160
submitted 2 months ago by guyrocket@kbin.social to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

Most are probably too young to remember but nanotechnology was supposed to be the most super amazing thing ever.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Zachariah@lemmy.world 181 points 2 months ago

It’s still here, but you aren’t seeing it because it’s really small.

[-] MissJinx@lemmy.world 60 points 2 months ago
[-] Sunny@slrpnk.net 4 points 2 months ago

God damn that got me good!

[-] Thcdenton@lemmy.world 16 points 2 months ago
[-] umbrella@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 months ago

omg this gif is hilarious

[-] Goun@lemmy.ml 15 points 2 months ago

It wasn't a big deal after all

[-] Crackhappy@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

That's exactly what my ex wife said.

[-] vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone 89 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

It split into two.

The “very small scale structure manufacturing” part is alive and kicking. You are holding about a trillion perfect nanoscale devices in the palm of your hand right now.

The “we will make tiny robots that live in your body and fix you” club was always selling snake oil-and they knew it. The technology they were pushing just does not work at atmosphere temperature and pressure and immersed in oxidizing not quite neutral pH fluid.

Thankfully, there a much better way to make tiny machines that live in your body. That’s making/adapting/causing others to make proteins that do what you need them to do. Proteins are essentially bio-robots that can manipulate their surrounding by changes in their folds (conformation), for example by exposing binding sites in reaction to something binding to another binding site.

TLDR: nanotech is one of the largest industries in the planet. A lot of promises were made by idiots in the nineties, but biotech, another huge industry, has picked up the slack very well.

[-] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 6 points 2 months ago

And if we count protein research as nanotech, afaik folding research is having its heyday.

[-] Speculater@lemmy.world 62 points 2 months ago

It's used in medicine, meta materials, and physics everyday.

[-] henfredemars@infosec.pub 51 points 2 months ago

This. You just don’t hear the word anymore. For example, it was instrumental in producing the COVID-19 vaccine.

[-] Crackhappy@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

The reason pencils work as well as they do is because of the way they are constructed, of nanomaterials.

[-] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 14 points 2 months ago

Graphite is now a nano material?

[-] Crackhappy@lemmy.world 28 points 2 months ago

Well it's not suddenly a nano material. It's always been one. We are still exploring it.

[-] geekwithsoul@lemm.ee 11 points 2 months ago

Much like one of the ways stained glass was colored in the medieval period involved adding materials to the glass that acted as nano materials. For example this one particular shade of red needed gold.

[-] Lemvi 50 points 2 months ago

it didn't disappear, just got to small for you to see 😉

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] intensely_human@lemm.ee 37 points 2 months ago

It got smaller and smaller until we lost track of it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] stoy@lemmy.zip 36 points 2 months ago

It is still around, only the buzz around it died

[-] Fondots@lemmy.world 29 points 2 months ago

I'm no nanotech scientist, so I won't pretend I know all of the ins and outs here, but I'm sure when most people think about nanotechnology, they're probably picturing something like the later generation iron man suit from the marvel movies made up of billions of tiny nanobots that can reconfigure themselves and such. If such things will ever be possible, they're still a long way off

I have a hunch you probably have some visions in your head of tiny robots similar in size to a red blood cell swimming around in someone's blood stream, that seemed like a trope that was used by a few different sci Fi series when I was growing up, and certainly the kind of thing I personally picture when I think of nanobots. Problem is, at the nano scale, those kinds of things are kind of huge, a blood cell is a few thousand nanometers across. Most of what we're doing with nanotechnology is just a handful of nanometers in size, at the scale of a few molecules or even atoms. Eventually we may be able to put some of those parts together to make tiny robots and computers and such, but right now we're still kind of figuring out how to make the nuts and bolts and gears and such to make those bots out of.

There's also a lot of nanotech research that you may not really think of as technology but more as something like material science or chemistry. Any time you hear about new developments with carbon nanotubes or graphene, that's nanotechnology. Practical applications for stuff like that are still mostly works in progress, we're probably years, decades, maybe even centuries out before some of those things really come into their own, but when we do work out the bugs, they will absolutely be revolutionary.

But it's not all far future stuff, it's almost guaranteed that you have used and maybe even have in your home or on your person right now something that makes use of nanotech in some way. One example I saw mentioned a lot is sunscreen, there's a lot of sunblock that makes use of zinc oxide and/or titanium dioxide nanoparticles, clothing may contain nanoparticles to help with things like waterproofing, reducing odor, etc. there's lots of mundane nanotech that you're probably already taking advantage of.

[-] Sethayy@sh.itjust.works 10 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

As a nano engineer, youre 100% right - with the added slowdowns of safety research. Many of these particles are entirely different beasts on a nanoscale, an example commonly used is microscopic copper is just copper, nanoscopic will have you dead within the hour if inhaled (dont quote my timeframe on that one).

That being said many cool materials are still coming out, just aren't yet at that commercialized availability level yet.

For example graphene has the potential to replace copper -at least in high performance applications- cause its got some fucked levels of conductivity

Edit for some more examples cause I'm a nerd about this stuff:

Carbon nanotubes make vantablack, the material that can absorb 99.9% of visible light (not that exciting beyond a party trick commercially, but in areas trying to minimize electromagnetic noise this is revolutionary).

Silver nanoparticles have been shown to have passive disinfectant properties, leading to the possibility of a cloth that you could run dirty water through and make it drinkable.

And my favorite being we've already created the carbon based structures (can't recall if it was nanotubes specifically) with theoretically high enough tensile strength that if made a couple kilometers long could be used to lasso an asteroid and create a space elavator

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 months ago

About the space elevator thing, even with mystical materials, it'd need to be 110.5km long with a counterweight. Assuming it could work at all on Earth (it can't, but let's assume it can) the amount of material required would be insane. I can't find where anyone has calculated the mass of carbon nanotubes needed, but I'm sure it's out there.

