Slashdot Mirror
Vir[i/ii/a/uses] As Nano-Blueprints? (Updated)
Auxon writes: "The Washington Post reports that researchers at the University of Texas "... have discovered that tiny protein-like strands on the surface of common viruses--the sort of molecules that enable germs to identify and grasp their target cells--also bind tightly and very selectively to materials widely used in high-tech electronics ..." They believe that this could be used to make templates with which they can grow circuits, in the same sort of manner that cells use calcium and other materials to produce bones, and oysters build their shells." I bet industrial sabotage could take on a whole new dimension with this as well. [Updated 9 June 3:55GMT by timothy] Pick your favorite plural of "virus" above :) All are supported by at least one comment posted below, but I concede the "ii" is probably best left to computer -- errr -- viruses.
I'd like to know where you got viri. References, or something? The conjugation (I suppose that's what it is in Latin) of a noun in Latin doesn't mean that form is an English word.
According to Miriam-Webster's, the Oxford English Dictionary (a huge volume I have in print), dictionary.com, Brittanica, and Encarta, the plural for virus - in English now - is viruses. None of these sources have any entry or make any reference to either "viri" or "virii."
This gives a whole new meaning to "bugs in the hardware" --- it'll be bugs making the hardware!
|/usr/games/fortune
At-choo!
Sorry for the long post but I'd like to try and explain what was actually done here.
I just read the paper and what the researchers have shown is that they can identify short peptides(<=12 amino acids) that can bind to inorganic surfaces selectively (ie bind to GaAs but not SiO2). They accomplished this feat using a technique that is widely used in the molecular biology research community...Phage Display.
Basically a bacteriophage is a virus that infects bacteria. Viruses are molecular machines that consist of an outer protein shell holding the nucleic acids which contain the instructions for making more copies of the nucleic acids and the protein shell. The Protein shell contains a few copies of the P3 coat protein (5 in the case of the virus used here). This protein recognizes the cell to be infected and triggers the process of cell entry, whereupon the virus enter the cell and hijacks the cellular macinery to produce many copies of the virus. In this way the virus replicates.
These biologists added a random sequence of 36 nucleotides (DNA bases) to the end of the DNA sequence that encodes the P3 coat protein. Now the virus will produce a P3 protein that has 12 additional random amino acids added to the end of P3 (3 DNA bases make a codon that encodes one amino acid), giving 20^12 possible unique P3 proteins (20 amino acids at each position, 12 positions).
Then they created a pool of ~10^9 phage (way fewer than the possible 20^12) and selected for phage with peptide sequences that bound to the desired material (GaAs) by affinity selection. Those viruses that bound were amplified in bacteria following elution from the material. The selection is repeated several times to identify the tightest binding peptide sequences.
Using this process, they found peptides that bound selectively to many different semiconductor surfaces and speculate that somehow this could be used to create new circuitry.
What they have done is use a standard molecular biology technique to find peptides (short polymers of amino acids) that bind selectively to inorganic surfaces of a given composition.
At the end of the article they speculate that by joining two peptides selected for binding to two different materials they can get peptides that would bind selectively at the interface between two material surfaces. I think this is the nano part of the technology as those interfaces must be created by conventional means. This method may allow finer features to be created.
Overall this is an interesting paper that opens up new possibilities but as usual in the nanotech field, it is a long way from being useful.
Hope that made sense
Cheers
no sig.
It could also pave the way for a better version of the bionic ear as well as other biotech.
It could even lead to implants similar to those depicted in the reality of Shadowrun. Jacked reflexes, skeletal sheathing/alteration, muscular augmentation, variable frequency optical prostheses, datajacks and implanted weaponry.
The optical prostheses have obvious uses as does most of the other stuff but datajacks could be used for more than they are in Shadowrun.
A person with irrepairable spinal damage or someone who has perfect cognitive function but has little or no control over their neuro-muscular system could be fitted with a datajack that could provide a degree of control over their bodies or their movement, either as a partial replacement for their spinal cord or as the control interface for a wheelchair or exoskeleton.
You could also use it for games like Q3 or UT. "You don't just play the game - you live it! (Pain is an optional extra.)"
At any rate I'd be prepared to sign up as a guinea-pig for the experiments as long as I got release equipment at the end. No way I'm getting a datajack until at least the second or thid generation. My wetware's bad enough without people poking wires in it.:)
Another application of the assembly aspect is the construction of nanobots and other nanotech.
I'm not going into a discussion of the possible evils of nanobots but I can see this image: Country A builds or grows a batch of deconstructor nanobots which are delivered to Country B.
The nanobots are programmed to reproduce themselves at a set rate until a preset limit is reached and have the ability to call others to their programmed target.
One day while one of these bots are reproducing an error creeps in. Instead of building a copy that stops reproducing at the preset limit something goes wrong and the copy doesn't have this limit and the error is not registered as such.
It continues to reproduce without stoping. Eventually they will cover the Earth if they cannot be stopped. All it would require is one nanobot to be missed and it starts over.
The severity of this depends on what the nanobots were programmed to destroy. Copper wiring? Aluminium? Steel? People?
Neal Stephenson wrote a book, the title of which I cannot remember. It was about a poor young girl who one-day found a book. Not just any book but a nanotech "Young lady's primer". Esentially it was a nanotech teaching device. The difference was in the actual construction. Instead of todays electrical circuitry it was mechanical. Kind of a vastly superior Babbage engine.
To me this seems more feasible than microscopic versions of todays computers.
In the book nanobots had been released and had propogated so much that on bad days it meant death to go outside without some kind of respiratory protection (a breathing mask).
Thats enough for now, I've spent far too long on this. When I first saw it there were 2 posts showing at a threshold of 0.
This post does contain blatant speculation and a tiny bit of scare-mongering. Any inaccuracies or mistakes are the fault of my insomnia, as is the length and any rambling that occurs.
---
"When I was a kid computers were giant walk-in wardrobes served by a priesthood with punch cards."
OK, I'm not exactly a techno-geek, but with seven years of Hah-vud Law School behind me, I think that a bit of Latin has rubbed off on me. Here's the explanation:
"Virus" comes from the Latin word "Vi", meaning "crappy text editor". It is pluralised because one is creating the concept of multiple vi, adding feature after feature to create a completely bloated, horrifically crappy text editor.
To then double-pluralise it, one would be creating a concept of a text editor bloated beyond the point of reason, so that you actually question your own sanity.
I therefore submit that the plural of "Virus" is "Emacs".
-- the most controversial site on the Web
"Hey Phil, did you leave the incubator on last night?"
"Don't think so Mike, why?"
"Well, we seem to have a supercomputer where the lab used to be."
Dreamweaver
"If a man hasn't discovered something he will die for, he isn't fit to live" -- MLK, Jr.
Many other areas of development seem to be drifting closer to using natural models, the pharmaceutical industry has almost always depended on examining natural processes, earlier today slashdot posted a news item about scientists attempting to replicate the mechanism on a gecko's feet that allows it to grip. It seems only natural that electronics and micro-manufacture has a thing or two to learn for natural processes, after all, many of the things we strive for with the continuing development of technology have been done for countless years in the simplest of cells.
The relevance of this work to nanotechnology particularly interests me. If you haven't read Eric Drexler's
book 'Engines of Creation' it's something you should check out. The book discusses nanotechnology and suggests several things that should be done to prepare for it, none of which anyone has taken the slightest notice of (as far as I can tell). Does anyone else fear what may happen if true nanotechnology is developed in the near future without the slightest move to control it? Once it is here, it's far to late for control.