Talk:Nanotechnology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.7 / Vital / Supplemental
WikiProject icon This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
Taskforce icon
This article has been selected for Version 0.7 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia.


The technology[edit]

How is it possible to create the nano molecules and structures? For example,how can we produce c60 in it's solid form, or how are nano tubes produced? --Reza M. Namin (talk) 05:57, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Try the Reference Desk. Alternatively, there are some details about this on Buckminsterfullerene and Carbon nanotube i think. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 11:43, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

While I do not propose any changes to the article as is, I would welcome an "understandable to the common man" pre-amble that actually explains what Nanotechnology is to those who don't have science degrees. This is an Encyclopedia for the normal person, not a textbook or scientific paper. I am a well educated and academic person working in a different field, and I cannot really glean any usable material here for my own understanding. This article has lost me by the end of the second sentence and as such fails totally to fulfil its purpose. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.180.214.134 (talk) 19:55, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps I have not explained mySELF very well there. Let's say this article was about not Nanotechnology, but about Music. This is how it would read.....

"Music is the deliberate organisation of air vibrations which fall generally into the spectrum that can be perceived by the human ear, namely between 30hz to 21 khz. The majority of Western music is formed of 12 established frequencies and multiples thereof. Different frequency sets exist in Eastern and African cultures. Music is created using acoustic, electric and electronic resonators...ete etc etc."

All basically true, yet totally inappropriate in the context of an Explanation. This (like the Nano Tech article) is an supposedly expert analysis. I am relying on you good Wikipedians to provide me with information I can use and understand. That DOES develop and lead me further into the subject. Please look at Encyclo Britannica's first line on Nanotech which is focussed, understandable and entirely more suitable. Many Thanks. My Name is Andy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.180.214.134 (talk) 07:39, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Key to the future[edit]

Regarding this edit (which I have just reverted). I don't much care for the "key to the future" phrase either but removing it renders the whole passage meaningless. Fastener technology, for instance, has many potential uses, but that has not meant that governments have seen fit to invest billions in it. Billions are being invested in nanotechnology because of its potential importance to the future of industry, and hence to the economies of the countries doing the investing, to say nothing of the possible military applications. The edit I reverted had completely lost this point. SpinningSpark 11:23, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

OK, then we should mention industry, economy and/or military. That point is also missing as is, unless we assume that's all the future holds. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:47, March 16, 2013 (UTC)
There's a broad range of motivations behind government funding of nanotech research (some countries see an opportunity to join the forefront of scientific discovery, others are focused on nanomedicine, and still others on the potential for social transformation through better technology). So I put “industrial and military” in parentheses -- still less vague than "key" and avoids the inaccuracy of stating that there are only two government motivations. Cibits (talk) 00:18, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Error and misleading description in first sentence![edit]

"Nanotechnology (sometimes shortened to "nanotech") is the manipulation of matter on an atomic and molecular scale". Nope this is wrong, nanotechnology is about the nanoscale, you know things measured conveniently in nm, sure at the lower end of this scale it begins to look like the molecular scale and at fractions of nm the atomic scale but for a couple of orders of magnitude, say 10-300nm it is still nanotechnology but it isn't definitely not atomic and only tenuously molecular scale, in fact, continuum mechanics rule the roost here (albeit with different material properties).

This needs fixing! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.71.104.35 (talk) 00:29, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

I added "supramolecular" to the sentence. The isn't a exact definition for nanotechnology that's universally accepted, but I agree that the supramolecular scale should definitely be included. Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 22:06, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 January 2014[edit]

197.243.48.20 (talk) 00:39, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Note: No request was made. --ElHef (Meep?) 01:10, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 February 2014[edit]

Subject: You have an error on [1]

Hey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanotechnology,

I noticed you have an error on this URL, [2]. The link with the anchor text [3] is pointing to a dead page.

If you want, I found another, similar page that you can replace that link with. You can find it here "http://techwaq.com/nanotechnology-cosmetics/" the page is even good enough for Wikipedia to link to it.

Keep up the good work!

Cheers,

[Steven Walker]

Stevenwalker2014 (talk) 08:09, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Not done:{{U|Technical 13}} (tec) 19:50, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Subject: You have an error on [4]

Hey [5],

I noticed you have an error on this URL, [6]. The link with the anchor text [7] is pointing to a dead page.

If you want, I found another, similar page that you can replace that link with. You can find it here[8] the page is even good enough for Wikipedia to link to it.

Keep up the good work!

Cheers,

[Steven Walker]

Stevenwalker2014 (talk) 11:21, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. This appears to be a request from some kind of (semi)-automated system, and I can't understand what the requester is asking to be changed. Please clarify your request which your end result will be best achieved with a clear please change "this text" to "this other text" based on th(is|ese) reliable source(s):
  • Source 1
  • Source 2
  • ...

Thank you for your interest in editing the English Wikipedia. — {{U|Technical 13}} (tec) 19:53, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

The editor is requesting a change in the "Top-down approach" subsection of replacing the url http://www.nano.gov/html/facts/appsprod.html (which is a deadlink) with http://techwaq.com/nanotechnology-cosmetics/. Unfortunately, the suggested link is a spammy site about cosmetics and is not suitable for verifying a statement about giant magnetoresistance-based hard drives. SpinningSpark 09:54, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Nanotech and IP[edit]

Consider adding a small section covering the current debate about nanotechnology and IP. See for example: http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/2013/01/nanotechnology-patent-thicket-jungle-graphene-nanotubes

--Juliadryf (talk) 12:50, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

@Juliadryf: Did you want to edit the article yourself? I have now confirmed your account so that you are able to edit semi-protected articles. SpinningSpark 15:23, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 March 2014[edit]

Concrete is the most widely manufactured construction material. The addition of carbon nanofibres to concrete has many advantages in terms of mechanical and electrical properties (e.g. higher strength and higher Young’s modulus) and self-monitoring behavior due to the high tensile strength and high conductivity. Mullapudi [1]used the pulse velocity method to characterize the properties of concrete containing carbon nanofibres. The test results indicate that the compressive strength and percentage reduction in electrical resistance while loading concrete containing carbon nanofibres differ from those of plain concrete. A reasonable concentration of carbon nanofibres need to be determined for use in concrete, which not only enhances compressive strength, but also improves the electrical properties required for strain monitoring, damage evaluation and self-health monitoring of concrete. Samjoe8 (talk) 17:09, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. — {{U|Technical 13}} (tec) 18:05, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Nanobots Rabotos[edit]

Sehr geherrte Damen und Herren

hiermit teile Ich Ihnen mit das Ich so genante Nanobots im Koerper habe Wollte sie fragen wie steuert man diese ? Wie bekommt man die wieder aus dem Korperherraus ? Uber mir meine Nachbarn haben Sie in meinem Koerper rein gemacht. Weiss was man machen kann. Die Steuern diese übers Handy, habe keine ahnung davon. Ich werde seit ca 5000 Stunden Elektronisch vergewaltigt kann nix da gegen tuen finde kein handy app dazu. Brauche hielfe oder einen Ratschlag. Kontacktieren Sie mich unter der Rufnummer 01778534036 M.Scheulen — Preceding unsigned comment added by PsychoMg (talkcontribs) 13:08, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

  1. ^ Mullapudi, T.R.S., Gao, D., and Ayoub, A.S., “Nondestructive Evaluation of Carbon-Nanofiber Concrete,” Magazine of Concrete Research, ICE, V. 65 (18), 2013, pp. 1081-1091. http://www.icevirtuallibrary.com/content/article/10.1680/macr.12.00187;jsessionid=1mejdtp8p7j4n.x-telford-live-01