Nobel Prize for Productive Nanosystem Research

by Eric Drexler on 2009/10/07

The 2009 chemistry Nobel Prize has been awarded to Venkatraman Ramakrishnan, Thomas Steitz and Ada Yonath for their studies of the structure and function of programmable nanoscale manufacturing systems. See news story here, and videos of the machines in action here.

{ 7 comments… read them below or add one }

Miguel October 9, 2009 at 9:20 am UTC

It is good to hear that, nanotechnology is finally receiving the respect it deserves in the scientific community.

Patrick October 10, 2009 at 4:38 pm UTC

Could you explain how the 09 NP for Chemistry relates to programmable nanoscale manufacturing systems?

Miguel October 11, 2009 at 8:12 am UTC

It seems Patrick has a very inaccurate understanding of programmable nanoscale manufacturing systems. Biological systems are also a type of nanotechnology.

Eric Drexler October 11, 2009 at 9:51 pm UTC

Miguel — Actually, the prize was given, not for nanotechnology, but for work in molecular biology, a biological nanoscience. Ribosomes are, however, essential tools in large areas of bionanotechnology.

I find it interesting that ribosomes can make a wide range of nonbiological products. They can synthesize not only polypeptides with nonbiological amino acids, but polypeptoids and polyesters, too, with usual sort of programmable control in all cases. I commented on the virtues of polypeptoids in my post on Peptoids at the Molecular Foundry.

Miguel October 11, 2009 at 10:36 pm UTC

Eric — Thank you for your contribution. I did understand that the prize was not given for “nanotechnology” in the narrow usage of the term. That’s why I corrected Patrick, but I made a mistake of calling his understanding innacurate, in fact it was accurate in the wrong way, in the sense it showed a very limited view of what nanotechnology is. So it was not a matter of inaccuracy but of inadequate understanding.

I think nanotechnology could employ a narrow definition, as the one you are using for your answer to my post, and another broader definition that would include molecular biology. But I understand it can cause misunderstandings and confusion to use the broad definition.

Eric Drexler October 14, 2009 at 7:30 pm UTC

Miguel – Yes, and I had intended to direct my comment to Patrick. Thanks for saying more.

Miguel October 14, 2009 at 11:48 pm UTC

[Comment removed. Please note the policy: “criticize the idea, not the person.” BTW, Miguel, please try to find a way to forgive my error in having pasted the wrong name in my response.]

{ 1 trackback }

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: