Nanotechnology

[rocketdodger]

I have gotten really interested in nanotechnology lately, namely because I think it is the most viable way we might be able to increase our lifespans to near indefinite lengths (which implies much improved healing ability as well).

Anyone into this topic? What is the current state of nanotechnology around the world? Any interesting projects going on that you people know about?

Theoretical considerations? Anyone care to apply their wisdom about other fields to this topic?

I am going on vacation for a week, I hope this thread has some interesting stuff in it when I get back!

[bokonon]

Scientific American has a special edition on nanotechnology on the newsstands thru 12/12. One of the articles deals with "applications in biomedical research, disease diagnosis, and, possibly, therapy." I question whether increasing lifespans to near-indefinite lengths is a worthwhile goal, outside of some "Children of Men" scenario. If it is ever realized I'm confident that it will, fortunately, not happen in my lifetime.

[rocketdodger]

Scientific American has a special edition on nanotechnology on the newsstands thru 12/12. One of the articles deals with "applications in biomedical research, disease diagnosis, and, possibly, therapy." I question whether increasing lifespans to near-indefinite lengths is a worthwhile goal, outside of some "Children of Men" scenario. If it is ever realized I'm confident that it will, fortunately, not happen in my lifetime.

Why do you think it is a bad idea?

[tsg]

The cryonics people are hanging their entire claim on it, if that's any help.

[Fnord]

Imagine a type of ant-like nanobot that could go into an area, extract individual atoms from their surrounding molecular matrix, and then stockpile them for pick-up by large bots.

Are you thinking deep-pit mining? No hazard to humans from heat cave-in or noxious gases. Just neat piles of metals, ready for pick-up.

Or are you thinking of a military application? No danger to friendly forces, just neat piles of purified carbon, calcium, iron, and other trace elements found in the human body. And no native population to object to occupation and re-colonization of the area, either...

[rocketdodger]

Or are you thinking of a military application? No danger to friendly forces, just neat piles of purified carbon, calcium, iron, and other trace elements found in the human body. And no native population to object to occupation and re-colonization of the area...

This brings up a topic that I should start another thread on, that of how the thinking caste needs to find a way to prevent the other castes from using the technology they develop until they are responsible enough to do so correctly (and I understand "correct" is subjective, but I am sure we can all touch base to some extent).

[Taffer]

Mmm, grey goo... ;)

[Lucifuge Rofocale]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aubrey_de_Grey

[Taffer]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aubrey_de_Grey

What a truely awesome beard! :D

[wipeout]

I don't think nano-robots need to be anywhere near as complex as those that often get described to achieve the same goals.

A large number of simple little devices which are designed to only stick to one kind of surface and do nothing more than that and be detectable by a scan could do all sorts of useful things in medicine, for example. Regular scans could then show heart disease or cancer from the build-up of the devices in certain areas at a very early stage. And then even current medicine could take over and be far more successful because of the headstart in detection.

Nano-devices don't have to cure the disease, just finding it early could do wonders.

[Mr. Skinny]

My current knowledge of nanotechnology is currently limited to the safety concerns of producing carbon nanotubes and nanopearls. I'm currently reading the latest available information on the industrial hygiene aspects of working with nano materials and find that information lacking. The technology is so new that relatively little data exists. Some data exists on respiratory exposures. Little seems to be know about dermal entry routes.

I realize this isn't really what you're looking for, but thought you might be interested nonetheless.

Based on what I know to date, safety and health concerns (among others) might slow down the rapid initial research and development of nanotechnology that some people seem to be expecting.

[Madalch]

Imagine a type of ant-like nanobot that could go into an area, extract individual atoms from their surrounding molecular matrix, and then stockpile them for pick-up by large bots.

Using what- a very tiny pair of tweezers?

My views on nanotechnology are somewhat tainted by hearing an obnoxious high school student lecture me on the possibilities many years ago- he thought such nanobots could be used to make ozone and fix the ozone layer. Presumably, they would have tiny tweezers to put the atoms into place, and even smaller tweezers to move the electrons into the proper bonding orbitals.

A more educated fellow who was also in on this sermon/conversation suggested that they may work similar to a catalyst. Unfortunately, the formation of ozone is thermodynamically unfavourable, so a catalyst would only decompose the ozone more quickly.

[jsfisher]

My current knowledge of nanotechnology is currently limited to the safety concerns of producing carbon nanotubes and nanopearls.

Nanotechnology covers a broad range of topics -- how do things of all sorts behave below micro scale. One area of importance is electronic integrated circuits. As I understand things (and my understanding is limited), as micro-electronics continue to shrink, quantum mechanical effects begin to dominate so all the old design rules start breaking down.

At any rate, my point is that chip manufacturers are keenly interested in nanotechnology research.

[Fnord]

Using what- a very tiny pair of tweezers?


Okay, the analogy isn't perfect.

An army of nanobots disassembling anything organic into its component elements, and then disintegrationg after a set time would bee a very fearsome weapon.

Just don't make them self-replicating.

[bokonon]

Why do you think [living forever] is a bad idea?
A couple of reasons. I think old folks need to die off to make room for young folks. The world is plenty populated enough (and the population is still exploding) with current death rates.

A finite lifespan makes it more important to choose meaningful activities in which to spend one's time. It's also a spur to action rather than perpetual planning (fantasizing). I already procrastinate way too much, without the luxury of all the time in the world.

[Madalch]

I already procrastinate way too much, without the luxury of all the time in the world.
I cannot believe that anyone who posts on this forum would ever, ever procrastinate.

[Mr. Skinny]

Nanotechnology covers a broad range of topics -- how do things of all sorts behave below micro scale. One area of importance is electronic integrated circuits. As I understand things (and my understanding is limited), as micro-electronics continue to shrink, quantum mechanical effects begin to dominate so all the old design rules start breaking down.

At any rate, my point is that chip manufacturers are keenly interested in nanotechnology research.
That was kinda my point. At this stage, I don't know if I'm dealing with "the new asbestos" or not. I don't know if the nano materials can penetrate protective gloves (and then the skin). I do know that a standard lab hood is useless from a practical standpoint to guard against respiratory exposure, since the hood just sucks the nanotubes up the hood and blows them out the roof stack.

jsfisher, if you work for a chip manufacturer, PM me. Perhaps I can put you in touch with someone at my lab that can either do some research that you sponsor or, if you have the capabilities, sponsor some research that you're willing to do that would be beneficial to us.

[Mr. Skinny]

I cannot believe that anyone who posts on this forum would ever, ever procrastinate.
I have some thoughts on this which I'll express at a later date.

[joobz]

I just had two nanotech* papers accepted last week.

One is on proving that you can load active proteins within polymer based worm-like filaments (80-100nm by a couple micron).

The other was to demonstrate
1.) the spherical counterparts can be targeted to the lungs
2.) That the enzyme in these carriers is protected from premature proteolysis
and
3.) That these particles can protect against oxidative injury.

:)

*My carriers are boarder line "nanotech". The wormlike ones definitely are, the spheres are actuall 300nm in size. This puts them above the 100nm limit set by the NSF. However, the NIH is still willing to call them "nano", mainly because the proteins I'm loading are actually 10nm in size. You can't put a lot of 10nm stuff in a 50nm shell. BUt you can sure put a lot in a 300nm sphere.

[Soapy Sam]

[quote=joobz;3008386]I just had two nanotech* papers accepted last week.


These would be printed on microfiche?

[mhaze]

just neat piles of purified carbon, calcium, iron, and other trace elements found in the human body.

Okay, you've got dibs on those.

I got dibs on the neat pile of gold.

[joobz]

I just had two nanotech* papers accepted last week.


These would be printed on microfiche?
Obviously, it's nanofiche.:D

[Muppet]

I cannot believe that anyone who posts on this forum would ever, ever procrastinate.

Oh sweet irony, I suckle thy tit.

[krazyKemist]

Using what- a very tiny pair of tweezers?

My views on nanotechnology are somewhat tainted by hearing an obnoxious high school student lecture me on the possibilities many years ago- he thought such nanobots could be used to make ozone and fix the ozone layer. Presumably, they would have tiny tweezers to put the atoms into place, and even smaller tweezers to move the electrons into the proper bonding orbitals.

A more educated fellow who was also in on this sermon/conversation suggested that they may work similar to a catalyst. Unfortunately, the formation of ozone is thermodynamically unfavourable, so a catalyst would only decompose the ozone more quickly.

