While it is not strictly classical nanotechnology, researchers at OSU and Hewlett Packard are reporting the development of transparent transistors based on zinc-tin-oxide.

This of course begs the question given the energy absorption capability, heat radiation capability and the fact that one is moving around electrons which can be much faster than moving around covalently bonded carbon atoms (as is the case with the Drexler rod-logic computer) whether we are headed for an age when our windows are more intelligent than we are?

Tim Fonseca writes "Greetings,

This is not a story, but a question. My question concerns my qualifications for entering my nanomedicine image renderings in the "IMM Prizes in Computational Nanotechnology for 2004 Art Contest" http://www.imm.org/prizes/ The IMM webpage mentions that submissions can be sent to Nanodot. Here I am at Nanodot, and damned if I can find a place to submit an image entrie. Please browse through my Nanobot Galleries, on my website. Let me know if my nano images qualify for the "design" and "rendering" categories of the 2004 IMM contest. Can one do a time reversal and enter the 2003 IMM contest, too, since no one won that year? As you can see, pride does not standeth in my wayeth.

Thanks,
Tim Fonseca"

The editors of nanodot apologize to Tim that it took so long to work back to his submission which is now ~6 months old.

UCLA and the California NanoSystems Institute are reporting on rapid progress in Molecular Electronics based on rotaxanes and catenanes [1, 2].

They apparently have an operational 64-bit RAM and are working on a 16-Kbit memory. These have densities that conventional DRAM or disk drive manufacturers can only wish for in their dreams.

1. Flood AH, Stoddart JF, Steuerman DW, Heath JR., Chemistry. Whence molecular electronics? Science 306(5704):2055-6 (17 Dec 2004).

2. Science Daily: Rapid Progress Reported In Emerging Field Of Molecular Electronics (20 Dec 2004).

Well it would appear that the U.S. government has released an updated strategic plan for nanotechnology development for the next 5-10 years. You can find the plan itself here. According to comments here the 22 government agencies involved are spending $1 billion on these efforts in 2004. Interesting given that there is no definition for "MNT" in the glossary of the "plan". So we are effectively spending $1B/yr on "nanoscale science"…

The question becomes is there any way to evaluate these plans and budgets to determine whether the U.S. government pushing long term high risk efforts that will ultimately lead to continued U.S. leadership in these high technology areas, or had we best sell everything we own in the U.S. and move to China and enroll in one of the 50 MIT's they plan on constructing? [1]. More…

1. Ray Kurzweil in "Machine Dreams" an interview by Art Jahnke in CIO, October 15, 2004

�

A group lead by Luc Jaeger at UCSB is reporting [1] in the Dec. 17 2004 issue of Science that they now can program RNA building blocks to self-assemble into complex shapes. Interestingly if extended slightly and combined with certain chemical mixthres that polymerize or perhaps light-hardened polymers one could use the RNA pieces to create casting molds that would allow you to "cast" nanoscale parts with relatively precise atomic dimensions and a relatively high density of covalent bonds. More…

1. Chworos A, Severcan I, Koyfman AY, Weinkam P, Oroudjev E, Hansma HG, Jaeger L., "Building programmable jigsaw puzzles with RNA," Science 306(5704):2068-72 (17 Dec 2004).

Richard Jones, a physicist in the UK and author of the book: Soft Machines: nanotechnology and life, has a rather extensive blog detailing a number of aspects of the debate between the ETC Group, CRN, Drexlerites (esp. Merkle & Freitas) and the majority of nanoscale scientists at this time.

Well worth a look.

Christine Peterson has pointed out that the ETC group is making noise again about "nanoparticles" in our food. In line with their general perspective they claim "In keeping with the Precautionary Principle, all food, feed and beverage products (including nutritional supplements) that incorporate manufactured nanoparticles should be removed from the shelves and new ones prohibited from commercialisation until such time as laboratory protocols and regulatory regimes are in place that take into account the special characteristics of these materials, and until they are shown to be safe."

See: Down on the Farm: The Impact of Nano-scale Technologies on Food and Agriculture.

In an effort to make nanodot a more concentrated news resource we have added a number of new block summaries that users may choose to add to their nanodot homepages. More…

Christine Peterson has pointed out an item from Howard Lovy's Nanobot regarding Further Info on Nanotech Action in Leeds.

It looks like the European GMO perspective is starting to spill over into nanotechnology. Obviously an education problem here as it seems that the anti-nanotech forces don't seem to realize that nanotechnology can help clean up the existing problems as well as reduce future problems.

How does one make it clear to people that reality is going to evolve and they had best evolve with it?

