Tuesday, July 31, 2007
NANo Applications
Already today nanotechnology is available in the market for applications such as cosmetics and sunscreens, water filtrations, glare filters, ink, stain-resistant clothing, more durable tennis balls, more lightweight tennis rackets, dressings for burns or injuries, etc. However, we have only begun to see what can be achieved through nanotechnology, and its continued development to the point of maturation will lead to changes in the world that will redefine life as we know it.Some of the potential future benefits of nanotechnology include: solution to the global water shortage problem by means of filtration that will completely purify even the most polluted of water, agriculture that can be sustained within greenhouses instead of acres of land, computers billions of times faster and yet inexpensive enough to be readily available to everyone, significant improvements in living conditions through the elimination of insect-borne diseases and the easy installation of pipes and plumbing for sanitation purposes, the technology required to support large-scale solar energy, the protection of the environment, especially as an indirect result of the abovementioned applications. Furthermore, the benefits to the study and practice of medicine are too numerous to enumerate, but suffice it to say that medical services will be much more inexpensive as well as much more effective.
Molecular Manufacturing
This more radical form of nanotechnology originated in the mind of an M.I.T. undergraduate in the mid-1970s. Eric Drexler, who went on to obtain a Ph.D. from M.I.T., realized that the biological "machinery" already responsible for the full diversity of life on Earth could be adapted to build nonliving products upon command.
Molecule-sized machines, modeled after those found in nature, could be used to manufacture just about anything man wished.
Drexler, who began to develop these theories even before he'd heard of Feynman's lecture, first published his ideas in a 1981 journal article. Five years later, he brought the notion of molecular manufacturing to the general public with his book Engines of Creation.
An astonishingly original work of futurism, Engines of Creation pointed out how molecular manufacturing would revolutionize other areas of science and technology-leading to breakthroughs in medicine, artificial intelligence, and the conquest of space. Drexler refutes every technical objection he can anticipate, explaining how such phenomena as quantum uncertainty and thermal vibrations don't make molecular manufacturing impossible. It was also in Engines that Drexler introduced the term "nanotechnology"-a reference to the nanometer, one-billionth of a meter-to describe this approach to molecular manufacturing, although the term is now also used for the more mundane applications (cosmetics, tennis balls, etc.) described above.
To shore up his technical arguments for the feasibility of his vision, Drexler further expanded on his ideas in the world's first nanotechnology textbook. Nanosystems (1992), a dense volume that grew out of a class he taught at Stanford, is crammed with equations and diagrams and designs for molecular machines, and it has gone far to put the theory of molecular manufacturing on sound technical footing-although scientific debate about the achievability and the best routes to developing nanotechnology has continued.
Molecule-sized machines, modeled after those found in nature, could be used to manufacture just about anything man wished.
Drexler, who began to develop these theories even before he'd heard of Feynman's lecture, first published his ideas in a 1981 journal article. Five years later, he brought the notion of molecular manufacturing to the general public with his book Engines of Creation.
An astonishingly original work of futurism, Engines of Creation pointed out how molecular manufacturing would revolutionize other areas of science and technology-leading to breakthroughs in medicine, artificial intelligence, and the conquest of space. Drexler refutes every technical objection he can anticipate, explaining how such phenomena as quantum uncertainty and thermal vibrations don't make molecular manufacturing impossible. It was also in Engines that Drexler introduced the term "nanotechnology"-a reference to the nanometer, one-billionth of a meter-to describe this approach to molecular manufacturing, although the term is now also used for the more mundane applications (cosmetics, tennis balls, etc.) described above.
To shore up his technical arguments for the feasibility of his vision, Drexler further expanded on his ideas in the world's first nanotechnology textbook. Nanosystems (1992), a dense volume that grew out of a class he taught at Stanford, is crammed with equations and diagrams and designs for molecular machines, and it has gone far to put the theory of molecular manufacturing on sound technical footing-although scientific debate about the achievability and the best routes to developing nanotechnology has continued.
