SciAm: nano and cryonics

From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.com)
Date: Wed Aug 15 2001 - 14:34:15 MDT


Great pointer Anders!

Whitesides at least gets it right that bacteria are
nanomachinery but gets the size scale wrong (nanobots
are 1-micron not 100nm -- obviously hasn't read the
literature). Stix makes the same point, perhaps
because the NSF is defining real nano-tech at that
size scale. I can't understand why Whitesides gets
stuck on the Smalley many-fingers problem -- how
would enzymes work if this isn't solveable?

Stix is back to whining about cryonics and trying
to sell Block's "distance yourself from the
futurists" argument. Takes a swipe at Zyvex while
he's at it. He gets my vote for the last guy
to reanimate after being frozen!

Eric makes the same points he usually makes, placing
an emphasis on the need for molecular systems engineers.
He's got that precisely right. I'm in the middle
of wrestling it from an untractable problem to a
tractable problem and its a bear.

I agree with Robin that it sounds like the last gasps
of those who don't want to admit that once we know
how to fly, the blood of billions will be on our
hands for not doing it sooner.

Robert



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:40:09 MDT