Slashdot Mirror


Nanotech Products Hitting the Market

stdin writes "Saw this on SFGate. Nanotech's first fruits are nearing the consumer market." Not little machines, yet, but a variety of products using very small components.

155 comments

  1. No Nano! by PhysicsGenius · · Score: 1, Interesting
    I can see the use for tiny machines as much as the next person,, plus I applaud the use of Linux in theoretical research projects, however, something nobody seems to want to talk about is the feasibility of propelling an object composed of somewhere between a few dozen and a few hundred atoms. Remember Newton? F=ma ring a bell? To find the acceleration of a nanobot, a = F/m where F is the thrust of the propellant and m the mass of the nanobot. The thrust can be calculated by multiplying the mass of the propellent by its acceleration which in turn equals 2v/d (v = the final velocity and d the atomic radius).

    Plug these numbers in and you'll find that even if the propellant consists of a single atom the forward velocity of the nanobot will be somewhere in the region of 1/100th of the speed of light. That may not sound like much, but even 1/1000 * 3e8 m/s = 3e5 m/s = 300 km/s = 1080000 km/h!

    1. Re:No Nano! by Have+Blue · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You're assuming nanomachines use ejection-based engines. Perhaps it would be better to use less-efficient forms of propulsion like propellers or even legs. Also, you're neglecting the fact that (in general) the machine is makings its way through a relatively dense medium. Most of the force would be spent displacing the thousands or millions of atoms in the path it is trying to follow.

    2. Re:No Nano! by PD · · Score: 3, Funny

      And that's why bacteria are so hard to kill - they are moving fast.

      Guess I should mention a crazy little thing call sarchasm now...

      Nanobots will use those devices anyone who has looked at bacteria has seen. Little spinning appendages, or little waving appendages, or little oscillating appendages, or possibly a gas turbine. Ha ha only serious.

    3. Re:No Nano! by Anne_Nonymous · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And don't forget friction!

    4. Re:No Nano! by CarlDenny · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Huh?

      Your calculations make no sense. Where did you get 2v/d from? How did the atomic radius enter into the picture at all?
      That calculation clearly involves a -lot- of assumptions, most of which I doubt you know/remember, and are not applicable to the situation you describe.

      If I have a machine with 100 atoms, and propel it by ejecting a single atom at velocity V, the machine will be moving at ~V/100 in the opposite direction.

      This is ignoring the numerous other methods for propelling an object, without ejecting a propellant. Various forms of electromagnetic fields do a damn good job.

    5. Re:No Nano! by moonbender · · Score: 2

      I am intrigued by your ideas and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

      --
      Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
    6. Re:No Nano! by MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM · · Score: 1, Funny

      Ejection happens after friction.

    7. Re:No Nano! by Oliver+Wendell+Jones · · Score: 2

      Guess I should mention a crazy little thing call sarchasm now...

      Sarchasm: (n) The gap between reality and the information implied.

      --
      A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing -- Emo Phillips
    8. Re:No Nano! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> physics_seeker@ya ... minus threevowels

      h is not a vowel dipshit.

    9. Re:No Nano! by leifb · · Score: 1
      Propellors aren't exactly nano scale. At that scale, you're emphatically not dealing with a dense medium -- you're dealing with a *vacuum*.


      And legs... legs make a bloody long time to get from point A to point B, and rely on *friction* to create leverage for motion. Friction is only a few steps away from outright chemical interaction, and that's not going to go over well on delicate work surfaces.


      For truly nano-scale devices, moving relatively long distances will require the use of light, probably from LEDs or sufficiently long-wavelength LASERs. These have such additional advantages of fast response, and not spewing their exhaust all over your work area.

    10. Re:No Nano! by Rubyflame · · Score: 1

      Plug these numbers in

      What numbers? You haven't given any numbers.

      and you'll find that even if the propellant consists of a single atom the forward velocity of the nanobot will be somewhere in the region of 1/100th of the speed of light. That may not sound like much, but even 1/1000 * 3e8 m/s = 3e5 m/s = 300 km/s = 1080000 km/h!

      You haven't given us the mass of the nanobot, the mass of the atom (they're not all the same, you know), or the exhaust velocity of the atom. Your calculations are without basis.

      Dumbass.

      --

      All it takes is nukes and nerves.
    11. Re:No Nano! by jduckworth · · Score: 1

      Firstly, I don't know how he arrived at his figure of 1/100 speed of light, is he joking when he says it doesn't sound like much? However using his velocity, by simply considering conservation of momentum, with a nanomachine of ~100 x the mass of the propellant atom (within his size range). The single expelled propellant atom would have to be traveling at the speed of light!! For more massive nanobots, light speed would have to be exceeded! Remember Einstein? Special Relativity ring a bell? You run into all sorts of problems, like your propellent having infinite mass and travelling back in time (if light speed is exceeded). Not to mention the fact that to accelerate the atom up to light speed would take an infinite amount of energy! Secondly. the sort of propulsion that he seems to be talking about is a chemical reaction producing the controlled explosive vapourisation and expulsion of a liquid or solid propellant. How this would work at atomic dimensions with a single atom of propellant, and containment problems I dont know. Thirdly, nanomachines will probably have more like the order of 10,000 -100,000 atoms i.e complex organic molecule sized, not atom sized. Specially if they have to perform complex tasks. Fourthly, there are other ways of propelling a nanomachine apart from the rocket engine approach, in the macroscopic world take cars, people etc. Nanomachines will probably be driven by chemical reactions like the hydrolysis of ATP. It is unlikley that nanomachines will carry their own fuel. Take molecular motors (dynein, kinesin, myosin) these are essentially biological nanomotors ~40 Nm and are activated by the presence of ATP in their surrounding environment. These or similar synthetic structures may well be used to provide the motive force behind nanomachines. Fifthly, most nanomachines will probably not be individually directed and powered. They are more likely to use redundancy in numbers and random effects such as brownian motion to get them were they need to be. I could go on....

    12. Re:No Nano! by musekinin · · Score: 1

      I see that some people have pointed it out, but Newtons laws cannot be applied to objects of this scale without making significant adjustments, if at all.
      As far as how to propell a nano-machine... Well, it would greatly depend on what the machine were to be used for. For computers "nano" simply reffers to the scale on which things are being implemented (usually the logic gates). Smaller gates are faster, and you can put more on a chip, meaning there is a potential for better devices.
      I don't know much about propelling machines, but I'm guessing that in most cases, it wouldn't really be nessecary. If the machines were to be used in constructing something else, or in the body, they could most likely simply "drift". As far as powering them, something like an electric current, or light would be reasonable. Keep in mind the scale that you're working with, and even using newtons laws you should get more reasonable numbers.

  2. OK people, slow down! by forged · · Score: 0, Redundant

    ...One of the first nanotech-related breakthroughs consumers will see, for example, is a new type of sunscreen -- expected to start showing up on store shelves within the next year or so -- being perfected by a German company that was discussed, but not named, at the conference.

    The sunscreen's manufacturer (represented by one of its lead investors) says the company has mastered the task of making reliably miniscule particles of a substance that can block out the sun's harmful ultraviolet rays.

    Hair dye, anyone?

    1. Re:OK people, slow down! by Lumpy · · Score: 2

      Hell with that... how about Zinc oxide? works great and has a SPF of 60 bajillion.

      Oh boy.. over engineered sunscreen... what's next? nano-tech toilet paper? or tub cleaner that really has scrubbing bubbles?

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    2. Re:OK people, slow down! by gwizah · · Score: 1

      I thought artcile already mentioned hair dye as a possible application of nanotech?

      --

      There is no spork.
    3. Re:OK people, slow down! by GospelHead821 · · Score: 2

      As the article said, they've developed the tools and are now working on manufacturing materials using these tools. The next step is to build more advanced systems using nanotechnology. I was impressed by the description of the nano-scale lithium-ion film that they are proposing. They didn't mention how many slices of the film you can pile into a single source, but the prospect of a higher-efficiency, longer-discharge battery should appeal to any /. user. Not to mention the initial use they're considering as a power source for implants. Any step that advances a technology that makes such possibilities as safe and effective artificial hearts more feasible is a good thing!

      --
      Virtue finds and chooses the mean.
      Aristotle, Ethica Nichomachea
    4. Re:OK people, slow down! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes, it sure did.
      this was to see if you guys wele following, and hod had RTFA and who hadn't ;)

    5. Re:OK people, slow down! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was going to say laser printer toner. And as an added bonus, no one will take your poolside chair when you go for a dip.

    6. Re:OK people, slow down! by geekoid · · Score: 2

      how about the protection of zinc oxcide, but nearly clear, and can last all day?

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    7. Re:OK people, slow down! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Zinc Oxide is clear. You're just looking in the wrong part of the EM spectrum!

    8. Re:OK people, slow down! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I read an article about 2 years ago where some engineers were using nanotechnology to create extremely small (hence transparent) Zinc Oxide molecules. The purpose of this was to make an extremely powerful sunscreen that wouldn't make your whole body look like a lifeguard's nose.

      Hope it comes out soon because I'm still recovering from the sunburn I got on Saturday!

    9. Re:OK people, slow down! by timeOday · · Score: 0
      How is the suscreen described complex? Maybe it will be cheaper, especially if you can use less.

      It's the common items like sunscreen and lightbulbs that require the *best* engineering, because every improvement is magnified by millions of users.

      As to the scrubbing bubbles, I would be thrilled if somebody can come up with something that can actually remove hard water stains.

    10. Re:OK people, slow down! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I read the article about the sun screen where they said that there were nanometer holes in the current variety of sunscreen that let ultraviolet light through. HUH! Ultraviolet light light is in the range of 300-400 nanometers wavelength. How does something with this wavelength fit through a hole a (few) nanometers wide? I thought that was a FILTER!

    11. Re:OK people, slow down! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Not to mention the initial use they're considering as a power source for implants.

      Yeah. Battery powered boobs would be nice.

    12. Re:OK people, slow down! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm hoping this type of battery will lead to the sci-fi battery that holds megawatts, light enough to carry in the palm of your hand, and can be charged from completely empty to full in seconds. A true digital display of charge would be nice too.

      Screw the current tech where batteries take 12 hours to charge, and start dropping in output as the available charge drops. And the only way to figure out the available charge is to estimate it based on the power output. Blech.

  3. Nothing new by Geeyzus · · Score: 0, Troll

    Whenever I go to Wendy's, the amount of fries I get in my "Biggie" fry borders on nanotechnology I would say.

    Mark

  4. Nanotech hair dye? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Hair dye!? What happened to the army of nanobots that will march across my scalp, planting each and every individual hair in its own designer follicle and touching up the paint job on the rest? There goes my dream...

    1. Re:Nanotech hair dye? by PunchMonkey · · Score: 1

      Pfftt... you and your hair dye. I want ones that will move the hair off my back and put it back on my head where it belongs!

      The hair dye advancements can come later.

      --
      I'll have something intelligent to add one of these days...
    2. Re:Nanotech hair dye? by Subcarrier · · Score: 1

      I want ones that will move the hair off my back and put it back on my head where it belongs!

      Well, that's a pretty radical application. :) Here's another cool one: you could have a group of nanomachines that come with a dozen preprogrammed hairstyles and rearrange your hair to a new configuration every thirty seconds.

      Now that would be a great party trick!

      --
      "I have opinions of my own, strong opinions, but I don't always agree with them." -- George H. W. Bush
  5. Nano-coolness by DirtyJ · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Yeah, yeah. Nano-techno sunscreen and hair dye blah blah blah. Where are the freakin' robots already?!?

    1. Re:Nano-coolness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      "Where are the freakin' robots already?!? "

      Oh they're there, you just can't see them...

  6. First Fruit! by kafka93 · · Score: 0

    Imagine.. tiny, tiny apples..

  7. ahh so they are doing it with fruit! by Jonny+Ringo · · Score: 5, Funny


    Wait don't eat that apple, that's my Web Server!!!

  8. Interesting Quote by Chagatai · · Score: 2, Funny
    I liked this quote:

    "We need to see a technology that can lead to real products," explained Zwi Vromen, whose Israel-based Millennium Materials Fund has made 19 nanotechnology investments to date."

