Nanotech Assembly One Step Closer

perrin5 writes "according to Science Daily researchers at University at Buffalo have managed to assemble 3D structures of carbon,silicon, and latex by using "non uniform AC electric fields" as the shaping impetus. I've never really understood exactly what purpose nano-machines were going to fufill, especially in their early stages. Any one care to fill me in?"

Comments

Nanotech

[TheOnlyCoolTim]

It's the damn future! Read Neal Stephenson's The Diamond Age.

For example, imagine if you never had to take a shower or bath again, becuase there were tiny little robots that went over you in your sleep, grabbed all the dirt in their tiny robot claws, and threw it in a tiny robot garbage can.

Tim

Re:Nanotech

[satanami69]

I think they call them Dust Mites. But last time I checked, they didn't die on my toungue and leave
fecal matter which formed the crusties in the corner of my eye.

(Never let a Kurby salesman into your home, becuase you
learn way too much about what you sleep in)

What can they do?

[TheSHAD0W]

Well, let's look on the computing side...

* Assembly of computer chips, atom by atom.
* Reconfigurable computing -- use the silicon to its optimum.

If we can use nanoassemblers to create macro-sized objects, such as Stephenson's feed/seed does, then each item that comes out of the assembler (maybe in your own home, using the master template) will be absolutely identical to the others; no manufacturing errors, no worrying about tolerances, because an atom is an atom.

For that matter, if items can be made quickly enough, there won't be any assembly lines at all; instead, items will be manufactured as needed. No inventories (except of raw materials)...

An economy based on nanotech would be completely different from the one we have now, and IMO mostly for the better; but the transition is going to be murder...

Re:What can they do?

[TheSHAD0W]

Well, in Stephenson's Diamond Age, that's basically what was happening, except one step further on... Nanotech was based on "feed" technology, where in order for a nanofactory to work it had to be hooked up to a source pipe. Since each pattern had a different number of atoms of each type, each pattern had its own fingerprint, and if objects were generated without the IP holder being paid royalties, or if the objects were dangerous, the culprit could be tracked down.

There was a new technology, called "seed" technology, where an independent bunch of nanos would not only act as a factory, but would also absorb raw materials by themselves. The powers that be were quite unhappy with their loss of control over nanotech, and were actively trying to suppress the new paradigm.

Boot-Strapping...

[Froosh]

The whole idea of being able to build the first nano-bots is to boot-strap into a real nano-bot era.

Build a small nano-bot sophisticated enough to help you construct v0.000000002 of the bot, which you the use to build v0.000000003, and so on until the bots become advanced enough to perform some real work.

It has many parallels to computing and construction of new processors: build a processor, and use it's power to help you build a bigger better one.

Thats my take on it anyway.

R

Ask me again in 1000 years...

[tlambert]

Ask me again in 1000 years.

Nanotechnology is a long term investment. Its for people who expect to be around, and have to live with the consequences of their present day actions.

But if you absolutely need an answer on what initial value it's going to have, here's one for you: hydroxyapatite.

Otherwise known as rebuilding your tooth enamel an atom at a time, following tooth decay, instea of putting in these big metal wedges which cause them to crack and which leak mercury, or grinding them down to little nubs and capping them with steel and porcelin.

It's amazing how many new technologies get their start at dentists offices... like, oh, say, anesthetics.

-- Terry

Politics/economics, not technology

[dpilot]

Again, science fiction can show some of the range available to us in the future.

Obviously "The Diamond Age" has been pointed out as one possible future. Rather an odd one, as it has both dystopic and Utopia features to it. Usually literature focuses more on one or the other.

Joe Haldeman brought out another possibility in "The Forever Peace" where he invoked similar capabilities to The Diamond Age, but with a completely different model of control. In The Diamond Age, nanotech construction was available to anyone at a market price. In The Forever Peace, the US government managed to convince everyone that nanotech was inherently dangerous, and ran a small number of NanoForges on a very limited basis. At least public use was very limited.

Greg Bear's use of nanotech in Queen of Angels, Slant, and Moving Mars is somewhere between, but probably closer to Haldeman than Stephenson.

I also just finished A Deepness In the Sky by Verner Vinge, which skirted nanotech, and brings up an interesting contrast.

Briefly, nanotech in science fiction takes on two forms, replicators and itsy-bitsy machines. The Diamond Age had both models. Greg Bear used mostly replication in Queen of Angels and Slant, with itsy-bitsy machines in Moving Mars. Haldeman focused on replication.

Obviously replication becomes an interesting issue framing today's copyright debates. Itsy-bitsy machines are interesting in the context of today's security/privacy debates, since the most basic use seems to be surveillance.

Replication was also touched on much earlier, in a story (name forgotten) where aliens give us a replicator. Of course first you replicate the replicator, then watch the economy break down as goods become free. Some even wonder if giving us the replicator was a prelude to an invasion because of the economic effects. Then someone hits on the idea of Originals, and the economy is saved! Copyright triumphs, effectively.

Fortunately we're a long way from any of these concerns. In the meantime, I hope for some moderately itsy-bitsy machines, most notably the pill camera as I approach 50.