Assuming the material issue is solved somehow though, it's still going through the atmosphere. How does it handle those forces? It's untenable to have on Earth. It's possible on the moon, which would also require much less material since it has less mass.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[-] CanadaPlus 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Nanotubes and graphene themselves had a deep hype cycle. They're super strong... as long as they're atomically perfect. The second bit just kind of got left out of the popsci stuff circa-2009.

The biggest thing about technology nobody talks about is manufacturing. The physics was there to design a modern GPU in WWII, it's just that reliably making a thing with few-hundred-atom switches starting with 1940's tools is a very hard problem. The correct approach to do so wasn't even clear until the 70's or so, and then it took many decades of finetuning and building up ever larger and more expensive fabs that can print features that small in environments that perfect.

There's no clear way to place individual atoms of a large object at reasonable price right now. Maybe some kind of biotech will make it possible eventually, or just scaling up current atomic manipulation techniques a lot, but for now CNTs are but high-tech asbestos.

[-] colonial@lemmy.world 25 points 2 months ago

I mean... you're surrounded by trillions of perfect nanotech devices. They're called MOSFETs, and they make literally the entire modern world go round.

[-] CanadaPlus 22 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I'm not sure which era you're talking about exactly. Graphene and carbon nanotubes can't currently be made both big and perfect, and are lame when imperfect. Nanoscopic robots have problems with sticking together and jumping around due to brownian forces, and also are just very hard to build. Chemical-based robotics has been a crapshoot because quantum chemistry is hard. The last one has been tackled with machine learning pretty well recently, where natural biological analogues exist.

As a result, about as far as we've gotten is nanoscopically fine dust. It has uses, but it's only a technology the same way pea gravel is. It's looking like a lot of the stuff nanobots were supposed to do is going to fall to biotech instead.

[-] PresidentCamacho@lemm.ee 6 points 2 months ago

Love the phrase "quantum chemistry is hard" because it makes it sound as if it's difficult for the average person, but I can only imagine it means that the smartest people alive are struggling with it haha.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] hperrin@lemmy.world 21 points 2 months ago

It became normal and normal is boring.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] shirro@aussie.zone 19 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Micro-electro mechanical systems (MEMS) are extremely successful. You have them in your phone and lots of other devices. It turns out semiconductor manufacturing techniques could be leveraged to make some useful devices but that is about it. There is obviously a lot happening at these scales in biology, semiconductors, materials science etc but the grey goop of nanobots turned out to be a fantasy based on extrapolations that don't seem to hold up well with physical materials thankfully. One less thing to worry about. Now we only have climate change, pathogens, war etc. Hopefully the machine learning bubble will blow over in a similar fashion, genuinely revolutionary in some areas but increasingly difficult/uneconomical to scale into others.

[-] LazaroFilm@lemmy.world 19 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

The sophon are stopping nanotechnology from making progress #3bodyproblem

[-] Harbinger01173430@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

Stop us harder, san-ti. 🥵

[-] starman@programming.dev 18 points 2 months ago

nanotechnology was supposed to be the most super amazing thing ever.

Like blockchain, 3d-printing, cloud and machine learning?

[-] Kuvwert@lemm.ee 15 points 2 months ago

I feel like passionately arguing with you about 3 of your 4 examples

[-] AAA@feddit.de 13 points 2 months ago

It would be possible to argue about all of them, as each has genuine use cases. Just not to the extend they were praised during the hype.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Bell@lemmy.world 16 points 2 months ago

Totally replaced by the most super amazing AI ever

[-] tias@discuss.tchncs.de 14 points 2 months ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Resol@lemmy.world 14 points 2 months ago

It's too small to be used by the average human being, which is why you don't see it anymore.

[-] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 5 points 2 months ago

It's also too small to be seen by the average human.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] stewie3128@lemmy.ml 13 points 2 months ago

While we're at it, how about cybernetics, too?

[-] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 25 points 2 months ago
[-] MonkderDritte@feddit.de 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

At least we don't need Neuropozyne (Deus Ex).

Btw, what happened with the nanotubes-coated contacts that neurons are all too happy to connect to?

[-] TheOneCurly@lemm.ee 22 points 2 months ago

Prostetics have gotten extremely advanced in the last 20 years. People are controlling and getting real feedback from replacement limbs.

[-] snooggums@midwest.social 10 points 2 months ago

Yeah, both nanotech and cybernetics are everyday things. Still very expensive, but both have mostly reached enough milestones that they go by whatever their more specific puposes are. Like prothetics with feedback aren't called cybernetics because cybernetics is too broad a term.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Jimmycakes@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago

I heard Bill gates installed it in covid vaccine for like 2 years straight.

[-] nightwatch_admin@feddit.nl 10 points 2 months ago

For every vial, someone had to click next next finish, such an evil overlord

[-] z00s@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

They should invent microscopic IT guys to do that automatically

[-] aramus@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago

I'm studying nano science right now, I think it still exists. And if it does it's still a super amazing thing.

[-] downpunxx@fedia.io 9 points 2 months ago

It 'asent dissapeared guvn'ah, it's jus very small innit

[-] thericcer@reddthat.com 4 points 2 months ago

MEMS have done wonders

[-] BuddyTheBeefalo@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 months ago
[-] Etterra@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

It's old and common enough to not be noteworthy on its own. You do still hear about it sometimes, but only in the context of a new innovation or application. Even then it's usually subcategorized.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 17 Apr 2024
160 points (94.9% liked)

Asklemmy

42601 readers
1138 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS