|
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
 Posted - 05/05/2006 : 11:58:42
|
Don't know where this belongs. Like most things in the world, I don't know a thing about it, and I don't understand it so I won't be in on the discussion anytime soon. Wondered if anyone here thought this was something worth talking about.
http://nano.foe.org.au/
|
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 05/05/2006 : 12:46:34 [Permalink]
|
I don't know much about this stuff, either.
Though I am concerned that the Friends of the Earth may end up getting things wrong, it does seem to me that nanotechnology does need careful, rational scientific oversight. From what I understand, health and environmental side effects, even the inhalation of fine particles, haven't been considered by some researchers, who naturally tend instead to focus on their intended applications.
Wikipedia's article on nanotechnology speaks to some perceived potential risks:quote:
Potential risks
For the near-term, critics of nanotechnology point to the potential toxicity of new classes of nanosubstances that could adversely affect the stability of cell membranes or disturb the immune system when inhaled, digested or absorbed through the skin. Objective risk assessment can profit from the bulk of experience with long-known microscopic materials like carbon soot or asbestos fibres. Nanoparticles in the environment could potentially accumulate in the food chain. [3]
An often cited worst-case scenario is "grey goo", a hypothetical substance into which the surface objects of the earth might be transformed by self-replicating nanobots running amok.(Due to recent suggestions, this case has been proven as "impossible".)
Societal risks from the use of nanotechnology have also been raised, such as hypothetical nanotech weapons (e.g. a nanomachine which consumed the rubber in tires would quickly disable many vehicles), and in the creation of undetectable surveillance capabilities.
Now, I hope someone more expert on this subject than you and I, Gorgo, will interject some comments.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
 |
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 05/05/2006 : 12:49:18 [Permalink]
|
Basically nanotech is all about creating new molocules which behave in a predicatable manner when a certain condition is met. Like all new molocules these nanoparticals react with the environment and are not all inert, therefor they need regulation so that they are treated as potential toxins until studied properly.
Edit: Halfmooner by a nose. |
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
| Edited by - BigPapaSmurf on 05/05/2006 12:50:07 |
|
|
|
dglas
Skeptic Friend
Canada
397 Posts |
Posted - 05/05/2006 : 14:02:48 [Permalink]
|
| It strikes me that it is really the self-replicating part that is scarey since that seems to be the point at which we can quickly lose control of its application. A blanket prohibition of self-replication seems a sensible minimal condition for work until we understand things a whole lot better. |
--------------------------------------------------
- dglas (In the hell of 1000 unresolved subplots...)
--------------------------------------------------
The Presupposition of Intrinsic Evil
+ A Self-Justificatory Framework
= The "Heart of Darkness"
--------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
