Univ. of Washington Announces First Nanotech Ph.D.

Scott Brauer writes: "The University of Washington's Center for Nanotechnology has announced that the UW will be host to the first nanotech degree program in the U.S. An article in The Daily, the campus newspaper, mentions here that the Ph.D. offered is an 'option program' within a group of other programs, meaning that 'students will earn simulatneous degrees in both nanotechnology and in one of nine other departments.' The program is estimated to have 20 to 40 students per year, including this year, as soon as the Board of Regents makes its expected vote of approval. Another article can be found here."

Comments

Nano-tech Diploma

[bmongar]

What good will it do to hang your nano-tech diploma on the wall, it will be too small for anyone to read.

Imaginary Degree

[1alpha7]

UW will be host to the first nanotech degree program in the US.

What a sleazy grab for headlines. Unless one works in an advanced IBM lab or the like, such a degree isn't worth the paper it's printed on. No one is currently in a position to "teach" nano-tech. It's like teaching warp-drive at this point. Okay, so I exaggerate. Not by much.

1Alpha7

Re:Imaginary Degree

[wass]

What a sleazy grab for headlines. Unless one works in an advanced IBM lab or the like, such a degree isn't worth the paper it's printed on. No one is currently in a position to "teach" nano-tech. It's like teaching warp-drive at this point.

ummm, what's the difference between this and all other scientific graduate programs? Scientific research involves reaching into the unknown. nanotech is one such unknown. how is this different?

Are you at all familiar with how graduate science programs function? They don't just teach you stuff that's already known. Maybe for a master's degree you can do a few classes and maybe a short thesis project. But for a PhD, you've got to pick some specific research area, and work it out for a few years, under guidance of your thesis adviser. You're pretty much expected to become the world's expert in that fairly specific sub-area.

And of course this research is into a new realm. Trying something new out, or possibly finding a better way to do something that's already known. But one doesn't merely repeat what's already done, just for the sake of repeating it. There is an amount of verification, though, just to keep people honest (remember cold fusion)?

Plus, there's usually lots of colloboration between big labs and grad programs, such as IBM as you mention. Big companies like this are usually more than willing to shell out small cash in comparison, to have some slaves (read grad students) really focus on research specifics. Much cheaper than hiring full-time employees to do the same.

Finally, there are many grad programs already doing nanotech stuff. For example, down the hall from me right now some people in the experimental condensed matter physics wing are doing research on carbon nanotubes. Just this is in the physics dept, this announcement deals with the first dept focused exclusively on nanotech.

nTech Ph.D. program

[TBHiX]

Well, looks like my advanced studies plan just finalised. ;)

I can just picture my thesis: "The Gray Goo Scenario and University Cafeteria Supply Issues: a Modest Proposal".

I'll forego the obvious jokes about atomic-scale diplomas, labs, etc., as the humour so derived is way to small to notice. ;)

-TBHiX-

You think this is bad?

[Mike1024]

Hey,

You think THIS is silly? Here in teh UK, we (used to) give students grants and free tuition. Then someone noticed that it worked out cheaper than giving them state benefit and lowered unemployment figures.

Degree in the history of Darts, anyone?

Michael

...another comment from Michael Tandy.

Other l33t degrees...

[Reality Master 101]

Ph.D. in Transporter Technology

Ph.D. in Holodeck Science

Ph.D. in Geology, focus of Planet Terraforming

...and dare I say it...

Ph.D. in Artificial Intelligence.

--

Project Based Courses?

[CMU_Nort]

I can see it now.

Prof: You didn't hand in your project.
Student: It's right there.
Prof: Where? I don't see it.
Student: Right there, underneath that piece of dust.
Prof: Ah yes, I must have missed it.

It's getting harder to show off our work ...

[taniwha]

As a chip designer I've often found myself whipping out an opened die and showing off - "look I did that little square there" - luckily as feature sizes shrink tools have kept pace and we've become much more productive - so "that little square there" has stayed roughly the same size over the past decade or so.

Nanotech will change all this - features will be way too small to show off .... instead we'll probably be bragging about "do you remember that cold you had last summer ..."

Only now?!

[efuseekay]

This is sad. After all these years of nanotechnology, people are only starting to have department of nanotechnology.

And, this also seem like a trendy thing (Stanford Mech Eng dept is hiring Physicists to teach quantum mechanics to their grad students so they can do nanotech blalh blah.

The gauntlet was thrown down by Feynman years ago : read this.

Re:Why?

[Saige]

I just can't see these degrees getting much respect until such time as there's actually something to teach to the students.

Actually, there is a lot to teach with regards to Nanotech. Sure, not actual means of creating and manipulating atmos/molecules to create objects, but there's a lot more than that. There are a few potential roads to nanotechnology, and all of them require a lot of effort and specialization. Wouldn't it make more sense for someone to get a degree in Nanotech while learning about protein folding, quantum mechanics, and the like, so to increase the chance of being able to combine these methods, than to make someone take more time to get multiple degrees to learn the same stuff?

There's also all the theoretical parts, the ideas that can't be tested yet, but still provide interesting work. When they get to the point of creating molecular machines, wouldn't it be nice to have software ready to help design them, and parts, and even entire machines, ready to start working on?

There is not, by any means, a shortage of things to study and research in such a degree program. The only shortage is of actual molecular nanotechnology itself, and this degree program will likely aim at getting to that point, at least at first.
---

Pioneers

[Veteran]

Not to point out the obvious, but from the comments I have read - something many people fail to understand, that the pioneers in any field never have degrees in the field. How could they, who would teach them?

The reason that progress is slow at the start of a new field is that the pioneers have to teach themselves. Once a field is established by those people then a university can start 'professing' what the pioneers discovered and grant degrees in the subject.

This greatly expands the quantity of people available to work in the field, and allows the graduates to look down their noses at the pioneers and say: "We don't hire people without degrees." This has the benefit of allowing less talented people to work without having to compete with the rare people who can teach themselves to do something at a Ph.D. level without formal instruction.