And I've seen many conferences presenting cyclic peptide autoassembled tubes supposed to insert themselves in bacteria walls to kill them. I'm seeing them since many years in fact. It looked interesting at first. So far, no pharma has jumped on it. I guess the idea doesn't sound great to them.

Now 'nanotech' is a word a chemist professor puts on a grant application to increase the chance of payoff. In any field, from materials science to medicinal chemistry.

My opinion: lousy buzz-word made to appeal to the public's imagination and justify (not always honestly) funding.

the Kemist

[joobz]

And I've seen many conferences presenting cyclic peptide autoassembled tubes supposed to insert themselves in bacteria walls to kill them. I'm seeing them since many years in fact. It looked interesting at first. So far, no pharma has jumped on it. I guess the idea doesn't sound great to them.

Now 'nanotech' is a word a chemist professor puts on a grant application to increase the chance of payoff. In any field, from materials science to medicinal chemistry.

My opinion: lousy buzz-word made to appeal to the public's imagination and justify (not always honestly) funding.

the Kemist
I cna think of some colloidial and surface scientists who would agree with you.

To my mind, the "nanotech" umbrella does helps bring together seperate areas of research that might not have had much interaction.

All those who jumped on the nanotech gravytrain due to a lack of creativity will be leaving the field shortly for the "alternative energy" train that's soon to depart the station.

[krazyKemist]

I cna think of some colloidial and surface scientists who would agree with you.

To my mind, the "nanotech" umbrella does helps bring together seperate areas of research that might not have had much interaction.

All those who jumped on the nanotech gravytrain due to a lack of creativity will be leaving the field shortly for the "alternative energy" train that's soon to depart the station.

What you're publishing I would actually call polymer supported therapeutics. Maybe it sounds less flashy than the nanorobots, but this is something that actually means something, and sure has a future (I can vaguely remember pharmaceuticals linked to PEG polymers already on the market). The thing is 'nanotech' means nothing in particular (simply imposing a size limit seems a little absurd to define a field of science), except in the imagination of the public. Maybe it forged some alliances between material scientists and organic/medicinal chemists.

Alternative energy sounds cool as a buzz-word. Not as sci-fi as nanotech, but still, 'alternative' is popular after all:rolleyes:... Voters will like that.

the Kemist

[joobz]

What you're publishing I would actually call polymer supported therapeutics. Maybe it sounds less flashy than the nanorobots, but this is something that actually means something, and sure has a future (I can vaguely remember pharmaceuticals linked to PEG polymers already on the market). The thing is 'nanotech' means nothing in particular (simply imposing a size limit seems a little absurd to define a field of science), except in the imagination of the public. Maybe it forged some alliances between material scientists and organic/medicinal chemists.

Well, there are some cool aspects at that size scale. The rapid transport of water through carbon nanotube membranes come time mind right.

You are correct, as to the name of the field. Indeed, polymer based drug delivery and biomaterials is my exact area. Also, you can say that nanomedicines are on the market (PEGylated liposomes loaded with doxorubicin)

I will say, though that the stuff I'm working on has had enough unique size characteristics, that the name isn't so terrible.

For instance, the worm-like micelles (due to the high aspect ratio) flow allign in circulation and are capable of evading macrophage clearence. this has resulted in enhanced circulation times over what is seen with purely PEGylated proteins and PEGylated spherical counterparts.

Further, when you get to cell response, size is everything. >500nm or larger, endothelial cells don't internalized carriers very readily(if at all). However if you taget 300nm or less carriers, you can get extremely high levels of internalization.

I'll admit, though, this this is simply in vitro observations. I have no clue if it translates to what occurs in vivo yet.

As another aside, my current work has switched a bit from enzyme delivery to polymeric prodrugs. Just out of interest.

[rocketdodger]

A couple of reasons. I think old folks need to die off to make room for young folks. The world is plenty populated enough (and the population is still exploding) with current death rates.

A finite lifespan makes it more important to choose meaningful activities in which to spend one's time. It's also a spur to action rather than perpetual planning (fantasizing). I already procrastinate way too much, without the luxury of all the time in the world.

Well what you have to realize is that these are all reasons that you formulated while living in a society of humans that know they are going to die, most likely, within 100 years of being born. Perhaps this type of thing would be a good thread in another section, but if people *didn't* think this, there would be some major paradigm shifts in how we view life.