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

  • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I’m not sure which era you’re talking about exactly. Graphene and carbon nanotubes can’t 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
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 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.

      • fsxylo@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Some Stephen Hawking level intellect is currently in a basement acting like an angry Jim Carrey because his math just chooses not to work.

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I mean, most of the magical uses haven’t materialised. Computers are better, that’s about it. It has a few other commercial applications, but they’re indistinguishable from normal chemistry from a laymen’s perspective.

        • hperrin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          That highly depends on what you mean by “nanotechnology”. There are tons of advancements in medicine that use what most people would consider to be nanotechnology. As well as material science, robotics, energy production and storage, and telecommunications, to name a few.

            • hperrin@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              I mean how uninformed of a layman are we talking about? Do they know the difference between a molecule and a micelle?

  • colonial@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 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.

    • henfredemars@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

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

          • geekwithsoul@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 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.

  • shirro@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 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.

  • aramus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 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.