Emeka Okafor writes "PhysOrg comments on a breakthrough in the path towards DNA computing, with implications in the field of molecular construction methods: "…Caltech assistant professor Erik Winfree and his colleagues show that DNA "tiles" can be programmed to assemble themselves into a crystal bearing a pattern of progressively smaller "triangles within triangles," known as a Sierpinski triangle. This fractal pattern is more complex than patterns found in natural crystals because it never repeats…" More…

WilliamDye writes "A few weeks ago, the University of Nebraska Medical Center in Omaha announced that it was forming a Center for Drug Delivery and Nanomedicine. The new center was briefly discussed in a recent newspaper article in the Lincoln (Nebraska) Journal-Star. Unfortunately, the use of the term "nanomedicine" at the new center does not appear to be in the realm of what many NanoDot readers would consider to be true Nanomedicine, but as with the current popular usage of the term "nanotechnology", perhaps the present initiatives will eventually lead to the earlier, more powerful concepts."

Christine Peterson has pointed out AzoNano.com which is a new Online Journal of Nanotechnology which is a collaboration between AZoM.com PTY. Ltd. in Australia and The Institute of Nanotechnology in the U.K.

A brief review of the book list seems to suggest their primary focus is on nanomaterials rather than on molecular nanotechnology. For example, Nanosystems and Nanomedicine Vol. I are not included. More…

WillWare writes "I saw the preliminary animation at the October conference. It's an incredible aid to visualizing and discussing the ideas of molecular manufacturing. The DVD can help wealthy, influential people wrap their brains around the feasibility and the benefits and thereby vastly expedite development. Every Nanodot reader is a stakeholder in the future, so it might be smart to put our ideas where Foresight can see them."

The NanoAging Institute writes "There is a nice article mentioning nanomedicine on The New York Time, here is a excerpt from the article:Nanomedicine will probably become the biggest change for humans in our society but when?

There is more extensive discussion on the development of various aspects of nanotechnology for use in medicine as well as cryonics here."

Brian Wang writes "South Korean scientists found a simple way to produce high-purity single-walled carbon nanotubes en masse, the vital materials for nanotechnology, under ambient conditions.

Until now, scientists created the substances at high temperatures ranging from 700 to 2,000 degrees Celsius. But the yield rate was still below 70 percent and purity was between 70 to 95 percent, even after multi-step purification processes.

By contrast, Park's team used the chemical effects of ultrasound and a liquid solution to make nanotubes at atmospheric pressure and room temperature.

The newfound method worked handsomely as it enabled volume production of high-purity nanotubes without a purification process and its yield rate also improved to more than 90 percent. Mass Production of Carbon Nanotube Becomes Possible"

Roland Piquepaille writes "Carbon nanotubes, which can have useful electrical or optical properties, are typically grown using chemical vapor deposition techniques. During this process, amorphous and useless carbon layers are also produced, meaning that a post-growth purification process is needed. Not anymore. According to this article from Technology Research News (TRN), Japanese researchers have successfully used water to get rid of these impurities. The idea of using water to clean carbon nanotubes is so simple that I'm amazed that nobody thought about it before. Anyway, this method, which eliminates the post-growth purification process, still needs some improvements and will not help to mass produce carbon nanotubes before at least five years. You'll find more details and references in this overview. And you'll find even more nanotechnology achievements in this Nanotech News Roundup #1."

Senior Associate Gina Miller brings to our attention a film from a team affiliated with University of Toronto: "N is for Nanotechnology is a new 30 minute documentary that discusses the field of nanotech. You can download the trailer at this website: http://www.knhproductions.ca. You can also click through drawings at the site. I have not figured out where, when, or even if the documentary is going to air or if it will be available for purchase?" The trailer looks promising. óCP

While current work is bulk materials-based, researchers in Texas are setting high goals for future achievements in nanomedicine: ìThe whole idea of being able to develop devices that we can manipulate at the cellular level to perform a function is very compelling"…Rosenblum likens these devices to a kind of miniscule robot ìbecause they are programmed to perform a certain task and report back to us. We can track exactly where they are in the body…We have hurdles to overcome because these are very complex devices…But we think this has the potential to solve crucial problems in cancer diagnosis and care.î

Christine Peterson points out a letter from Greenpeace UK Chief Scientist Doug Parr to the editors of the Times regarding comments from Tracy Brown from Sense About Science asserting that Greenpeace is opposed to nanotechnology. It appears that is not entirely accurate. They may support nanotechnology if a case can be made that the benefits outweigh the risks.

Christine Peterson points to this press release involving the new center.

"The goal is to merge nanotubes and a host of other Tinkertoy-like nanopieces with organic molecules – DNA, proteins or nanomolecular motors – to create sensors or nanomachines small enough to fit on the back of a virus…. While some of the researchers are synthesizing and characterizing various building blocks, others will integrate them and map out system properties, and still others will develop the tools to manipulate and construct new building blocks and systems. Several researchers will pursue the theoretical basics and limits of new devices."

Foresight Senior Associate Tom Kalil "helped meld the diverse group of researchers into a coherent center that captured the attention of the NSF."