R
Richard Jones
softmachines.org · Personal blog · on HN since 2008
Richard Jones, a physicist who writes about nanotechnology, the economics of innovation, and critiques of transhumanism.
What HN saysHN commenters cite his Against Transhumanism book for arguments that nanotechnology won't bring super-abundance, and his views on molecular information processing.
19HN people shared it
3linked it in comments
19stories submitted
292story points
5 years agolast shared
2008people per year2026
Most-shared posts
- 1Rock climbing and the economics of innovation4 people · 200 points · first shared 2019 · 91 comments on HN
- 2Your mind will not be uploaded (2014)2 people · 41 points · first shared 2016 · 106 comments on HN
- 3Feynman, Waldo and the Wickedest Man in the World (2010)1 people · 19 points · first shared 2018 · 2 comments on HN
- 4Nobody knows anything – oil price edition1 people · 11 points · first shared 2016 · discussion on HN
- 5Steel and the dematerialisation (or not) of the world economy1 people · 3 points · first shared 2016 · discussion on HN
- 6When the promise of economic growth is not fulfilled1 people · 3 points · first shared 2021 · discussion on HN
- 7The semiconductor industry and economic growth theory1 people · 2 points · first shared 2018 · discussion on HN
- 8Technological Innovation in the Linear Age1 people · 2 points · first shared 2018 · discussion on HN
- 9What’s the best way of harvesting the energy of the sun?1 people · 2 points · first shared 2014 · discussion on HN
- 10Rubber City Rebels1 people · 2 points · first shared 2021 · discussion on HN
- 11Nanomedicine comes of age with mRNA vaccines1 people · 2 points · first shared 2020 · discussion on HN
- 12The role of hydrogen in reaching net zero1 people · 1 points · first shared 2020 · discussion on HN
- 13Watching an assembler at work1 people · 1 points · first shared 2008 · discussion on HN
- 14Even if Drexler is wrong, nanotechnology will have far-reaching impacts1 people · 1 points · first shared 2015 · discussion on HN
- 15Six challenges for molecular nanotechnology (2005)1 people · 1 points · first shared 2017 · discussion on HN
What HN people wrote when they linked it
Bluestrike2 · 2014-04-20
Not really; or rather, I should say, the issue isn't nearly as clear-cut as some of the anti-nanotech groups that have been screaming about it would have you believe. They usually point to research by Ken Donaldson, showing similar pathogenic effects between asbestos and nanotubes longer than 20 μm, but fail to acknowledge that there's a difference between nanotubes (and graphene) in general and long nanotubes in particular, as Donaldson's study clearly points out. In brief:
> The basis of toxicity of asbestos and other fibrous materials is now reasonably well understood; their toxicity is based on the physical nature of the materials, rather than their chemical composition. In particular, fibres are expected to be toxic if they are long – longer than about 20 µm – and rigid. The mechanism of this pathogenicity is believed to be related to frustrated phagocytosis. Phagocytes are the cells whose job it is to engulf and destroy intruders – when they detect a foreign body like a fibre, they attempt to engulf it, but are unable to complete this process if the fibre is too long and rigid. Instead they release a burst of toxic products, which have no effect on the fibre but instead cause damage to the surrounding tissues. There is every reason to expect this mechanism to be active for nanotubes which are sufficiently long and rigid. [1]
Donaldson's research doesn't somehow negate the benefits--or even the possibility--of nanotubes; on the contrary, he's rather upbeat:
> There…
srunni · 2016-09-22
See chapter 3 ("Nanotechnology will not lead to super-abundance") of Against Transhumanism for a good argument for why this isn't so simple: http://www.softmachines.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Again…
Summary
1. Lack of rigidity, excessive stickiness of molecules (Van der Waals force), constant random interactions (Brownian motion) at the microscale of cells means mechanistic intuitions from the macroscale don't apply.
2. High surface area (combined with VdW force) causes problems related to friction and energy dissipation.
JackFr · 2016-05-27
"The fundamental unit of biological information processing is the molecule, rather than any higher level structure like a neuron or a synapse; molecular level information processing evolved very early in the history of life."
http://www.softmachines.org/wordpress/?p=1558#more-1558