Slashdot Mirror


Self-assembling 3D Nanostructures

Roland Piquepaille writes "Chips holding 10 terabits of data? Copper as strong as steel? Ceramics tough enough to be used in car engines? All this will be true in five years, thanks to two new methods to create self-assembling 3D nanostructures. These methods used pulsed laser deposition to create layers of nanodots organized in a matrix. These arrays of nanodots are consistent in shape and size -- 7 nanometers with nickel for example. But the real beauty of these methods is that they can be applied to almost any material, like nickel for data storage or aluminum oxide for ceramics. These methods also reduce drastically imperfections, leading to future superstrong materials. Read more here for other details and an image of a single nickel nanocrystal, or nanodot."

176 comments

  1. Mithril blades by Space+cowboy · · Score: 5, Funny


    So that's it then - the elves had nanotech. It all makes sense now. Looks like steel, feels like steel, but cuts like sinclair molecule chain :-)

    I do remember the UK Science minister at the time (Lord Sainsbury, I think it was) who said "Nanotechnology is going to be really BIG". He didn't quite get it, did he... Oh well, science is anathema to most politicians in the UK :-(

    Simon

    --
    Physicists get Hadrons!
    1. Re:Mithril blades by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
      While your statement about science and politicians is true in the sense that every lawyer joke is true, actually the UK has one of the more enlightened sceience-friendly governments around. the POST in the UK (parliamentary office of science and tech) is particularly good and people such as gordon brown have been pretty active in promoting science and technology.

      but, of course, what do you know. you're just some dork spouting off about elves on slashdot.

    2. Re:Mithril blades by wtrmute · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, in "The Hobbit", Mithril was described as silver with the strength of triple steel. So it would have to be silver, then? Still expensive...

    3. Re:Mithril blades by Space+cowboy · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Quoth the anonymous coward:

      but, of course, what do you know. you're just some dork spouting off about elves on slashdot


      At least I'm not an ANONYMOUS dork...

      Simon.
      --
      Physicists get Hadrons!
    4. Re:Mithril blades by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
      Actually I've been thinking mithril could be metallic glass (also known as "liquid metal"). Discover had an article about the stuff recently...stronger and lighter than steel, and extremely durable because it's springy - you can bounce a steel ball on a plate of the stuff, and it keeps bouncing for two minutes. Normal steel eats energy from the bounces because you get little micropits in the steel on every bounce. Metallic glass stays sharp...a razor blade of the stuff would last for a year.

      But then, what do I know, I'm an anonymous dork spouting off about elves on Slashdot.

    5. Re:Mithril blades by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, the american government doesn't believe in science... they believe in things like creationism (also known by their bullshit name 'intelligent design'), or what i call anti-sciences.

  2. A bit like whats going on at MIT by Slashbot+Hive-Mind · · Score: 4, Interesting

    last I heard, MIT was working on something like this. Just a rumor - can anyone verify?

    --

    --
    We are the collective Slashbot HiveMind
    1. Re:A bit like whats going on at MIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nano research isn't limited to the NSL. Many other groups are doing their own research. This next year I plan on working with self-assembling nanomaterials as well.

  3. Spam by soyuz_2 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Roland Piquepaille is a blogspammer, every day for over a week now, we've had his rehashings of old stories posted on the frontpage. Don't click on the first and the last link in the story.

    1. Re:Spam by LeBlanc_Joey · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I second that, just link straight to the story.

      --

      Everything in moderation, even moderation.

      No, especially moderation.

    2. Re:Spam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I'm sick of this asshole and I've only been here two weeks.

    3. Re:Spam by ElDuderino44137 · · Score: 1

      Blog spammer?

      I don't know that I understand?

      It's okay to post a story on slashdot that brings down some website w/ a story that you're interested in reading. But when it brings down the website that talks about bringing down a website this is "blogspamming"? Then what is the former? Innocent bunch of folks w/ a good idea spamming?

      How did this post get rated a 5 anyway? Should have been -1 offtopic.

      Cheers,
      --The Dude

    4. Re:Spam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I see by your high UID number that you've probably only been here a week or two. Roland Piquepaille has been blog-spamming us for a long time now, though it seems that lately he's been getting an article every single day. I'd like to know how much slashdot editors are taking in bribes from this guy. I submit great articles and they get rejected for this. If they'd at least trim out all his spammed radio.weblog.com links I would tolerate him. Now I only read the articles by him in order to comment on what an asshole he is...

    5. Re:Spam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Don't click on the first and the last link in the story."

      ????
      There are only two links in the story (unless you count his name, but that's not part of the story).

    6. Re:Spam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's the frickin' big deal? It's not like he has any ads on his page.

    7. Re:Spam by Tim+C · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The OP means that this guy gets a number of stories posted every week, all containing links to (amongst other things) his blog.

      That's rubbing a fair few people here up the wrong way, and personally I'm not surprised. Slashdot gets so many submissions from so many people, that to have so many accepted by the same person seems a little odd, especially given he always promotes his own site in them. Starts to feel like advertising...

    8. Re:Spam by soyuz_2 · · Score: 1

      I see by your high UID number

      This is not my first /. account. However, I've only noticed him the last week or two.

    9. Re:Spam by aussie_a · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You say not to click on any of the links but don't provide any alternate links for us to click. How are we to RTFA if we don't get any links..... oh wait. Sorry, I forgot where I was momentarily.

    10. Re:Spam by ajna · · Score: 3, Informative

      As I posted earlier on /., block the following regex in your ad-blocker of choice (adblock in Firefox, PithHelmet in Safari) and be gone with your troubles: radio\.weblogs\.com\/0105910.

      Also, the Triangle TechJournal article is not spam, but merely slashdotted. Here is google's cache: http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:uVKexn1-BtYJ:ww w.triangletechjournal.com/news/article.html%3Fitem _id%3D666+&hl=en&start=1

    11. Re:Spam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RTFA? Who the hell does that?

    12. Re:Spam by GileadGreene · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Trust me, it's been going on for way more than the last week. Somehow Piquepaille has managed to average 1 story every 2-3 days for the past 6 months or more. I don't know how he does it. Kickbacks to the /. editors maybe?

    13. Re:Spam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, the first link in the summary is straight to the story. How stupid are you, exactly?