History of Nanotechnology
The foundations of nanotechnology have emerged over many decades of research in many different fields.
Computer circuits have been getting smaller.
Chemicals have been getting more complex.
Biochemists have learned more about how to study and control the molecular basis of organisms.
Mechanical engineering has been getting more precise. In 1959, the great physicist Richard Feynman suggested that it should be possible to build machines small enough to manufacture objects with atomic precision.
His talk, "There's Plenty of Room at the Bottom," is widely considered to be the foreshadowing of nanotechnology.
Among other things, he predicted that information could be stored with amazing density. In the late 1970's, Eric Drexler began to invent what would become molecular manufacturing. He quickly realized that molecular machines could control the chemical manufacture of complex products, including additional manufacturing systems-which would be a very powerful technology.
Drexler published scientific papers beginning in 1981. In 1986 he introduced the term "nanotechnology" in his book Engines of Creation to describe this approach to manufacturing and some of its consequences. (Subsequent search showed that Taniguchi had previously used the word "nano-technology" in Japan to describe precision micromachining.)
In 1992 Drexler published Nanosystems, a technical work outlining a way to manufacture extremely high-performance machines out of molecular carbon lattice ("diamondoid"). Meanwhile, he was also engaging in policy activism to raise awareness of the implications of the technology; he founded the Foresight Institute in 1986. Engines of Creation created much excitement.
The term "nanotechnology" rapidly became popular, and almost immediately its meaning began to shift. By 1992, Drexler was using "molecular nanotechnology" or "molecular manufacturing" to distinguish his manufacturing ideas from the simpler product-focused research that was borrowing the word.
This research, producing shorter-term results, came to define the field for many observers, and has continued to claim the term "nanotechnology." To avoid confusion, this Press Kit refers to such research as "nanoscale technology." Federal funding for nanotechnology began under President Clinton with the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI). Opinions differ about whether Clinton was influenced by Drexler's descriptions of advanced manufacturing. Instead of focusing on molecular manufacturing, the NNI chose to fund nanoscale technology, which it defined as anything with a size between 1 and 100 nanometers with novel properties.
This broad definition encompassed cutting-edge semiconductor research, several developing families of chemistry, and advances in materials. Meanwhile, a brief mention in Engines of Creation of the dangers of self-replicating systems was proving increasingly troublesome to the field of molecular manufacturing. The idea arose that any molecular manufacturing system would be only one "oops" away from eating the biosphere. The Wired article "Why the Future Doesn't Need Us" by noted computer scientist Bill Joy publicized this concern.
Nanoscale technology researchers, fearing-perhaps with justification-that "gray goo" would threaten their funding, increased their efforts to distance their work from molecular manufacturing. One of the easiest ways to do this was to claim that molecular manufacturing was impossible and unscientific. These claims gained force since molecular manufacturing research was (and remains) highly technical, interdisciplinary, theoretical, and mostly undemonstrated. The controversy continues. Some scientists continue to assert that molecular manufacturing is impossible. Others note that opposition is based on the widespread misinterpretation and misrepresentation of Drexler's work, and that there is no research demonstrating the supposed unfeasibility of molecular manufacturing theory. A published debate between Drexler and Nobelist chemist Richard Smalley in December 2003 illustrated the tone of the controversy, with Smalley accusing Drexler of "hav[ing] scared our children" with "such monster[s] as the self-replicating mechanical nanobot" and Drexler accusing Smalley of having "attempted to dismiss my work in this field by misrepresenting it." The two did not communicate effectively. On the technical side, Drexler mostly restated what he had been saying for years, but Smalley made some interesting scientific errors [link1 & link2]. A recent paper by Chris Phoenix and Eric Drexler, "Safe Exponential Manufacturing," is an attempt to distance molecular manufacturing from fears of runaway self-replication
Computer circuits have been getting smaller.
Chemicals have been getting more complex.
Biochemists have learned more about how to study and control the molecular basis of organisms.
Mechanical engineering has been getting more precise. In 1959, the great physicist Richard Feynman suggested that it should be possible to build machines small enough to manufacture objects with atomic precision.
His talk, "There's Plenty of Room at the Bottom," is widely considered to be the foreshadowing of nanotechnology.
Among other things, he predicted that information could be stored with amazing density. In the late 1970's, Eric Drexler began to invent what would become molecular manufacturing. He quickly realized that molecular machines could control the chemical manufacture of complex products, including additional manufacturing systems-which would be a very powerful technology.
Drexler published scientific papers beginning in 1981. In 1986 he introduced the term "nanotechnology" in his book Engines of Creation to describe this approach to manufacturing and some of its consequences. (Subsequent search showed that Taniguchi had previously used the word "nano-technology" in Japan to describe precision micromachining.)
In 1992 Drexler published Nanosystems, a technical work outlining a way to manufacture extremely high-performance machines out of molecular carbon lattice ("diamondoid"). Meanwhile, he was also engaging in policy activism to raise awareness of the implications of the technology; he founded the Foresight Institute in 1986. Engines of Creation created much excitement.
The term "nanotechnology" rapidly became popular, and almost immediately its meaning began to shift. By 1992, Drexler was using "molecular nanotechnology" or "molecular manufacturing" to distinguish his manufacturing ideas from the simpler product-focused research that was borrowing the word.
This research, producing shorter-term results, came to define the field for many observers, and has continued to claim the term "nanotechnology." To avoid confusion, this Press Kit refers to such research as "nanoscale technology." Federal funding for nanotechnology began under President Clinton with the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI). Opinions differ about whether Clinton was influenced by Drexler's descriptions of advanced manufacturing. Instead of focusing on molecular manufacturing, the NNI chose to fund nanoscale technology, which it defined as anything with a size between 1 and 100 nanometers with novel properties.
This broad definition encompassed cutting-edge semiconductor research, several developing families of chemistry, and advances in materials. Meanwhile, a brief mention in Engines of Creation of the dangers of self-replicating systems was proving increasingly troublesome to the field of molecular manufacturing. The idea arose that any molecular manufacturing system would be only one "oops" away from eating the biosphere. The Wired article "Why the Future Doesn't Need Us" by noted computer scientist Bill Joy publicized this concern.
Nanoscale technology researchers, fearing-perhaps with justification-that "gray goo" would threaten their funding, increased their efforts to distance their work from molecular manufacturing. One of the easiest ways to do this was to claim that molecular manufacturing was impossible and unscientific. These claims gained force since molecular manufacturing research was (and remains) highly technical, interdisciplinary, theoretical, and mostly undemonstrated. The controversy continues. Some scientists continue to assert that molecular manufacturing is impossible. Others note that opposition is based on the widespread misinterpretation and misrepresentation of Drexler's work, and that there is no research demonstrating the supposed unfeasibility of molecular manufacturing theory. A published debate between Drexler and Nobelist chemist Richard Smalley in December 2003 illustrated the tone of the controversy, with Smalley accusing Drexler of "hav[ing] scared our children" with "such monster[s] as the self-replicating mechanical nanobot" and Drexler accusing Smalley of having "attempted to dismiss my work in this field by misrepresenting it." The two did not communicate effectively. On the technical side, Drexler mostly restated what he had been saying for years, but Smalley made some interesting scientific errors [link1 & link2]. A recent paper by Chris Phoenix and Eric Drexler, "Safe Exponential Manufacturing," is an attempt to distance molecular manufacturing from fears of runaway self-replication
Resources
http://worldpubliclibrary.org/Members/Techonology_eBook_Collection/reports/TechPolicy/Nanotech/030523.pdf
http://www.futurebrief.com/miketrederbeams001.asp
http://worldpubliclibrary.org/Members/Techonology_eBook_Collection/reports/TechPolicy/Nanotech/010910.pdf
http://www.nanotech-now.com/Press_Kit/
http://www.nanovip.com/nanotechnology-companies/download-databases-clickbank?hop=nanotech12
http://www.nanovip.com/knowledge-book
http://www.crnano.org/Speech%20-%20Times%20of%20Change.ppt
http://www.futurebrief.com/miketrederbeams001.asp
http://worldpubliclibrary.org/Members/Techonology_eBook_Collection/reports/TechPolicy/Nanotech/010910.pdf
http://www.nanotech-now.com/Press_Kit/
http://www.nanovip.com/nanotechnology-companies/download-databases-clickbank?hop=nanotech12
http://www.nanovip.com/knowledge-book
http://www.crnano.org/Speech%20-%20Times%20of%20Change.ppt
What is nanotechnology all about?
