Berkeley Scientists Develop Self-Assembling Nanorods

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Berkeley Scientists Develop Self-Assembling Nanorods

Posted by samzenpus on Wednesday February 1, 2012 @09:23PM from the out-of-the-lab dept.

First time accepted submitter techgeek0279 writes "Researchers with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)'s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) have developed a relatively fast, easy and inexpensive technique for inducing nanorods to self-assemble into one-, two- and even three-dimensional macroscopic structures."

11 of 43 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Re:Oh god by VortexCortex · 2012-02-01 21:35 · Score: 3, Funny

That's it, we're doomed!
Yeah, whew! I thought it said "Nanodroids" too.
Old by goldaryn · 2012-02-01 22:20 · Score: 5, Funny

I've been turning a nanorod into a three dimensional structure for years.

Haven't yet worked out how to make it visible to the naked eye, though.
1. Re:Old by macraig · 2012-02-01 22:37 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Haven't yet worked out how to make it visible to the naked eye, though.
  That's what she said!
Self-anything materials by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-01 23:21 · Score: 3, Interesting

They scare me. Not because the gray goo idea, but because I can't help but think that it could really be a problem to stabilize them once they're in the desired shape/structure. If their curing is chemical, and we do get to see some great materials, couldn't their "self-stuff" functions be triggered once they're in place inside our objects ? I RTFA, but yeah, IANAC.
OTOH, it would be cool if these materials were easier to recycle, maybe at room temperature.
Oh the irony ... that's not irony by sakdoctor · 2012-02-01 23:51 · Score: 2

The one story where that xkcd spam bot could have been even vaguely relevant, and it doesn't post.
And yet they can't mass product them? by Karmashock · 2012-02-02 00:15 · Score: 4, Insightful

What's so odd about these self assembly claims is that while they do that to some extent it's rarely very reliable or significant.
Several industries want this material for use in products but they can't get the tons of the stuff required to actually go into production.
Why use carbon fiber when we can make nanotubes that are many times as strong when weaved appropriately? Well... because no one can get their hands on enough of it to bother making anything.
It's very frustrating.
I'm sure they'll crack the problem eventually, but until then I'm taking these reports with a grain of salt until I see them going into industrial production.

--
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
1. Re:And yet they can't mass product them? by Courageous · 2012-02-02 01:34 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  As a technology forecaster, I can personally attest to the strategy of "taking these reports with a grain of salt until I see them going into industrial production" is quite wise. While the sheer volume of work going on in nanomaterials suggests quite strongly that interesting nanomaterial innovations are in our future, the specific innovations are gated quite firmly by commercial production problems that for some specific innovations may never materialize at all.
2. Re:And yet they can't mass product them? by EvilBudMan · 2012-02-02 02:44 · Score: 2
  
  Well even carbon fiber products like Kevlar are still higher than crap. If you want it really strong you have to put the panel in a press mold and then into an autoclave for hours.
  We do need the car companies to start spending some money on how to press out lightweight and strong structures that can be made as cheap as steel. It's simple power to weight. The vehicles and the batteries need to get lighter, if we are going to see a bunch of battery powered cars everywhere or maybe the highway department could have a mass project to put induction wires under the roads. The battery could be a lot lighter then.
  But like everyone else has said, not much of this nano stuff has made it to market except in some high priced bullet resistant vest that may or may not be stronger than Kevlar or Spectra. If we could just make a long enough nano fiber, then it can be woven and made into things. An inch or two is all the length I have seen for sale and you can't buy a lot for any price.
Call Col Jack O'Neil by Starfleet+Command · 2012-02-02 01:04 · Score: 2

Looks we got some replicators ahead.....
similarity to protein synthesis by mapkinase · 2012-02-02 02:07 · Score: 3, Insightful

mRNA = "varying .. morphology of the block copolymers "
aminoacids = nanorods
Sans ribosome.

--
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
two- and even three-dimensional macroscopic struct by mapkinase · 2012-02-02 02:15 · Score: 2

"two- and even three-dimensional macroscopic structures" = different types of uniform glass-like structures with different pattern of near-order.
Another sophisticated supernanomonomers that can do that is hydrogen dioxide and carbon. Except environmental conditions (temperature, etc) here they use a chemical agent (block copolymer)
Can anybody explain what the big deal is?

--
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.