New nanoparticle self-assembly routes “more like nature”

Here’s the latest on new techniques in nanoparticle self-assembly as discovered by researchers from the US Department of Energy:

“We’ve demonstrated a simple yet versatile approach to precisely controlling the spatial distribution of readily available nanoparticles over multiple length scales, ranging from the nano to the macro,” says Ting Xu, a polymer scientist who led this project and who holds joint appointments with Berkeley Lab’s Materials Sciences Division and the University of California, Berkeley’s Departments of Materials Sciences and Engineering, and Chemistry. “Our technique can be used on a wide variety of nanoparticle and should open new routes to the fabrication of nanoparticle-based devices including highly efficient systems for the generation and storage of solar energy.”

Well, that’s the sales pitch out of the way. The thing that caught my eye about this particular piece, though, was this paragraph:

“Bring together the right basic components — nanoparticles, polymers and small molecules — stimulate the mix with a combination of heat, light or some other factors, and these components will assemble into sophisticated structures or patterns,” says Xu. “It is not dissimilar from how nature does it.

Now, think back to that video of DNA and RNA synthesising proteins like tiny little machinesas we get closer and closer to mastering matter at an atomic level, will the line between “life” and “machines” become increasingly meaningless?

Underground economics

Gaza Strip smuggling tunnelHere’s some fresh food for thought via the perpetually reliable BLDGBLOG, in the form of a report (and photoessay) on the black economy of the Gaza strip, which hinges on the many tunnels that run beneath the border:

If Gaza runs off a tunnel economy, Rafah is its tunnel town. In Najma Square, in the center of Rafah, the fruits of tunnel labor meet their first customers. Encircling the square are tables of TV sets, fans, blenders and generators; stalls packed with refrigerators, washing machines and ovens — and this is just the electrical side of town. Moving west toward the border, you see more goods: boxes of cigarettes, giant sacks of potato chips and sacks of cement. Then you pass the warehouses that sell the tools used to physically shape the tunnel industry: shovels, rope, pulleys and electrical cords, plus pickaxes, hammers, nuts, bolts and screws in all sizes. The industry of making the tunnels is a booming business on its own.

It’s not an especially science fictional story, at least at first glance – what could be less futuristic than hand-dug tunnels in the desert soil, and their freight of minor luxuries? [Image by Richard Mosse, from Time magazine; all rights reserved]

But think again: the tunnels are a result of a community placed under extreme economic isolation, a combination of the entrepreneurial spirit and the drive for survival. The risks, as documented in the article, are great – the tunnels are not only illegal, but dangerous – but the presence of the border makes them essential, inevitable. Ingenuity and desperation can defeat a physical border; history makes that very plain.

But this is all taking place in a world where goods are physically instantiated before being transported to the end user. Flash forward a decade or two (maybe less) to a world where fabrication and rapid prototyping technologies are as widespread as computers are now. How will nation-states contain the flow of goods across borders when the goods are no longer physical, when complete designs for contraband items can be emailed into a restricted zone, encoded by steganography into some innocuous image macro or spam leaflet?

Networks nullify geography… OK, so you won’t be able to fabricate food, but you’ll be able to fabricate weapons to attack those who prevent food from getting to you, and once you’re hungry enough that’ll seem like the best idea you ever had. End result? Physical blockades of other nation-states will become self-defeating; the very technologies that have enabled your initial superiority will oblige you to concede certain freedoms to those you have suppressed, because it will be easier and safer (and, hopefully, more politically acceptable) than the alternative. You can’t pull the ladder of technology up behind you as you climb.

Worlds enough, and time: NASA commitee says Mars too costly, asteroids more plausible

MarsEven someone who struggles as badly with their personal finances as myself would be hard pressed not to realise that NASA finds it hard to balance its lofty ambitions with the number of greenbacks in the jar on the mantelpiece. Now the Agency’s recently-appointed committee is saying the same thing in plain language: the money for a Mars mission just isn’t there, but more realistic goals like jaunts to asteroids and the Lagrange points can and should be followed up.[image by jasonb42882]

Now, I’d like to see manned Mars missions happen in my lifetime (as I’ve made plain here a number of times), but I’d rather that the planet’s biggest player in the space game got the maximum bang for its diminishing buck. As things stand now, everyone else follows where NASA leads, and while that won’t be the case for ever (or even for long, if you want to be a pessimistic realist about it), and I’d rather see them pushing the envelope steadily than trying to blast heroically through it. Watch the private space companies, as Brenda suggested the other day; those incremental baby steps soon start adding up.

And after all, there’s plenty of interesting stuff to do that doesn’t require a jag all the way to Mars. As the committee’s report points out, asteroids are easier to get to, and there’s still plenty they can teach us. Plus there are resources to be had; maybe NASA could balance the books a bit by slinging some or all of an asteroid back to Earth? A big lump of ice and minerals in close proximity to the home planet is the sort of thing a lot of the smaller fry would pay for a piece of, and it would be a handy thing to have in inventory for your own future works at the top of the gravity well (and beyond). And then there’s the the Lagrange points… depending on your focus, you could either do some good science out there, or get all Ben Bova on our asses with hotels and heavy industry.

Thinking pragmatically, the committee are right: Mars can wait, not just for NASA but for everyone. We should go, yeah, but we should go when we’re ready and able. As this rather charming infographic at BoingBoing shows, our success rate has been improving ever since we started trying to reach the Red Planet… but by trying to punch above our current weight, maybe we’re missing out on flooring some more manageable targets closer to home.

Cyberstyle: military-spec wrist-mounted keyboard

Because I’ve had a busy weekend (and because I’m the ed-in-chief, and because I can), I’m going to kick the week off with a blatant no-context-necessary tech-geek “I want one of those!” post. No, it’s not a Barnes & Noble Nook (though if anyone would like to send me one of those, I promise to be extremely grateful!) – it’s the iKey AK-39 wrist-mounted keyboard, as flagged up at grinding.be last week.

iKey AK-39 wrist-mounted keyboard

Thinking about it, I’m kinda dating myself by admitting to that lust; a wrist-mounted keyboard is very much a cyberpunk1.0 fetish, a desire from someone who grew up around computers as clunky chunky beige boxes with frustrating limits on functionality, portability and availability. In less than half a decade, the physical keyboard will probably be a complete anachronism for any device with sufficient gee-whiz to be both desirable and useful. I know this intellectually, but kids growing up now know it instinctively. This isn’t your father’s Kansas, Toto. Insert further mangled “culture shock is no longer something that happens to other people now that I’m in my thirties” aphorisms here.

Another (shorter) changing-fashions point – isn’t it high time that the fad for branding products or businesses by grafting a lower-case ‘i’ onto the start of another word went somewhere and died quietly?