How would a nanorobot disease be identified by a scientist

it's pretty straight forward, how could a scientist such as a doctor, identify that nano-robots are the cause of some disease without knowing what it is looking for ?

It would somehow need to be by serendipity, either by a doctor studying a specific disease or another scientific field, as these robots are omnipresent but in a relatively small quantity (~100 ug/m3).

they would also be the cause of a rise of cancer mainly.

so to summarise:

• they are everywhere, on earth, in every ecosystems
• remained hidden for decades
• 300-600 nanometers
• made of carbon diamonoids
• they can be found in any body tissues
• in "small" concentration
• are a cause of (but are not limited to) the rise in cancer in the population
• they replicate themselves at a slow rate (still have to figurate a good one) by disassembling matter around them.

for the concentration it seems that I need much more present ton insure a detection chance.

The nanobots do not actually aim to cause cancer, what they effectively do is disassemble matter to replicate themselves. I was thinking that if they were on small quantities, acting relatively slowly, then it would cause a rise in cancer in the population as a result of our body having to heal itself constantly against it. it seems now a bit too naïve...

as their effect is not limited to humans, but can be seen as a primary factor of erosion, decline of biodiversity etc...

and because of these multiple sources, theoretically unrelated, be identified as a such.

Edit to clarify their behaviour, they literally just consume and replicate as they are a mistake.

posted almost 6 years ago

Lolobstant‭

1 reputation 1 0 0 0