I Want To Be a Mad Scientist
ANAHEIM, Calif.—The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency is approaching its golden anniversary, and there's reason to celebrate. If we can trust the commemorative deck of cards they're handing out at the DARPATech conference, the Pentagon's most radical, forward-thinking scientists have accounted for no fewer than 52 major technical innovations since 1958. Check out the high-energy lasers on the four of diamonds, the night-vision goggles on the six of clubs, and the whizzing stealth fighter aircraft on the queen of hearts. And let's not forget the agency's trump card, here assigned to the jack of spades: Thirty-five years ago, DARPA helped create the earliest version of the Internet.
PRINT
DISCUSS
E-MAIL
RSS
RECOMMEND...
Facebook
MySpace
Mixx
Digg
Reddit
del.icio.us
Furl
Ma.gnolia
Sphere
StumbleUponThese days, the enormous exhibit hall at the center of the conference can be a confusing place. In one sense, I can't help but feel complicit in a government PR blitz as I wander amid sleek models and demonstrations of the latest military technology. And yet, as a journalist, I hardly feel welcome at all. DARPA's press office permits reporters just two hours a day to take notes and ogle the gizmos. It's a lonely two hours at that: Many of the presenters have been warned not to interact with the media under any circumstances; one look at my double-sided, blood-orange badge, and they nervously turn away.
A few loose-lipped company reps can be cajoled into talking, but most of the projects seem so far-fetched and hypothetical that there's little to explain. One display features nothing more than a brief artist's rendering of a portable surgical robot called the trauma pod, which is supposed to perform complex medical operations in the field. Across the hall is a gray plastic model of an intriguing "heliplane," a hybrid helicopter and fighter jet that seemed something like the military's version of the liger. But will we ever see these exotic technologies in the flesh? Are they a few years away, or a few decades?
If some devices seem impossibly advanced, others come off as weirdly passé. The RPGNets system is designed to protect light tactical vehicles from rocket-powered grenades. Hanging from the ceiling is a giant net with a grenade tangled in the weave like a sockeye salmon. According to the display, this advanced research program aims to "leverage net technology" against enemy weapons by manipulating the size of the mesh and the diameter of the lines. Do we really need DARPA to invest in high-tech nets?
More interesting are the updates to projects presented in previous years. In 2004, DARPA marched out its "phraselator," a device to help soldiers bark out simple commands in foreign languages. Today, these machines allow for comprehensible two-way communication. A new system designed at USC does real-time translation between a pair of users, in Arabic or Farsi. I watch a pair of grad students trade full sentences in different languages. A laptop transcribes, translates, and repeats their words aloud through a speaker. (The system isn't perfect, but it seems to work much better than Google Translate.) The translation can also be performed over a network, which means that some day soon you might be able to dial up the service on your cell phone.
Meanwhile, research seems to have progressed on the brain-controlled prostheses that were introduced (in concept, at least) two years ago. At one display area, a pair of armless volunteers and a young veteran missing his right hand demonstrate some fancy new models. We don't yet have bionic arms that hook up directly to the cortex, but one machine uses electrical signals from the muscle tissue remaining in a patient's stump to drive a mechanical hand: After extended training, the veteran could open and close his metal grip by imagining the movements. Another makes use of a foot-operated control mechanism hidden in a normal-looking shoe.
I'm far less enthusiastic about the endless parade of new military robots that dominates the hall. Is it me, or have robots gotten a little played out in the last 10 years? A major portion of DARPA's resources seem to go toward the development of ever-more-advanced unmanned aerial vehicles and four-legged land-rovers. We've got robots that can clamber up rocky hills, navigate around obstacles, and see in three dimensions. The StickyBot, inspired by wall-climbing lizards, can climb up smooth surfaces like glass windows, while its cousin adheres to rough stone or brick. I guess these are cool enough to look at, but we've all seen this kind of thing before. And why do we need wall-climbing lizard robots when we've got flying drones?
Animal locomotion does inspire one of my favorite devices—the simple and amazing PowerSwim. Worn over the lower legs of divers, the contraption uses a pair of oscillating fins connected by a spring to emulate the undulating movements of marine mammals. Video clips projected on a huge overhead screen show something that works a bit like an underwater bicycle: The swimmer propels himself forward by wiggling his legs back and forth at the knees. At a cost of less than $500, the PowerSwim seems destined for immediate placement in Skymall.
I'm so enchanted by the PowerSwim that I almost miss the insect cyborgs tucked away in the corner. The latest innovation from DARPA's Office of Creepy Technologies comes from Dr. Amit Lal, who wants to use controllable flying insects for surveillance missions. So far, his teams of engineers have managed to implant electrodes into moths during the pupa stage of early development, with minimal tissue damage. Video monitors show the insects as fully grown adults that can be induced to flap their wings in any direction. They're also working on a way to use the moth's living body—its movements and metabolism—as a power source for the implant's electronics.
DARPA's government-financed mad-science programs originate with managers like Dr. Lal. Tomorrow, I'll try to figure out how to get what must be one of the world's most awesome jobs.
*************
Before I leave for the day, I'd like to make a quick point about DARPA project titles, which—in keeping with the agency's penchant for high-risk, high-reward endeavors—push the military's mania for abbreviation to the extreme. Some of these acronyms are embarrassing failures. Take, for example, the Large Area Coverage Optical Search-while-Track & Engage system, or LACOSTE. This violates a cardinal rule of acronymy: You can't skip words—like while and and—that might not fit into your pithy title. If DARPA were playing by the rules, they'd have to call their device LACOSWTAE. Another violator—the Human-carried Explosives Detection Stand-off System, or HEDSS.
It's just as bad to slip meaningless words into a project title with the sole intention of making a nifty acronym. Take Lockheed Martin, which padded out the name of its sensor-laden airship program. They call it ISIS, short for "Integrated Sensor Is Structure."
Some DARPA acronyms turn out to be real winners. Watch a video of the Magneto-Hydrodynamic Explosive Munition in action, and you'll agree it deserves the title MAHEM. (In general, I think it's OK to pull multiple letters from the beginning of the same word, as in "MAgneto-Hydrodynamic." But this practice should not be abused—the MOrphable Networked ARCHitecture project, or MONARCH, clearly takes it too far.) I also like the tiny Dynamic Optical Tags, or DOTs, that help soldiers identify friendly units and download information on their surroundings.
My favorite DARPA abbreviation of the year belongs to a technology designed to ward off shoulder-fired heat-seeking missiles. The Pulsed Fiber Laser Infrared Countermeasures program may not have a catchy nickname like MAHEM. But for sheer character, it's hard to beat the good ol' P-FLIRCM. Could that be onomatopoeia? There it goes again, blasting away at enemy targets—puh-flurr-cuhm, puh-flurr-cuhm, puh-flurr-cuhm …
Happy Birthday, Smokey Bear
Are Gas Grills More Eco-Friendly Than Charcoal Ones?
He-Man: Briefs of Rage and Other Toy-Inspired Movies We're Dying To See
Kaus: Seven Possible Theories Explaining Palin's Resignation
The U.S. Embassy in Djibouti Cordially Invites You to a Fourth of July Cookout
The Week's Best Editorial Cartoons
Remarks from the Fray:
Daniel Engber does not seem to get it. Research always pays off in the end. The microwave oven came about as the result of a researcher leaving an egg he intended to cook for lunch on the bench beside a radar emitter. The SKU code and its associated scanners were developed so NASA could keep track of all the parts needed for Project Gemini. Remote station monitoring of vital signs common in hospitals was initially developed for the space program. And so on.
Yes, some of the things at DARPAtech seem a little bizarre, particularly the bionic insects. But consider: at present, no army considers bugs to be anything more than a nuisance, so apart from putting on insect repellant they don't bother about them. If you can make the technology work, it's the perfect cover for sneaking a bionic spy-bug into the enemy's camp so you can see what's there. Win the intelligence battle and you win the battle, period.
As far as the wall-crawling lizardbots go, provided they can be kept innocuous-looking, once again you can get up close and personal against an enemy in a building, without risking any of your soldiers until you must. Apart from the military, I'm sure every SWAT team in America is impatiently awaiting the lizardbots.
With regard to the bionic limbs, yes, they are still in the breadboarded-prototype stage. Yes, they are a long way away from being able to do even a tenth of what a human limb can do. Yes, at the moment they make anyone wearing one look like C-3PO's cousin. But ask a roomful of amputees if they'd like to have an artificial limb they can control with a thought, even if that thought is aimed at influencing a muscle instead of directly linking into the nervous system. Be sure you're out of the way of the sign-up sheet - you'd likely get trampled by the rush.
And rest assured: DARPA isn't showing you all the good stuff they're working on. All Engber saw was stuff that has already appeared in various journals and even been filmed for TV. The really good stuff, the things that would make your jaw drop, was left in the labs. What might such "good stuff" be? Full body suits with jump capability and super-strength like those Robert Heinlein postulated for his Mobile Infantry units? A self-directing tank, like Keith Laumer's incredible Bolos? Powerguns shooting copper plasma bolts, like the weapons David Drake created for Hammer's Slammers? A spaceplane capable of delivering a company of Marines anywhere on the planet in a couple of hours, then flying them back? An aerial vehicle simple enough for anyone to fly without flight training? An aqualung that's really gills, that can take oxygen directly from the water in quantities capable of allowing human activity underwater without scuba tanks?
Rest assured, DARPA only showed people the jokers and the low cards in the deck. The royal cards were carefully left at home. Knowledge is power, and DARPA has a lot more power than you think.
--Cyrano
(To reply, click here.)
(8/9)