It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Nano Assemblers 11a

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 9 2005 @ 07:56 AM

Hi Anyone there, AMENHOTEPI here..

I, know K E Drexler has written in his published work:' Engines of Creations '..about th development by governments and private business of: nanobots, molecular nano tec [MNT], nano-assemblers, nano-machines, and nano self replication..

..but i wondered if any of you had any interesting sources worth looking at for more in this area..especially: on self replicative bot and nano assemblers..thanks


[edit on 9-6-2005 by John bull 1]

posted on Jun, 9 2005 @ 09:34 AM
Currently nano assemblers are a bit of a taboo subject. Speaking with people peripherally involved in the field in the US apparently self assembling nano bots is a guaranteed funding proposal killer.

posted on Jun, 9 2005 @ 10:42 AM
I'm not sure if this is exactly what you are looking for, but I took a course in nanotechnology at my university last term. Here are the slides we used in class and here is the textbook we used.

posted on Jun, 9 2005 @ 11:17 AM
Most nano assembler reasearch is private now, both in funding and in research.

There is a very limited info out there because of the reasons Sugarlump mentioned.

If you come across any, please post it!

posted on Jun, 9 2005 @ 12:32 PM

..Quest Seeker ..AMENHOTEPI here..

thank for th interest..if i come across any more news i will pass on..its yours

..nice link..


posted on Jun, 9 2005 @ 01:21 PM
hi all,

Here are some links, it's more speculative and general but hey, you takes what you can get I guess.

Also, I haven't looked into it, but you may want to check out Japanese University websites, I don't know if they have english versions of these but when it comes to future and speculative sciences the Japanese tend to be way more open about it and also pretty hard core researchers.

So you may want to go that route.

Here are the links, again I'm not a scientist so don't know if this helps, but I can't think of anything smarmy to say about this thread so I may as well pitch in. 0nanotechnology

Happy hunting.


posted on Jun, 9 2005 @ 02:50 PM

Originally posted by Sugarlump
Currently nano assemblers are a bit of a taboo subject. Speaking with people peripherally involved in the field in the US apparently self assembling nano bots is a guaranteed funding proposal killer.

So, why is that? Please fill me in as I'm interested in this subject.

posted on Jun, 9 2005 @ 09:06 PM

..spiderj, AMENHOTEPI here..

..thanks for th interest in your posting.. th links seem good meat ..i will read them later..and also try some japanese sites too..there may be a conspiracy..!

.. In all cases, "Molecular Nanotechnology" that provides massively scalable and precise control of molecules needs to be distinguished from less advanced, present day nanoscale technologies such as nanoelectronics or the nanoparticles used in sunblocks and coatings. Further, self-replicating nanomachines or assemblers are unlikely to be the norm for molecular manufacturing. Molecular machine systems can be completely non-biological, and self-replicating assemblers are not necessary to achieve molecular manufacturing capabilities. As Drexler and Phoenix have shown in their Safe Exponential Manufacturing paper (2004 Nanotechnology 15 869-872), developing manufacturing systems that use self-replicating assemblers would be needlessly inefficient and complicated. The simpler, more efficient, and safer approach is to make nanoscale tools and put them together in factories big enough to make what is needed. People use tools to make more and better tools, from blacksmiths' tools to automated machinery. One schema that develops this idea is based on the convergent assembly architecture developed by Ralph Merkle (1997 Nanotechnology 8 18-22), where small parts are put together to form larger parts, starting with nanoscale blocks and progressing up the hierarchy to macroscopic systems. The machines in this would work like the conveyor belts and assembly robots in a factory, doing similar jobs. If you pulled one of these machines out of the system, it would pose no risk, and be as inert as a light bulb pulled from its socket.