    14. Re:Spam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be fair, he's changed his summaries and he now links directly to the story. The link to his weblog appears only at the end. (He used to submit articles with only one link to his weblog). Some of his articles are interesting while others turn out to be totally wrong, but that's par for Slashdot...

      I think people should be more upset at the editors than Roland, for publishing his stories much more often than other submissions. But again, that's par for Slashdot, nowadays.

    15. Re:Spam by danharan · · Score: 2

      Oh, for fuck's sake, enough about Piquepaille's success already. You don't have to read them. Heck, you don't even have to read /.

      Are you people bitter that you haven't had their stories posted? Is it because the man's French?

      WTF is blogspamming anyways, and why do you care?

      --
      Information: "I want to be anthropomorphized"
    16. Re:Spam by ElDuderino44137 · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the explaination! ;)

      The sub-text from the original message was lost on me.

      Cheers,
      --The Dude

    17. Re:Spam by Herschel+Cohen · · Score: 1

      My only complaint would be that "more" implies more than a quoted extracts without further insights.

      I must admit that I had not noted the pattern of postings, though I remember other times having similar let downs on clicking minimal content links.

    18. Re:Spam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      RTFA? Who the hell does that?

      Good one! You took the joke you replied to and then repeated it in a less funny way! Nice!!

    19. Re:Spam by danila · · Score: 1

      But you must admit that his submissions are very consistent in quality. There are no speling errors, he has a relevant link, his blog always has an illustration (even when the primary source doesn't), etc. If you ignore who makes his submissions, there appears no reason for editors to reject them.

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
    20. Re:Spam by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

      You just listed all the reasons for the editors to reject him!

      He's not up to /. standards!

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
    21. Re:Spam by Spy+Hunter · · Score: 1

      Hey, if he wants to spend hours of his own time researching stories for Slashdot, I don't see why Slashdot shouldn't reward him by putting his stories on the front page. Especially since they are often about interesting things, and he doesn't have obnoxious advertising on his page or anything. What's wrong with that? Isn't that why you read Slashdot, to find interesting stories about technology, submitted by readers?

      --
      main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
    22. Re:Spam by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

      My guess is that he's an editor.

    23. Re:Spam by GileadGreene · · Score: 1

      Yes, he does have ads. Therefore any traffic steered his way by /. (and lets face it, /. steers a lot of traffic around the web) directly benefits him. I wouldn't care if it happened once or twice, but it happens every other day. I probably also wouldn't care if the stories were any good, but Piquepaille seems to traffic in hype rather than substance, presumably because that also helps to gather traffic to his blog.

  4. Ceramics by tuxter · · Score: 4, Informative

    I haven't RTFA, but ceramics are already used in certain motorcycle engines.

    1. Re:Ceramics by bconway · · Score: 2, Interesting

      And very expensive brakes.

      --
      Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru?
    2. Re:Ceramics by joib · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Ceramic brakes have been used for a pretty long time on racecars. IIRC at least since the early 90'ies. During night races (e.g. Le Mans 24 h) you can see how the brake discs glow red when they brake into the corners.

    3. Re:Ceramics by RicktheBrick · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ceramics in engines to me means no cooling needed. A engine that can be heated to 2000 degrees without cracking would save alot of energy and polution.

    4. Re:Ceramics by Herschel+Cohen · · Score: 1

      Also a bit dangerous, think hot exhaust!

      Might be applicable in a larger vehicle that could take the equipment required to extract some of that excess energy prior to release into the atmosphere.

    5. Re:Ceramics by thebigmacd · · Score: 1

      Those aren't ceramic, they are carbon brakes.

      For a while Ferarri and perhaps a couple other teams used a molybdenum (maybe not molybdenum) composite that has been since outlawed in F1 racing, but Porsches ceramic solicon carbide brakes are new.

      FYI, the clutch in the Carrera GT is silicon carbide as well.

  5. But how does it kill people? by MacFury · · Score: 5, Funny

    I guess you could make stronger bullets...How else could it be used to kill people? I'd like to see this technology get funded.

    1. Re:But how does it kill people? by tuxter · · Score: 1

      Perfectly smooth ceramic or glass projectiles fired from a sabot?

    2. Re:But how does it kill people? by wtrmute · · Score: 2, Funny

      Theoretically, you could make super-strong body armor to outfit your stormtr^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hsoldiers. So, indirectly, it can be used to kill people...

      Of course, even super-strong body armor pales before the power of the Force :)

    3. Re:But how does it kill people? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You build nanomachines that turn people into gray goo, obviously.

    4. Re:But how does it kill people? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You could get a crate of this stuff and drop it on someone's head.

    5. Re:But how does it kill people? by UranusReallyHertz · · Score: 1

      Well a rather obvious application would be in better body armor. Or maybe more durable rifles. Most rifle barrels wear out after only a few thousand rounds.

      --
      Smoking is an expensive, slow, and unreliable method of suicide.
    6. Re:But how does it kill people? by nounderscores · · Score: 1

      A few thousand rounds? Oh well. You could sacrifice some accuracy and get a chrome plated barrel. Low tech, but it works.

    7. Re:But how does it kill people? by king-manic · · Score: 1

      Theoretically, you could make super-strong body armor to outfit your stormtr^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hsoldiers. So, indirectly, it can be used to kill people...

      Of course, even super-strong body armor pales before the power of the Force :)


      The heaviest and highest tech of the current body armours work on sub machine gun and small arms fire only. A rifle will lay waste to any and all current body armour. even if you had a body armour equivilent to 10 times it's thickness in steel, some rifles will cut right through that.

      You'd be better off making opticam. Rifles cannot be defeated by infantry body armour. Not yet anyways.

      --
      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
    8. Re:But how does it kill people? by RsG · · Score: 1

      But the super strong body armour won't even protect the troops from spear-wielding teddybears! We must first learn to build spear-proof armour, lest our soldiers be decimated by primitive abboreal merchandising tie-ins!

      --
      Erotic is when you use a feather. Exotic is when you use the whole chicken.
    9. Re:But how does it kill people? by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

      "A rifle will lay waste to any and all current body armour."

      Bullshit. Threat Level III withstands 7.62 NATO/.308 ammo and Threat Level IV withstands 30.06 armor-piercing. These body armors use titanium steel plates.

      Unless of course you riddle the fucker with multiple rounds at the same impact point - or simply shoot his arms and legs (and head, of course) full of holes.

      Not to mention the fact that a rifle IS considered "small arms." If you mean handguns, ignoramus, say so.

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
    10. Re:But how does it kill people? by cfuse · · Score: 1
      How else could it be used to kill people?

      1. Make android
      2. Android makes 'toys'
      3. Toys go nuts, make more of themselves and kill everything, then leave
      4. Android goes to sleep
      5. Toys still going nuts, making more of themselves and killing things. This pisses your friends from space off.
      6. You find android and wake it up. It makes more toys, which try to kill you but android tells toys to go to sleep just as you kill it.
      7. You give your friends the android
      8. They use the android to call all the toys to their homeworld to capture them with a time machine.
      9. Toys find android and use it to make more androids, which turn the time machine off
      10. You land on the homeworld, trick the androids and turn the time machine on and escape
      11. Some other stuff happens, but I'm getting tired of typing about it ...
  6. Pffft by frankthechicken · · Score: 5, Funny

    I used to have self assembling lego/mechano structures, thanks to my father's need to 'help' me whenever I got a new set.

  7. Terabits? by Xshare · · Score: 0

    Isn't bits generally used for data transfer, rather than storage, which is generally bytes?

    1. Re:Terabits? by tuxter · · Score: 0

      A terabit is a thousand bits A terabyte is 8 terabits. You read slashdot and ask this?

    2. Re:Terabits? by Xshare · · Score: 1

      Just asking a question, thanks for the answer. And yes, I do ask this and read slashdot. I'm still learning my way around though.

      Still though, from those links, it does seem that byte is more commonly used for storage than bit, although I see that it can be as well.

      Thanks.

    3. Re:Terabits? by RWerp · · Score: 1

      Isn't bits generally used for data transfer, rather than storage, which is generally bytes?

      And this gets modded as Insightful???? A thousand monkeys randomly typing on keybord could not possibly write 'Hamlet', but they could well moderate posts on /.!

      --
      "Long run is a misleading guide to current affairs. In the long run we are all dead." (John Maynard Keynes)
    4. Re:Terabits? by Xshare · · Score: 1

      Trust me, I was expecting to get modded DOWN! I was just wondering, that's all. I laughed my ass off at it being modded up.

    5. Re:Terabits? by Mixel · · Score: 1

      A terabit is a thousand bits I'm sorry.. but how/why is one terabit (1 000 000 000 000) equal to one thousand bits (1 000), again? Or is that Wikipedia Article != Authoritative?

    6. Re:Terabits? by nounderscores · · Score: 1

      Don't sweat it, he's cursing at himself for being a fair few orders of magnitude out when he said that a terrabit was 1000 bits.

    7. Re:Terabits? by Tony-A · · Score: 3, Informative

      Isn't bits generally used for data transfer, rather than storage, which is generally bytes?

      Not quite so simple.
      Bits is generally used for the raw basic capability. No provisions for framing, error detection or correction.
      Bytes are generally used for 8 bits of usable information. This is measured after the framing, error detection/correction etc.

      Bandwidth caps are related to data transfer, but probably expressed in bytes instead of bits.
      Memory chip capacity probably expressed in bits. Memory stick capacity probably expressed in bytes, and usually be less than the corresponding number of bits in the chips.
      Disk capacity probably expressed in bytes, but there is a significant difference between raw unformatted capacity and the formatted capacity. The difference is furthered by reserving alternate sectors so the disk behaves as if it were error free.

    8. Re:Terabits? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Wait, are you saying that monkeys didn't write hamlet?

      Fuck.

    9. Re:Terabits? by Have+Blue · · Score: 1, Informative

      Executive summary: Bits and bytes are like centimeters and meters. They're different scales of the same thing, and whether you use one or the other is dictated partly by which is appropriate to the magnitude of the value being expressed and partly by tradition.

    10. Re:Terabits? by Segway+Ninja · · Score: 1

      We're still out on the debate as to if a thousand monkeys at a thousand keyboards could write enough Cease and Desist letters for the RIAA/MPAA

    11. Re:Terabits? by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

      They might not be able to moderate posts, but they could certainly generate the posts themselves...

      In fact, they do...

      Never give a Transhumanist a monkey straight line...

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
  8. Server is fine (so far)... by mrgeometry · · Score: 0

    The really great part about Roland Piquepaille's posts is that the sites he mirrors seem never to have any trouble staying up. Perhaps it's just me, but I'd think he could help out more by mirroring some of the sites that appear in other stories?

    Well, I guess he still does a service by bringing these stories to attention.

    -zach

    1. Re:Server is fine (so far)... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I should have mentioned that occasionally, as on this occasion, he provides extra links to outside sources. This is helpful.

      There were no extra links in the recent story about simulating the universe.

      A more negative take could be to point out that it would be pretty easy to provide one or two extra links in the story submission!

      --zach

  9. Ooops by tuxter · · Score: 3, Funny

    I post that and read slashdot? Fucking asshat.

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

      Dear moderators, I find it a bit misleading that parent is modded Funny. 'Insightful' would be more appropriate, IMO.

  10. Imperfections by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    "methods also reduce drastically imperfections"

    Maybe he should have used those methods on his text!

    1. Re:Imperfections by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

      Maybe they need to be used on /.

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
  11. Re:Weeeee by qbzzt · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Another Slashdot story that is going to change my life. Why is it after 3 years I'm still doing the same stinking job, same stinking money eh?

    Maybe because you expect /. to change your life? The .com boom is over, get over it. Find a job you enjoy, or one you can stand. Then, to enjoy yourself, get a life. It's amazing how unimportant work is once you have a kid.

    --
    -- Support a free market in the field of government
  12. Space Elevators.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Hmmm, isn't this just what we need to make space elevators possible?

    1. Re:Space Elevators.... by topynate · · Score: 1

      You can make metals strong - but not that strong. A strength of 65 to 120 gigapascals is needed.

    2. Re:Space Elevators.... by HiThere · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No. Carbon nanotubes are what you want for that. But we need better production.

      OTOH, this might be jim dandy for the electrical connections. (Might, because I'm not sure how well it conducts electricity, or what conducting electricity does to it's strength.) It's obviously desireable to minimize the parasitic weight that the elevator contains in its lift cable.

      P.S.: To me it seems a poor idea to go directly to a Space Elevator. Starting with an easier design might well be better, say with a pinwheel. You need to fly up to catch the rotating arm, but not too high, and by doing things that way you don't need quite as strong a cable. (You don't even need to do it from a geo-stationary orbit, but you would need to be high enough so that progression is rather sedate. Say, once every 6 hours...and build four of them for less than the price of one in geostationary orbit. (You do need to have the arms reach down far enough to hook the cargo-bay off the plane...say 10 miles up? I didn't look up how high planes can reasonably fly, or what the air resistance is at that height, so that a wild ass guess [WAG].)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    3. Re:Space Elevators.... by Karora · · Score: 1

      50,000 feet is certainly doable in a plane - not that much higher than where a commercial international flight gets to.

      And there are things that will get to 60 miles without too much trouble...

      --

      ...heellpppp! I've been captured by little green penguins!
    4. Re:Space Elevators.... by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Ideally, you'd want this to be reachable by a standard (high altitiude) cargo plane. But certainly any increment in height will improve things...lighter cable, less air friction, etc. 12 miles up is better than 10, and 15 is better than 12, etc.

      Also, if you can arrange things properly you might get it so that air friction acted to speed up the rotation of the arms...but I'm not sure what effect that would have on delta-V at contact, which you would prefer to be zero.

      Additionally note that with a pinwheel, you never visit the pinwheel, so the cargo is aimed at it's destination by timing when it releases from the arm. So you'll want at least minor manuvering capability internal to the pod. (I.e., small rockets, probably.) But these won't be needed until you are in the vicinity of your destination.

      Also notice that as with most skyhooks, the system isn't stable in the long term unless you download as much mass as you upload. So collecting meteors becomes essential. (You sure aren't going to collect your escaped rocket propellant.) Things would be easier if there were a catapult on the moon that could launch chunks of rock for downloading to earth. That might be cheaper than catching meteors...and the darkside of the moon is a the best place for an observatory anyway. (Probably a totally automated one, though, so forget every SF story about such a thing.)

      The scaled composites page is quite interesting, and may apply to the kind of thing that would BE the cargo pod, but you want to be able to lift pods in the multi-ton range, and preferably above the kilo-ton range ... well, that may be dreaming excessively, and the heavier the thing you can lift, the higher the central mass needs to be, not to mention the stronger the cable, so start with something that can manage a loaded Apollo capsule. (Go much lighter than that, and you can forget a manned capsule.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  13. You missed the point!!!! by ScottGant · · Score: 3, Funny

    These things are "self-assembling"!! Doesn't this just scare the hell out of you?!?!

    How long will it be before these 3D nanostructures figure out they no long need Mankind to survive...and see us as a threat!?!?

    I for one will welcome our new Self-assembling 3D Nanostructures Overlords!

    --

    "Music is everybody's possession. It's only publishers who think that people own it." - John Lennon.
    1. Re:You missed the point!!!! by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "These things are "self-assembling"!! Doesn't this just scare the hell out of you?!?!"

      No, but I think I read a little farther than you did.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
  14. Already slashdotted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Google cache

  15. Replicator? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe this is the path to a general purpose replicator a la Star Trek. I bet it would make some really tough biscuits.

  16. Article text by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    NC State engineers patent methods for 3-D nanostructures

    Nanotechnology promises to revolutionize modern life. From energy-efficient lighting that lasts for 50 years, to greater data storage capacity, to stronger metals and ceramics, the improvements attributed to the development of nanostructures seem limitless. So far, the greatest impediment to developing these advances has been creating usable nanostructures that self-assemble. Engineers at North Carolina State University recently received a patent for two processes that help break that barrier.

    Dr. Jagdish "Jay" Narayan, the John C.C. Fan Family Distinguished Professor of Materials Science and Engineering and director of the NSF Center for Advanced Materials and Smart Structures at NC State, and Dr. Ashutosh Tiwari, research associate in the Department of Materials Science and Engineering, developed and patented two methods for self-assembly of three-dimensional nanostructures.

    Results of their research will be published in the September issue of the Journal of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology with images of the newly created structures appearing on the cover of the journal. The research was supported in part by the National Science Foundation (NSF).

    The new methods are a breakthrough in nanotechnology that opens the door to creating new materials for a myriad of applications, including super-dense data storage, solid-state lighting, super-strong materials and advanced detection systems. According to Narayan, three-dimensional self-assembly is the key to being able to use the nanostructures.

    "The grand challenge is to be able to use the nanounit in the form of nanodot, nanowire or nanodisc," said Narayan. "In the past we could make only one layer of the nanostructure with these units. There was only two-dimensional self-assembly, which is not usable for applications. We couldn't control the properties of the medium. Now, with this development, we can control the medium and do three-dimensional self-organization. More importantly, we can change the size in different layers and change the functionality at different depths."

    "National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) has created a broad base of scientific discovery and potential technological development," said Dr. Mihail Roco, senior advisor for nanotechnology at NSF and chair of the NNI organization. "This research shows the importance of creating infrastructure because NC State University has established a strength in the area of nanostructured materials, and at this moment, we can see several results that weren't initially planned."

    The two methods involve using pulsed laser deposition, which works with a variety of materials and reduces imperfections. The sequential growth method uses the laser pulses to ablate successive targets to create layers of nanodots in a matrix. The simultaneous growth method is based on the difference in the oxidation rate of the nanodot and matrix materials. In this method the matrix and nanodots are deposited simultaneously on a substrate. Both methods produce consistent size and shape of the nanodots and demonstrate control of the materials that cannot be achieved by previously proposed methods.

    "This device is part of the first generation of passive nanostructures which illustrate how one can exploit new phenomena and behavior of materials at the nanoscale for economic advantage," said Roco.

    The patented processes can be applied to almost any material. To create nanostructures for the different applications, the material used for the nanodots and the matrix are changed. For example, to create structures for data storage, Narayan uses nickel; for solid-state applications, gallium nitride or zinc oxide is used; for superstrong materials, copper, tungsten carbide and nickel aluminide are used; and for ceramics, aluminum oxide is used.

    The most interesting application may be the development of energy-efficient, low-cost, solid-state lighting. By creating a matrix of layers of varying sizes of nanodots em

  17. Robot Cities by Logic+Probe · · Score: 1

    This sounds like the stuff that the Asimov robot cities are made of that are mentioned in the Robots and Aliens series of books.

    --

    No problems, only solutions

    1. Re:Robot Cities by SamBeckett · · Score: 1

      I am not familiar with Asimov's "Alien" series of books, but the only robot city I am familiar with was actually an entire robot world, but everyone was "one" with nature and all that hippie crap. They were probably running a GPL operating system.

