The NY Times (registration required) is running an article today "Tiny is Beautiful: Translating 'Nano' Into Practical which quotes many of the 'known' names such as Dr. Mirkin and Dr. Alivisatos.
But much of what is discussed is nanoscale chemistry and/or nanoscale physics and not "nanotechnology". As Dr. Alivisatos says, "They're just little rocks."
How does one communicate to writers for the publications between the scientists and the public, such as Kenneth Chang at the NY Times, as well as the people approving "nanotechnology" research grants, the differences between what one gets simply from making something small and what one gets from engineering complex machines at a nano-scale?
Perhaps more importantly, how does one communicate to the VC firms such differences (making something which is small vs. engineering small machines) and how does one judge investment models based upon this?