Nanotechnology is the engineering of tiny machines — the projected ability to build things from the bottom up inside personal nanofactories (PNs), using techniques and tools being developed today to make complete, highly advanced products. Ultimately, nanotechnology will enable control of matter at the nanometer scale, using mechanochemistry. Shortly after this envisioned molecular machinery is created, it will result in a manufacturing revolution, probably causing severe disruption. It also has serious economic, social, environmental, and military implications.
A nanometer is one billionth of a meter, roughly
What's a personal nanofactory?
It's a proposed new appliance, something that might sit on a countertop in your home. To build a personal nanofactory (PN), you need to start with a working fabricator, a nanoscale device that can combine individual molecules into useful shapes. A fabricator could build a very small nanofactory, which then could build another one twice as big, and so on. Within a period of weeks, you have a tabletop model.
What could nanofactories produce?
Lifesaving medical robots or untraceable weapons of mass destruction.
Networked computers for everyone in the world or networked cameras so governments can watch our every move.
Trillions of dollars of abundance or a vicious scramble to own everything.
Rapid invention of wondrous products or weapons development fast enough to destabilize any arms race
Is it Good Or Bad
Nanotechnology offers great potential for benefit to humankind, and also brings severe dangers. While it is appropriate to examine carefully the risks and possible toxicity of nanoparticles and other products of nanoscale technology, the greatest hazards are posed by malicious or unwise use of molecular manufacturing. CRN's focus is on designing and promoting mechanisms for safe development and effective administration of MM.
Nanotechnology is the engineering of tiny machines — the projected ability to build things from the bottom up inside personal nanofactories (PNs), using techniques and tools being developed today to make complete, highly advanced products. Ultimately, nanotechnology will enable control of matter at the nanometer scale, using mechanochemistry. Shortly after this envisioned molecular machinery is created, it will result in a manufacturing revolution, probably causing severe disruption. It also has serious economic, social, environmental, and military implications.
A nanometer is one billionth of a meter, roughly
What's a personal nanofactory?
It's a proposed new appliance, something that might sit on a countertop in your home. To build a personal nanofactory (PN), you need to start with a working fabricator, a nanoscale device that can combine individual molecules into useful shapes. A fabricator could build a very small nanofactory, which then could build another one twice as big, and so on. Within a period of weeks, you have a tabletop model.
What could nanofactories produce?
Lifesaving medical robots or untraceable weapons of mass destruction.
Networked computers for everyone in the world or networked cameras so governments can watch our every move.
Trillions of dollars of abundance or a vicious scramble to own everything.
Rapid invention of wondrous products or weapons development fast enough to destabilize any arms race
Is it Good Or Bad
Nanotechnology offers great potential for benefit to humankind, and also brings severe dangers. While it is appropriate to examine carefully the risks and possible toxicity of nanoparticles and other products of nanoscale technology, the greatest hazards are posed by malicious or unwise use of molecular manufacturing. CRN's focus is on designing and promoting mechanisms for safe development and effective administration of MM.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)