    2. Re:Robot Cities by Catbeller · · Score: 1

      Asimov did not write a "Robots and Aliens" series of books. His Foundation and robot novels were noteworthy for a total lack of alien sentient life.

      The stories you refer to may be pastiches written after his death.

    3. Re:Robot Cities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not 100% true.

      Foundation and Earth mentions the possibility of aliens. That's why Daniel needed a replacement.

      I never was happy with that ending.

  18. Re:Weeeee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    have kids? You insensitive clod, eight years married and still no kids...

  19. greatest invention since the lightbulb by Jotham · · Score: 4, Funny

    Why is it that every time I read about a scientific breakthrough, journalists always promise that it could lead to... *drumroll*... an improved lightbulb?

    I wonder if Einstein had this problem.
    E=mc^2... helps us understand the relationship between energy and matter... which could lead to...

    1. Re:greatest invention since the lightbulb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is it that every time I read about a scientific breakthrough, journalists always promise that it could lead to... *drumroll*... an improved lightbulb?

      That's because a lightbulb is the universal symbol for a brilliant idea.

      They'd probably use the metaphor "build a better mousetrap," but that'd annoy PETA.

    2. Re:greatest invention since the lightbulb by nounderscores · · Score: 1

      Nanite powered mousetrap. Now that is a genuinely scary idea.

      Billy:"Hey Mom, what's this strange piece of cardboard that has a lead to the wall socket?"
      Mom:"No Billy! Don't Touch That!!!"

      *WHACK*

      Mom cleans up what's left of Billy's hand with a dust pan.

    3. Re:greatest invention since the lightbulb by aussie_a · · Score: 1

      Pfft. What an inefficient nanomachine. It should get the rest of Billy AND clean up the remains.

    4. Re:greatest invention since the lightbulb by RsG · · Score: 1

      And use the rest of Billy to make copies of itself!

      --
      Erotic is when you use a feather. Exotic is when you use the whole chicken.
  20. Re:Weeeee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's amazing how unimportant getting married and having kids is when you have a meaningful life purpose.



    Please, spare us the "I'm married and in a wonderful relationship isn't my life great" spiel. We all appreciate your ability to procreate, but in all reality, it's nothing special.



    Some of us have meaningful lives, and don't need a family to support our egos and make us feel needed. Now I'm sure having dependants makes you feel just dandy, but I'm getting tired of hearing people tell me how wonderful their lives are now that they're married with kids. They see themselves as free, I see them as tied to their homes, under the watchful eyes of three or four people, with no personal freedom at all. Before you go and criticize someone for complaining about his job and expound on the virtues of married life, remember: US divorce rate is .5%, what makes you so sure you won't add to that statistic?

  21. Data storage shrinks again? by oneandoneis2 · · Score: 1, Funny

    Great... As if contact lenses weren't bad enough, we'll soon be on hands & knees searching the carpet for somebody's Very Compact Disc collection

    --
    So.. it has come to this
    1. Re:Data storage shrinks again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      searching for compact disc collections - where have you been, CDs are dead...

      music is just data, data in large files, data stored on mass storage medium...

      just like people these days who will have no concept of 45 rpm records, lp records, songs from the 'B' side, ep (extended play lps with one or two songs on them), cassette tapes so shall another generation look back on the whole music CD era. For a glimpse of the future look to what is happening with MP3 and portable mp3 players and extend that onwards...

  22. Mod parent up! by ScottGant · · Score: 3, Funny

    This isn't redundant man...don't you GET IT?

    Listen. And understand. Those Self-assembling 3D Nanostructures are out there. They can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They don't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they absolutely will not stop, EVER, until we are dead!

    --

    "Music is everybody's possession. It's only publishers who think that people own it." - John Lennon.
    1. Re:Mod parent up! by thoughtcriminal87 · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Someone's been watching too much Stargate ..

    2. Re:Mod parent up! by ScottGant · · Score: 1, Informative

      Lol, how is this redundant? It's a fricken joke you idiot moderators.

      Ok, how is this in ANY WAY a troll? Who am I trolling? It's an obvious joke taken from the Terminator...if you guys can't get that it was suppose to be funny and NOT a troll, don't mod it at all...just ignore it.

      Morons

      --

      "Music is everybody's possession. It's only publishers who think that people own it." - John Lennon.
    3. Re:Mod parent up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Or, you know, the first Terminator movie.

    4. Re:Mod parent up! by thoughtcriminal87 · · Score: 1

      That too ..

      And I fail to see how my first post was off topic

    5. Re:Mod parent up! by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

      My kind of guys!

      Actually, I thought it was humans who couldn't be reasoned with...But of course, humans REALLY feel pity (for themselves), remorse (for themselves) and definitely fear.

      And humans definitely won't stop doing this until they're dead.

      The only question: why do you say that like it's a Bad Thing?

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
    6. Re:Mod parent up! by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

      "Morons"

      Hey, it's /.! You were expecting PBS?

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
    7. Re:Mod parent up! by Razor+Blades+are+Not · · Score: 1


      Those self-assembling 3D Nanostructures are really cool, and by really cool, I mean totally sweet.

      Their purpose is to flip out and kill people. They fight ALL the time.

  23. Can we use it for the space elivator project? by bluFox · · Score: 4, Informative

    The space elivator project needs materials strong enough to with stand the tension of its own weight, and we already have carbon nano fibers that provide 60-70% of the strength needed to make it a reality. If this new technique can get us to the magic strength, we are probably in the threashhold of a new era.

    --
    ~561
    1. Re:Can we use it for the space elivator project? by Rakishi · · Score: 1

      Well nanotubes can theoretically provide the required strenth (and more) however out current methods of making them are still not good enough. At current rates it should take a few more years.
      The space elevator also has other hurdles besides the material.

    2. Re:Can we use it for the space elivator project? by Have+Blue · · Score: 1

      The other obstacle to making the space elevator is that we can't manufacture carbon nanotubes of non-microscopic length yet. And depositing single atoms at a time won't solve that problem.

  24. I for one welcome our... by dwalsh · · Score: 1

    ... yada yada ya ... overlords. You can fill the rest in yourselves.

    --
    ${YEAR+1} is going to be the year of Linux on the desktop!
  25. Re:Weeeee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's amazing how unimportant work is once you have a kid.

