK is proposed to be supplemented and expanded at the expense of the social and humanitarian sciences so that the Russian NBICS is obtained. No specifics are offered, and not a single example of the successful application of the concept of convergent technologies is given in the document.

Reading the Strategy leaves a very strange impression. First, with the exception of general words, there is no scientific content - basically just a collection of loosely related phrases. Secondly, the extreme superficiality and slovenliness of what is written is surprising. So, for example, the explanation of the term "nanotechnology" is almost verbatim taken from the Russian "Wikipedia": "an approach to the design of materials through atomic-molecular design." And although there is nothing shameful in using Wikipedia, in our opinion, in this case this definition is very unsuccessful and does not reflect the essence of science, since nanotechnology is primarily the science and technology of nanoscale objects.

It would seem that the document being prepared for state authorities and claiming the status of a presidential initiative should have been prepared more carefully. It is difficult to get rid of the idea that the preparation of documents of this quality for the president, government or other state authorities is a manifestation of disrespect for these institutions. This document cannot be compared with the documents that were prepared for the Soviet government at the time, or the reports on scientific issues published in the USA, including the already mentioned report of the De Simone Commission.

At the same time, the Strategy repeatedly emphasizes that the concept is being developed in pursuance of the instructions of the President and the Government of the Russian Federation, and proposes very cardinal measures for Russian science, including the approval of a special state program on convergent technologies, the restructuring of existing state programs with the allocation of approximately 10% of budgets for convergent technologies, formation of a separate state fund for the development of convergent technologies, the formation of an off-budget fund for financing convergent technologies and other measures. According to this document, to implement the concept of convergent technologies, a huge number of organizations should be involved, from the Presidential Administration and the Security Council to ministries and departments, universities and even municipalities. The Kurchatov Institute was also named among the performers.

Interestingly, the 2010 S&T Strategies of Six Countries: Implications for the United States analytical report by the National Research Council (NRC) concluded that that Russia will continue to focus on vertical management of issues such as nuclear power and space, rather than on creating innovative scientific and technological ecosystems that ensure economic growth in broad areas. The report predicted that Russia would remain a serious player in areas where it has a natural resource advantage or historical leadership, such as space technology, mining and supply, and energy.

However, advances in new fields - nanotechnology, medical technology, pharmaceuticals and computer science - will be modest on a global scale, as success in them requires a fundamental change in research policy, including decentralization of decision-making and funding, openness and active cooperation between scientists. These conclusions were made before the creation of new funding mechanisms and other efforts to modernize science in Russia, which we mentioned above. However, it is significant that six years after these conclusions, there is still talk in Russia about the need to “consolidate” and centralize scientists along the old Soviet lines.

Thus, summing up the analysis of the draft Strategy for the Development of Convergent Technologies and calls for "consolidation", we can conclude that for the sake of opaque, obscure and scientifically unfounded tasks, it is proposed to once again reformat Russian science. In our opinion, this will not bring her anything but harm. We believe that in order to achieve success, it is necessary to continue the course towards the modernization of Russian science and the development of innovative activities on a competitive and transparent basis.