Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 Politics
 Nanotechnology Policy?
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  

Gorgo
SFN Die Hard

USA
5310 Posts

Posted - 05/05/2006 :  11:58:42  Show Profile Send Gorgo a Private Message
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]  Show Profile Send HalfMooner a Private Message
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.
Go to Top of Page

BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard

3192 Posts

Posted - 05/05/2006 :  12:49:18   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send BigPapaSmurf a Private Message
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
Go to Top of Page

dglas
Skeptic Friend

Canada
397 Posts

Posted - 05/05/2006 :  14:02:48   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send dglas a Private Message
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"
--------------------------------------------------
Go to Top of Page
  Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.06 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000