April 17, 2014

New MIT floating nuclear plant would be safer and lower cost

A new design for nuclear plants built on floating platforms, modeled after those used for offshore oil drilling, could help avoid problems from Tsunamis and earthquakes. Such floating plants would be designed to be automatically cooled by the surrounding seawater in a worst-case scenario, which would indefinitely prevent any melting of fuel rods, or escape of radioactive material.

Plants could be built in a shipyard, then towed to their destinations five to seven miles offshore, where they would be moored to the seafloor and connected to land by an underwater electric transmission line. The concept takes advantage of two mature technologies: light-water nuclear reactors and offshore oil and gas drilling platforms. Using established designs minimizes technological risks, says Buongiorno, an associate professor of nuclear science and engineering (NSE) at MIT.


Read more »

Google's Modular Phone will be interesting and more expensive for Phones but for modular robots and phone based devices like medical tricorders, Ara will be a killer.

Project Ara is Google’s attempt to reinvent the cellphone as we know it. Instead of a slab of glass and metal that you have no ability to upgrade, save for buying a new device, it’s an attempt to launch a phone where all of the main components are interchangeable via modules that click in and out, attaching via electro-permanent magnets. Despite being highly customizable, it will only come in three main sizes, helping to eliminate the kind of device fragmentation that currently plagues Android. Google plans to roll out a “gray model,” a very basic device that costs as little as $50, as well as higher-end handsets that could go for as much as $500 and up. The former will be released first — around this time next year if all goes according to plan — and will likely be a smaller, Wi-Fi-only version. This bare-bones model will be followed by the higher-end ones eventually. But Google’s initial objective is to ramp up a hardware ecosystem that moves at the same pace as the software it runs.

Google is targeting January 2015 for the first Ara phone endoskeleton. For $50 you’d only get a bare-bones Project Ara endoskeleton, of course — you don’t even get a display.

The first Ara Developers Conference was held April 15-16, 2014.

Smartphone based devices like the Scanadu medical Tricorder will get a big boost from Ara

Smartphone based devices like the medical tricorder will be greatly enabled by the Ara modular phone California-based Scanadu is developing a health-checking scanner packed with sensors called Scout, which the user holds up to their head to check their vitals. The firm says it will be able to measure heart rate, skin and core body temperatures, respiratory rate and blood oxygen levels among other readings. It has no screen of its own, but relies on a smartphone app to interpret the data in order to warn of potential problems

Modular robotics based upon smartphones or tablets will have a lot more flexibility

iRobot Ava 500 is a robot with a tablet for head.



Read more »

April 16, 2014

Loaded nanostars kill cancer cells

Nanoparticles containing large amounts of therapeutic oligonucleotides make for better anti-tumour agents

Blow forming makes BMGs the easy way

A new and speedy technique identifies ideal bulk metallic glass alloys

April 11, 2014

Electrode nanogap makes good biosensor

New MCBJ can more accurately measure tunnelling currents from single molecules thanks to its insulator coating

April 10, 2014

Copper nanostructure improves liquid fuel yields

Nanocrystalline catalyst could help store renewable energy more efficiently

April 09, 2014

Microwaves reverse magnetization

New technique might be used to optimize hard drive writing times or help advance new MRAM device technologies

First principles shine a light on LED design

Studies of light-emitting diodes based on diffusion theory rather than simulations will for the first time allow lighting engineers to predict LED behaviour.

April 07, 2014

2D transfers made easy

New all-dry viscoelastic stamping technique does not require any wet chemistry steps at all

What’s the best way of harvesting the energy of the sun?

This is another post inspired by my current first year physics course, The Physics of Sustainable Energy (PHY123). Calculations are all rough, order of magnitude estimates – if you don’t believe them, try doing them for yourself.

We could get all the energy we need from the sun, in principle. Even from our cloudy UK skies an average of 100 W arrives at the surface per square meter. Each person in the UK uses energy at an average rate of 3.4 kW, so if we each could harvest the sun from a mere 34 square meters with 100% efficiency, that would do the job. For all 63 million of us, that’s just a bit more than 2,000 square kilometres out of the UK’s total area of 242,900 km2 – less than 1%. What would it take to turn that “in principle” into “in practise”? Here are the problems we have to overcome, in some combination: we need higher efficiencies (to reduce the land area needed), lower costs, the ability to deploy at scale and the ability to store the energy for when the sun isn’t shining.

There are at least four different technological approaches we could use. The most traditional is to use the ability of plants to convert the sun’s energy into fuel molecules; this is cheap, deployable at scale, and provides the energy in easily storable form, but it’s not very efficient and so needs a lot of land. The most technologically sophisticated is the solar cell. These achieve high efficiencies (though still not generally more than about 20-25%), but they cost too much, they are only available at scales that are still orders of magnitude too small, and produce energy in the hard-to-store form of electricity. Other methods include concentrating the sun’s rays to the extent that they can be used to heat up a working fluid directly, a technology already in use in sunny places like California and Spain, while in the future, the prospect of copying nature by using sunshine to synthesise fuel molecules directly – solar fuels – is attractive. How do these technologies compare and what are their future prospects?

We can get a useful baseline by thinking about the most traditional of these technologies – growing firewood. Traditional methods of sustainably managing a wood for fuel – a coppiced hardwood – would give you an annual harvest of between 5 and 10 tonnes of wood a year per hectare. At an energy yield of about 15 GJ/tonne, this corresponds to an average power yield of perhaps 0.25 W/m2. The energy arrives in conveniently storable form (though to convert it into the most useful form – electricity – you have to factor in conversion losses of perhaps 60-70% after you’ve taken your woodchips to your local communal thermal power station). In round numbers, this corresponds to a conversion efficiency to electricity of 0.1%. To meet one person’s energy needs, you’d need about 30,000 m2 – 3 hectares. For one person this doesn’t sound too bad a deal – the woodland would cost perhaps £30,000 up front, and it would need a certain amount of time and labour to manage it. But, on the positive side, the woodland would have other wildlife and ecosystem value as well. The problem, of course, is that for all 63 million people to be so supplied would take more than 7 times the total area of the UK, even leaving aside the need to have some land to live in and grow food on.

With solar cells of 20% efficiency, you’d need much less land area – a still large, but more manageable 11,000 square kilometres in total, 170 square meters per person (for comparison, about 3,500 km2 of the UK is covered with buildings) . The trouble with this is that we can’t at the moment make anything like enough of them. The total annual world production of solar cells has been growing fast, but it is still only a few hundred square kilometres a year. The energy arrives in the form of electricity, which is flexible and useful, but not easily storable in large enough quantities to smooth out the obvious differences between night and day, summer and winter. The solar thermal technologies operate at roughly similar efficiencies to photovoltaics, and don’t have significant advantages in cost or scalability.

Can we make biofuels more efficient, so their land demands are more reasonable? For first generation biofuels, such as rapeseed for biodiesel and maize to produce bioethanol, the selling point is not so much efficiency, as the ability to produce directly a liquid fuel that can conveniently substitute for fossil fuels. On the other hand, the use of more intensive agricultural methods means that one needs to carefully account for energy inputs into process. One estimate of the energy return from rapeseed for biodiesel gives 0.15 W/m2. This in the same ball park as the traditional woodland, though in that case to deliver the energy in convenient liquid form you would have to use the Fischer-Tropsch process to convert solid fuel to liquids, which would lose a further factor of 2 or 3 in conversion losses. Another estimate, for the net energy yield from bioethanol derived from maize (corn) grown in the US midwest, is 0.05 W/m2; this is a biofuel that wouldn’t survive in a rational world. Bioethanol derived from sugar cane in Brazil, on the other hand, yields a much more respectable 0.3 W/m2, though of course Brazil is more than twice as sunny as the UK.

What are the ultimate limits on the efficiency of biofuel production? The first obvious point to make is that leaves are green, not black – they don’t absorb light across the whole spectrum. Different varieties of chlorophyll absorb red light and blue light, leaving the green light unabsorbed – this puts a fundamental upper limit of 43% on the efficiency of photosynthesis. But the actually achievable efficiencies are much lower; further energy losses take place during the photochemistry of photosynthesis and in the synthesis of the carbohydrates that are its ultimate products. Efficiencies are further lowered in most plants by a back-reaction called photorespiration. In certain plants, adapted for hot, dry conditions, a physiological mechanism suppresses this reaction; these so-called C4 plants can achieve a maximum efficiency of about 6%, compared to the 4.6% possible for normal, or C3 plants. There’s an obvious advantage to using C4 plants as biofuels – such plants include sugar cane, maize and the tropical grass miscanthus. It’s probably also possible to genetically modify normal C3 plants so they use the more efficient C4 mechanism (this is the aim of the Bill and Melinda Gates supported C4 Rice project).

These figures, on the face of it, should encourage us to be optimistic about biofuels – they suggest that our baseline energy yield, from traditional firewood, could be improved by a factor of 20 or so. But as the discussion of maize bioethanol makes clear, actual net yields fall far below these theoretical maxima. Many other factors limit plant growth in practise, and the energy inputs in intensive farming and processing aren’t negligible.

To return to photovoltaics, one can see that the key issues to be solved are cost, scale and storage. I don’t include efficiency here; silicon is quite close to being the ideal single semiconductor to make a solar cell from, in terms of the match of its band-gap to the solar spectrum, and commonly available silicon solar cells are already close to their theoretical efficiency limit. To improve on this level of efficiency one needs complex compound semiconductor nanostructures which necessarily will greatly increase cost and reduce scalability. Roughly speaking, we’d need to increase the annual production of solar cells by a factor of 100 or so for them to approach the point of being able to supply most of our energy needs (this would ramp production up to the point at which a year’s output would yield capacity to generate 5% of our current world needs). To do this in 20 years would require annual compound growth rates of 25%, which is by no means completely ridiculous – recent years have actually seen higher rates of growth. But I doubt that these growth rates can be sustained with current technologies – instead, we’ll need new designs of cells, not significantly worse in efficiency and lifetime than silicon, that can be made by very large scale, low-cost, reel-to-reel processes. A variety of promising new technologies promising this are on the horizon, with the organo-metallic perovskites introduced by Oxford’s Henry Snaith being the most topical.

