Talk:Nanosensor

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Technology (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 


Previous Discussions[edit]

I put in the "attention" because the article is speculation on something that "may exist in the future." Also, there are no references available to check on the facts presented.

Joe 1/2/2006

I second the "attention" status--according to the glutamic acid article, a team at Stanford has already developed a nanosensor, therefore seeming to make it more than just speculation. I admittedly am not conversant with this topic, but the two articles contradict each other.Muskrat Collective 14:27, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Updated the tag to "Today". Nanonsensors exist/will exist (maybe not under this name) and deserve a much better article. Hope someone will pick that up. Dilane 07:13, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

What exactly is a nanosensor?[edit]

The definitions and examples given in this article are hardly satisfying. This may be due to a misunderstanding on my part of what exactly defines a nanosensor, so I'm hoping this generates discussion on this matter.

First 2 sentences: "Nanosensors are any biological, chemical, or physical sensory points used to convey information about nanoparticles to the macroscopic world. Though humans have not yet been able to synthesize nanosensors, predictions for their use mainly include various medicinal purposes and as gateways to building other nanoproducts, such as computer chips that work at the nanoscale and nanorobots."

Firstly, nanoparticles specifically refer to small, particulate clusters of molecules. Individual molecules are not nanoparticles. My understanding was that nanosensors are nano-sized detectors (the nano- prefix is given due to the size of the device, and not necessarily the analyte) that are often used to detect small quantities of analyte, such as the amounts found in an individual cell. As such, nanosensors have to be extremely sensitive, often down to the single-molecule level. Their small size allows nanosensors to detect analytes that are localized to a small volume.

Secondly, examples are given later in the article of supposed artificial nanosensors already in existence. This contradicts the statement that humans haven't been able to synthesize nanosensors.

The other problem I have with this article are the examples. The sense of smell should not count as a nanosensor. Plenty of artificial devices already exist that can, for example, "sniff" the air for all types of different analytes. This is hardly unique/new/distinct. Our noses detect molecules (which aren't nanoparticles) but noses are still macroscopic. I guess you could argue that the individual chemoreceptors in our olfactory cells function as biological nanosensors. The sense of smell as a whole, though, should not count.

Tiny photosensitive chips should also not count as nanosensors. There's nothing distinct about them other than that they are tiny. I think we should add an extra criterion for determining whether something constitutes a nanosensor: that the small size of the detector is a necessary property exploited in the detection of its analyte. By this criterion, tiny photosensitive chips would not be nanosensors because a bigger chip could accomplish the same task. However, the nanotube-based detectors of gases does qualify because the size and unique properties of the nanotubes are a necessary component of the detection system. By this definition, even the olfactory chemoreceptors of our noses wouldn't count, because a hypothetical macroscopic version could accomplish the same task.

142.103.207.10 22:24, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Nanosensor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Question? Archived sources still need to be checked

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:50, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Nanosensor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Question? Archived sources still need to be checked

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:25, 28 February 2016 (UTC)