    So now, not only do we have nanotechnological fruits, but we have nanotechnological fruits that shall battle for the Holy Land inside my colon! Jihad!

    --
    --Chag
    1. Re:Interesting Quote by Buck2 · · Score: 1

      Isrealis don't battle for the Holy Land. They're already there. They're battling for the space they were given as well as the space that they for no real reason other than to piss others off, they moved into.

      --

      As my father lik@(munch munch)... ....
  9. define nanotech! by rfischer · · Score: 3, Informative

    If silicon micromachines are considered nanotech, these products have been commercially available for years: microfluidic valves, accelerometers for airbag systems, the DLP (digital light processor) from Texas Instruments that is the basis of many video systems.

    1. Re:define nanotech! by edrugtrader · · Score: 2

      uh... NANO... like the well defined measurement...

      these are things that are on the scale of nanometers.

      --
      MARIJUANA, SHROOMS, X: ONLINE?! - E
    2. Re:define nanotech! by Chorizo911 · · Score: 0

      Nanotech is an order of magnitude smaller. All the hype about Nanotech now is due to the government giving out buttloads of cash for research. Nanotech has actually been around for a long time. It has been used in the manufacturing of tires for years.

    3. Re:define nanotech! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would define nanotechnology as anything built from the bottom up, by manipulating individual atoms or molecules, as opposed to top-down approaches, even if these result in nanometer-scale products.

    4. Re:define nanotech! by InadequateCamel · · Score: 1

      Technology is trying to use smaller and smaller materials, and we are only now approaching manipulation on a molecular scale. How, then, can you define nanotechnology as the bottom-up design of molecules by manipulating individual atoms?

    5. Re:define nanotech! by B.J.+Blazkowicz · · Score: 1

      never heard about the atomic force microscope?

    6. Re:define nanotech! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True nanotechnology as envisioned by Eric Drexler, Ralph Merkle, and other pioneers in the field deals by definition with a bottom-up approach. There is nothing new or revolutionary about miniturization; we continue to build smaller and smaller gears, valves, and motors, lithography is becoming more and more refined, but none of these advancements merit the term "nanotechnology", even if they do approach nanometer sizes. The true revolution is, as I said, a bottom-up approach.

      Technology is trying to use smaller and smaller materials, and we are only now approaching manipulation on a molecular scale. How, then, can you define nanotechnology as the bottom-up design of molecules by manipulating individual atoms?

      What are you talking about? We have been manipulating things on a molecular scale at least since 1985, and we have come a long way since then.

    7. Re:define nanotech! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "NANO... like the well defined measurement..."

      nano is not a measurement at all, it is an order of magnitude and is applied to many types of units not just length.

      the word is "nanotech" not "nanometertech" and as such does not inherently define a physical dimension.

  10. A few Words by "Ralph Merkle" by Real+World+Stuff · · Score: 4, Informative

    Manufactured products are made from atoms. The properties of those products depend on how those atoms are arranged. If we rearrange the atoms in coal we can make diamond. If we rearrange the atoms in sand (and add a few other trace elements) we can make computer chips. If we rearrange the atoms in dirt, water and air we can make potatoes. Todays manufacturing methods are very crude at the molecular level. Casting, grinding, milling and even lithography move atoms in great thundering statistical herds. It's like trying to make things out of LEGO blocks with boxing gloves on your hands. Yes, you can push the LEGO blocks into great heaps and pile them up, but you can't really snap them together the way you'd like.

    In the future, nanotechnology will let us take off the boxing gloves. We'll be able to snap together the fundamental building blocks of nature easily, inexpensively and in almost any arrangement that we desire. This will be essential if we are to continue the revolution in computer hardware beyond about the next decade, and will also let us fabricate an entire new generation of products that are cleaner, stronger, lighter, and more precise.

    It's worth pointing out that the word "nanotechnology" has become very popular and is used to describe many types of research where the characteristic dimensions are less than about 1,000 nanometers. For example, continued improvements in lithography have resulted in line widths that are less than one micron: this work is often called "nanotechnology." Sub-micron lithography is clearly very valuable (ask anyone who uses a computer!) but it is equally clear that lithography will not let us build semiconductor devices in which individual dopant atoms are located at specific lattice sites. Many of the exponentially improving trends in computer hardware capability have remained steady for the last 50 years. There is fairly widespread confidence that these trends are likely to continue for at least another ten years, but then lithography starts to reach its fundamental limits.

    If we are to continue these trends we will have to develop a new "post-lithographic" manufacturing technology which will let us inexpensively build computer systems with mole quantities of logic elements that are molecular in both size and precision and are interconnected in complex and highly idiosyncratic patterns. Nanotechnology will let us do this.

    When it's unclear from the context whether we're using the specific definition of "nanotechnology" (given here) or the broader and more inclusive definition (often used in the literature), we'll use the terms "molecular nanotechnology" or "molecular manufacturing."

    Whatever we call it, it should let us

    Get essentially every atom in the right place. Make almost any structure consistent with the laws of physics and chemistry that we can specify in atomic detail. Have manufacturing costs not greatly exceeding the cost of the required raw materials and energy. There are two more concepts commonly associated with nanotechnology: Positional assembly. Self replication. Clearly, we would be happy with any method that simultaneously achieved the first three objectives. However, this seems difficult without using some form of positional assembly (to get the right molecular parts in the right places) and some form of self replication (to keep the costs down).
    The need for positional assembly implies an interest in molecular robotics, e.g., robotic devices that are molecular both in their size and precision. These molecular scale positional devices are likely to resemble very small versions of their everyday macroscopic counterparts. Positional assembly is frequently used in normal macroscopic manufacturing today, and provides tremendous advantages. Imagine trying to build a bicycle with both hands tied behind your back! The idea of manipulating and positioning individual atoms and molecules is still new and takes some getting used to. However, as Feynman said in a classic talk in 1959: "The principles of physics, as far as I can see, do not speak against the possibility of maneuvering things atom by atom." We need to apply at the molecular scale the concept that has demonstrated its effectiveness at the macroscopic scale: making parts go where we want by putting them where we want!

    The requirement for low cost creates an interest in self replicating manufacturing systems, studied by von Neumann in the 1940's. These systems are able both to make copies of themselves and to manufacture useful products. If we can design and build one such system the manufacturing costs for more such systems and the products they make (assuming they can make copies of themselves in some reasonably inexpensive environment) will be very low.

    --
    If we don't fight for ourselves no one will.
    1. Re:A few Words by "Ralph Merkle" by Codifex+Maximus · · Score: 2

      > Get essentially every atom in the right place.
      > Make almost any structure consistent with the laws
      > of physics and chemistry that we can specify in
      > atomic detail. Have manufacturing costs not
      > greatly exceeding the cost of the required raw
      > materials and energy. There are two more concepts
      > commonly associated with nanotechnology:
      > Positional assembly. Self replication. Clearly, we
      > would be happy with any method that simultaneously
      > achieved the first three objectives.

      You have just described life. Rather than reinventing the wheel, why not improve existing life processes.

      --
      Codifex Maximus ~ In search of... a shorter sig.
    2. Re:A few Words by "Ralph Merkle" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wonderful post. Not sure who Ralph Merkle is, although I think I saw his name in the "first fruits" article. Can't seem to find it now though.

      I personally don't want to see self-replicating nanomachines. Too much risk of the "grey-goo" result, where they can't be turned off.

      I would rather see nanomachines-making machines instead. This would allow the target nanobots to be designed for specific purposes only. You need more nanobots, just fire up the nano-generators that make one kind of nanobot. Eliminate the von neumann issue.

      If you need more of that kind of nanobot created faster, fire up the nano-generator-maker for a while, and it makes more nano-generators.

      I could see going to home-depot to buy a new nano-generator-maker. Bring it home, fire it up for 5 minutes to generate a few thousand nano-generators. Turn those on for an hour (where's the on/off switch?) to generate a few billion nanobots. And we're ready to rock.

    3. Re:A few Words by "Ralph Merkle" by lurwas · · Score: 0

      In the future, nanotechnology will let us take off the boxing gloves. We'll be able to snap together the fundamental building blocks of nature easily, inexpensively and in almost any arrangement that we desire. This will be essential if we are to continue the revolution in computer hardware beyond about the next decade, and will also let us fabricate an entire new generation of products that are cleaner, stronger, lighter, and more precise.

      If the human race could do that, we would be gods.

  11. They better hurry up by joeflies · · Score: 1

    I want to make sure that we have that nanotechnology ready in case those borg terrorists show up again. I'm not counting on the Borg forgetting to close up that "sleep" backdoor that witty androids hack into using an unsecured terminal that calls itself Picard.

  12. I wonder... by kaustik · · Score: 3, Insightful

    While these may seems trivial, I can think of at least one product not mentioned here that may benefit from this:

    contraceptive devices

    This is not meant to be funny... this is a dept. seriously lacking in safe products.

    1. Re:I wonder... by Subcarrier · · Score: 2

      contraceptive devices

      Hmm. Wouldn't work. At least not if you're pretty well hung.

      --
      "I have opinions of my own, strong opinions, but I don't always agree with them." -- George H. W. Bush
    2. Re:I wonder... by jcoy42 · · Score: 1
      While these may seems trivial, I can think of at least one product not mentioned here that may benefit from this:

      contraceptive devices

      I don't know if I'm quite ready to let millions of little bugs loose on my privates..

      Well, maybe I am, but not as a contraceptive device.. unless you mean the preventative form of contraceptive.
      --
      Never trust an atom. They make up everything.
    3. Re:I wonder... by RevRigel · · Score: 2

      Neal Stephenson addressed this in The Diamond Age, actually. The main character, Nell, is conceived when her mother's 'freedom machine' wears out. Supposedly it's a nanobot one of which sits at the outlet of each fallopian tube and gobbles up any eggs that happen to come out. Very affordable, in fact, since Tequila, her mother, is quite poor.

    4. Re:I wonder... by Manitcor · · Score: 1

      It was probaly made in an MC, as with most thing nanotech taken to its extreme in that book. To see what a fully nano-tch society might be like it might be a good read. They go so far as creating entire cities atom by atom.

      --
      "Don't mess with him, he taunts the happy fun ball."
  13. good idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    should put these on a website

  14. Nano-Movies by Indras · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    When most people think about nanotechnology, they usually conjure images of microscopically tiny contraptions such as the invisibly small submarine that was injected into a character's bloodstream in the classic 1966 sci-fi movie "Fantastic Voyage."

    Actually, I think Innerspace was better (you know, the one with Meg Ryan, Dennis Quaid, and Martin Short?).

    --
    The speed of time is one second per second.
  15. The new buzzword by Target+Drone · · Score: 3, Interesting
    It sounds like "nano" is about to become the new prefix of choice. It will be in front of every product in the same way that "e" became popular a couple years ago during the dot com era.

    1. Re:The new buzzword by plastic_heaven · · Score: 2, Funny

      The first company to pitch an idea using the words "nano", "tech", "green", and "anti-terrorist" will likely have no problem getting funding. :)

    2. Re:The new buzzword by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I claim prior art on the following:

      naonobusiness
      nanocommerce
      nanointegration

    3. Re:The new buzzword by Morphine007 · · Score: 1

      It sounds like "nano" is about to become the new prefix of choice. It will be in front of every product in the same way that "e" became popular a couple years ago during the dot com era.

      Increase your penis size dramatically with the new...er... nano-penis... ??

    4. Re:The new buzzword by Alsee · · Score: 2

      SUN Microsystems:
      We're the nanodot in .COM

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    5. Re:The new buzzword by Guru2Newbie · · Score: 1, Funny
      Increase your penis size dramatically with the new...er... nano-penis... ??
      ...sig:
      I can only satisfy one person a day

      And with a nano-penis, you'll be lucky if you can satisfy anyone in a day!

    6. Re:The new buzzword by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It sounds like "nano" is about to become the new prefix of choice. It will be in front of every product in the same way that "e" became popular a couple years ago during the dot com era.