    I see - so the kid is now your main job. Maybe you'll get lucky and enjoy it for longer than the first several years.

  26. Ok, after reading the article by nounderscores · · Score: 4, Interesting

    At the moment, "self assembling" means that we don't have to push the nanodots together after we make them. That's all. You still need to ablate a carefully prepared target with a laser to etch the structures we want.

    Personally, I'm excited about their solid state lighting idea.

    from the article The most interesting application may be the development of energy-efficient, low-cost, solid-state lighting. By creating a matrix of layers of varying sizes of nanodots embedded in a transparent medium such as aluminum oxide, Narayan can create a chip that glows with white light. Solid-state lighting would use about one-fifth the energy of standard fluorescent lighting and last for approximately 50 years.



    Looks like my LCD monitor is about to become obsolete: there's no reason why these solid state can't be made the size of a pixel and tied to active matrix display electronics. Maybe the us military might be able to replace their $30,000+ individual soldier helmet monocles which are currently using 5000 hour MTBF organic led technology with durable, bright and efficient nano-leds and save taxpayer money while we're at it.

    1. Re:Ok, after reading the article by danharan · · Score: 1
      Maybe the us military might be able to replace their $30,000+ individual soldier helmet monocles which are currently using 5000 hour MTBF organic led technology with durable, bright and efficient nano-leds and save taxpayer money while we're at it.
      Er... $6/hour for... night-vision goggles?
      --
      Information: "I want to be anthropomorphized"
    2. Re:Ok, after reading the article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Hmmm...solid state lighting that uses one fifth the energy that fluorenscents do. I wonder if they also provide a wide spectrum of lightwaves too? Because if so...I could grow 5 pot plants instead of one, and not have to worry about the cops picking up on my electric bill. COOL! I love science!

    3. Re:Ok, after reading the article by biobogonics · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the misleading headline. "Self-assembling 3D Nanostructures" is a far cry from a form of ultra-micro-lithography.

    4. Re:Ok, after reading the article by fishicist · · Score: 1

      An image is displayed on an LCD screen by varying the darkness of each pixel, NOT by varying how much light each pixel emitts (as with a CRT). An LCD screen still needs a (very) bright white back-light. An LCD screen displaying white will only be letting through about half the light from this back-light A more efficient back-light has got to be good news for laptop battery life.

    5. Re:Ok, after reading the article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      ...save taxpayer money while we're at it.

      Wouldn't happen. If they didn't spend it all they wouldn't get the nice big budget next year. Now if they found a way of using this tech that would cost taxpayers more money, it would have a chance.

    6. Re:Ok, after reading the article by nounderscores · · Score: 1

      Fortunately the headsets I'm talking about are not nvgs but data displays. Of course you can route nvg images through them. read about a representative system here here. The 5000 hour life was a figure I got back in 2002, mostly based on how long it took the blue oled to burn out. Maybe liteye might have improved since then.

  27. Re:Weeeee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
    Because you rely on outside influences to make a difference to your internal view of the world without any effort on your behalf.

    Please read the previous sentence for as many thousand times as needed for you to fully understand it.

  28. Google cache by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    of the Triangle Tech Journal article, since it's slashdotted at this instant.

  29. Space Elevator material? by WebTurtle · · Score: 1

    Could this technique be what brings us one step closer to the material needed for developing the space elevator?

    --
    ------- "One of the joys of travel is visiting new towns and meeting new people." -- G. KHAN
    1. Re:Space Elevator material? by balbord · · Score: 1

      Not related: your sig rocks big time!!!! :):):):)

      --
      "If I have been able to see so far, It is because I went out and bought a damn binoculars" - Ze da Esquina
  30. new life for LCD tech vs OLED by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    > 'chip-light using' one-fifth the energy of standard fluorescent lighting and last for approximately 50 years

    Well that puts LCD back in the race against the upcoming OLED technology. If they can further reduce bad pixels and failure it may be more environmentally friendly than OLED which may have a shorter life span. The energy used by the backlight was LCDs culprit, with that solved LCD may become our long lasting friend.

    OLED pushers better speed their cheap display printing tech to market before we expect displays to last 40 years.
    --
    Dennis SCP

    1. Re:new life for LCD tech vs OLED by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you say "ovlord" ? yes I bow to them.

  31. prosthetic limbs? by mn3m05yn3 · · Score: 1

    of course when your fake hand is strong enough to crush steel it gets classified as a weapon and you have to check it with your luggage...

    1. Re:prosthetic limbs? by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

      No, you just crush the security guard.

      When the others open fire on you, they hit your Threat Level Fifty body armor (plus ten civilians who happen to be around you), then you crush them.

      Of course, then they send an F-16 to shoot the plane down (killing another 150 civilians, of course), so you might as well take the train or a private car and avoid the hassle.

      That's using the ten terabits of smarts you've got stored in your head.

      See how this works?

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
  32. PostID = 666! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...and then i got covered in grey-goo from satan...

    which was nice!

  33. The Diamond Age by Viking+Coder · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Okay, so this has been really bugging me, ever since I first read it. In "The Diamond Age" by Neal Stephenson, he talks about making tiny little diamonds that are lighter than air. They have vaccuum inside, and they're diamond, so they're strong enough to handle the pressure. So, they end up being diamonds that float in our atmosphere.

    Is that possible, or is there something fundamentally flawed about it?

    --
    Education is the silver bullet.
    1. Re:The Diamond Age by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, fill the sky with floating rocks and see how happy people in airplanes get when they impact on diamonds at 900 km/h.

    2. Re:The Diamond Age by mikael · · Score: 3, Interesting

      They have vaccuum inside, and they're diamond, so they're strong enough to handle the pressure. So, they end up being diamonds that float in our atmosphere.

      You'd probably need a good few layers of carbon atoms to make sure no oxygen, nitrogen or even hydrogen atoms sneaked in. Not forgetting the byproducts of cosmic rays. My guess is that the total mass of the casing / volume would exceed the density of the surrounding air.

      Buckminster Fuller has a similar idea, but on a much grander scale. He figured you could could create floating cities from ordinary steel. If you could imagine a geodesic polyhedron 2 miles in radius with steel pipes 2-3 metres in radius for the edges, the force exerted by raising the air temperature inside the pipes by just a couple of degrees would be enough to make the structure float in the air.

