Slashdot Mirror
Nanotech or Nano-Not?
LabRat007 writes "CNN has a story on the current status and future of nanotechnology. This infromative overview on the technology talks about current research and when we can expect nano-parts for our geek gear."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Would this involve the sort of things in Metal Gear Solid? Such as nanocommunication, via thoughts, and controlling of medication amoung other things?
I would say the best possible example of the last "grey goo is bad!" technology was the advent of restriction enzymes, which cut the DNA chain at specific intervals and are used to study microbiology.
Lots of Universities had all sorts of problems getting these things used in the lab, now they're commonly used in beginning level biology classes.
I'm not saying there's NO danger from nanotechnology, I'm just saying a lot of what people are doing is keying into insanely low probability risks which could really be associated with any item if you put enough thought into it.
A relevant (a bit old though) article that I read by bill joy . He calls the threat by self-multiplying nano-tech etc Knowledge of Mass Destruction :). But still the bottom line about looking before we leap still holds pretty damn true.
"It's unfortunate that the Pugwash meetings started only well after the nuclear genie was out of the bottle - roughly 15 years too late. We are also getting a belated start on seriously addressing the issues around 21st-century technologies - the prevention of knowledge-enabled mass destruction - and further delay seems unacceptable."
bhs.k12.nj.us/coltech04
Get paid to read spam
I am hoping to persue a Ph.D. in the cross over point between nano and bio technologies.
Basically, Nanotech can be seen from two different points, one, where the individual nano-structures are built atom by atom, and the other (where biotech comes into play), where nano structures build, replicate and repair themselves.
A gross example are the structures of "Self Assembled Monolayers", where lots of alkanethiols create a carpet of lipids on a gold surface (all by themselves).
By crossing these self assembling structures with advanced artifically designed amino acids to create complex nano-structures, the need to actually "build" anything is removed. You merely design lego blocks that assemble together in a certain way, and then mix them in a test tube and stand back.
I'm not soo concerned about potential dangers, I just wonder if it's actually feasible at all. If you're creating little machines at the atomic scale, then what is the size of a processor required to manage this device? I've seen little motors and joints and so forth being developed, but how much easy is it to say "Grip gold atom, place it next to the other one, let go, repeat"? Wouldn't even the smallest nano-processor be thousands of times larger than the size of the nano-bots people envision? Perhaps they'd be better named "nano-blimps". ;-) But seriously how much processing power do they need to work in a 3-D environment? And how small could that amount of processing power actually get?
-Don.
Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
From a condensed-matter physics grad student who's researching some aspects of 'nanotechnology' - Thank You!!!
It's ridiculous, how so many people on /. think of nanotechnology as nothing less than self-assembling nano-robots. This association is utterly naive, and is no more realistic than the standard 'Hollywoodification' of computer technology used in movies (eg, Hackers).
Sure, nanotechnology is a buzzword, and people in the field prefer to refer to it as research at the nanoscale, or self-assembling nanosctructures, etc. Just like spintronics is usually called magnetoelectronics by the researchers amongst themselves, and spintronics in the popular science media.
Basically, nanotechnology deals with anything at nanometer scale, which is in the realms of molecules. I'm studying carbon nanotubes, and superconducting nanowires of about the same size. I guess it's boring from a slashdot perspective because there's no robotics or selective biological processes going on. But for us physicists there's tons of interesting processes happening here. The systems really behave as one-dimensional (large superconducting wires would be three-dimensional), the standard statiscial-mechnanics starts to break down because of small system size, and there's other interesting quantum effects that manifest themselves. These factors make things act really weird and/or cool, and there's alot to discover. [If anybody thinks this research is pointless, concepts like GMR, which is now implemented in all new hard disk read heads, started the same way.]
Other nanotech researchers are looking at DNA (another guy in my lab is studying conductivity of various DNA systems). DNA is interesting because it can assemble itself, and some groups have made interesting self-assembling structures.
But this is nothing at all like the grey-goo concepts that are ever so popular and cliche here at slashdot. Every time 'nanotech' is mentioned on /. there's immediate posts about grey-goo and bio-enhancement nanites, yada yada yada. I'm actually relieved to hear of at least one other person here that gets past the hollywoodification of it all.
make world, not war
It's gotten so bad that true nanotech had to rename itself "molecular manufacturing" in order to avoid confusion with the nifty materials science stuff.
--
Power to the Peaceful
Yes, there are nano particles that have existed naturally for a very long time, but now we are in the age of creating our very own man made nano particles. There is a problem though. That is that there is a possibility that we may cause unwanted damage to people, various organisms, and the environment. Nano particles are not well understood and some substances that are completely non-toxic can cause serious damage to a person who comes into contact with the nano sized version of the same substance. Where did this attitude come from that people are either against something or not? Why this attitude that we should completely stop with this technology or go head on with it? Can we not work with nanotech, but at the same work on preventing the industry from causing harm? Do not look for the black and white answers, there are far too few of those. Instead, understand the subject at hand. We will not accomplish much with the all or nothing attitude. Progress does not happen in an instant.
Question everything.
I think we will have a ways to go before the any grey goo manages to endanger the green goo that already infests the planet. Actually the scenario that seems more theatening than grey goo is a grey fog. We already do a pretty good job of producing that already. Imagine if something airborne were released that could replicate and either obscure the sun or create a greenhouse problem.
The original or the mouse version?
Rod Taylor
A DVM is a high impedance device. Measuring voltage is not the same as measuring current. Theoretically, the ideal voltmeter will have ZERO amps through it. Now think about an ammeter. What is the lowest amperage you can read on a hand held ammeter? The problem should now become apparant. Also remember, 1 AMP is ALOT of electrons. It's an absolutely HUGE number! so you are right in a sense in believing that a nano amp isn't really that small. New ammeters are now capable of measuring currents of individual electrons. blows my mind. as for you question about building your own STM... It is definately possible, You can even do it in your basement!!! all you need is a little bit of investment $$$ and some know-how. The STM I work with was built by Undergraduate Students in the University (Which I helped with) It's almost entirely home-brew. The only part of it that is not is the control circuits, amplifiers, and the software. However, looking at actual atoms isn't that easy. One HUGE, MONUMENTAL, CATESTROPHIC item I didn't mention was vibrations. You may not notice, but you live in a noisy world. Especially in a city. In order to see these atoms, you need the surface and tip to be very very quiet. A sound room is even too loud. There are many methods to do this including Springs and mechanical tables. I am working on a maglev method which is very experimental still. Bottom line however.... If you want your own STM in the basement, have an extra $20,000 lying around, you have done your research... give it a shot, even if it doesn't work, you'll learn hella lots about software, hardware, drafting, and most importantly ;) physics.
Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what's right. --Isaac Asimov
Hi.. I work on an STM for my Masters, if you are interested, I have pictures of the STM and a SEM (Scanning Electron Microscope) from the lab. (Two totally different things) http://stevenhorn.kicks-ass.net/cpg/index.php?cat= 7
Enjoy... please don't leech them without sourcing.
Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what's right. --Isaac Asimov
One of the best books of all sci-fi-dom, IMO. I too wish my daughter could have something like this. As it is, she's gonna have to get by with me, and the adventure games I'm sure she'll grow up being very familiar with.
The Intel Pentium 4 processor uses a 90nm-process to put the features onto a wafer of silicon, and by some definitions, technology with features smaller than 100 nm are "nanotechnology." The amount of engineering that is required to go into modern day processors is absolutely amazing, and even more so when you consider they are making patterns that are smaller than the wavelength of the light used to imprint them (diffraction!)