Well it would appear that the U.S. government has released an updated strategic plan for nanotechnology development for the next 5-10 years. You can find the plan itself here. According to comments here the 22 government agencies involved are spending $1 billion on these efforts in 2004. Interesting given that there is no definition for "MNT" in the glossary of the "plan". So we are effectively spending $1B/yr on "nanoscale science"…

The question becomes is there any way to evaluate these plans and budgets to determine whether the U.S. government pushing long term high risk efforts that will ultimately lead to continued U.S. leadership in these high technology areas, or had we best sell everything we own in the U.S. and move to China and enroll in one of the 50 MIT's they plan on constructing? [1]. More…

1. Ray Kurzweil in "Machine Dreams" an interview by Art Jahnke in CIO, October 15, 2004

�

A group lead by Luc Jaeger at UCSB is reporting [1] in the Dec. 17 2004 issue of Science that they now can program RNA building blocks to self-assemble into complex shapes. Interestingly if extended slightly and combined with certain chemical mixthres that polymerize or perhaps light-hardened polymers one could use the RNA pieces to create casting molds that would allow you to "cast" nanoscale parts with relatively precise atomic dimensions and a relatively high density of covalent bonds. More…

1. Chworos A, Severcan I, Koyfman AY, Weinkam P, Oroudjev E, Hansma HG, Jaeger L., "Building programmable jigsaw puzzles with RNA," Science 306(5704):2068-72 (17 Dec 2004).

Richard Jones, a physicist in the UK and author of the book: Soft Machines: nanotechnology and life, has a rather extensive blog detailing a number of aspects of the debate between the ETC Group, CRN, Drexlerites (esp. Merkle & Freitas) and the majority of nanoscale scientists at this time.

Well worth a look.

Christine Peterson has pointed out that the ETC group is making noise again about "nanoparticles" in our food. In line with their general perspective they claim "In keeping with the Precautionary Principle, all food, feed and beverage products (including nutritional supplements) that incorporate manufactured nanoparticles should be removed from the shelves and new ones prohibited from commercialisation until such time as laboratory protocols and regulatory regimes are in place that take into account the special characteristics of these materials, and until they are shown to be safe."

See: Down on the Farm: The Impact of Nano-scale Technologies on Food and Agriculture.

In an effort to make nanodot a more concentrated news resource we have added a number of new block summaries that users may choose to add to their nanodot homepages. More…

Christine Peterson has pointed out an item from Howard Lovy's Nanobot regarding Further Info on Nanotech Action in Leeds.

It looks like the European GMO perspective is starting to spill over into nanotechnology. Obviously an education problem here as it seems that the anti-nanotech forces don't seem to realize that nanotechnology can help clean up the existing problems as well as reduce future problems.

How does one make it clear to people that reality is going to evolve and they had best evolve with it?

Emeka Okafor writes "PhysOrg comments on a breakthrough in the path towards DNA computing, with implications in the field of molecular construction methods: "…Caltech assistant professor Erik Winfree and his colleagues show that DNA "tiles" can be programmed to assemble themselves into a crystal bearing a pattern of progressively smaller "triangles within triangles," known as a Sierpinski triangle. This fractal pattern is more complex than patterns found in natural crystals because it never repeats…" More…

WilliamDye writes "A few weeks ago, the University of Nebraska Medical Center in Omaha announced that it was forming a Center for Drug Delivery and Nanomedicine. The new center was briefly discussed in a recent newspaper article in the Lincoln (Nebraska) Journal-Star. Unfortunately, the use of the term "nanomedicine" at the new center does not appear to be in the realm of what many NanoDot readers would consider to be true Nanomedicine, but as with the current popular usage of the term "nanotechnology", perhaps the present initiatives will eventually lead to the earlier, more powerful concepts."

Christine Peterson has pointed out AzoNano.com which is a new Online Journal of Nanotechnology which is a collaboration between AZoM.com PTY. Ltd. in Australia and The Institute of Nanotechnology in the U.K.

A brief review of the book list seems to suggest their primary focus is on nanomaterials rather than on molecular nanotechnology. For example, Nanosystems and Nanomedicine Vol. I are not included. More…

WillWare writes "I saw the preliminary animation at the October conference. It's an incredible aid to visualizing and discussing the ideas of molecular manufacturing. The DVD can help wealthy, influential people wrap their brains around the feasibility and the benefits and thereby vastly expedite development. Every Nanodot reader is a stakeholder in the future, so it might be smart to put our ideas where Foresight can see them."