But this still leaves the problem of storage. There are at least three separate issues for a solar-dominated energy economy – the need for seasonal storage to get us through our cold, dark winters, the need for smoothing energy needs over day and night, and the need for energy for transport. I believe that current battery technologies are inadequate for these tasks by orders of magnitude and are unlikely to improve fast enough to solve these problems fully (to justify this statement would require another long post, of course). The lesson of our current fossil fueled world, on the other hand, is that flammable liquids are an enormously effective way of storing and transporting energy, hence the attractiveness of current liquid biofuels, despite the inefficiency of their production.

The easiest fuel to produce from electricity is hydrogen, easily generated from water by hydrolysis. But hydrogen, as a gas, has a very low energy density and is difficult to store and transport. One attractive option is to use the hydrogen, together with nitrogen, to make ammonia, using the Haber-Bosch process. This is an easily liquified gas that can be burned in a gas turbine – to generate electricity from the stored fuel – or a modified diesel engine, without producing carbon dioxide. But ammonia is toxic and less convenient than hydrocarbon fuels, as it has to be stored under pressure. Methanol is much more attractive as a liquid fuel, as it can be used in minimally modified petrol engines. It can be made from hydrogen and carbon dioxide; a zero-emission methanol economy would extract carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, though that separation in itself needs both energy and new technology. An intermediate technology would use carbon dioxide that would otherwise be released into the atmosphere, for example from a gas-fired power station or a cement works.

These ways of of producing liquid fuels from the sun look to be roundabout and indirect, and it’s tempting to ask whether we can design a synthetic chemistry that does the same as plants do – absorb light in a photocatalyst that directly converts water and carbon dioxide into fuel. This is the idea behind the field of “solar fuels”. It’s a fascinating research field, but we’re at a very early stage, and I’m not convinced that we are anywhere close to the conversion efficiencies that can be achieved by the less elegant alternative of using a solar cell to make electricity and using that to produce hydrogen from water by electrolysis. Or, for that matter, the efficiencies that can in principle be obtained by what are potentially the most effective biofuel systems – using algae in tanks, with added carbon dioxide, to make algal biofuels.

I am optimistic in the long run about solar energy – the order of magnitude calculations I began with make it clear that it does have the potential to provide plentiful, entirely sustainable energy to the whole world. But there’s a lot of technology to be done to get there, and some interesting choices to be made on the way.

The estimates of the maximum efficiencies for plant photosynthesis come from Zhu et al., Current Opinion in Biotechnology 2008, 19:153–159, and for net energy returns on biofuels from H.S. Kheshgi et al, Annu. Rev. Energy Environ. 2000. 25:199–244

April 04, 2014

Graphene synthesis: Joining the dots

Growing oriented graphene seeds until they join up provides a scalable route to high-quality single-crystal graphene.

Virus coating helps deliver drugs

Capsid proteins and DNA “origami” nanostructures could help treat diseases like cancer

April 03, 2014

Doped semiconductor nanocrystals boost solar concentrators

“Zero self-absorption” quantum dots will make cheaper, more efficient solar cells

April 02, 2014

US government report highlights flaws in US nanotechnology effort

Credit: GAO adapted from Executive Office of the President

Here at Nanodot we often report on basic research that may lie on the path to atomically precise manufacturing, and we also frequently report on nanoscale science and technology research that promises near-term revolutionary developments in medicine, computation, energy and other application areas, but we seldom have anything to say about the transition from research to commercial production. The United States Government Accountability Office (GAO) is worried about this same lack, and has identified an important nanotechnology policy gap. Last month Business Insider Australia reported “A New Report Warns That America May Lose The Nanotechnology Race“:

VACUUM TUBES, semiconductors and the internet have changed how we live; now nanotechnology promises a similar revolution. Nanocoatings that make it impossible for liquid to even touch a treated surface are transforming material science. Carbon nanotubes can help artificial muscles behave like the real thing, while nanoscale drug delivery can target cancer cells with deadly accuracy. Concrete infused with nanofibres can be self-sensing, enabling roads and bridges to be monitored remotely for structural weakness or traffic volumes. …

It is this breadth of nanotechnology’s potential that makes it vital to America’s future competitiveness. Congressman Lamar Smith, chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, believes that American dominance in the field has enormous economic potential and the ability to create new jobs: “it’s a game-changer that could transform and improve Americans’ daily lives in ways we can’t foresee,” he says.

On any measure — patents, private and government-sector investment, academic activity — America has so far been a leader in nanotechnology research and, to a lesser extent, development. …

So why is the United States Government Accountability Office (GAO), an independent agency that works for Congress and scrutinises how the federal government spends taxpayer dollars, now fretting that America may lose the nanotechnology race? In a new report on nanotechnology manufacturing (or nanomanufacturing) released today and prepared for Congressman Smith’s committee, the GAO finds flaws in America’s approach to many things nano. …

The article goes on to describe the GAO’s concern with “the missing middle” between basic research and laboratory scale prototypes on one hand, production at commercial scale on the other. This missing middle includes things like reliable manufacturing processes, and in the case of healthcare, clinical trials. The report also cites unfortunate policy lapses, like the lack of a grand nanomanufacturing strategy, failure to match competition from Russia and China, and failure to develop and adequately fund “nano-commons” where research, design, prototyping, and manufacturing can mutually profit from close proximity to each other.

Congressman Smith, unsurprisingly, believes there’s an Act for that — specifically the wordy but acronym-friendly Technology and Research Accelerating National Security and Future Economic Resiliency (TRANSFER) Act of 2013, which he co-sponsored. “The bill”, he believes, “will give researchers and universities incentives to partner with entrepreneurs and venture capitalists in order to move new technologies from the laboratory to the marketplace”.

The 125-page GAO report Nanomanufacturing: Emergence and Implications for U.S. Competitiveness, the Environment, and Human Health grew from a forum convened by the GAO in July 2013. A introductory paragraph states:

Although limited data on international investments made comparisons difficult, participants viewed the U.S. as likely leading in nanotechnology research and development (R&D) today. At the same time, they identified several challenges to U.S. competitiveness in nanomanufacturing, such as inadequate U.S. participation and leadership in international standard setting; the lack of a national vision for a U.S. nanomanufacturing capability; some competitor nations’ aggressive actions and potential investments; and funding or investment gaps in the United States … which may hamper U.S. innovators’ attempts to transition nanotechnology from R&D to full-scale manufacturing.

The report quite reasonably focuses on the nanomanufacturing gap that stands between advancements in current and near-term nanoscience and nanotechnology, on the one hand, and large-scale commercial developments, on the other. But in addition to near-term nanomanufacturing that will grow out of incremental advances in several areas of nanoscience, there is the component of advanced nanomanufacturing that has a longer development path, but will (IMHO) dominate the economy before mid-century. My quick search of the document did not turn up any mention of “molecular manufacturing”, “atomically precise manufacturing”, or “productive nanosystems”. A comprehensive view of the impact of nanotechnology on US competitiveness must (IMHO) embrace both incremental progress in nanomanufacturing for current and near-term applications, and advancement of nanomanufacturing ability to the ultimate limits of high throughput atomically precise manufacturing. For the history of why the U.S. lacks a national vision for advanced nanomanufacturing, check out chapter 13 “A funny thing happened on the way to the future …” of Eric Drexler’s 2013 book Radical Abundance [see also TEDx talk: "Transforming the Material Basis of Civilization"].
—James Lewis, PhD

April 01, 2014

ReRAM Patent Landscape

ReRAM (Resistance RAM) is a type of memory which may one day replace Flash as the common form of non-volatile storage for electronic devices. I recently updated a file I keep on US patents related to ReRAM and some related non-volatile memory materials and posted the results on SlideShare available at this link.

A full copy of the patent data used to create this presentation can be obtained by sending an e-mail to tinytechip@gmail.com with the subject "Resistance switching materials and device patent landscape".

March 31, 2014

Programmable nanoprocessors integrated into a nanowire nanocomputer

Credit: Yao et al. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA

Three years ago we noted “the world’s first programmable nanoprocessor” achieved by a collaboration between Harvard and MITRE [also, see further details here]. This year the same interdisciplinary team has taken further key steps toward a functioning nanoelectronic computer based on integrating several of the tiles that they first reported three years ago. A hat tip to KurzweilAI for reprinting this news release from MITRE “MITRE-Harvard Team’s Ultra-tiny Nanocomputer May Point the Way to Further Miniaturization in Industry“:

An interdisciplinary team of scientists and engineers from The MITRE Corporation and Harvard University has taken key steps toward ultra-small electronic computer systems that push beyond the imminent end of Moore’s Law, which states that the device density and overall processing power for computers will double every two to three years. In a paper … in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences [abstract; full text PDF courtesy of the Lieber Research Group], the team describes how they designed and assembled, from the bottom up, a functioning, ultra-tiny control computer that is the densest nanoelectronic system ever built.

The ultra-small, ultra-low-power control processor—termed a nanoelectronic finite-state machine or “nanoFSM”—is smaller than a human nerve cell. It is composed of hundreds of nanowire transistors, each of which is a switch about ten-thousand times thinner than a human hair. The nanowire transistors use very little power because they are “nonvolatile.” That is, the switches remember whether they are on or off, even when no power is supplied to them.

In the nanoFSM, these nanoswitches are assembled and organized into circuits on several “tiles.” Together, the tiles route small electronic signals around the computer, enabling it to perform calculations and process signals that could be used to control tiny systems, such as miniscule medical therapeutic devices, other tiny sensors and actuators, or even insect-sized robots.

In 2011, the MITRE-Harvard team demonstrated a single such tiny tile capable of performing simple logic operations. In their recent collaboration they combined several tiles on a single chip to produce a first-of-its-kind complex, programmable nanocomputer.

“It was a challenge to develop a system architecture and nanocircuit designs that would pack the control functions we wanted into such a very tiny system,” according to Shamik Das, chief architect of the nanocomputer, who is also principal engineer and group leader of MITRE’s Nanosystems Group. “Once we had those designs, though, our Harvard collaborators did a brilliant job innovating to be able to realize them.”

Construction of this nanocomputer was made possible by significant advances in processes that assemble with extreme precision dense arrays of the many nanodevices required. These advances also made it possible to manufacture multiple copies of the nanoFSM, using a groundbreaking approach in which, for the first time, complex nanosystems can be economically assembled from the bottom up in close conformity to a preexisting design. Until now, this could be done using the industry’s expensive, top-down lithographic manufacturing methods, but not with bottom-up assembly.

For this reason, the nanoFSM and the means by which it was made represent a step toward extending the very economically important five-decade-long trend in miniaturization according to Moore’s Law, which has powered the electronics industry. Because of limitations on its conventional lithographic fabrication methods and on conventional transistors, many industry experts have suggested that the Moore’s Law trend soon may come to an end. Some assert that this might occur in as little as five years and have negative economic consequences, unless there are innovations in both device and fabrication technologies, such as those demonstrated by the nanoFSM.

James Ellenbogen, chief scientist for nanotechnology at MITRE and an expert in the development of computers integrated on the nanometer scale, said, “The nanoFSM and the new methods that were invented to build it are not the whole answer for the industry. However, I believe that they do incorporate important steps forward in two of the key areas the electronics industry has been focused upon in order to extend Moore’s Law.”

In addition to Das and Ellenbogen, the development team at MITRE included James Klemic, the corporation’s nanotechnology laboratory director. The researchers from MITRE—a pioneer in the nanotechnology field since 1992—collaborated with a three-person team at Harvard, led by Charles Lieber, a world-leading nanotechnology investigator.

In this work the three tiles integrate 180 programmable transistor nodes into both computing and memory elements, which were successfully reprogrammed to form a 2-bit full adder. It will be interesting to watch how far this promising approach can be scaled.
—James Lewis, PhD

March 21, 2014

On universities and economic growth

I wrote this short piece for the online magazine The Conversation as a comment on the government’s response to the Witty Review on universities and economic growth. It was published there as Budget 2014: cash for research set against an overall story of long-term decline; as the new title suggests it was edited to give more prominence to the new science-related announcements in the Budget. Here’s the original version.

Current UK innovation policy has taken on a medieval cast; no sooner do we have “Catapult Centres” for translational research established, than there is a call for “Arrow Projects”. This is the headline recommendation of a report to government by Sir Andrew Witty on the role of universities in driving economic growth. The tip of the arrow, in Witty’s metaphor, is world-class research from our leading universities – behind this tip we should mobilise research institutes and private sector partners to develop new technologies that would drive new economic growth, involving British companies, big and small, in new supply chains.

Last week saw a government response to this report, which warmly welcomed its recommendations, while making few actual new commitments to support them. But last week also saw the publication of the latest set of national research and development statistics. Total R&D expenditure – in the private sector, in government laboratories and in the universities – has fallen in both cash and real terms, and in proportion to the size of our economy is now substantially lower than both established economic rivals such as France, Germany, the USA and Japan and emerging economic powers such as Korea and China.

Our continuing economic problems, with stagnating productivity and a continuing inability to produce enough tradable goods to pay our way in the world, suggest that we should worry about how effective our innovation system is for translating science into economic growth. But this is hardly a new problem. Does the Witty Review represent the kind of radical new approach that might help us solve this persistent problem, or are there more deep-seated issues that require a more fundamental rethink?

The “arrow” metaphor puts the role of basic research at the forefront – the Witty Review follows in a long tradition of UK science and innovation policy in assuming that translating strong basic research into economic growth is a matter of improving the connectivity between research and industry – particularly innovative SMEs – , encouraging universities to make the most of their IP through spin-outs, and ensuring a continuous output of skilled people.

That’s all worthwhile, but it’s all about the supply side of the innovation system, and the message from last week’s R&D figures should be that this is not enough. Most of the UK’s R&D takes place in the private sector, which saw in 2012 another 2% decline. In the sector in which Sir Andrew Witty’s own company, GSK, operates – pharmaceuticals – R&D fell by 15%.

The relative decline in business R&D in the UK is a long-term phenomenon. It began in the 1980’s. It is a phenomenon that is unique to the UK; in major developed economies like USA, Japan, France and Germany, and in fast industrialising countries like China and Korea, business R&D intensity has been rising and has surpassed the UK. R&D is not the only source of private sector innovation, but it is important as a measure of the degree to which business is organizing itself to create valuable new products and processes through technological innovation. The decline in private sector R&D intensity in the UK is a signal that the problems with our innovation system cannot solely be addressed by supply-side measures – the problem is on the demand side.

The origins of the UK’s declining capacity to deliver commercially valuable technological innovation are deep-rooted, and have been analysed in more depth in my own paper “The UK’s innovation deficit and how to repair it”. The causes include an economy marred by persistent short-termism, excessive financialisation, and an emphasis on deal-making rather than business building.

There are some welcome signs that some of these problems are being recognized in government, and if the response to the Witty Review doesn’t commit to very much new, it does underline positive signs in the way thinking is evolving in government. After a long period in which the industrial policy of successive governments was not to have an industrial policy, we are once again seeing sector strategies being developed and some technologies being identified as priorities. We see more prominence for the Technology Strategy Board, and the development of Catapult Centres as physical hubs for translational research. Fields like graphene, cell technology, and quantum information technologies have been singled out as areas in which world-leading research supported by our research councils should be purposefully translated into new products and new businesses. New announcements, in this year’s budget, of new Catapult Centres in two of these areas continue this direction.

The budget announcements have a high political profile, but they are small interventions against a big picture of continuing overall decline. This is the issue that faces us now; whether the scale of the remedies matches the scale of our problems, or indeed the scale of the opportunities that new technologies could offer. Our chronic and continuing underperformance in R&D – particularly at the strategic and business supported end – suggests not yet.

May 14, 2013

Researchers develop synthetic HDL cholesterol nanoparticles

Atherosclerosis, a buildup of cellular plaque in the arteries, remains one of the leading causes of death globally. While high-density lipoprotein, or HDL, the so-called good cholesterol, is transferred to the liver for processing, low-density lipoprotein, or LDL, builds up in the arteries in the form of plaque.

Early detection of cellular components in the plaque that rupture and block arteries have long been held as potentially effective detection for heart diseases and their link to atherosclerosis.


A new study by University of Georgia researchers in the Franklin College of Arts and Sciences department of chemistry, published online May 13 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, documents a : Synthetic  nanoparticles. A completely biodegradable  of the so-called , the nanoparticles represent a potential new detection and therapy regimen for atherosclerosis.


Source: http://phys.org/news/2013-05-synthetic-hdl-cholesterol-nanoparticles.html

May 07, 2013

3D Systems trending up

3D Systems Corporation (DDD) trend seems to continue up on the short and long term.
The 3d Printer hype still looks quite strong.

January 03, 2013

The brave new world of science communication

In a new Perspectives piece in Science, my colleague +Dominique Brossard and I discuss the challenges and opportunities created by the constantly changing information environment modern science is currently facing.  Most importantly, we highlight examples of new empirical social science research that indicates that the interplay between audiences, science (journalism), and new modes of communication produces far more complex outcomes than many commentators (and scientists) initially assumed.

It would be naive to assume that communicating science online is about citizens consuming the equivalent of TV or newspapers through online channels.  Instead, we’re moving into a new world of audiences interacting with each other and with journalists to repurpose and reinterpret the content they encounter.  As a result, we’re no longer dealing with “mass” media in their traditional sense, but with messages that are socially contextualized through Facebook “likes,” retweets and reader comments (1).  Long story short, online communication about science produces a complex interplay of interpersonal exchanges, science journalism, and audience reactions that social scientists are only beginning to understand.

And the solution is not just about shifting more science content online.  We’re moving into an online environment that rapidly morphs blogs, microblogs, social media, web sites of traditional news outlets, video channels and a host of other tools of online communication into a constant stream of information and conversation.   Science needs to have an authoritative, fact-based voice across all of these channels, regardless of how dynamic they might be.  And it needs to enter the conversation with a clear understanding of how to best engage all members of society in a meaningful discussion about an increasingly complex set of scientific issues.

Unfortunately, the decline of traditional science journalism has to be a concern, in this context.  And news organizations are in the middle of sorting our new business models that allow them to create enough revenue online to produce high-quality science journalism.  NBC's Alan Boyle's Cosmic Log is just one successful example. But complementing science journalism with science information that is produced "by citizens for citizens" is not necessarily a bad thing.  Traditional news outlets, such as the New York Times or Nova Science, have never been targeting or able to reach general cross-section of the population with their science content.  As a result, recent research has shown widening gaps between the least- and most-educated strata of the population when exposed to similar types of traditional science content (2).  And some of the new forms of online communication about science that involve interactions among citizens, journalists and sometimes even scientists have in fact been shown to narrow knowledge gaps across different strata of society (2,3).

