Unsung hero of nanotech: U.S. Department of Energy
We in the U.S. who are interested in nanotech tend to focus on NSF, but DoE deserves substantial attention as well. See their overview page, and then download the pdf brochure on their nanoscale science research centers (worth the effort for the illustrations alone): Center for Functional Nanomaterials, Center for Integrated Nanotechnologies, Center for Nanophase Materials Sciences, Center for Nanoscale Materials, and the catchily-named Molecular Foundry.
“Realizing the promise of nanoscale research, however, will require much more fundamental scientific knowledge and technological know-how. This includes a detailed understanding of the processes by which molecules organize and assemble themselves, the construction of quantum devices, and the operation of complex nanostructured systems. We also must find new ways to think about all aspects of materials and device fabrication. In the future, we will be building things from the bottom up as well as from the top down.” Emphasis added.
June 3rd, 2005 at 10:19 PM
With all the recent advances in producing solar electric devices, and ultrahigh capacity storage devices
we should soon see the installation of these technologies in all new homes as well as retrofitting present
homes. with further improvements in efficiencies it is likely that enough power can be produced to provide
our cars as well to be operated electrically. These technologies will make hydrogen powered cars unnecessary.
June 6th, 2005 at 3:37 AM
The DoE has enough extorted money to hedge their bets. After all, they didn’t earn it, and they can always demand more.
How can we gaurantee that there are no government obstacles to the capitalist distribution of these devices? There might be a situation such that only those in a position to block scientific advance know about the scientific advance, other than the researcher/developer himself. It is unfortunate that a young John Galt would likely be easily bought off by collectively-extorted dollars (tax money). The silence of the innovator purchased, the government then maintains its ill-gotten power by supporting outmoded technologies that are easiest to tax and regulate.
Consider the evolutionary forces placed on government: there is a tendency for it to multiply the attitudes of the lowest common denominator among us (the luddite/green mentality). As the lowest common denominator becomes more aware (through necessity) the greatest common denominator (innovators) is restrained. Sound money and economic freedom will therefore lag behind minor gains in the protection of personal private property rights.
Those innovators who INSIST that they earn what they would have earned without government intervention are typically placated with payouts. Lacking a background in ethics that they have not been exposed to, they often accept the payouts and/or restrictions on their work.
Thus I urge anyone on the cusp of exponential breakthrough to follow their own development path, paying close attention (using foresight’s guidelines) to the potential destructive side of their work. Don’t beg the FDA for permission, just do the work. When it comes time to profit from your work, smuggle it to market, or sell it in areas of the world with little government, rewarding their minimal governments with prosperity ( http://www.libertario.org ).
By the time the world’s governments become aware of what you are doing, and threaten you financially, demanding a large share of your work/wealth, you will be able to operate from a position of strength. Hopefully you will have achieved market penetration by that point, and can find a single sympathetic juror, assuming they give you a trial. It only takes one juror to hang a prosecution, and you can also aid that fact by being ready to have your family and friends communicate to your jury, with the fliers on jury rights available at http://www.fija.org and http://www.isil.org .
The tech-sympathetic works of Ayn Rand ( http://www.aynrand.org ) are also a good way to begin the study of ethics that is so profoundly absent from most highschool and university curricula.
I hope that this advice is useful to someone who hadn’t previously considered these points, because if you’d already considered these ideas, they would seem awfully simplistic. The above links are a good starting point to examine these ideas in greater complexity. Another good source for individualist/independent thought is http://www.reason.com
–With malice toward none–
June 18th, 2005 at 1:48 AM
i appreciate both comments on this site. i would like to offer the postulation that nanotech at its current stage is highly science fictionalized by many. there are however, great benefits that could surely come of this technology. we live amongst a stockpile of resources that are being ignored; just visit your local dump, or look inside any trash bin. all of this ‘garbage’ could be easily formed into eco-safe materials and redistributed, without further ravaging of the landscape. recycle recycle recycle. there is plenty of crap already here to stabalize a planet. to think that we have to project molecules through wormholes to reincarnate our species is fiction on the border of doomsday absurdity. we must, however, start thinking seriously about the problems that the entire planet faces. the environmental issues the earth is enduring could be remedied through common sensical, technological shifts, as could the quality of living for so many malnourished, underappreciated billions of people on the planet. we must all take responsibility in the fields of science and technology to heart, in order to make machines that matter, so we don’t even have to think about machines making us, when we fail to care enough to fix the problems we’ve created. innovation, creativity and truth.
i love you, one and all