Slashdot Mirror


'Nano-Machines' Win European Trio Chemistry Nobel Prize (theguardian.com)

Dave Knott writes from a report via The Guardian: Sir Fraser Stoddart, from Scotland, Bernard Feringa, from the Netherlands, and Jean-Pierre Sauvage, from France have won the Nobel prize in chemistry for developing "nano-machines," an advance that paved the way for the world's first smart materials. In living organisms, cells work as molecular machines to power our organs, regulate temperature and repair damage. Working separately, the Nobel trio were among the first to replicate this kind of function in synthetic molecules, by working out how to convert chemical energy into mechanical motion. This allowed them to construct molecular devices a thousand times smaller than the width of a human hair, including switches, motors, shuttles and even something resembling a motorcar. The advances have allowed scientists to develop materials that will reconfigure and adapt by themselves depending on their environment -- for instance contracting with heat, or opening up to deliver drugs when they arrive at a target site in the body.

16 comments

  1. Nano machines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    War has changed.

    1. Re:Nano machines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Europeans always beat americans?

    2. Re: Nano machines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. SIEG HEIL!

    3. Re:Nano machines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most of the time.

  2. 200% GLAD by Dekonega · · Score: 0

    NANOMACHINES, SON!

    1. Re: 200% GLAD by ArylAkamov · · Score: 1

      RULES

      OF

      NATURE

  3. As always; Simpsons called it by cablepokerface · · Score: 1
    http://blog.everydayscientist....

    Feringa for Chemistry

  4. artificial cells branded as nano-machines by sittingnut · · Score: 1

    " nano-machines", "world's first smart materials" etc!?
    rather they are basically organic material like natural cells, on the same scale, doing similar things.
    award is deserved because they are artificial and hopefully controllable and customizable.

    but we should not forget, that we can also sometimes control natural cells and other organic material, with chemicals etc already.

    anyway silly branding,buzz words, and hype, will only do disservice on the long run by creating false impressions.

  5. NANOMACHINES, SON by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't fuck with this senator!

  6. Morning news sucked by Sqweegee · · Score: 1

    Their entire intro to nano machines revolved around injecting a shrunken Dennis Quaid into Martin Short for slapstick comedy and emergency surgery.

    Why are they letting luddites do science reporting?

  7. Wake me up when they are self-assembling by iMadeGhostzilla · · Score: 1

    and escaped from the lab through faulty air vents in a secret research facility somewhere in a Nevada desert.

  8. News for (N|T)(e|u)rds? by DavidHumus · · Score: 2

    Some of the most interesting science happening today and there's only 12 comments? If only we could work climate change or the short-fingered vulgarian into the headline....

    1. Re:News for (N|T)(e|u)rds? by The-Ixian · · Score: 1

      Well... if we can't make this into a Clinton/Trump flame war then what's the point?

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    2. Re:News for (N|T)(e|u)rds? by sysrammer · · Score: 1

      ...or Bigfoot.

      So many articles have posting talking about "why is this on /.?" Then we get something like this nano-article, and...12 comments, 2/3's of them a waste of a parsing. I quote this guy in the Bigfoot posting:

      " Slashdot By vadim_t 2016-Oct-6 13:01 Score: 5, Insightful Thread I remember back when it was "Slashdot: News for Nerds, Stuff That Matters" Now it seems it's ever trending towards "Slashdot: News for Morons, Inane Bullshit" "

      So, as a business, what is /. to do? When is the last time somebody referred to a site being slashdotted? How would one turn it around? Clickbait works, unfortunately. See the bigfoot article. Lots of postings, lots of bitching, lots of political crap; a few good zingers but nothing worth posting about. And /. made money off of that article.

      This article? 12 postings? Not so much. In fact they probably lost money on this one.

      --
      His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
    3. Re:News for (N|T)(e|u)rds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, it's worse than that. The Thread on a (Paywalled...) article about the crackpot idea that we are all living in a Computer Simulation is up at 702 comments. It begins with something that is inane even for msmash/manishs: "Many believe that we live in a computer simulation."
      No, many do not believe in any such thing. A few may amuse themselves with the notion, but I would speculate that actually no sane person believes in it. BeauHD is actually doing a decent job of Editing these days, btw.

      It was interesting that this work was chosen for the Chemistry Prize, because this is actually Materials Science, which is closer to Physics than Chemistry. But there is no Prize for Materials Science, and the only people that I know these days going for a PhD. in Chemistry are involved with Nuclear Chemistry, (Yea Berkeley!), and people studying basic Chemical Reactions at the Femtosecond level. (Yea Berkeley again!)

      "So, as a business, what is /. to do?"
      Perhaps Time has left Slashdot behind. It started as a hobbyist site, with no Ads, but all those people left a long time ago. I don't see where Slashdot fits within the BizX Box of websites, most of which the average Slashdotter would have absolutely no interest in. Maybe they were just interested in SourceForge, and Slashdot was part of the deal, and the plan is just to let it slowly wither/whither away. That would certainly explain the curious choice of msmash/manishs as an Editor.