Foresight Nanotech Institute Logo
Image of nano

Drexler on nanotech research politics

Foresight VP Ralph Merkle brings to our attention an article by Foresight founder Eric Drexler on the political forces shaping nanotech research in "Nanotechnology: from Feynman to Funding", published in the Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society.

4 Responses to “Drexler on nanotech research politics”

  1. RobertBradbury Says:

    Well detailed historic perspective

    This is a very well detailed historical perspective with several important insights. People should take the time to read it as it provides the basis for explaining in large part how we got to where we are now and hints at how overhyping and misinterpretation of what nanotechnology is and can do could lead to a negative backlash that would delay overall development. That would probably be undesirable.

  2. Anonymous Coward Says:

    But Feynman said MNT was useless!

    The principles of physics, as far as I can see, do not speak against the possibility of maneuvering things atom by atom. It is not an attempt to violate any laws; it is something, in principle, that can be done; but in practice, it has not been done because we are too big.

    Ultimately, we can do chemical synthesis. A chemist comes to us and says, “Look, I want a molecule that has the atoms arranged thus and so; make me that molecule.'' The chemist does a mysterious thing when he wants to make a molecule. He sees that it has got that ring, so he mixes this and that, and he shakes it, and he fiddles around. And, at the end of a difficult process, he usually does succeed in synthesizing what he wants. By the time I get my devices working, so that we can do it by physics, he will have figured out how to synthesize absolutely anything, so that this will really be useless.

  3. Anonymous Coward Says:

    Drexler fails to credit Taniguchi

    Taniguchi was the first to use the term "nanotechnology," He presented the term in 1974:
    ——————————————-

    N. Taniguchi, "On the Basic Concept of 'Nano-Technology'," Proc. Intl. Conf. Prod. Eng.
    Tokyo, Part II, Japan Society of Precision Engineering, 1974.

    On the Basic Concept of ëNano-Technologyí
    Norio TANIGUCHI
    Tokyo Science University
    Noda-shi, Chiba-ken, 278 Japan

    Abstract

    ëNano-technologyí is the production technology to get the extra high accuracy and ultra
    fine dimensions, i.e., the preciseness and fineness of the order of 1 nm (nanometer), 10-9
    m in length. The name of ëNano-technologyí originates from this nanometer. In the
    processing of materials, the smallest bit size of stock removal, accretion, or flow of
    materials is probably of one atom or one molecule, namely 0.1~0.2 nm in length.
    Therefore, the expected limit size of fineness would be of the order of 1 nm. Accordingly,
    ëNano-technologyí mainly consists of the processing of separation, consolidation, and
    deformation of materials by one atom or one molecule. Needless to say, the measurement
    and controll (sic) techniques to assure the preciseness and fineness of 1 nm play very
    important role in this technology.

    In the present paper, the basic concept of ëNanotechnologyí in materials processing is
    discussed on the basis of microscopic behaviour of materials and as a result the ion
    sputter-machining is introduced as the most promissing (sic) process for the technology.

  4. Anonymous Coward Says:

    Are you calling Drexler a liar?

    Drexler's article says:
    ———————–

    The problem started with the word. In labeling the
    Feynman vision nanotechnology (Drexler, 1986), the
    author chose a word with roots that let it fit any
    nanoscale technology no matter how old or mundane.
    The excitement of the Feynman vision attached itself
    to the word, tempting specialists to relabel their
    nanoscale research as nanotechnology.

    ————————

    So are you saying that in fact specialists were NOT re-labeling their work because Taniguchi's prior label of "nanotechnology" already described their work?

    Are you saying that it was Drexler, instead, who attempted to re-label his work with Taniguchi's label?

Leave a Reply