It's easy to think technological progress follows an incremental and predictable path -- that research leads to development, then to commercialization and finally to the consumer.
Take a trip to a desert in spring and you'll see evidence of a different model for growth. One day the landscape is dry and bleak, and the next it explodes into plants and flowers. Years of invisible preparation have been taking place and the result is a change so swift and complete that the landscape becomes an entirely different place.
Right now the desert of nanotechnology looks dry. Billions of dollars are being invested and thousands of researchers are working all over the world on countless different issues, but we've yet to see any single, revolutionary advance. Even so, the groundwork is being laid, and every day nanotech moves forward.
One of the most exciting new developments is the production by UC engineering researchers of arrays of 18mm carbon nanotubes. That might not seem like much, but it's a huge increase in length over past efforts and is an important step towards producing a material that is stronger and more conductive than anything now in use.
What will come of this achievement? A replacement for copper wire? Energy independence? A space elevator? Nobody can say for sure because so much more work remains to be done before carbon nanotubes fulfill their promise. Even so, one thing seems certain -- we're getting closer and closer to the day the desert will bloom.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I think that the key is going to be opening up nanotechnology research to semantic exploration. Right now, R&D in this area is happening in little protected pockets and when talking to the companies doing the R&D in an industrial capacity, I found that they rarely talk to one another. This might be for protectionist reasons - it doesn't really matter. The fact is that great ideas rarely occur in isolation and like an organism, evolve from interaction with other partially-formed or sub-component ideas.
Until we see this cross-fertilization of ideas in a meaningful and open way, I don't see how we're going to get to the point where Nanotechnology becomes a disruptive force.
You are absolutely right about the isolation between different R&D groups and I also agree that if that isolation continued indefinitely we would be in trouble.
Personally though, I'm hopeful that the protectionism we're seeing is partly a result of the newness of nanotech for many companies.
My sense is that over time universities, professional and technical associations and just the natural movement of people between companies is going to erode the pockets we see at the moment, and encourage the kind of cross-fertilization you're talking about.
But then, I'm an optimist...
Post a Comment