Subject: [extropy-chat] CRN in Information Week

From: "MIKE TREDER" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 13:05:46 -0500

In an article published yesterday by Information Week, Chappell Brown 
writes:

>Nanofactories A Few Years Away From Realization?
>
>When the notion of nanotechnology first hit public consciousness a decade 
>ago, exciting concepts of molecular-scale nanobots performing miraculous 
>feats of engineering-or, in the nightmare scenario, self-replicating until 
>they dominated the earth-seemed to be within reach. But the vision has 
>since been scaled back considerably, with funded projects looking at the 
>next generation of semiconductor manufacturing and with companies marketing 
>nanocluster solutions for building new materials.
>
>A genuine nanoscale fabrication capability might arrive soon that would 
>transform industrial society, though not in the fashion initially 
>envisioned, according to a study by Chris Phoenix, director of research at 
>the Center for Responsible Nanotechnology (New York). Phoenix proposes a 
>desktop nanofabrication system that could build industrial components from 
>the molecular level up under programmable control. The concept blends 
>traditional mass-production techniques with an assembler that would use a 
>combination of chemistry and physical mechanics to assemble objects from 
>individual atoms.
>
>Such fabricators, Phoenix believes, could arrive as soon as 2010 and 
>certainly before 2020.
>
>Pivotal System
>
>The key component that's still needed to ramp up nanofactories rapidly is a 
>nanoscale fabricator that could itself build other nanoscale fabricators. 
>This pivotal nanofabricator would be designed using mechanosynthesis, a 
>process that operates at the atomic level using atomic-force microscope 
>techniques to position components and molecular milling systems to shape 
>objects at that scale. The first step in building such a system was 
>demonstrated last year at Osaka University by a research group that used an 
>AFM to pick up silicon atoms on a surface and move them to any desired 
>location.
>
>The significance of the experiment was that no special chemical or physical 
>properties were required of the atoms in order to complete the operation. 
>IBM researchers had earlier demonstrated the ability to move atoms with a 
>scanning tunneling microscope tip. But that scheme required an electric 
>field, and the substrate had to be a conductor. Mechanosynthesis aims to 
>enable a general ability to manipulate materials.
>
>Once a basic fabricator has been built, it would be able to build a small 
>number of copies of itself. Those copies could be aligned to perform a 
>series of nanofabrication steps, just as conventional factories perform 
>specialized operations and then pass the assembly along to the next 
>station.
>
>The assembly process then could be used to create fabricators that would 
>operate on a larger scale; for example, designer molecules could be 
>created. A hierarchy of machines could be created wherein the machines 
>would operate at successively larger scales.
>
>That hierarchy of machines would be assembled into a desktop-sized unit 
>that would have software input for controlling the factory and special 
>containers of basic materials used for manufacturing.
>
>Phoenix believes rapid development would follow the creation of the first 
>nanofabricator, since the remaining steps are well-known from conventional 
>factory design. In addition, nanofactories could be put to work building 
>more nanofactories, so the technology would spread quickly, with perhaps 
>only a year passing from the first nanofactory to worldwide deployment.
>
>It may seem impractical to build materials from the atomic level up, since 
>there is such a huge number of atoms in objects on the human scale. 
>Small-scale machines move at extremely high speed, however, and biology is 
>one example of nanofabrication that produces working systems-ranging in 
>size from bacteria to blue whales-in a reasonable time, Phoenix pointed 
>out.
>
>Public's Misconceptions
>
>The nanobot concept has blinded the public to the more practical routes to 
>nanofabrication, said Mike Treder, executive director of the Center for 
>Responsible Nanotechnology. "Confusion about terms, fueled by science 
>fiction, has distorted the truth about advanced nanotechnology. Nanobots 
>are not needed for manufacturing, but continued misunderstanding may hinder 
>research into highly beneficial technologies and discussion of the real 
>dangers," Treder wrote.
>
>The full report is available at crnano.org/BD-Nanobots.htm.

=====================

We're very pleased with this coverage, obviously. You can read more about it 
on our blog at --

http://crnano.typepad.com/crnblog/2005/03/nanofactories_a.html

See you in the future!

Mike Treder
Executive Director, Center for Responsible Nanotechnology - 
http://CRNano.org
Research Fellow, Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies - 
http://ieet.net/
Editorial Advisory Board, Nanotech Briefs - http://nanotechbriefs.com
Consultant, AC/UNU Millennium Project - http://www.acunu.org/
Director, World Transhumanist Association - http://transhumanism.org
Founder, Incipient Posthuman Website - http://incipientposthuman.com
Executive Advisory Team, Extropy Institute - http://extropy.org
KurzweilAI "Big Thinker" - http://kurzweilai.net/bios/frame.html

_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
[email-masked]
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat