avondale writes "I'm looking for undergrad programs specifically geared towards a 'well rounded' education in nanotechnology. I've only found one so far, at the Flinder's University in Adelaide, Australia… Which will cost me at least 60k in tuition and is on the other side of the planet. I'm willing to go that far to pursue my potential, but am looking for alternatives. My proposed field of study would be nanotechnology for health and wellness. If anyone knows of an applicable undergraduate program, please let me know. Thank you"

brettl writes "Question for a sci-fi story that would like to have some sci in the fiction. If an organ (or person) could be mapped at the molecular level, wouldn't the cost of nanofabricating an organ, a limb, or a person be equivalent to the cost of manufacturing any sort of organic product of equivalent mass (ie plastics)? Or would the complexity increase cost/time of manufacturing? Or would it not be possible at all? Would it be cheap? Also, opinions on how this would play out in reference to the current bioethics debate on cloning would be interesting. Thanks"

HLovy writes "So, what's a nice nanotech entrepreneur like James Clements doing in a place like this?

The founder of Nanosciences Inc., a man with impeccable business credentials, has apparently fallen in with a bad crowd, hanging out here with a bunch of "crackpot" scientists at last weekend's 11th Foresight Conference on Molecular Nanotechnology.

That's the sort of reaction Clements almost universally received from fellow nanotechnology business people when he told them he planned to attend this gathering. Foresight is a nonprofit collection of folks who have been dreaming for decades of a nanotechnology that has yet to exist. It's the one envisioned in 1986 by Eric Drexler in "Engines of Creation," of molecular assemblers that can rearrange atoms into any way permitted by the laws of physics, the nanotechnology that existed in theory before the "n" word morphed into sunscreen, pants and "nanobusiness."

"Crackpots," Clements said, and "too SciFi," were the comments he kept getting from other nanotech entrepreneurs. "I still find it absolutely amazing that one early-adoption population considers another early adoption population a bit too 'out there.' "

For the complete story, please see Small Times."

stan_h writes "Speakers Discuss Big Hopes for Small Science – October 15, 2003 at the American Chemical Society "The Capitol Connection" report:

Senator John Warner (R-VA) opened a recent ACS Science and the Congress briefing entitled "Nanotechnology: from Theory to Commercialization." Senator Warner was a featured participant in the program because he closely follows developments in the field of nanotechnology for two reasons: as chair of the Senate Armed Services, he is interested in seeing discoveries applied for use by the military; and he is hopeful his home state will be able to harness the economic growth that nanotechnology promises.

… [part of first of six paragraphs, more at the URL]

Roland Piquepaille writes "In "NanoKids made in lab," Nature writes that "man-shaped molecules help students learn chemistry." "A team of Texans has created molecules in their own image. The tiny army of human lookalikes is helping Houston kids to learn about chemistry. The researchers call their molecules the NanoKids. Their bodies are made from carbon and hydrogen, and their eyes are oxygen atoms. Each stands just 2 nanometres tall." The Texan team has produced a DVD filled with the NanoKids to teach chemistry to young students. This summary contains other links to the project and pictures of some of the NanoKids, like the NanoTexan, the NanoTeen or the NanoScholar molecules."

Roland Piquepaille writes "According to the Daily Californian, researchers at UC Berkeley have developed a new technique to build monolayers of nanowires. By applying various kinds of chemistry to these nanowires, they think it will open the way for future applications in nanotechnology. "The monolayers can be placed onto surfaces such as plastics, polymers, glass, silicon and even soft, flexible surfaces. With so many possibilities, the nanowires can be used as active components in solar cells, light-emitting diodes and other optics to enhance electromagnetic signals." The researchers also are targeting surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy for better detection of chemicals and explosives. This summary contains more details and a spectacular photograph of these monolayers of nanowires."

Phil Bowermaster writes "Skeptic Michael Shermer is having a little fun at the expense of the life extension movement with an opinion piece running on ScientificAmerican.com. Let's have a look:

For most of our history, humans could turn only to prayer and poetry to help cope with this reality. Today we are offered scientistic alternatives–if not for immortality itself, then at least for longevity of biblical proportions. All have some basis in science, but none has achieved anything like scientific confirmation. Here is a short sampling, from the almost sublime to the near ridiculous:

Continued…"

Dr_Barnowl writes "The BBC reports that scientists at Purdue university have mapped out the structure of cytochrome in blue-green algae.

Cytochromes are the core of the photosynthetic process, making them an interesting photo-electro-chemical curiosity and potentially a model for nanotech systems with similar functions, although less "squishy" alternates might be more efficient."

Roland Piquepaille writes "In "Lasers operate inside single cells," Nature writes that nanosurgery can be achieved by vaporizing some components of living cells without killing the cells themselves. "With pulses of intense laser light a millionth of a billionth of a second long, US researchers are vaporizing tiny structures inside living cells without killing them. The technique could help probe how cells work, and perform super-precise surgery." This was developed by Eric Mazur of Harvard University and his colleagues. This summary contains more details and references about the process and these microexplosions."

HLovy writes "Let's make some decisions based on what we do know, rather than what we don't. Here's one thing we know: Texas Tech professor David D. Allen recently demonstrated "no adverse effects" of nanomaterials "on blood-brain barrier baseline parameters." Yes, it's one study of a few varieties of nanoparticles and not by a long shot the final word on the toxicity of nanoparticles. But it is something that the "nanotech is bad for you" crowd lacks: actual scientific data.