IEEE Blogs CRN Event

A recent entry on the IEEE's Tech Talk blog asks the question, "Oh where, oh where has my mechanosynthesis nanotechnology gone?"

The entry provides a brief overview of CRN's nano/bio conference in Tucson, mentioning that among our speakers were:

• Dr. Ned Seeman of New York University on building structures with DNA
• Prof. Ralph Merkle at Georgia Tech University’s College of Computing on mechanosynthesis
• Jim Von Ehr of Zyvex on atomically precise manufacturing

And they describe some of the conference presentations and discussions in this way:

There was much head scratching, finger pointing and exasperation at the fact that molecular manufacturing in the form of mechanosynthesis had not developed further over the last 20 years since it was first proposed by Eric Drexler.

Some of my favorite exchanges were when Chris Phoenix, Research Director of CRN, remarked that for MNT to progress, “It will require some visionary that has many millions of dollars.”

Unfortunately, he made this remark in the presence of Mr. Von Ehr, who after selling a company for $100 million devoted many of his resources to developing MNT through mechanosynthesis.

“I had the money to do it, but couldn’t attract the right people. No amount of money will do it with an average person,” responded Von Ehr.

Mr. Von Ehr is being overly modest here. He is no average person.

But the classic line was left to Dr. Seeman, who after hearing a bit of this exchange, said, “I don’t fit in this room. I am not a believer in anything.”

Science is like that sometimes. It’s not supposed to believe.

We agree that science is not supposed to believe. Indeed, science proceeds by being skeptical, by pursuing doubt, by undermining irrational belief through empirical evidence.

But science is not the same thing as technology. Technology's role is to make use of the truth that science discovers. Technologists put science into practice to achieve practical goals. Sometimes that does require belief that an unproven approach will work, even in the face of wide opposition. Just ask the Wright brothers.

Or consider some of these quotes from Jack Smith's presentation [PPS] at our conference:

Heavier than air flying machines are impossible - Lord Kelvin, Royal Society President, 1882
The horse is here to stay, the automobile is a novelty - Bank manager to Henry Ford, 1908
There is no likelihood man can ever tap the power of the atom - Robert Milliken, Nobel Prize winner in physics, 1923
I think there is a world market for maybe five computers - Thomas Watson, IBM President, 1943

Will statements about the supposed impossibility of nanobots or mechanosynthesis someday join this list? We think that's quite likely. But we're also humbled enough by the sometimes halting progression of molecular manufacturing technology and realistic enough (we hope) to recognize that any prediction about exactly how and when desktop nanofactories will be developed is almost certain to be wrong.

Still, it's equally certain that the future will be filled with radical change. And conferences like the one we just held in Tucson are essential to try and make sense of that change before it overwhelms us.

UPDATE: Brian Wang has a must-read entry on his Advanced Nano blog explaining why it is taking a long time to achieve robust mechanosynthesis, why that fact is not surprising, and why it seems probable that molecular manufacturing will be developed in the near future.

Mike Treder

Tags: nanotechnology nanotech nano science technology ethics weblog blog

Comments

[Brian Wang]

I have addressed the IEEE article here

http://advancednano.blogspot.com/2007/09/where-is-mechanosynthesis-in-progress.html

1. There are plenty of potentially worthwhile scientific and engineering endeavors which take a long time to occur.
2. There are specific instances of other long term plans which have received significant money but not delivered results.
ie. Smalley's carbon nanotube grid proposed in 1995. received $11 million. Little to show for it.
ie. Tokomak nuclear fusion. Billions over many decades. Very little to show for it. Not conclusive that this is best way to achieve commercial nuclear fusion
3. Von Ehr has not spent $100 million on mechanosynthesis development. Even the atomically precise manufacturing effort is for atomic layer deposition