      I eagerly await the first wave of nano-skirts.

  16. yeah so by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But can you install Linux on it?

  17. upcoming products by rnd() · · Score: 1, Redundant

    nanotech toothpaste
    nanotech contact lenses
    nanotech moisturizer
    nanotech toupees

    --

    Amazing magic tricks

    1. Re:upcoming products by sharkey · · Score: 2

      nanotech Fruit Roll-Ups!

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
    2. Re:upcoming products by toxcspdrmn · · Score: 1

      I can't see there being many takers for the "nano-condom".

      --
      "E pur si muove!" - attributed to Galileo Galilei, 1564-1642
  18. technologically boring appearances of cool stuff by hackman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I enjoyed the article. It makes an interesting point very clear, that nanotech is showing up first in rather technologically boring places. Converse to all the visions I've heard of self-assembling machines and the like it is a real technology that is being used for real applications.

    I've heard increasingly frequent use of nanoscale devices in the Bio arena and for medical purposes, but far from the "submarine" concept. One of the more interesting ones was in a Scientific American or Science News article recently (can't find the article) talking about a small square chip that makes thorough and useful chemical tests doable in one step instead of hundreds of seperate ones. Imaging the chip using a basic camera provides a detailed readout on the exposure of many thousands of tests. Another interesting application involves carbon nanotubes, a much touted revolution in circuit building and such.

    It seems that many people (geeks included) have been spouting the broader, long term vision of building complex nano machines that invade our bodies or self replicate, it's refreshing to hear a realistic perspective on nano technology.

    Although I do admittedly get tired of the constantly pro-tech mindset that occurs in these articles, how about someone mentioning the detriments of these technologies occasionally? (grey goo theory anyone)

    --
    __ No registration required to read this message. They did it in the Matrix.
  19. Replication by datastew · · Score: 1
    From the companion article: Brandeis University researchers have figured out a rudimentary way to use nanomachines to build more nanomachines.

    Uh Oh.

    1. Re:Replication by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ever see fantasia?

    2. Re:Replication by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I fell for that one. I actually went looking for the companion article. Sheesh.

  20. Nano nano! by TheSHAD0W · · Score: 3, Funny

    Umm, forgive me, but I don't think the "gray goo" syndrome referred to the stuff you squeeze out of a bottle of sunblock.

    1. Re:Nano nano! by Alsee · · Score: 2

      In 2014 the earth died, the entire surface buried under a layer of grey goo sunblock over 8 meters thick.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    2. Re:Nano nano! by Mizery+De+Aria · · Score: 0

      Gray goo?

      That sounds like cement to me. Yep, rubbing wet cement all over your body would certainly block your skin from the sun's uv rays.

      --
      If you're religishitty, KILL YOURSELF!
  21. Re:Help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    So, what exactly is your problem? Sounds like a pretty decent life.

  22. I don't get it. by crucini · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The advances mentioned in the article seem to be improvements in grinding substances finely. The article claims that there is some kind of continuum from this grinding to actual nanotech machines, and that cautious investors are starting at the easy end of the continuum.

    I don't see how this could be. It seems that if you want to approach the kind of nanotech described in Stepehenson's The Diamond Age you would probably work with tiny machines and assembly techniques and gradually push the size envelope downwards - which is how it happened with silicon. Or work with subtractive etching techniques that could remove material to leave behind movable parts. Merely grinding up tiny nondescript particles - in other words soot or dust - doesn't seem like a step on this road at all.

    Of course my understanding of nanotechnology is firmly grounded in science fiction.

    1. Re:I don't get it. by TheSHAD0W · · Score: 2

      Both subtractive etching and atomic construction are being used in trying to build real nanomachines. I agree, I think these people are trying to redefine the term in order to make their product more sexy.

    2. Re:I don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately, even if a nano-size machine could be built today, the required design to make it operate successfully is still lacking.

      Baby steps.

      Nano-scaled machines with even micro-machine designs won't work. A design for propulsion is still on the drawing board, for example. Current ideas, and some initial experiments, involve stealing the propulsion method of bacteria (flagella, or a sort of propeller). Another problem is a power source. The latest design I've heard about uses blood sugar for one, and light for another.

      It doesn't do much good to make nanobots if they don't do anything.

      So you make nano-sized target products, such as carbon nanotubes, or a technique to add nano-sized particles to cotton fibers to make it water-proof.

      As industry can build smaller, and we get past the learning curve, true nanotech products will appear. Eventually we will have nanobots. (But I'm not sure how this will give me my promised flying car.)

  23. Re:Help by rocket97 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    You can't be a true geek you need to be drinking caffeine free Jolt to be a true geek so feel good about yourself. I used to have a script like yours that told me when a new article was posted with 0 replies but since I never learned how to type with more than one finger, I would get 101'st post... damn you all to hell, all you freakish people that type with all 10 fingers....

    --
    "The two most abundant elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity." -Harlan Ellison
  24. Re:Help by Lieutenant_Dan · · Score: 0

    Perhaps this is a serious cry for help ...

    - get more hours at the coffee shop. Start earning some money and some self-respect.
    - stop wasting your time on silly computer stuff. Either do something productive such as web-pages, programs, or server configs, or log off
    - take better care of your body; you'll feel better and people won't cross the street when they s(m)ee(ll) you.
    - sign up for some courses in anything you like. Meet real people who have similar interests.
    - do stuff around the house to help your parents. They're paying your bills, so show some responsibility and do your share.
    - volunteer for something.

    --
    Wearing pants should always be optional.
  25. Re:A few Words by "Ralph Merkle", EXCELLENT VIEW ! by geekster_2000 · · Score: 0


    Ferroelectric Molecular Optical Storage NanoTechnology from a company many years in design, research, and devlopment.

    3D Volume Holographic Optical Storage

    will replace all data storage device with " ALL IN ONE " memory device in future.

    Inventor of 3D volume holographic optical storage
    shopping his concept for Space Propulsion Engine
    using Propellantless Mass to US and other countries.

    Space Propulsion Engine for Flying Saucer - New Physics

    Rumor in Silicon Valley -

    for further look at biography background goto

    http://colossalstorage.net/colossal.htm

    he is working in top secret and he says no physicist or scientist he has ever studied or researched had this approach and knows his concept will work to give near light speed travel thru Galaxy with 500K/Miles per Hour to start or 138 miles/sec. Nasa fastest time are 25,000 mile/hr or 3.9 miles/sec

    he says it is a mankind first concept !!

  26. Nonotech gallery by loconet · · Score: 2, Informative


    Nasa has an interseting nanotechnology gallery With some pics and videos of the technology in action

    --
    [alk]
  27. Re:Help and Open Source by Lieutenant_Dan · · Score: 0

    ... almost forgot ... Join the hardened Open Source developer community who will be more than willing to help you on your path to become a complete programmer.

    --
    Wearing pants should always be optional.
  28. Yay. Hair. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I want nano*hair* that can change colors at my whim. Length would be nice, too, but that'd involve replication I suppose, and evil terrible crises that would destroy the planet in a wave of nano-boffing. Or something.

    (At the least, I'd like some hair dye that doesn't suck. Gods below, I'm all for multicolored hair, but not florescent crap.)

  29. Re:I wonder... (OT) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are *many* safe and effective contraceptive devices (both to prevent disease transmission and pregnancy).

    If pregnancy, alone, is your concern, the birth control pill and related drugs (shots; patches; etc) are *highly* effective when used properly.

    Preventing disease transmission, also, isn't that difficult - barrier protection, such as latex condoms (both male and female), are *slightly* less effective when used properly and consistently than hormonal contraceptives at preventing pregnancy *but* they do provide significant (while not perfect) protection against disease transmission.

    Of course, when possible, just choosing partners who are at low risk and are known not to be infected by any STDs is safer and more effective (if *slightly* more difficult).

  30. Re: Being horribly trolled by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    YHL, man. I'm sorry.

  31. Possible Application by delphin42 · · Score: 2

    Maybe with nanotechnology they can design a webserver that will survive slashdoting?

    --
    -- Adam
  32. This is not the first by Chairboy · · Score: 2

    I already use products that are essentially nanotech. For instance, an electronics project of mine uses an Analog Devices ADXL202, a two axis accelerometer that uses MEMS technology to measure acceleration. It's amazing stuff, they took a device that used to be the size of a big box and made it small enough so that 5 can fit on a dime. The nano-tech part of it is that all the moving parts that were in the original accelerometers have been replaced with a tiny series of tuning fork-like assemblies measured in nanometers that somehow impart movement information on an almost molecular scale.

  33. Nano MEMS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Hmm, I'm not sure this reporter understands the difference between a nanometre and a micrometre. A number of the examples are more at the MEMS scale, rather than true nanomachines.

    Saying that, there is action around. For instance, want to buy the raw materials for building your own nanomachine? Try buying in bulk from http://www.nano.qinetiq.com/

    With the action around, fast forward to 2010 and you start to see the real ramp up of the nanotech revolution. Quite what that will do to the world, who knows? But its nothing to the impact of Von Neumann nanomachines...

  34. Wesley Crusher by Ace905 · · Score: 1

    Does anybody remember when Wesley let a bunch of nano-bastards loose - and they multiplied like crazy, eating the computers and forming a big neural network that could talk?

    Yeah, that's about as much as I know about nano-technology - and this article didn't really help.

    --

    Ace
  35. Please ! &-(=)# by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please wide your clit. THX.

    1. Re:Please ! &-(=)# by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Holy fucking shit, that is FUNNY.

  36. Let the IPO's begin anew! by BitHerder · · Score: 1

    I think I shall start a company called eNanoCyberDynaTech. Bidding begins at $25.00

  37. Re:Help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Damn, you sould like most of the slashbots here. At least you are keeping kosher.

  38. Remember when... by phloon · · Score: 1

    nanotechnology was called miniturization. Ahh... those were the days. I wonder when some marketing droid will decide to rename microprocessors to nanoprocessors.

  39. don't those laws.. by gkuchta · · Score: 1

    Uh, I thought newton's laws broke down when dealing with extreamly high velocities and/or tiny distances.

    --
    when salmon are outlawed, only outlaws will have salmon
  40. Dee Dee Ramone Dead at 50 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just heard some sad news over at msnbc.com. Punk Rocker Dee Dee Ramone was found dead in his home this morning. He apparently died of a drug overdose. Even if you didn't like his music, there is no denying his contributions to punk rock. Truly an American icon.

  41. Re: Being horribly trolled by Lieutenant_Dan · · Score: 0

    Appreciate the warning, but I knew the potential trolling. Problem is, I've known a couple people like that and my Christian upbringing sometimes gets the better of me.

    Only when we embrace the full potential of the Open Source community can we withstand the impact of lack of standards by MS.

    --
    Wearing pants should always be optional.
  42. Seven of Nine by 00_NOP · · Score: 1

    There was a nanotech product I wouldn't mind owning :->

    1. Re:Seven of Nine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "We are the borg. Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated."

      "n0 w4, d00d; 1 4r3 1337; 1 0wn3d ur s3rv3r!"

  43. OK people, Speed Up! by SEWilco · · Score: 1
    Clear sunscreen?

    I expect that if the nanotech which has been described is accomplished, a sunscreen which applies itself is the obvious overengineered sunscreen.

    And as aluminum is a very common element, I wouldn't be surprised at a fad of silver-coated beachgoers. Quickly followed by Halloween costumes that make you resemble the liquid Terminator...

  44. News for nerds? Most definitely! by carambola5 · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    Upon reading the article, I learned that the first nano-related products are sunscreen and hair dye. I thought: "How exactly is this 'News for Nerds. Stuff that matters'"?!?

    Then I realized the self-evident. I'm one of those tries-to-be-cool-by-dying-my-hair nerds. The sunscreen? I'm as pale as a ghost, so even though I hate the sun, I can now bear it!

    --
    IWARS.
    People, in general, disappoint me. Politicians even more so.
  45. My favorite quote... by soboroff · · Score: 3, Funny
    "(A nanometer is one billionth of a meter, the width of about 10 atoms lined up shoulder-to-shoulder. The head of a pin, by comparison, is about one million nanometers in diameter)."


    I didn't know atoms had shoulders. About how many Libraries of Congress can that hold?
  46. In other news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jump on the nano-tech bandwagon quick.

    I'm still waiting for all the virtual reality stuff promised back in the mid 90's...

  47. Which was... by protest_boy · · Score: 2, Informative
  48. Troll Alert by quantaman · · Score: 2

    In case you're not too familiar the intricacies your physics (or your spelling:) this is a troll. My own physics isn't perfect and I might have some mnior details slightly off but I have taken several first year physics which is sufficient for the purpose of debunking this troll. Aside from the fact that he doesn't actually give any numbers lets look at a more accurate description of thrust. Thrust is more or less caused by impulse, this is the change in momentum of an object. When a particle goes out the back of an engine the velocity to which the impulse will accelerate that craft is described by the equation McVc=MpVp (c=craft p=particle). Therefore if you start from motionlessness and have a particle of propellent shooting out the back at 1/100000 c (c = speed of light) or 3000m/s, your craft made of 10 particles of the same mass will go at 1/1000000 c or 300m/s not 300 km/s as he would have you believe. Keep in mind also that I have chosen a very large value to shoot out my particle and the engineers could easily shoot their propellent on the scale of nanometers per second which would result in very manageable velocities. The only problem I could see is in storing propellent, it is much more likely that they would have some sort of electrical motor to drive legs or something like that. There could be some errors in my calculations or in the equations I used, if you find errors please post corrections, but I can assure you that the above post is a troll (I ran into one of his a while ago where he invented what can only be described as the opposite of an event horizon:).

    --
    I stole this Sig
  49. 7 of 9 by antitribue · · Score: 1

    I am still waiting for this to make all women hot and computer literate.

  50. In related entertainment news... by MiddleHitter · · Score: 1

    P.T. Barnum announces new "nano-tech" flea circus. If you look closely enough, you can see the greatest show on earth!

    --
    I don't fear computers, I fear the lack of them. -I. Asimov
  51. sUGGESTION by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See a psychiatrist. They can address whatever issues are causing this anti-social behavior. The clinical term for the disorder would likely be "OCD", that is to say, obsessive compulsive disorder. This can be controlled with medication. It is characterized by a compulsive feeling of necessity to perform repetitive, seemingly pointless tasks.

  52. Oh, the rich irony... by Avumede · · Score: 1

    The very demographic that has been salivating over nanotechnology is the same demographic least likely to use the sunscreen it has produced. The only thing more ironic would be some sort of nano-technology condom.

  53. Super sunscreen? by Harold+Hill · · Score: 2, Insightful
    From the article:
    Current sunscreens, by contrast, can leave many nanometer-size areas of the skin unprotected. Add all those small, unprotected areas together and you can get a pretty nasty sunburn, no matter how much of the goop you've applied.
    Uh, UV light has a wavelength in the range 100 to 400 nm. How is it getting through "nanometer" sized holes? I know, it's probably people just being sloppy with language, but it's still irritating.
    1. Re:Super sunscreen? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, since no one else has pointed out the flaw in your logic, why not me?

      Wavelength is about length, not width. The size of the hole mentioned is about width, not length. Assuming that the light comes in close to perpendicular to the sunscreen (not always true, but true enough for the direct sunlight that has the highest intensity and gives the strongest effect), the two measurements should have nothing to do with each other.

      I can put on a long sleeve shirt even though my arms are about 2 1/2 feet long and the sleeve is only 7 inches diameter. While your sizes may be right, it is the orientation of the measurements that is important in this case.

    2. Re:Super sunscreen? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are not thinking about the problem correctly. Your "arm" example is fine, but light is a completely different beast. The 300-400 nm radiation that causes sunburns will not go through a nanometer hole because of the diffraction limit of the light. Harold Hill (previous post) is right about the sunlight not transmitting through the nanometer holes mentioned in the article.

  54. Re:LINUX HEADS WILL FLAME YOU FOR USING APPLE SERV by Buck2 · · Score: 1

    It's quite unfortunate that your humorous observation was moderated down.

    I would have given it a "funny" at least.

    --

    As my father lik@(munch munch)... ....
  55. Dye for your country by InadequateCamel · · Score: 1

    Be careful to check where that bottle of hair dye was manufactured! Otherwise you may hear little voices coming from your head: "I claim this follicle in the name of Allah"

  56. Perpetual phone calls by Macka · · Score: 3, Funny

    What makes the batteries even more remarkable, according to an investor in the company that developed them, is that they can be recharged by radio waves that pass harmlessly through body tissues.


    Great! Now we can have mobile phones that recharge themselves.

    Macka
  57. projection TVs have million moving mirrors by peter303 · · Score: 2

    The DLP chip family from Texas Instruments have up to 1.3 million moving mirrors for high luminance TV projection systems for conference rooms, home and theatre digital TVs. These have been on the market for four years. This is nano tech if I ever saw it.

    1. Re:projection TVs have million moving mirrors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is nano tech if I ever saw it.

      Not even close. See http://www.dlp.com/dlp_technology/dlp_technology_c hip_details.asp

      The mirrors are 13.68 micrometers across. That's small, but not nearly nanoscale (a nanometer is 1/1000th of a micrometer).

  58. This is overhyped bullshit by citanon · · Score: 1

    Better examples of nanotechnology or microtechnology than the ones found in the articles have been around for years and years:

    Harddisk drive heads
    Microprocessors
    DNA arrays
    Genetically engineered organisms
    LCD screens
    Engineering of better chemical catalysts
    Arrays of micro-mirror for projection displays
    Integrated optical switches
    Ink jet printer heads

    et cetera

  59. The only type of nanotechnology that has worked... by citanon · · Score: 1

    Is biology. Billions of years of evolution have propeled biological systems to a local optimum in terms of nanomachines that could be made from carbon based molecules.

    Are there other optima based on different materials and/or manufacturing and design techniques? These questions are critical to the future of nanotech. As yet, no one has the answer.

  60. LOL by citanon · · Score: 1

    Hot girl: Baby common!
    Geek: Alright baby, let me put on my nano-condom.
    Hot girl: Your what?!! Oh my GOD that's pathetic!