Similarly, the recent hype surrounding social media may be less than productive.  In fact, social media often produce “echo chambers,” as some researchers have called them (1).  As a result, Facebook groups or pages focused on science often preach to the already converted, i.e., those who like science in the first place.  And those folks tend to befriend others who are like them.  In other words, people tend to talk to people who think like them in social media environments, and social media don’t necessarily help communicators connect with many new audiences.  But again, solid social science research is only beginning to emerge, and it suggests that the processes surrounding science communication in social media environments is much more multifaceted than most of us would intuitively assume.

One thing is for certain: Traditional media will not remain traditional media for long.  They will be forced to reinvent themselves in this brave new world of communication.  We’re already seeing this for newspapers and TV stations who offer much of their content across platforms and with more and more audience involvement. We will also see new and creative ways of monetizing online content and therefore maintaining high quality (science) journalism.  But those models will only emerge if we rely on the insights from social science in fields, such as communication research, to help us understand how audiences use and interact with the information they find online.

Most commentators agree that media are in the midst of an intense period of change, but also argue that we should wait to see where the dust settles. Unfortunately, science journalism will not have that luxury.  We live in a (media) world where the dust is not going to settle for a long time.  What we really do need is a systematic collaboration between the sciences and social sciences to figure out how to use these new communication tools for a productive dialogue about science without some of the unintended consequences that our Perspectives piece is only beginning to hint at.


References:

(1)  Scheufele, D. A., & Nisbet, M. C. (2012). Online news and the demise of political debate. In C. T. Salmon (Ed.), Communication Yearbook (Vol. 36, pp. 45-53). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.) 

(2)  Cacciatore, M. A., Scheufele, D. A., & Corley, E. A. (forthcoming). Another (methodological) look at knowledge gaps and the Internet’s potential for closing them. Public Understanding of Science. doi: 10.1177/0963662512447606

(3)  Corley, E. A., & Scheufele, D. A. (2010). Outreach gone wrong? When we talk nano to the public, we are leaving behind key audiences. The Scientist, 24(1), 22. 



Additional Resources:

Slideshare presentation on the topic I gave last month at the 5. Forum Wissenschaftskommunikation in Dresden, Germany.









A Science and (New) Media primer (courtesy of UW-Madison's scimep lab; unless linked directly, reprints available upon request):

Anderson, A. A.; Brossard, D.; Scheufele, D. A. (forthcoming). Nanoparticle-related deaths: Science news and the issue attention cycle in print and online media. Politics and the Life Sciences.

Anderson, A. A., Brossard, D., Xenos, M., A.; Scheufele, D. A.; Ladwig, P. (forthcoming). Crude comments and concern: Online incivility's effect on risk perceptions of emerging technologies. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication.

Cacciatore, M. A., Anderson, A. A., Choi, D.-H., Brossard, D., Scheufele, D. A., Liang, X., Ladwig, P., Xenos, M., & Dudo, A. (2012). Coverage of emerging technologies: A comparison between print and online media. New Media & Society, 14(6), 1039-1059. doi: 10.1177/1461444812439061

Cacciatore, M. A., Scheufele, D. A., & Corley, E. A. (forthcoming). Another (methodological) look at knowledge gaps and the Internet’s potential for closing them. Public Understanding of Science.

Li, N., Anderson, A. A., Brossard, D., Scheufele, D. A., (forthcoming). Channeling science information seekers' attention? A content analysis of top-ranked vs. lower-ranked sites in Google. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication.

Liang, X., Anderson, A. A., Scheufele, D. A., Brossard, D., Xenos, M. A. (2012). Information snapshots: What Google searches really tell us about emerging technologies. Nano Today, 7, 72-75. doi: 10.1016/j.nantod.2012.01.001

Runge, K. K., Yeo, S. K., Cacciatore, M., Scheufele, D. A., Brossard, D., Xenos, M., Anderson, A. A., Choi, D. H., Kim, J., Li, N., Liang, X., Stubbings, M., & Su, L. Y. F. (forthcoming). Tweeting nano: How public discourses about nanotechnology develop in social media environments. Journal of Nanoparticle Research.

Xenos, M. A., Becker, A. B., Anderson, A. A., Brossard, D., Scheufele, D. A. (2011). Stimulating upstream engagement: An experimental study of nanotechnology information seeking. Social Science Quarterly, 92(5), 1191-1214. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6237.2011.00814.x

December 31, 2012

Top Ten Nanotechnology Patents of 2012

The following is a list of the most interesting nanotechnology patents this past year (in my opinion):

#10 - US 8093786 - Nanoscale piezoelectrics (Stevens Institute of Technology)

This patent teaches manufacturing piezoelectric nanofibers enabling the fabrication of nanoscale sensors and actuators.

#9 - US 8289352 - Erasable printing with nanoparticles (HJ Laboratories)

This patent teaches using nanomagnetic particles as an erasible ink in a printer.

#8 - US 8121162 - Nanocrystal laser (MIT)

This patent has priority going back to 2001 and includes some basic claims for nanocrystal coatings of diffraction gratings used for optical feedback in lasers.

#7 - US 8323976 - Genetic alteration using nanodiamonds (International Technology Center)

This patent includes basic claims reciting nanodiamonds as delivery particles used in ballistic DNA injection.

#6 - US 8113437 - "Memristor" RFID (Hynix SK)

Hynix SK is HP's manufacturing partner for a form of nanoscale ReRAM which HP (incorrectly) equates to the memristor theorized by Leon Chua in the 1970's. This is the first patent from Hynix mentioning memristors and may be indicative of the first commercial application.

#5 - US 8278757 - Printed graphene electronics (Vorbeck Materials Corp./Princeton University)

This patent incudes some basic claims for using graphene as an electrically conductive ink for printed electronics.

#4 - US 8182807 - Stroke treatment using nanoparticles (University of Nebraska)

Nanoparticles have a specific advantage in delivering drugs across the blood-brain barrier and this patent (priority 2004) seems to include some basic claims important to this application.

#3 - US 8147791 - Graphene oxide reduction (Northrop Grumman Systems)

This patent includes basic claims to graphene production via the reduction of graphene oxide.

#2 - US 8323607 - High tensile strength CNT wire (Hon Hai Precision)

Carbon nanotubes have been measured to have the highest tensile strength of any material tested but in macroscopic and composite structures the collective tensile strength is greatly reduced. This patent includes some basic claims for carbon nanotube structures with a tensile strength which, while less than the highest measured value of individual nanotubes, is compatible with larger structures (i.e. wires, films) and is greater than that of steel.

#1 - US 8101149 - "Purified cage molecules consisting of carbon atoms" (Mitsubishi)

This could be the most important submarine patent relevant to nanotechnology. The priority goes back to 1990 and the patent may have a life extending to 2029 (assuming 17 years from issuance). The quote above recites in full the first claim indicating the importance of this patent to purified carbon nanomaterials.

November 06, 2012

October 31, 2012

August 29, 2012

The Polarization Paradox: Why Hyperpartisanship Strengthens Conservatism and Undermines Liberalism

In a new essay in Breakthrough Journal +Matthew Nisbet and I examine the spiral of polarization that has reshaped politics in recent election cycles, and make an argument for a big “D” Democratic effort to overcome polarization, given the long-term problems that widening ideological rifts create for them.  

“As liberals, we tell a one-sided story about the complex causes of America's political paralysis. We blame the conservative movement, Fox News, libertarian billionaires, and the "do nothing" Republicans in Congress. Much of this story is true. … But there is plenty of blame to go around. Over the past decade, liberals have become more like conservatives, adopting a win-at-all-costs commitment to policy debates and elections. … 
The strategy has been dangerously misguided. Extreme polarization has served conservatives very well, driving moderate leaders from politics, promoting feelings of cynicism, inefficacy, and distrust among the public, and forcing Democrats to spend huge sums of money on canvassing, texting, social media, and celebrity appeals in order to turn out moderates, young people, and minorities on election day. Less clear is how America's escalating ideological arms race will conceivably serve liberals. Instead of going to war against the Right, liberals will better serve their social and political objectives by waging a war on polarization.”

Read the full article from Breakthrough Journal here.

July 07, 2012

Euro in Poland and Ukraine



European soccer champioship in Poland and Ukraine should attract thousands of visitors interested in Ukrainian architecture and places to see.

October 17, 2011

Nano-channels for molecule delivery - and construction?

Molecules can be delivered through a tiny channel templated by one strand of DNA.

Here's the article.

The developers are using this to deliver precise amounts of chemicals through the membrane of individual cells. This is highly cool, with all sorts of research implications. And eventually, perhaps therapeutic implications - they're talking about scaling it up to process 100,000 cells at a time.

So I got to wondering: If someone loaded up these reservoirs with two kinds of molecules, that would stick to each other but not to themselves, could this be used as an ink-jet printer at the nanoscale?

For starters, use one kind of molecule that will stick to a surface. Squirt it on and see if it worked. Then, scan the tip while you squirt.

Once you start using multiple kinds of molecules, you can perhaps build 3D structures. And with a patterned surface, it might be possible to get atomic precision.

With a million addressible reservoirs, and 10 ms per 1-nm voxel, it would be possible to build the volume of a human cell in a few hours.

Hat tip to Next Big Future.

Chris Phoenix

CRN Home Page

$MTEntryPermalink$>')+'&title='+encodeURIComponent('$MTEntryTitle$>'), 'addthis', 'scrollbars=yes,menubar=no,width=620,height=520,resizable=yes,toolbar=no,location=no,status=no,screenX=200,screenY=100,left=200,top=100'); return false;" target="_blank" title="Bookmark and Share">Bookmark and Share

March 14, 2011

Interesting Facts About Nano Technology

I am contanly looking for interesting facts and things related to nano technology. Even though I am not a professional yet, I am trying to become one and maybe contribute to the development of nano technologies.

