Re: Submolecular nanotech [WAS: Goals]

Raymond G. Van De Walker (
Tue, 25 May 1999 00:03:21 PDT

On Sun, 23 May 1999 23:36:02 -0700 (PDT) Eugene Leitl <> writes:

>(However, I honestly believe no utility fog will be ever built, since
>we either screw us up first *real tight*, or evolve beyond the
>necessety of needing utility fog at all before we have a chance of
>building it.
Oh, but it's such a neat hack. And, we can build it without FDA approval!
(Or in _your_ jurisdiction, a CE mark under EN601-1, i.e. not quite as bad, but almost)
I predict it will be the second thing constructed after a true assembler.

> If you can work with electronically excited states
>and photons, why on earth would you want to drag atoms around?
>(Disclaimer: system maintenance and coevolutionary artefacts
Gosh. Because they don't wiggle around so much. After all, the excitation lasers have to built from something, don't they?

You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]