Foresight Nanotech Institute Logo
Image of nano

HP gets serious about molecular electronics

Physorg.com is reporting that HP Labs in conjuction with Applied Physics A will be having an "invitation-only international nanotechnology symposium" on March 25. They intend to outline the HP combined strategy (fundamental scientific research into nanometer scale quantum effects; defect tolerant architectures for molecular components; and cost-effective fabrication methods) for implementing robust molecular electronics.

My only question is "When will we see the results?"

4 Responses to “HP gets serious about molecular electronics”

  1. Kadamose Says:

    We won't see results from 'them'

    Them, meaning HP, Micron, Intel, and the majority of the computer industry. Not only are they on their last legs and crying their death throes, the government simply will not allow its civilians (i.e. its 'property') to have access to technology that can be used against it. Even our current technology is posing a threat to the fascist regime which rules under the disguise of freedom…this is why most of the hardware in the coming year will be DRM (Digital Rights Management) enabled.

    As I have said for years, the big breakthroughs in nanotechnology, genetic engineering, and Zero-Point Energy will first come from a 'nobody' in his/her garage. If the 'discoverer' is a weak individual (the majority of them are) they will sell out (because the price is good, or because of the death threats), and companies like Intel, HP, and even government institutions like the Department of Energy benefit from this weakness, and incorporate the technology into the many other technologies they have swindled from others over the years, and claim it as their own.

  2. Chemisor Says:

    Re:We won't see results from 'them'

    > the government simply will not allow its civilians
    > to have access to technology that can be used against it.

    So, dear Kadamose, tell us exactly how can a faster computer defeat our government overlords?

    > this is why most of the hardware in the coming year
    > will be DRM (Digital Rights Management) enabled.

    Not even close. DRM is around because those big entertainment companies want to stop you from stealing (that is, taking something you didn't pay for) their stuff. It has nothing to do with the government. In fact, there was a court case recently where the government forbade the FCC to mandate DRM in TV sets (or something).

    > the big breakthroughs will first come from a 'nobody' in his/her garage.

    I would agree here. Now that everyone thinks "nanotechnology" means "materials science", most funded research is likely to go in that direction.

    > even government institutions like the Department of Energy benefit from this weakness

    The Department of Energy, being a government organization, couldn't care less about any new technologies. They are not doing anything to make a profit, and in fact would not be allowed to do so. They may, however, be interested in promoting the use of those technologies by businesses.

    > many other technologies they have swindled from others over the years

    Like what?

  3. RobertBradbury Says:

    Re:We won't see results from 'them'

    I'd beg to differ somewhat. The DOE is funding a very active program on how to push coal supported electricity production up into the 80+% efficiency range with relatively low pollution. This makes sense as the U.S. has large reserves of coal. It also makes sense from "our" perspective because if you get someone else to pay for removing the carbon from the ground and putting it into the atmosphere from which it can be extracted using robust nanotech (e.g. molecular sorters) then one is getting a "free ride" to some extent.

    Now of course the part of the DOE that is doing this probably doesn't realize that this is the long term consequence of their efforts — but I'm not going to complain.

    The DOE is also funding research into sonoluminescence and bubble fusion as it may relate to cold fusion possibilities in the long run.

    And let us not forget the NIF at LLNL.

    While I'm not overly fond of the DOE I would say that they do do relatively good science.

  4. philonous Says:

    "moltronics"

    The problem, of course, is that the estimates of the market value of nanotechnology have proven to be wildly inaccurate. HP is in deep crap. This is little more than a publicity stunt. If one looks at where industry is putting its money, one can estimate exactly how much nanotech is really worth, and it ain't much. So far, the market value has been increasing only because the definition of nanotech has been broadened to include things that have nothing to do with nano.

    The discoveries will not come from a nobody in a garage. They will come from somebody who can navigate this haze of hype and lies with a clear enough mind to do real science and real engineering.

Leave a Reply