March 06, 2011

Interesting Facts and Nanotechnology

Nanotechnology is a technology, which allows to work with substances on the levels of individual atoms. During traditional methods of production, scientists work with portions of tissue, which consist of billions of atoms. Even now, with such powerful technological base, it is almost impossible to view the smallest parts of an atom.

Image Credit - DebateitOut.com
In 1959, Nobel Laureate, Richard Feynman predicted that if the humanity will learn how to manipulate separate atoms, it will be possible to synthesize almost anything. And he was absolutely right, in 1981 the first tool for atom manipulation was introduced – the tunneling microscope, which was invented by scientists from IBM.

It turned out that by using this microscope scientists could not only see individual atoms, but also to lift and move them around. This demonstrated the ability to manipulate atoms and brought an idea to build new subsctances by moving them around and stacking in something new, it was like building a house with a set of bricks.

Traditionally, nanotechnology is divided into three major areas:
  • manufacturing of electronic circuits and schemes, the elements of which consist of several atoms
  • creation of nano-machines and nano-robots, for examples mechanisms and robots the size of a molecule
  • direct manipulation of atoms and molecules in order to assembly of them something new.

February 15, 2011

NanoArt 2011 INTERNATIONAL ONLINE COMPETITION

FREE Entries - Open to All Artists and Scientists - Seed Images of 3 Nanostructures are Provided for Further Artistic Creation

Submission deadline March 31, 2011
 
NanoArt is a new art discipline at the art-science-technology intersections. To read more about NanoArt and Nanotechnology please visit the entire nanoart21.org website. The 5th anniversary edition of the worldwide competition NanoArt 2011 is open to all artists 18 years and older. The online exhibition will open for public in April, 2011.
Jurors: Dr. Anatoli Korkin (PhD in Physics from Moscow Lomonosov State University) is Associate Research Professor at Arizona State University and President of Nano & Giga Solutions, a company that provides research and software development in the area of computational chemistry and materials design for nanotechnology applications and consulting and project management in nanotechnology education, science, and innovation; Hugh McGrory is an Irish filmmaker/photographer and a NanoArt pioneer who has built a strong reputation for innovation through experimentation. He was filmmaker in residence at the Toomre Lab’s CINEMA microscopy department, Yale University School of Medicine for summer 2007, researching, collecting and creating moving images of the living cell and exploring the wider area of scientific imaging. He is now the Creative Director of Culture Shock Marketing in New York City.
Winners will be notified and published online on May 31, 2011. The competition will be promoted on different venues online, nanoart21.org contacts, word-of-mouth. The artists could also promote the competition on their websites and other venues.
For the 5th anniversary edition of this competition, nanoart21.org founded by artist and scientist Cris Orfescu (www.crisorfescu.com) will provide 3 high resolution monochromatic electron scans of nanosculptures created by Orfescu. The participating artists will have to alter the provided image(s) in any artistic way to finish the artistic-scientific process and create NanoArt work(s). The artists and scientists are strongly encouraged to participate with their own images as long as these visualize micro or nano structures.
For more information, visit NanoArt 2011 competition site. 

December 28, 2010

Fwd: Your Paper Makes SSRN Top Ten List

 


Dear Mohamad Mova Al 'Afghani:

Your paper, "The Potential Role of the Human Right to Water in the Management of Indonesia's Water Resources", was recently listed on SSRN's Top Ten download list for Environment & Natural Resources eJournal. As of 12/27/2010, your paper has been downloaded 11 times. You may view the abstract and download statistics at http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1723205.

Top Ten Lists are updated on a daily basis. Click on the following link to view the Top Ten list for the journal Environment & Natural Resources eJournal Top Ten.

Click on the following link to view all the papers in the journal Environment & Natural Resources eJournal All Papers.

To view any of the Top Ten lists, click the TOP button on any network, subnetwork, journal or topic in the Browse list reachable through the following link: http://www.ssrn.com/Browse

Your paper may be listed in the Top Ten for other networks or journals and, if so, you will receive additional notices at that time.

If you have any questions regarding this notification or any other matter, please email AuthorSupport@SSRN.com or call 877-SSRNHelp (877.777.6435 toll free). Outside of the United States, call 00+1+585+4428170.

Sincerely,

Michael C. Jensen
Chairman
Social Science Research Network


October 08, 2010

NanoArt21 Exhibition at Passion for Knowledge Festival, in Spain

"Quantum Tunneling, by Orfescu
Passion for Knowledge is a festival that brings world leading scientists and humanists together from different disciplines and cultures to celebrate the 10th anniversary of the Donostia International Physics Center under the commitment for progress of science driven by the love for knowledge. Along with highlighting the thirst for knowledge as the driving force behind scientific, technological and cultural progress, the festival aims to expand the debate and to engage the society in the celebration, and is spread out to different venues in the entire city of San Sebastian. The festival comprises a number of outreach activities such as encounters, exhibitions, seminars and contests with the objective of promoting science as a cultural activity, establishing connections between scientists and citizens, and fostering the participation of the public in the dissemination of science.

The NanoArt21 exhibition closes on October 10, 2010. The exhibition curated by Cris Orfescu (USA) and Igor Campillo Santos (Spain) features 2D, video, and multimedia works authored by 31 worldwide Top 10 artists at 4 editions of the NanoArt International Online Competition: Imamedin Amiraslan (Azerbaijan), Daniela Caceta, Maria Matheus, Ricardo Tranquilin (Brazil), Bjoern Daempfling, Jan Schmoranzer (Germany), Gilberto Sossella, Simone Battiston (Italy), Teresa Majerus (Luxemburg), Pilar Azuara (Mexico), Han Halewijn (Netherlands), Elena Lucia Constantinescu (Romania), Janko Jelenc, Teja Krasek (Slovenia), Frances Geesin, Leonel Marques (UK), Anna Ursyn, Carol Flaitz, Chris Robinson, Cris Orfescu, Darcy Lewis, David Derr, David Hylton, Janis Kirstein, Jean Constant, Linda Alterwitz, Lisa Black, Patrick Millard, Shruti Gour, Deeraj Roy, Steven Pollard (USA). After the show, the artworks will be exhibited in different research centers in San Sebastian city: nanoGUNE, DIPC, the Faculty of Chemistry...
"NanoMaiastra, Brancusi - In Memoriam", by Orfescu
NanoArt21 was founded by scientist and artist Cris Orfescu, to promote NanoArt throughout the world as a reflection of the technological development. Orfescu considers that NanoArt is a more attractive and effective way of communicating with the general public in order to provide information on the new technologies of the 21st Century. NanoArt aims to raise the awareness of the general public with regard to nanotechnology and its impact on our lives.

"NanoArt is a new art discipline at the art-science-technology intersections. It features nanolandscapes (molecular and atomic landscapes which are natural structures of matter at molecular and atomic scales) and nanosculptures (structures created by scientists and artists by manipulating matter at molecular and atomic scales using chemical and physical processes). These structures are visualized with powerful research tools like scanning electron microscopes and atomic force microscopes and their scientific images are captured and further processed by using different artistic techniques to convert them into artworks showcased for large audiences." (Cris Orfescu)

June 21, 2010

TAKING THE SUMMER OFF

I have been busy traveling with my new LLC (Center for Emerging Technologies). Got a few contracts and we are doing well as a consultancy. Still working on our NIRT which is due to lapse in 2011. Most recently we submitted articles for Nanotechnology Law and Business and another to Nanotoxicology (out of UK). The first article will appear in the Summer issue and examines (critically) the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies consumer product inventory. The second is the first data from the Delphi we completed under the NIRT. My students and I are working on six more articles and we expect at least two from each of our NIRT subawards - Wisconsin, Minnesota, and South Carolina. I submitted a NUE proposal for the next two years and am pending. I am also on a U19 NIH grant proposal that is pending and a P48 NIH Superfund grant as well.

While I have been approached to write another book on Nanotechnology, I haven't pull the trigger on that. I am also attempting to rewrite a piece I wrote for Nature Nanotechnology but the reviewer were all over the map with recommendations (some of which were totally off base) and given the length restrictions attempting to accommodate this recommendations is nearly impossible. So, beyond the six articles and the work on my new book on FEAR I am a bit overwhelmed.

I will be at the 4S (social science of science) Conference in Tokyo in August. I will be speaking at the Nano-dialogue meeting at the Free University of Amsterdam in September and have two papers for a NCA ARST (rhetoric of science and tech) meeting in San Francisco in November and a SRA(risk) meeting in Salt Lake in December. In addition, I am teaching a CRD 893 class in Social Media in the fall and CRD 790 Issues in Communication, Rhetoric, and Digital Media and COM 562 Communication and Social Change in the spring. Pending grant may affect some of this.

We did manage a hire to work with PCOST (Public Communication of Science and Technology). Dr. Andrew Binder from U Wisconsin will join us as an assistant professor in communication and will be associate director of PCOST. I expect a small team of doctoral and masters students to work with me as well.

So.... we will take a few months off and re-examine the state of this blog. I would like to broaden the subject field. Let me know what you think.

May 18, 2010

Add your lawfirm to our Lawfirm Directory (and get featured!)

 

In case you haven’t realize, the Nanotechnology Law blog adds a few links in the tabs: Lawfirm Directory and Add Lawfirm.

Lawfirm directory is a new feature aimed at collecting information about lawfirms practising Nanotechnology related issue. If you fill out the form and request a review, we will consider the application subject to further documentation provided by you.

Please note that the review is not an advertorial. If you request an advertorial, we will have to disclose it in the blog post.

Click here to download the list of firms and here (or scroll below) to fill out the form.

Loading...