  61. I've got an exciting nanotech product by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I call it water - it consists of 2 hydrogen atoms and an oxygen atom and it is in the nano size range.
    All this article is about is chemistry - THIS IS NOT NANOTECH!!!!
    Everyone is trying to jump on the bandwagon to get easy access to funding and as a marketing ploy.
    Until we have a real Nanotech product I ask the moderators to filter out such marketing hype and save us reading things that are in actuality of no intrest to those wanting REAL NANOTECH.

    This type of thing will actually dissapoint those who have been told about all the wonders of nanotech only to find some new dodgy hairdye is the type of thing to expect.

    I thought Slashdot readers had higher IQ's than to fall for such marketing Guff!!!

    VERY DISSAPOINTING!!

  62. Don't let Micro$oft know about this! by Guru2Newbie · · Score: 0
    Uh oh is right! Just imagine the horrors that be unleashed on the earth when Micro$oft's "well-known" coding practices are written into nanobots that spawn more nanobots!

    The Sorcerer's Apprentice, perhaps?
    Or the Dunwich Horror?

    Hey wait...maybe Bill Gates already is a nano-creation...?

  63. Business plan nFruit.com by _ph1ux_ · · Score: 2

    So you see we are poised to be the leader in nano fruit creation. Leveraging our high tech nano-enabled orchards or our "green tech" as we like to call it - we can have the highest quality output available in the US today. We focus on our core-competancies and get our arms around the solutions of the future in nano fruit production. By getting mind-share through advertiusing with strategic partnerships we will soon be the standard in quality fruit. Our b2b network supports a global fruit production infrastructure which can produce product on a scale that will put our competitors far behind.

    Our seed funding was provided by the US goverment through a seed bill - the "US anti-terrorist new business development fund" which provides funds to new companies who develop products that can aid in any form with the fighting of terrorist in this post 9-11 economy. Our nano fruit growing technology is used in our "Fruit for the Troops" program to feed troops and refugees displaced by the terrorists in the US and abroad.

    We are looking to raise 15 million in capital by Q2.

  64. The real benefit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think the greatest impact this technology will have on humanity is being able to provide food, medicine, clothing and reclaiming 100% of material waste. We will take the shit we flush down the toilet and make apples of it without screwing up the environment!

  65. intels 20 ghz cpu by butternipples+wee · · Score: 1

    intel plans to use similar nanotechnology to create a processor, scheduled 6 years from now, to run at 20 ghz switching on and off at 1.5 trillion times/sec

    1. Re:intels 20 ghz cpu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The time for the proverbial monkey and a word-processor to create the Oxford English Dictionary or a couple of Shakespeare plays should become so short that another monkey will be able to write a review/critique within our lifetime.

  66. Life, reinventing wheels by WillWare · · Score: 2
    You have just described life. Rather than reinventing the wheel, why not improve existing life processes.

    Ralph's agenda is long term. We'll get there eventually, but before we do, we'll spend a lot of time puttering around with simple bacteria. Tom Knight is already starting that effort, which he calls microbial engineering. This is very cool, commendable work.

    But there are limitations. You can make cells do logic operations, but they do them very slowly. Each cell has a very limited number of usable state variables. As long as we are starting with life, we are stuck with the limitations of cells. Cells can easily be programmed to make proteins, which don't have very desirable material properties, but to make more interesting stuff like tooth enamel or spider silk you need much more cleverness.

    What's nice about cells is that they are inexpensive replicators that work today. What's bad about them is that humans never got a vote on the basic design, simplicity was never a design goal, programming them is hard, and the range of things they can be programmed to do is limited.

    Ultimately we want a human-designed replicator that comes with a manual, is easy to program, and can do lots of different things.

    --
    WWJD for a Klondike Bar?
  67. Holographic Storage Nanotechnogy by geekster_2000 · · Score: 0


    http://colossalstorage.net/colossal.htm

  68. Useless by HybridTheory · · Score: 1

    When the coloring chemicals, known as pigment, are tinier, they likewise cover surfaces -- in this case hair -- more evenly. The results are dyes that should eventually last at least twice as long as those now sold.

    But I need to redo the hair when the roots start showing, not when the colour fades...

  69. DLP by MuMart · · Score: 1

    I always considered the DLP chips used in video projectors (that have millions of pivoting mirrors on a silicon chip) to be an application of nanotech

    Is there something about DLP that disqualifies it?

  70. nano nano by jduckworth · · Score: 1

    Firstly, I don't know how he arrived at his figure of 1/100 speed of light, is he joking when he says it doesn't sound like much? However using his velocity, by simply considering conservation of momentum, with a nanomachine of ~100 x the mass of the propellant atom (within his size range). The single expelled propellant atom would have to be traveling at the speed of light!! For more massive nanobots, light speed would have to be exceeded! Remember Einstein? Special Relativity ring a bell? You run into all sorts of problems, like your propellent having infinite mass and travelling back in time (if light speed is exceeded). Not to mention the fact that to accelerate the atom up to light speed would take an infinite amount of energy! Secondly. the sort of propulsion that he seems to be talking about is a chemical reaction producing the controlled explosive vapourisation and expulsion of a liquid or solid propellant. How this would work at atomic dimensions with a single atom of propellant, and containment problems I dont know. Thirdly, nanomachines will probably have more like the order of 10,000 -100,000 atoms i.e complex organic molecule sized, not atom sized. Specially if they have to perform complex tasks. Fourthly, there are other ways of propelling a nanomachine apart from the rocket engine approach, in the macroscopic world take cars, people etc. Nanomachines will probably be driven by chemical reactions like the hydrolysis of ATP. It is unlikley that nanomachines will carry their own fuel. Take molecular motors (dynein, kinesin, myosin) these are essentially biological nanomotors ~40 Nm and are activated by the presence of ATP in their surrounding environment. These or similar synthetic structures may well be used to provide the motive force behind nanomachines. Fifthly, most nanomachines will probably not be individually directed and powered. They are more likely to use redundancy in numbers and random effects such as brownian motion to get them were they need to be. I could go on....