New nanodesign work from Princeton
From the AAAS website EurekAlert:
“It has been 20 years since the futurist Eric Drexler daringly predicted a new world where miniaturized robots would build things one molecule at a time. The world of nanotechnology that Drexler envisioned is beginning to come to pass, with scientists conjuring new applications daily.
“Now Salvatore Torquato, a Princeton University scientist, is proposing turning a central concept of nanotechnology on its head. If the theory bears out – and it is in its infancy — it could have radical implications not just for industries like telecommunications and computers but also for our understanding of the nature of life.
“Torquato and colleagues have published a paper in the Nov. 25 issue of Physical Review Letters, the leading physics journal, outlining a mathematical approach that would enable them to produce desired configurations of nanoparticles by manipulating the manner in which the particles interact with one another….
“Instead of employing the traditional trial-and-error method of self-assembly that is used by nanotechnologists and which is found in nature, Torquato and his colleagues start with an exact blueprint of the nanostructure they want to build.”
Folks: despite the explanation attempts in the press release, I’m finding it hard to understand this. Anyone who’s read the journal article care to try? Or anyone at all?
December 1st, 2005 at 8:28 PM
I’m just a novice but I’ll take a stab at it. I believe the article is saying that when a researcher is trying to make something useful by means of self-assembly it is usually a tedious process of trial and error. It probably has to do with make changes in things like time, pressure and temperature during the assembly process and then examining the final results. What Torquato has done is create a computer program where you input your desired result and the program tell you the process to achieve it.
December 3rd, 2005 at 12:14 PM
Me too, only a novice. Haven’t purchased the article, but I would think this might allow the self-assembly of graphene sheets or maybe even diamond lattices under the right conditions.
December 5th, 2005 at 2:47 AM
I saw a post here about this:
http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/003809.html
Wondering now if I was naive to just nod along with the minimax talk about ‘optimization,’ whereby the optimal output of a system (costs/benefits) can be modeled.
December 5th, 2005 at 2:50 PM
Can someone post a pdf of the article? Thanks in advance.
December 5th, 2005 at 7:08 PM
The article is about this paper.
December 6th, 2005 at 3:43 AM
This must be a candidate for worst science press release of the year. I’ve done my best to explain it on Soft Machines.
December 6th, 2005 at 11:17 AM
Hi A Khavryuchenko,
I believe that you can get the article here:
http://arxiv.org/pdf/cond-mat/0508495
An amateur mathematician
December 11th, 2005 at 4:18 AM
Read the web-available article copy. What’s so fascinating in it? Such approach is a routine, e.g. when optimizing parameters for semi-empirical quantum mechanics approach or any empirical force fields (MM* et al).
December 16th, 2005 at 3:43 PM
That is not an impossible approach but one must examine that program carefully. Still, trial and error will remain a valid and necessary approach for accumulation of knowledge that may help devising of such programs and enhancement of the other approach.
November 5th, 2006 at 12:45 PM
This is trash-from practical point of view, but there is ambutious mathematic thought.
Return to the reality.