..or; thesatirist,com
....Engines of Creation [ book ] introduces the power and possibilities of nanotechnology to the general reader. Drexler believes that nanotechnology—the ability to create molecular assemblers capable of constructing nearly anything in limitless quantity—will become viable sometime in the 21st century. Nanotechnology will have dramatic effects on medical technology (including reversing the aging process), the space program, and military technology. Drexler believes that if used wisely nanotechnology can bring about much higher living standards for everyone, and little impact on the environment. Drexler also discusses the great dangers of nanotechnology, and hopes that the “leading force” in nanotechnology will introduce it into the world in such a way that it will not fall into the hands of a totalitarian power. (Drexler believes that molecular assemblers are more dangerous even than nuclear weapons). On balance, Drexler sounds a hopeful note. He outlines various procedures and institutions that could be used to help soften the shock of assembler’s unveiling to the world.
Drexler divides his book into three parts. Part One, The Foundations of Foresight, explains the current state of nanotechnology, and so serves as a basis of his later predictions.
Part Two, Profiles of the Possible, offers predictions of various uses of assemblers, including: industrial technology to create anything (including food) in abundance (perhaps making much of the workforce redundant); artificial technology, to create computers that are more intelligent than human beings in every sense of the word; space exploration, to create spacecraft capable of indefinite stays in space, and harnessing the vast material resources of space, and creating true space colonies; and medical technology, to create assemblers capable of sailing through our capillaries to heal diseased organs, or even to replace all our old cells, and allow us to live healthy lives for hundreds of years. Drexler counters some of his dramatic claims by pointing out that even for assemblers physical limits will still obtain; that not anything is possible.

on the feasibility and applications of nanotechnology, then the age of assemblers would mark perhaps the greatest of all scientific breakthroughs, but yet perhaps the most destructive of man. More than merely the material benefits assemblers could bring, they could make much of the human race “obsolete” from a production perspective, thereby inaugurating a time of undue stress on the social order. Assemblers would prove to be an exceptionally difficult technology to control, and one fears that the techology would eventually fall into the wrong hands.
But in assessing the future it is important to keep in mind that history is incremental, that one day follows the next, and that checks and balances do exist; that new equilibriums are often achieved.


by K. Eric Drexler
Synopsis By Dan Geddes


[edit on 9-6-2005 by AMENHOTEPI]

posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 12:14 AM

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by Sugarlump
Currently nano assemblers are a bit of a taboo subject. Speaking with people peripherally involved in the field in the US apparently self assembling nano bots is a guaranteed funding proposal killer.

So, why is that? Please fill me in as I'm interested in this subject.

There are many reasons why that is, I'll try to summerize as I don't have the time right now.

A. It's a Distant Technological possiblity and any company risks alot by trying to develop this technology. Hell even Chriton can't seem to get a digital version of these things working for his upcoming movie called Prey. EG They are very hard to build and even simulate accurately as laid out by K Erik Drexler and Feynman.

B. It's a VERY Disruptive Technology and would send shockwaves throughout the entire economy, not a single person on this planet will be able to escape these ripples.

C. They carry alot of risk, any Venture Capitolists and the Feds remember all too well the GMO fiasco.

Here are some links for all ya'll to read up on

All Images below are clickable links...

Engines of Creation

These two links should be all you need

[edit on 10-6-2005 by sardion2000]

posted on Nov, 10 2007 @ 05:07 AM
for those interested in Nano tech, here is an interesting clip

posted on Nov, 10 2007 @ 06:48 PM
Unbelievable! That would be an incredible invention, but wow, the cost, startup, and implementation of such a technology would take a HUGE amount of resources. I suppose though, after you build one or two of these, they could technically just rebuild themselves.

That would be a programming nightmare though. It's gonna take some really really quick conventional complex computers to make work. I'd say this is all well beyond our current realm of reality. Fifty years? Strong possibility.

posted on Nov, 10 2007 @ 07:48 PM
The natural progression of the clip above is actually speaking of possible replicator technology like on star trek.

Imagine if each element of a computer could have a modular programmed nano formula. They are linked together. Then just as an example the nanos would build copper, silicon, plastic, and all the other needed pieces. They would be moved and stacked as needed based on the diagram for each sub module of the unit being assembled. Then hit a button and you have a replicator.

Earl Grey Tea anyone

top topics


log in