      The closest real-world implementation at present is a nyoln fibre airship, with helium gas for lift. Roughly, you get 1 Kg of lift for every cubic metre of Helium. For a 6x2 metre airship with 25 cubic metres, the weight of the skin is around 8 Kg, when inflated, and 25kg of lifting weight.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    3. Re:The Diamond Age by Have+Blue · · Score: 1

      There's no fundamental reason that would be impossible, but I suspect that would would have to have very thin walls and therefore be quite brittle, even if it is made out of the hardest substance we know of.

    4. Re:The Diamond Age by pimpimpim · · Score: 1
      You'd probably need a good few layers of carbon atoms to make sure no oxygen, nitrogen or even hydrogen atoms sneaked in. Not forgetting the byproducts of cosmic rays. My guess is that the total mass of the casing / volume would exceed the density of the surrounding air.

      In a perfect structure without faults, one layer would be enough (think buckyballs), but the diamond-lattice wouldn't be stable at all that way.

      Even then if you would make structures where the mass / volume would be lower than the density of air it would be difficult to get it to float in the air. Just try it, if you make a hollow object, and try to scale it up, the surface will scale with the power of two, while the volume will scale with the power of three. So, at large enough scales any vacuum hollow object can have a mass/volume lower than the density of air. If this would work, this would be a cheap and safe way to build zeppelins ;) I guess it really only works for objects which are in the gas phase at air temperature, and diamond doesn't really fall in that category.

      On the article itself: why should this be news? Any scientist in nano-assembly will say that his/her research results will change the world. This goes in steps, but if just any step will be posted on slashdot they might be better of just forwarding their site to web of science / current contents / pubmed in the long run...

      --
      molmod.com - computing tips from a molecular modeling
  34. Too bad... by zarthrag · · Score: 1

    "Mega-Damage" is already trademarked.

    --
    Why can't all fpga/microcontroller manufacturers just release free optimizing compilers???
  35. But when will it work with alchohol by GomezAdams · · Score: 3, Funny
    I'd rather like to see something along this line that would assemble the finest Cuba Libre on the planet, a good cigar, and then assemble some red headed carbon based life form to share it with. That would be nano-technology worth investing in!

    --
    Too lazy to create a sig...
    1. Re:But when will it work with alchohol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmmm... How about nano-activated charcoal to help control nanofarts???

    2. Re:But when will it work with alchohol by HiThere · · Score: 1

      You have a thing for orangutangs?

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  36. You JUST found that yet? (news.nanoapex.com) by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 3, Informative

    I had known this for months.

    If you really want to be up to date in nano, check out news.nanoapex.com.

    Every day there's a new discovery.

  37. no details by gollum123 · · Score: 1

    well the idea does seem interesting but the article does lack any details like did they actually try depositing other materials and what was the success rate. Also they are able to deposit Ni uniformly, but have they actually tried depositing it in different size layers to see if their method works. there are a bunch of ideas in the nanoworld which work specifically for a set of materials, so i wonder if this would be as general as claimed, and laser ablation has been around for quite a while now. well if anyone elas has any details it will be cool to know.

  38. 5 years? by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 2, Insightful


    Sounds extremely over-optimistic to me.

    1. Re:5 years? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but if they advertise a realistic timespan, they scare away any potential funders. I suppose their justification, if challenged, would be something like "5 years if a concerted large-scale research program is initiated" which could even be true, but no one's going to start a large-scale research program for an uncertain idea. (And if it was a certain idea, it wouldn't need 5+ years of development to become reality.)

    2. Re:5 years? by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Sure it would. Manufacturing process tuning alone could eat up five years. Easily.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  39. And where's my flying car? by mangu · · Score: 1

    These "All this will be true in five years," stories are so 1950... It used to look good in Popular Mechanics covers, but the public has got so used to vaporware in press releases that we expect some more solid evidence before getting excited about what's supposed to become true in a five years future.

  40. Dear slashdot: by thomastheo1 · · Score: 1

    If you post another story submitted by roland, i will stop reading this site.. I promise.

  41. Yawn. Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Hey slashdot: if someone puts the word nano in front of a sentence it does not mean the material is instantly going to build your nerdy wet dream of a space elevator, coming to take you away from your sad little cubicle/hand jobs.

    More nano hype. It's published in a crappy journal, and he's got nanoparticles to assemble into a lattice, which they've been doing now for, ooh >5 years? Suitably stabilized Nanoparticles do this anyway, it's called CLOSE PACKING and should be familiar to anyone with a modicum of HS chem.

    I have to say, it's a nice trick with the laser ablation though - it generalises exisitng nanoparticle positioning/assembly to a few new materials.

    Revolutionary it ain't.

    See

    http://www.cchem.berkeley.edu/~pagrp/

    and

    http://www.ncsu.edu/chemistry/dlf.html

    amongst many many others for better science.

    'Nonymous nanotechnologist.

    1. Re:Yawn. Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      finally someone competitent, I hate worthless hype like this. I work in a DNA nanotech lab and I always love to read and laugh at all the the extensive possiblities this could help with. It is absolutely ridiculous how far people stretch things. Tell me when this guys gets in Science or Nature-then maybe itll be something important.

  42. Placing my order early... by djcatnip · · Score: 1

    I'd like to place my order for a Number 3 hull, please...

    --
    I make these: http://beatseqr.com
  43. What about ... by NicerGuy · · Score: 1

    ... transparent aluminum? :-P

  44. Rotational Momentum by Boronx · · Score: 2

    Can someone explain to me how the space elevator is going to make up for changes in rotational momemntum as the elevator moves up and down? Are they going to have rockets on it to counter-act coreolis forces?

    1. Re:Rotational Momentum by HeghmoH · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As the cargo goes up, the elevator will lag slightly behind the earth's rotation because of coriolis forces. This will create a tension in the cable, pulling on the elevator, and causing it to speed back up. This will slow down the earth's rotation by an extremely small amount. The same kind of thing happens when things go back down.

      --
      Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
    2. Re:Rotational Momentum by HornWumpus · · Score: 1
      It is supposed to have a mass at the end (hanging out past GSO, used to launch deep space missions) that puts the whole thing into tension. When something goes up the earth slows, when something goes down the earth speeds up. The cable would pendulum a little. Operators would need to keep an eye on it and think about how they move unbalanced loads (up/down mass balance vs current cable velocity I mean). Atmosphere loading would be the only natural damper so the operators would have to watch the swing.