 

Related:

Solo Practicioner Lawyer, a Trend?
The future of work: no cubicle culture, smaller companies, working from home



April 14, 2010

 
National Science Foundation (NSF) Logo, reprod...Image via Wikipedia
Northeastern to host Global Regulation of Nanotechnologies conference in Boston, May 7 to 8 (Nanowerk News) Leading international experts on the global regulation of nanotechnologies, including scientists, lawyers, ethicists and officials from governments, industry stakeholders, and NGOs will join in a two-day conference May 7-8, 2010 at Northeastern University’s School of Law.
The conference will identify best practices that address the needs of industries, the public and regulators. Speakers include representatives from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Brazil Ministry of Science and Technology, the Korean governent, the International Conference of Chemicals Management and National Science Foundation-funded university-industry collaborations.

Looks like an interesting conference folks...

April 11, 2010

Untitled


This announcement below is from Foresight Institute.




Foresight Update 23.39: All conference videos now posted - April 9, 2010

 

Discuss these news stories at http://foresight.org/nanodot.


We are happy to announce that all videos from Foresight 2010, our January conference, are now posted: http://www.vimeo.com/album/176287

There are 17 videos, so in case you'd like some guidance in getting started, consider starting with the top three talks as rated by conference participants:

Special thanks to Monica Anderson, Miron Cuperman, and TechZulu (Efren Toscano) for their work on this project.

If you enjoy the videos and have not yet joined Foresight or donated in 2010, we encourage you to chip in and help fund this work: https://www.networkforgood.org/donation/MakeDonation.aspx?ORGID2=770119168

We hope to see you at the next Foresight Conference!






 

March 31, 2010

PROBLEM WITH NANO TATA

An embarrassing moment for Nano Tata. The article appeared in multiple outlets though I found it on DISGRASIAN.com.

We are examining how this event is being amplified in the net-media especially social media.

The incident happened by a man from Mumbai who escaped the explosion. The explosion was linked to a faulty electric switch. The V that appears over the plate is composed a flowers, a celebratory wreath that went up in flames as well.

To date, there is little evidence this event is being amplified in the discourse over nanotechnology in print or in netnews.

March 16, 2010

Google's exit and the Great FireWall of China

According to news agencies, it is very likely now that Google will exit China. A recent interview in the BBC revealed a targetted attack to gmail account owned by Chinesse Human Rights activists.

Will this triggers the creation of a new web-block? Will the future of the Chinese Web goes different way from the mainstream Internet? The Berlin wall did collapsed but the great firewall remains because the firewall has no direct effect on the Chinese economy. 

This could be the beginning of an entirely new internet culture.

March 09, 2010

NanoArt Works by Cris Orfescu in Los Angeles


Presented by EM & Co, 7940 W. 3rd St., L.A., CA 90048
RSVP: rsvp@emandco.com | 323.782.8155 | emandco.com

March 11 - April 8
Opening Reception: Thursday, March 11, 7-10 pm

About Cris Orfescu:

Cris Orfescu was born in Bucharest, Romania, and has lived and worked in Los Angeles since 1991. A scientist by day, he runs an analytical laboratory which uses nanotechnology to design improved lithium batteries. The molecular landscapes of various materials with which he works, measured in nanometers, are his inspiration and jumping-off point for his art. Using an electron microscope, he manipulates compounds and chemicals to create nano-sculptures, captures the images, which he then blows up into large artworks, digitizes, and applies color. A self-taught artist, he has been experimenting for over 40 years with different media and art forms, including digital art, murals, acrylic and oil painting, mixed media, and collage. 'NanoArt', a term he has coined, reflects the transition from Science to Art through Technology.

Orfescu has shown his works in numerous solo and group exhibitions in the US, Italy, France, Finland, Korea, UK, Ireland, Spain, Germany, Colombia, and Greece, and has won many awards in juried shows. For more information, please visit: www.crisorfescu.com.

Here are some extracts from prestigious publications about his work:

"...artists face a fundamental hurdle" trying to represent "the molecular landscapes of various materials, where features are measured in nanometers... For abstractionists like Mr. Orfescu though, such limitations are simply invitations to let color and shape-shifting run wild." (The New York Times)

"Artist and scientist Cris Orfescu manipulates chemicals and creates nano-sculptures, which he then blows up into large artworks with an electron scanning microscope." (The Wall Street Journal)

"Shouting their presence in loud shades of red, blue and yellow, artist and scientist Cris Orfescu's images look first like abstract pieces. The colorful curves, angular lines and sudden bursts that command the canvases appear to be the fantastical expression of the artist's whim and creative taste...Orfescu's partner in the exhibit, photographer Rick Chinelli, said "personally, I think that Cris works on another level both physically and mentally." (Pasadena Star News)

"Cris Orfescu lives in a fun universe, populated by phantasmagoric creatures which one would say come from another planet... In his studio-lab he is having a good time sculpting the imperceptible." (translated from the French magazine Stuff)

About EM & Co

EM & Co, a West 3rd Street boutique, supplies fashion-conscious shoppers with a well-orchestrated mix of fashions from world-class designers (i.e., Vivienne Westwood, Iodice, Stella McCartney, JC de Castelbajac, Beatriz), as well as innovative styles from emerging L.A. talent. Featuring over 30 lines from around the world in its gallery-like space, EM & Co is also an active supporter of local talent, hosting monthly art exhibits and other events featuring local artists and designers. For more information about EM & Co, please visit: www.emandco.com.

October 21, 2009

Rules for Dwarfs Risk Regulation of Nanotechnology and its International Context

A conference on nanotechnology will be held in Germany 30 November-2 December. According to the website:
We convene actors from Germany, Europe, and the United States to link previously separated regulatory debates. Participants will develop regulatory recommendations for German and European politics in frank and open discussions. This includes the prioritization of regulatory approaches and principles to guide the development of compatible regulatory systems on both sides of the Atlantic.

The price is € 160 including accommodation and meals; a reduction to € 80 is available for students. More detail here.

October 11, 2009

Calls for premarket registration of nanotech product

EEB calls for premarket registration, stakeholders consultation and adequate legislative framework before a deeper entrance in nanotech market is made. In its brochure, it deems voluntary regulation as unsuccessful. I have yet to see where the failures are, but the EEB claims for lack of participation on the enactments of these codes.

It appears to me that the EEB stance are 'precautionary' in essence and relies more on command-and-control approach in nanotech regulation. The argument may have some merit provided that there are huge uncertainties surrounding nanotech products.

More regulatory framework of precautionary nature may reduce the risk of future market failure. But over-precautions will have implications on the growing market for nanotech.

Read more here.

October 07, 2009

NanoArt 2009 INTERNATIONAL ONLINE COMPETITION - 4th Edition


FREE Entries - Open to All Artists and Scientists - Seed Images of 3 Nanosculptures are Provided for Further Artistic Creation

Submission deadline January 15, 2010

The worldwide competition NanoArt 2009 is open to all artists 18 years and older. The online exhibition will open for public on January 20, 2010.

Jurors: Dr. Pilar Irala (PhD, History of Art), world renowned photographer, expert on contemporary art, photography, and new technologies, and member of the International Association of Art Critics; apart from her activity as international photographer, Art critic and curator, she is currently Professor of Photography and Contemporary Art at San Jorge University (Spain) and co-director of the contemporary photography and music ensemble animAMusicae; Guillermo Muñoz, physicist and PhD candidate in Photonics, works in the field of Nanotechnology at Material Science Institute of Valencia University (Spain); he is part of the 'Piratas de la Ciencia' science communication group and is working as moderator for the international Art and Science network Yasmin; recently, he curated the NanoArt exhibition 'Nanoconfluencias: miradas artísticas hacia lo infinitamente pequeño'.

For the 4th edition of this competition, nanoart21.org founded by artist and scientist Cris Orfescu (www.crisorfescu.com and www.absolutearts.com/nanoart) will provide 3 high resolution monochromatic electron scans of nanosculptures created by him. The participating artists will have to alter the provided image(s) in any artistic way to finish the artistic-scientific process and create NanoArt work(s). The artists and scientists are strongly encouraged to participate with their own images as long as these visualize micro or nanostructures.

The artists can participate with up to 5 images (artworks). All submitted works will be exhibited on the nanoart21.org site until March 31, 2010, together with artist's name, a short description of the artistic process, and artist's web site and e-mail. The top 10 artists will be exhibited on nanoart21.org site for one full year and will be invited to exhibit at the 3rd edition of The International Festival of NanoArt. The previous editions of the festival were held in Finland and Germany

NanoArt is a new art discipline at the art-science-technology intersections. It features nanolandscapes (molecular and atomic landscapes which are natural structures of matter at molecular and atomic scales) and nanosculptures (structures created by scientists and artists by manipulating matter at molecular and atomic scales using chemical and physical processes). These structures are visualized with powerful research tools like scanning electron microscopes and atomic force microscopes and their scientific images are captured and further processed by using different artistic techniques to convert them into artworks showcased for large audiences. To read more about NanoArt and Nanotechnology please visit http://nanoart21.org.

For more information, please visit the competition site at http://nanoart21.org/html/nanoart_2009.html or send e-mail to 2009@nanoart21.org

For the Latest News on Art, Science, Technology, Follow me on TWITTER @ http://twitter.com/nanoart

September 14, 2009

NanoArt for “Pay It Forward” International Exhibition

Orfescu will donate a NanoArt limited edition print to IRSCA Gifted Education “PAY IT FORWARDInternational Exhibition.

To All Fine Artists of the World:

« Pay it Forward » to the generations to come, by DONATING AN ARTWORK for gifted and talented children!

Gifted Children of Romania need their FIRST Gifted Education Center in their country. A center where they can learn, where their TALENTS, DREAMS and ABILITIES can be supported to reach their maximum potential. This center costs $1 mil. Any one of us can contribute to this wonderful work.

