Who has the hype?
Imagine the possibilities. Materials with 10 times the strength of steel and only a small fraction of the weight. Shrinking all the information housed at the Library of Congress into a device the size of a sugar cube. Or detecting cancerous tumors when they are only a few cells in size.
That's former President Bill Clinton, in a speech given at Caltech a few years ago when he called for the creation of a U.S. National Nanotechnology Initiative.
Who has the hype?
Because of nanotech, we will see more change in our civilization in the next 30 years than we did during all of the 20th century.
That's Mihail Roco, senior adviser for nanotechnology at the U.S. National Science Foundation, and head of the National Nanotechnology Initiative.
Who has the hype?
Nanotechnology has the potential to revolutionize industry, changing the things we make and the way we make them—literally from the bottom up. Entire industries, their processes, and the knowledge and skills of the people who work in them could be changed completely. For that matter, entire industries could disappear as they are supplanted by new nano-enabled industries, much the same as horse-and-buggy makers were replaced by automobile manufacturers.On a human level, nano's potential rises to near Biblical proportions. It is not inconceivable that these technologies could eventually achieve the truly miraculous: enabling the blind to see, the lame to walk, and the deaf to hear; curing AIDS, cancer, diabetes and other afflictions; ending hunger; and even supplementing the power of our minds, enabling us to think great thoughts, create new knowledge, and gain new insights.
On a societal level, nanotechnology will deliver higher standards of living and allow us to live longer, healthier, more productive lives. Nano also holds extraordinary potential for the global environment through waste-free, energy-efficient production processes that cause no harm to the environment or human health. And nano is already showing great potential for repairing existing environmental damage as well.
That's Philip J. Bond, Under Secretary of Commerce for Technology, U.S. Department of Commerce, speaking at the World Nano-Economic Congress, Washington, DC, September 9, 2003.
Who has the hype?
From a June 2002 report on "Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance" [PDF], some projected developments of nanotech, biotech, informatics, and cognitive science:
* Fast, broadband interfaces directly between the human brain and machines.* Machines and structures of all kinds, from homes to aircraft, will be constructed of materials that have exactly the desired properties, including the ability to adapt to changing situations.
* National security will be greatly strengthened by lightweight, information-rich war fighting systems, capable uninhabited combat vehicles, adaptable smart materials, invulnerable data networks, superior intelligence-gathering systems, and effective measures against biological, chemical, radiological, and nuclear attacks.
* The ability to control the genetics of humans, animals, and agricultural plants will greatly benefit human welfare; widespread consensus about ethical, legal, and moral issues will be built in the process.
That report was edited by Mihail Roco and William Sims Bainbridge of the National Science Foundation.
Who has the hype?
The twenty-first century could end in world peace, universal prosperity, and evolution to a higher level of compassion and accomplishment. It is hard to find the right metaphor to see a century into the future, but it may be that humanity would become like a single, distributed and interconnected "brain" based in new core pathways of society.
Okay... That fascinating, inspiring (hyperbolic?) paragraph is from the same report co-edited by Mihail Roco, now head of the U.S. National Nanotechnology Initiative.
So, when government officials or scientists downplay the possibilities and the implications of molecular manufacturing by calling it "hype," we wonder if they might be looking in the mirror.
More tomorrow.
Yeah, but Bush has the power now. I bet the Christian Right will rule the 2008 Elections, and put an end to all nanotechnology research...for the near future at least.
Posted by: ~MysticMonkeyGuru~ | June 17, 2005 at 06:36 PM
You meant to say "an end to all *governmental, US-based* nanotechnology research". The world is moving on, with or without the USA. Granted, it might take longer to develop MNT without US researchers contributing, but it will not prevent MNT.
Also, I doubt that any industrialized nation can neglect mature nanotechnology. And in the not-too-distant future, regular private corporations (think IBM) can take a serious stab at developing MNT, if they can't already.
Posted by: matt | June 18, 2005 at 03:46 AM
Mystic Monkey Dumbass,
Bush has increased nanotech research funding 5x's what Clinton has it at. Rather than end nanotech research he has made it the centerpiece of his science policy. Get your facts right or don't waste time posting.
"Yeah, but Bush has the power now. I bet the Christian Right will rule the 2008 Elections, and put an end to all nanotechnology research...for the near future at least. Posted by: ~MysticMonkeyGuru
Posted by: MysticMoneyHater | June 19, 2005 at 03:50 PM
Dear MMH,
We welcome your comments on topics concerning nanotech and related policy. Please refrain, however, from calling names. The idea here is for everyone to have their say and be treated with respect, whether we agree with them or not. Or, I should say, *especially* when we don't agree.
Posted by: Mike Treder, CRN | June 19, 2005 at 06:53 PM