      Just thinking. What would be the period on that puppy? Anybody got a link to a set of base assumptions?

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    3. Re:Rotational Momentum by AoT · · Score: 1

      so how much mass do we need to send out to stop the earths rotation totally? Or even to significantly effect it.

    4. Re:Rotational Momentum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how much mass do we need to send out to stop the earths rotation totally

      The angular momentum of the earth is approximately 7e27 kg m^2/s.

      One kilogram on the earth's surface at the equator has angular momentum of about 3e9 kg m^2 /s. One kilogram in geosynchronous orbit has angular momentum 1.3e11 kg m^2/s. So, the earth can spin up approximately 5.4e16 kg to geosynchronous orbit, which is perhaps one hundred millionth of its mass. It's also about a million times the total amount of freight shipped in the US yearly.

      Note that bringing any mass down from the elevator will spin the earth back up.

      This helpful link will make it all clear.

  45. Open Source Manufacturing by TekPolitik · · Score: 1
    The potential implications of this are huge if you extrapolate the development and combine it with the open source philosophy.

    In principle you could make a more-or-less general purpose machine that could replicate itself and other machines, given enough raw material. If the software driving it was open source, in principle anybody could become their own manufacturing plant. Have the machine produce other machines that mine raw materials, and you could set it loose in a mineral-rich area and it would replicate enough of itself to start producing whatever you want.

    Want to go to Mars? Send a small manufacturing/mining combination machine with instructions to replicate itself and then build a habitable environment. Then we don't need to take the environment with us - we get a lower mission payload.

    Hell, with technology that can assemble stuff atom by atom you could produce food.

    The implications for society of having what amounts to Star Trek's replicators are massive. You could quite literally eliminate poverty and hunger.

    1. Re:Open Source Manufacturing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And even if you're not so optimistic, even gray goo will eliminate poverty and hunger, too!

    2. Re:Open Source Manufacturing by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

      Thank you for telling us what K. Eric Drexler told us in his first book published, uh, eighteen years ago now?

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
    3. Re:Open Source Manufacturing by TekPolitik · · Score: 1
      Thank you for telling us what K. Eric Drexler told us in his first book published, uh, eighteen years ago now?

      What I find more amazing is that according to you, he somehow managed to post something to SlashDot before it existed. Very impressive indeed.

    4. Re:Open Source Manufacturing by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

      What part of "in his first book" didn't you comprehend?

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
    5. Re:Open Source Manufacturing by TekPolitik · · Score: 1

      You are an idiot. What part of "he told us" did you not understand when you were writing it? He told us, the /. readership, nothing of the sort. He may have told those who read his book, but that does not fit any reasonable definition of "us" in this context. In the context of your post, it was critical that "us" be inclusive, otherwise you were just being a moronic jerk. Presumably you are one of these 12 year old /. readers I keep hearing about.

    6. Re:Open Source Manufacturing by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

      Since you can't comprehend simple English and react with hysterical insults when called on it, I'd opine that you're one of those 12 year olds,
      i.e., someone who can't comprehend "us" as meaning any reader of his book - not to mention that many /.'ers are quite well aware of his book anyway since nanotech is one of the news sections on /.

      I happen to be 55, actually.

      Do run along now and play.

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
  46. Re:Weeeee by NanoGator · · Score: 1

    "Why is it after 3 years I'm still doing the same stinking job, same stinking money eh? "

    Okay, since you rely on external forces to guide your life:

    Watch Star Trek Nemesis, pay real careful attention to what Data says about B-4. The key word is 'ambition'.

    --
    "Derp de derp."
  47. Spam? or just lazy editors. by barryp · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Is Roland actually submitting this stuff to Slashdot? Or are the illustrious Slashdot editors merely mining Roland's excellent site for material to fill whatever story quotas they have?

    Either way, I make a point of checking Roland's site regularly because he manages to have a posting every day that's usually interesting.

  48. I hear Piquepaille gives good head... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and that the pricks who edit this site enjoy it.

  49. Something I've been wondering for a while: by Lazyhound · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What would I be best off majoring in if I wanted to get involved in nanotechnology? Material engineering?

    1. Re:Something I've been wondering for a while: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Chemistry is probably more related to nanotech

    2. Re:Something I've been wondering for a while: by bar-agent · · Score: 1

      You could go to a school that offers a nanotech degree.

      --
      i'd hit it so hard, if you pulled me out you'd be the king of britain [bash.org]
    3. Re:Something I've been wondering for a while: by Lazyhound · · Score: 1

      Too bad those are all American universities. The only nanotech program in Canada I'm aware of is at the University of Toronto (and maybe Alberta).

  50. Re:Weeeee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "It's amazing how unimportant work is once you have a kid."

    What some people will do for entertainment is beyond the imagination...

  51. Procreation may turn into the ultimate nightmare : by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    True story :

    I knew a guy who once said "I owe it to the world to have kids, because my genes are superior".

    Guess what happened ? This arrogant ass had a child who is profoundly autistic.

    Wonder if he still thinks his genes are so superior ? Funny, he never seemed that superior to me, even before he had the kid.

  52. hey, everyone -- re: You missed the point!!!! by HiThere · · Score: 1

    It's a joke!

    Read the post again.

    --

    I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  53. Beryllium... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "For a while Ferarri and perhaps a couple other teams used a molybdenum (maybe not molybdenum) composite"

    You are thinking of beryllium. It has been used in engines, and
    various other parts of some cars, but is very expensive and also
    nasty ( toxic ) to work with. None of this stuff makes for better racing -
    all it does is raise the price of being competitive.

  54. Re:Weeeee by tobybuk · · Score: 1

    I laugh that you suggest my life changing experiences come from a TV show!

  55. Re:Weeeee by NanoGator · · Score: 1

    I laugh that you're in denial!

    --
    "Derp de derp."
  56. Re:Mithril blades ARE for dorks by jonskerr · · Score: 1

    Any reasonably techy person reading Tolkien will realize mithril is nothing but aluminum. It occurs in nature EXTREMELY rarely, but has shown up in the Alps, which are the Misty Mountains. He describes it as being similar in color to silver and can be alloyed with other metals to make amazingly light sturdy armor. Nowhere (to my knowledge) does Tolkien say mithril was ever used in swords. The great weapons of the dwarves and the Eldar were always steel whenever materials were mentioned.

    --
    O~ Him that studies revenge keeps his own wounds green. -- Francis Bacon