Donate
Donate

Gaming the Future: The Book!

Results for ""molecular manufacturing""

We found 308 results for your search.

Call For Papers on Nanotech Challenges

Two journals have issued a Call for Papers on Nanotech Challenges (print version in pdf). The deadline is June 30, 2004. Particularly welcome are papers on disciplinary challenges, epistemological challenges, ontological & metaphysical challenges, and ethical and sociological challenges.

Running Out of Time

Mike Treder writes "CRN Director of Research Chris Phoenix is currently attending a week-long IEEE Conference on Nanoscale Devices & System Integration in Miami, Florida. Chris will present a paper titled "Studying Molecular Manufacturing" at the conference later this week, and he'll be updating us with his impressions every day or two. Here is his first report:"

Best of 2003 Awards from Nanotechnology Now

Nanotechnology Now announces the Best of 2003 Awards. The "Best of the Best and Best Advocate" awards went to the Center for Responsible Nanotechnology (see following post), "for their efforts to help insure the safe use of nanotechnology-enabled products."

Letters about Drexler/Smalley debate

Ralph Merkle writes: "The December 1st 2003 issue of Chemical & Engineering News carried a debate between Drexler and Smalley about the feasibility of molecular manufacturing. The January 26th 2004 issue devotes a little over two pages to letters on the debate. Of the eight letters published, five supported molecular manufacturing, one was clearly opposed, and two seemed skeptical."

Federal Nanotech Confusion Spreads to California

Foresight Press Advisory: Palo Alto, CA ñ January 20, 2004 ñ A report released today in Sacramento indicates that U.S. federal confusion over nanotechnology's original goal has spread to the state of California, where the concept originated. The report, "Nanoscience and Nanotechnology: Opportunities and Challenges in California," was released today at a meeting of the state's Joint Committee on "Preparing California for the 21st Century."

Omission in the 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Deveopment Act

2012Rocky writes "Among a rapidly growing group of nano-commentators, Nanotechnology Now is concerned that the 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act calls for a one-time study of the feasibility of "molecular self-assembly," and omits any possibility of studying the feasibility of molecular manufacturing. Failure to investigate both the promise and the peril of molecular manufacturing may well lead to a future where we find ourselves taken by surprise, to our collective detriment. Read the other comments here: http://nanotech-now.com/MNT-12092003.htm"

Let the Nanotech Wars Begin!

David B. Hughes writes "The debate over whether molecular manufacturing and nanoassemblers are feasible has turned into a PR war. With billions of dollars of research funding and industrial profits at stake, both sides are taking their ideological clash to the public. So far, Eric Drexler and the Foresight Institute own the moral and scientific high ground. But his critics at the National Nanotechnology Initiative hold the purse strings. And they don't play by the same rules."

TNT Weekly: do the study of MNT

TNT Weekly summarizes the MNT debate: "We have had contact with other scientists too and our impression is that opinions in the scientific community vary between Smalley-style dismissal and open acceptance of the feasibility in principle of molecular manufacturing with only an urge to steer clear of some of the wilder claims. Unequivocal dismissal seems to be rare even if high levels of scepticism dominate. Familiarity with the subject matter seems to be pretty superficial in general…So why not have the independent scientific review that Drexler requests?"

NanoBusiness Alliance spokesman attacks MNT

As reported by James Pethokoukis at USNews.com, Mark Modzelewski's views on why a study of molecular manufacturing was changed to "molecular self-assembly" in the new U.S. nanotech bill: "There was no interest in the legitimate scientific community ñand ultimately Congress ñ for playing with Drexler's futuristic sci-fi notions."

So how does this fit with having the technology on the Dec. 1, 2003 cover of Chemical & Engineering News?

TNT Weekly: deletion of MNT study from nano bill is "a farce"

Issue #13 of TNT Weekly (which will be archived here), the leading nanotech industry e-newsletter, covers the recent deletion of a molecular manufacturing study from the new U.S. nanotech legislation:
" –The plot thickens and the nanotech bill gets sillier–
Last week we had some fun with the recent nanotech bill in the US, especially the plan for a one-time study to determine the feasibility of making things using molecular self-assembly, which makes about as much sense as conducting a one-time study into the feasibility of sharpening a stick with a sharp knife. With a combination of cynicism and naiveté, we assumed that the bill had got away from those who actually understood nanotech and ended up in the hands of politicians who didn't understand the difference between self-assembly and molecular assemblers, the result being a terminological boo-boo in the part that was meant to direct figuring out whether Drexlerian-style molecular nanotechnology (MNT) and molecular manufacturing are actually feasible.
We were not alone. Quite a few people, it seemed, thought that the MNT crowd had been given the chance to make their case or forever hold their peace. Even the sceptics seemed to think this was fair dinkum." Read More for the full story.

Facebook Twitter Youtube Linkedin Podcast Spotify
0
    0
    Your Cart
    Your cart is emptyReturn to Shop
    Continue Shopping

      Search Foresight Institute