Gifted children need hope. They shall be offered the support from people with great souls, who understand how much they need support NOW.

BE AN AMBASSADOR OF GIFTED CHILDREN IN YOUR COUNTRY AND BE PART OF THE GENERATION PAY IT FORWARD.

INTERNATIONAL EXHIBITION

Between 24 October – 7 November 2009 – IRSCA Gifted Education will organize an international exhibition and auction with the artworks received. This will create a powerful awareness on the issue. All artworks purchased with this occasion will help realize the funds needed for the center. All artworks will be published online and artists shall be acknowledged for their work. Donors, at their express wish, will receive an official Certificate of Ambassador of the generation of gifted children.

The Gifted Education Center online: www.giftededu.org
———————————————————————————————————————————

DONATED ARTWORKS

All artworks donated must be accompanied by a CERTIFICATE OF DONATION from the artist in favor of non-profit Association, IRSCA Gifted Education, registered in the Romanian Associations and Foundations Registry with #36/13.09.2004.
Details on the 1-page-CERTIFICATE: http://www.supradotati.ro/resurse/certificate-of-donation.pdf

SHIPPING ADDRESS

All artworks donated should be sent to the address mentioned in the 1-page-CERTIFICATE, up to 15 OCTOBER 2009 (postal date). [Artworks can be donated year round, first exhibited online and later on, in a Gallery, with the next International Exhibition organized by IRSCA Gifted Education]
The artist must take care of the shipping costs and the packing of the artwork.
The artworks donated will not be sent back to the artist.

————————————————————————————————————————————————
WHO CAN APPLY ?

EVERYONE !

————————————————————————————————————————————————-

WHAT CAN YOU DONATE?

  • Painting

  • Drawing

  • Sculpture

  • Photography

  • Miscellaneous

————————————————————————————————————————————————-
FAQ:

  • SIZE ? – any size as long as it is easy to transport

  • WEIGHT ? – any weight as long as it is easy to transport

  • FRAME ? – we recommend framed artworks (other options: w/t a frame; just a Passepartout/Matting), paintings on stretched canvas, or any artworks that can be easily exhibited

Recommended: We recommend that you send along with your artwork your – artistic statement – a description of the artwork – what made you support us? THANK YOU


WHAT ABOUT MY ARTWORK?

You will be announced if your artwork has been sold, and also the name/company of the buyer.
If your artwork has not been sold in this first edition of the Pay It Forward International Exhibition, it will be included in the next one.

For any QUESTIONS please email me at maiastefana@gmail.com

ORGANIZERS:


maia-oprea-fine-art Maia Ştefana Oprea
IRSCA Gifted Education Cultural Projects Director
Professional Independent Artist
www.maia-fine-art.com
maiastefana@gmail.com
dfleiss Dorothea Fleiss
Director Association DF&EWA Stuttgart
http://dfewa-international.blogspot.com/

Honorary Ambassador of the First Gifted Education Center for gifted & talented children in Romania


Thank you,
Monica Gheorghiu
Vice President
IRSCA
Gifted Education
www.supradotati.ro
Founder and Initiator of EDUGATE –The Romanian Consortium for the Education of Gifted and Talented Children
www.edu-gate.ro
+40 729 029 484
http://twitter.com/IRSCA
mgheorghiu@supradotati.ro

August 10, 2009

'Disruptive' Technology in Water Supply

As I have written in the previous post, nanotech may be able to revolutionize drinking water provision. Recently at the 2009 TED, an engineer demonstrated a non chemical nano-filtration bottle that could change filthy water into drinking water in a matter of second. The cost of the bottle is still quite high, around 116-170 GBP depending on the volume (filtration of up to 4,000 to 6,000 litres).

However, with better manufacturing, the price of the filter may significantly decrease in the future. If employed in a larger scale, this technology may decentralize water treatment facility and open doors for competition in the water sector.


July 27, 2009

What will happen if the world's population go down?

Lower land prices, higher labor prices, said Pete Alcorn. Surely, it will bring tremendous changes to social system: land reform, democratization and the rise of middle class. Alcorn suggest us to move beyond malthusian economy and pay attention to the tendency of population decrease.

In previous posts we have discussed a little about post-scarcity economics, which is a by-product of Molecular Manufacturing (MM). It may turn out that even without MMworld's population growth may decrease to negative within one century.

The reason for decreasing population may vary. In the past, it can happen because of wars. Now it seems unlikely. So plague -- such as virulent influenza viruses -- could be a scenario. Another scenario would be a relatively successful health and social programs which increases longevity but turned population growth into negative.

See Alcorn's talk here:




July 10, 2009

[OOT] The end of microsoft

Some says that this will be the end of microsoft. Maybe not, but at least it will lower the price of computers.

June 30, 2009

Legal loopholes in Nano Liability

Chris Phoenix at CRN referred us to a new report from Investor Environmental Health Network. The Report highlighted 8 loopholes under current regulations which, if go unrepaired, will trigger litigation bomb in the future.

June 09, 2009

Cris Orfescu and Winners of the NanoArt International Online Competition to Exhibit at the EuroNanoForum 2009


Cris Orfescu ( http://www.crisorfescu.com/ ) and winners from all 3 editions of the NanoArt International Online Competition ( http://www.nanoart21.org/ ) have been invited to exhibit at the EuroNanoForum 2009, June 2-5, in Prague, Czech Republic.
Frances Geesin (UK), Bjoern Daempfling (Germany), Carol Cooper, Eva Lewarne (Canada), Chris Robinson, Darcy Lewis, David Derr, David Hylton, Renata Spiazzi, Fred Marinello, Philip Brun Del Re, Ursula Freer, Diane Vetere, Steven Pollard (USA), Teja Krasek (Slovenia), Imameddin Amiraslan (Azerbaijan), and Teresa Majerus (Luxembourg) will show their works at this event. 36 prints and 2 multimedia works will be exhibited in diferent locations at the Prague Congress Center.
EuroNanoForum 2009 is the 4th conference of a set of international nanotechnology conferences organized within the framework of national Presidencies of the European Union. The conference will be hosted at the Prague Congress Centre, as an official event of the Czech Presidency, under the auspices of the Czech Ministry for Education Youth and Sports and with the support of the Industrial Technologies Program of the European Commission. Focusing on "Nanotechnology for sustainable economy", EuroNanoForum 2009 will address the contribution and challenges of nanotechnology research for a sustainable development of European industry and society, such as the need for reduction in carbon emissions and fossil fuels dependence, the substantial increase in energy demand, pollution control, clean water management and sustainable quality of life of the European citizen, as well as material production sustainability and efficiency. In this respect, nanotechnology presents many opportunities and challenges that have to be analyzed at international level through a safe, responsible and integrated approach, as first presented by the ENF2003 conference ( http://www.euronanoforum2009.eu/ ).
NanoArt is the expression of the Nanotechnology Revolution and reflects the transition from Science to Art using Technology. This new art discipline features nanolandscapes (molecular and atomic landscapes which are natural structures of matter at molecular and atomic scales) and nanosculptures (structures created by scientists and artists by manipulating matter at molecular and atomic scales using chemical and physical processes). These structures are visualized with powerful research tools like scanning electron microscopes and atomic force microscopes and their scientific images are captured and further processed by using different artistic techniques to convert them into artworks showcased for large audiences to educate the public with creative images that are appealing and acceptable.

June 05, 2009

Virtual worlds and the science gateway to democracy

C Milburn argued that virtual worlds such as Secondlife opens the gateway for science towards democracy. As I have previously written, secondlife's copybot resembles a nanofactory. Future post molecular manufacturing society could be benefited by the simulation from these virtual societies. How secondlife handle copybot might be an inspiration on how we handle nanofac.

Download the paper "Atoms and Avatars: Virtual Worlds as Massively-Multiplayer Laboratories" here.

June 03, 2009

Farewell, NanoBot

What a small, strange trip it's been.

I have been covering nanotechnology in some form since 2001, and I believe I have taken it as far as I care to.

I am proud of the way this blog became a voice for those who believed government and business were taking nanotech in the wrong direction.

I did my duty as a journalist. I comforted the afflicted and afflicted the comfortable -- even at the cost of my own employment in some cases. Now, it is time to move on.

The various twists and turns in my personal and professional life have led me to study, and write about, the future of the auto industry and the corrupt U.S. criminal justice system. Expect to see more of my work in those areas.

Meanwhile, I leave this six-year NanoBot archive to the ages. And I will exit with the same words that I have often repeated.

What is nanotechnology? Well, what do you want it to be?

June 02, 2009

Before the Internet, I was a better journalist

You know, my farewell to social media has lifted such a burden from me that I am considering taking it a step further.

When I began my journalism career, I covered some pretty interesting, complicated stories -- from health effects of trash incinerators in neighborhoods, to controversies surrounding methadone clinics to cultural implications of bilingual education. I covered these issues and more back in the 1980s and early '90s -- before the Internet existed.

I got out more, I talked to more people, I made more phone calls, I read more books, I went to more libraries, and I think I was actually a better writer and reporter back then.

Since then, I have seen how the Internet echo chamber can take one wrong piece of information and, via that lazy reporting tool, Google, fling it around the world and back a hundred times until bad information becomes conventional wisdom.

I have seen how the availability of tiny fragments of half-information, mostly out of context, can turn lazy reporters into "instant experts" because all it takes to write a successful "news story" is the ability to package information well so that it makes sense within certain closed-loop assumptions.

I've seen how addictive personalities and egomaniacs can obtain instant gratification from "connections" with others hunched behind screens, yet still not know the first thing about real communication.

I have already rejected Web 2.0. I am almost ready to tell Web 1.0 to get lost, as well.

Maybe an hour a day to answer e-mail, read some news and look up a few things. Then, back to gaining knowledge the old-fashioned way -- by communicating in a real way with real people.

Just a nice thought for now. I might follow through.

May 21, 2009

International Regulation

International Approaches to the Regulatory Governance of Nanotechnology" is available for download from the RGI website.

Nanotechnology seemed to be going towards the Private Ordering path

March 28, 2009

Convergent Regulatory Framework?

Does nanotech regulation needs to be standardized or can state develop their own laws about nanotech? I am more into a standardized framework, although of course, in reality there is always a gap. Read Lloyds report here.

March 22, 2009

The US Rules the Wave?

The US (and not the brits) will rule the wave. US will become the next Ottoman Empire. The next 100 years will be all about the United States. Europe will decline. Space-based solar power will be developed. Stratfor founder George Friedman said on the launching of his new book.



Hat tip to Chris Phoenix at CRN

March 21, 2009

Nanotech Law Webinar

KHK Law is holding webinars starting next month:

All webinars will be conducted from 1:00 p.m. – 2:30 p.m. EST

April 1, 2009 Legislation, Regulation and Small Business – 2009 Outlook

June 4, 2009 Nanotechnology in the Marketplace

Sept. 10, 2009 Nanotechnology, Food and Food Packaging

Nov. 19, 2009 Product Liability and Nanotechnology

The cost for Individual Webinar is $145 and $495 if you signed up all four. More detail here.


March 18, 2009

Nano Governance

I hate overstrecthing the word 'governance' into nanotech, but it seems this word is compatible with any new products subjected to regulation. I suggest you to have a look at this publication, titled FramingNano Project: A multistakeholder dialogue platform framing the responsible development of Nanosciences & Nanotechnologies, MAPPING STUDY ON REGULATION AND GOVERNANCE OF NANOTECHNOLOGIES. Download full report here.

November 12, 2008

NanoArt 2008 INTERNATIONAL ONLINE COMPETITION - 3rd Edition


FREE Entries - Open to All Artists and Scientists - Nanostructures Seed Images are Provided for Further Artistic Creation
Submission deadline January 15, 2009

NanoArt is a new art discipline at the art-science-technology intersections. It features nanolandscapes (molecular and atomic landscapes which are natural structures of matter at molecular and atomic scales) and nanosculptures (structures created by scientists and artists by manipulating matter at molecular and atomic scales using chemical and physical processes). These structures are visualized with powerful research tools like scanning electron microscopes and atomic force microscopes and their scientific images are captured and further processed by using different artistic techniques to convert them into artworks showcased for large audiences. To read more about NanoArt and Nanotechnology please visit http://www.nanoart21.org/.
The worldwide competition NanoArt 2008 is open to all artists 18 years and older. The online exhibition will open for public on January 20, 2009. Judges: Jeanne Brasile, artist, director and primary curator of the Walsh Gallery at the Seton Hall University; Rocky Rawstern, artist and consultant, former editor of Nanotechnology Now, awarded with the 2005 Foresight Institute Prize in Communication. Winners will be notified and published online after March 31, 2009. The competition will be promoted on different venues online, nanoart21.org contacts, word-of-mouth. The artists could also promote the competition on their websites and other venues.
For the 2008 edition of this competition, nanoart21.org founded by artist and scientist Cris Orfescu (http://www.crisorfescu.com/) will provide 3 high resolution monochromatic electron scans for competitors to choose from. The participating artists will have to alter the provided image(s) in any artistic way to finish the artistic-scientific process and create NanoArt work(s). The artists and scientists are strongly encouraged to participate with their own images as long as these visualize micro or nanostructures.
The artists can participate with up to 5 images (artworks). All submitted works will be exhibited on the nanoart21.org site until March 31, 2009, together with artist's name, a short description of the artistic process, and artist’s web site and e-mail. The top 10 artists will be exhibited on nanoart21.org site for one full year and will be invited to exhibit at the 3rd edition of The International Festival of NanoArt. The previous editions of the festival were held in Finland and Germany.

For more information, please visit the competition site at http://nanoart21.org/html/nanoart_2008.html or send e-mail to 2008@nanoart21.org

October 06, 2008

The 2nd International Festival of NanoArt

The 2nd International Festival for NanoArt organized by NanoArt21 (http://www.nanoart21.org/) will be hosted in Stuttgart, Germany by NAHVISION Institute for International Culture Exchange, between November 1st and November 30th, 2008. The show is curated by artist/scientist Cris Orfescu (USA) and art professor Dorothea Fleiss (Germany).
18 artists from 8 countries were selected to participate with their works at this invitational event: Geert Lensens (Belgium), Hugh McGrory (Ireland), Teresa Majerus (Luxembourg), Bjoern Daempfling, Dorothea Fleiss (Germany), Han Halewijn (Netherlands), Elena Lucia Constantinescu (Romania), Teja Krasek (Slovenia), Chris Robinson, Cris Orfescu, David Derr, David Hylton, Derek Toomre, Jan Kirstein, Judith Lightfeather, Lisa Black, Siddhartha Pathak, Steven Pollard (USA).
NanoArt is a new art discipline at the art-science-technology intersections. It features nanolandscapes (molecular and atomic landscapes which are natural structures of matter at molecular and atomic scales) and nanosculptures (structures created by scientists and artists by manipulating matter at molecular and atomic scales using chemical and physical processes). These structures are visualized with powerful research tools like scanning electron microscopes and atomic force microscopes and their scientific images are captured and further processed by using different artistic techniques to convert them into artworks showcased for large audiences.
NanoArt is the expression of the New Technological Revolution reflecting the transition from Science to Art using Technology and could be for the 21st Century what Photography was for the 20th Century. Over the past two decades the ability to measure and manipulate matter at atomic and molecular scales has led to the discovery of novel materials and phenomena. These advances underlie the multidisciplinary areas known today as Nanotechnology. The responsible development and application of Nanotechnology could lead to create jobs and economic growth, to enhance national security, and to improve the quality of life. Some of the benefits would be cleaner manufacturing processes, stronger and lighter building materials, smaller and faster computers, and more powerful ways to detect and treat disease. NanoArt is aimed to raise the public awareness of Nanotechnology and its impact on our lives.For updated information about the event, please send e-mail to info@nanoart21.org or check the event site at http://nanoartfestival-stuttgart.blogspot.com/

NanoArt by Orfescu at the Prince of Asturias Awards

Cris Orfescu has been invited to exhibit NanoArt to the 2008 Prince of Asturias Awards at the Campoamor Theatre in Oviedo, the capital of Asturias, Spain.
The Prince of Asturias Foundation has conferred its Awards yearly ever since 1981. They are intended to acknowledge scientific, technical, cultural, social and humanitarian work carried out internationally by individuals, groups or organizations in the following eight categories: communication and humanities, social sciences, arts, letters, scientific and technical research, international cooperation, concord and sports. H.R.H. Felipe de Borbón, Prince of Asturias and Heir to the throne of Spain is the Honorary President of the Foundation that bears His name since its creation in 1980. The aim of the Foundation is to contribute to encouraging and promoting scientific, cultural and humanistic values that form part of mankind's universal heritage. Bob Dylan, Al Gore, George M. Whiteside, Google, National Geographic Society, Maya Plisetskaya, Woody Allen, Paco de Lucia, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Lance Armstrong, Vittorio Gassmann, Yehudi Menuhin, Michail Gorbachev, Carl Lewis, are among the winners since the beginning of the award. The award presentation ceremony is considered as one of the most important cultural events in the international agenda. Throughout its history, these awards have been honored with different recognitions, such as UNESCO’s declaration in 2004 acknowledging the extraordinary contribution of these awards to mankind's cultural heritage. This year, the grand presentation ceremony is to be held on Friday, October 24th at 6:30 pm.

NanoArt is a new art discipline at the art-science-technology intersections. It features nanolandscapes (molecular and atomic landscapes which are natural structures of matter at molecular and atomic scales) and nanosculptures (structures created by scientists and artists by manipulating matter at molecular and atomic scales using chemical and physical processes). These structures are visualized with powerful research tools like scanning electron microscopes and atomic force microscopes and their scientific images are captured and further processed by using different artistic techniques to convert them into artworks showcased for large audiences.
NanoArt is the expression of the New Technological Revolution reflecting the transition from Science to Art using Technology and could be for the 21st Century what Photography was for the 20th Century. Over the past two decades the ability to measure and manipulate matter at atomic and molecular scales has led to the discovery of novel materials and phenomena. These advances underlie the multidisciplinary areas known today as Nanotechnology. The responsible development and application of Nanotechnology could lead to create jobs and economic growth, to enhance national security, and to improve the quality of life. Some of the benefits would be cleaner manufacturing processes, stronger and lighter building materials, smaller and faster computers, and more powerful ways to detect and treat disease. NanoArt is aimed to raise the public awareness of Nanotechnology and its impact on our lives.
For updated information about the event, please check the event site at http://www.fundacionprincipedeasturias.org/ing/00/index.html.
To view Orfescu's work visit http://www.crisorfescu.com/ or www.absolutearts.com/nanoart

July 24, 2008

NanoArt K12 Program


The NanoArt K12 program has been launched by NanoArt21 in collaboration with The Nanotechnology Group. The purpose of this worldwide program is to support the education of the new generations of artists and scientists and to promote the art-science-technology intersections and NanoArt for a better youth development. Please read about NanoArt here.


nanoart21.org founded by artist and scientist Cris Orfescu (http://www.crisorfescu.com/) is providing 3 images of nano or microstructures for children and teens to convert them into works of art through any artistic technique. The electron micrographs depict graphite micro and nanoparticles.


All artworks will be posted on the NanoArt21 site, and the best works will be selected to be shown in physical galleries worldwide.


To read more on how to participate to this program, please visit the NanoArt K12 page.