Talk:Nanorobotics

message: Was the first use of the term "nanite" the Star Trek: The Next Generation episode "Evolution" or was it used before then?  Brief google searches aren't giving me an answer.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.254.119.245 (talk) 20:52, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nanite Word Origin? 

message: Does anyone have any more info to add on Nubots? the article really doesnt say much, im curious to know more. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.169.7.115 (talk) 06:28, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See DNA machine.  Antony-22 09:25, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nubot? 

message: Why is the last sentence "Ryan Richard Fleming loves Vanessa C. Wilkins?" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.83.71.18 (talk) 21:17, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Last sentence of "Present research" section 

message: where did you get that? it's a mimetic polyalloy not a swarm of nanites, unless i'm wrong. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by WSFWarlord (talk • contribs) 19:37, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  T 1000 made with nanorobots?? 

message: — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.13.144.79 (talk) at 14:18, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Snow Crash/Diamond Age deserve mentions 

message: I am User:Mumia-w-18. The following two sections come from text User:Alanliddell placed into the main article. I moved these here so that we could discuss these before placing them into the article:
These are ideas that I've heard expressed in an Outer Limits episode and possibly a book or two. However, to appear in an encyclopedia article, these would have to be properly presented, referenced and cited.--Mumia-w-18 13:36, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't have references but I believe the argument has been largely disproved, assemblers can only replicate if they have enough energy - and its likely to be many times what natural cells need - its called the 'grey goo' problem. By the way this article is very good, but I notice that it misses the name "assemblers", the name I use in my research. I also see that there is at least one other Wikipedia article on 'assemblers'. - Lucien86 86.138.140.107 (talk) 14:03, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm sorry to tell you, but no, this argument has absolutely not been "largely disproved". It is a high-probability existential risk for earth. It's absolutely not to be taken lightly. The scenario is usually called "Grey goo", it even has it own article. It's not in any way "scare tactics" for one side of the discussion, it is simply stating the obvious. Ran4 (talk) 17:39, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

text: Gray Goo theory? It could happen, but it's not quite the end of the world. All that would be needed to prevent such a catastrophe would be the proper methods of controlling nanites (which should have been designed along side nanites to begin with) and the appropriate "nanite program" that caused nanites to attack and destroy Gray Goo nanites. The afflicted world would never be the same, but it would survive none the less. - Glitch Daracova (talk) 20:38, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New ideas and theories that could be debatable in the later future (from Alanliddell) 

message: I'm pretty sure that they exist, just ask Tonic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.172.223.74 (talk) 14:16, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Time Traveling Nanites 

message: In the section concerning Nanorobotics in fiction. Metal Gear Solid only is only mentioned with and I quote "and the popular video game series Metal Gear Solid". The other stated instances have explanations. Yet Metal Gear Solid is missing anything of the sort. Not to sound like an angry Metal Gear fan boy, but the "Nanomachines" play a major part in the series. It should make a minor note of some of the major applications of nanorobotics in the game series. Like, used as the radio or "Codec", Filtration of Information, Pain suppression, and Control and Monitoring of Private Military Company Soldiers. But it does seem A bit much to add all that. Some explanation would be nice. Though Metal Gear Solid depicts Nanorobotics in a rather negative and dystopian light. Something along the lines of: "In the popular video game series Metal Gear Solid, nanomachines have a variety of applications, from radio transmitting, and healing, to mind control." That doesn't seem a bit much. I would have edited it myself. But I wanted to run the idea past everyone else. Because if everyone else sees it as a bit unnecessary, then it must be. Kashmirxincx (talk) 09:19, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  inconsistent in Fiction section 

message: Yes, it is inconsistent. Nanomachines are the single-most important unseen force in the Metal Gear Solid series. Many aspects of the series would be impossible if not for Nanotechnology, such as the Codec, mind manipulation, and healing.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.59.200.82 (talk) 00:49, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsist Fiction Section, From Above^ 

message: Some part of the article does not comply with the wikipedia policy of neutrality, then instead of focusing on technical matters, it provides information clearly biased for self promotion.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.50.85.170 (talk) 15:37, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  wikipedia policy of neutrality 

message: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Feynman
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foresight_Nanotech_Institute_Feynman_Prize
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/There%27s_Plenty_of_Room_at_the_Bottom
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.83.84.47 (talk) 16:14, 3 September 2009‎ (UTC)
:What does Feynman have to do with nanomachines besides speaking about them? The science itself is valued over the figures that come up with the science, any scientist would agree.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nebnobla (talk • contribs) 17:26, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  No mention of Richard Feynman, the Feynman Prize (Foresight) 

message: An image used in this article, File:Artists Rendition of Nanobots.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 04:22, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Artists Rendition of Nanobots.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: There seems to be some misconceptions about contemporary or even near-future nano-technological potential. Firstly, it should probably be mentioned that nanomachines are actually everywhere around us; inside every kind of cell there is a vast ensemble of biological nanomachines working in extraordinary ways - more complex and with such flawless synergistic coordination that we will likely never be able to reach such technological levels as an animal species. The first life on earth were machines that were able to differentiate different kinds of matter for specific processing, e.g. amoebas having to differentiate food from other amoebas. The evolution of this nanomachine process has manifested in the immune system of organisms in the form of macrophages. Biological systems are also compatible with stabilizing these nanomachines with specific pressures, media densities, and media chemistry to accomidate nano-specific instabilities and structural limitations, and also allow them to do work in a more efficient manner. So before talking about nanomachines being some abnormality to reality, take time to consider your own nano technological design; if anything, biological systems are described most adequately in describing the nano-technological nature of their systems. 
Regarding anthropogenic nanomachines, we are not very far into R&D, at all. In fact, the references in the first paragraph of the actual article do not imply we have working nanomachines, they are as vague and overly-optimistic as any contemporary nano-microelectronics research; designing a fixed motor that responds to an electromagnetic field is just an adaptation of trivial mechanics to lithographic production processes. If anything, the research is most valuable in understanding what allows for such systems to remain stabilized and efficient in realistic environmental circumstances, the motor is impressive but theoretically expected. The nanocar would be a more impressive thing to see, though even it relies on trivial theoretical framework - it is just a sturdy structure (characterized by stable bonds) with rotatable bonds at the fullerenes. Of course, building the structure does deserve an applause. So in terms of contemporary applicability of nanomachines, we should be more fearful of natures own, such as viruses created in anthropogenic environments, e.g. AIDS, Avian flu, etc. It is also worth mentioning that not only do we not have the analytical techniques and machines to understand and design nanomachines, we do not even have the theoretical methods in understand how to do so. Contemporary nanotech is haunted by a limitation of analytical techniques, which makes our industrial use of nanomaterials and the subsequent runoff into the environment more troubling than anything - we can't measure environmental concentrations and thus predict their effects. This is a frontier perhaps people should be more doggish on.
There are also severe limitations to nanomachine capability, especially "nanoswarms". There are several obvious reasons for this. Firstly, environmental atmospheric conditions would not deem a structure with such a low mass to be able to adequately steer itself, even an extremely strong magnetic field would have trouble stabilizing particles in even soft breezes; the energy cost of resisting such natural processes would be astronomical and technically impossible even for nature. This is why some viruses, bacteria, and organisms spread based on environment chaos, and not by some energy-using mechanism. It is an overly ambitious thought to try to stabilize nanomachines in the environment, and beyond human understanding. There is also the question of surface oxidation in air and adsorption of aquatic natural organic matter (NOM) in the aquatic environments, which may electrostatically or sterically hinder any intended processes leverages by intrinsic structures of the nanomachine. 
There are more obvious shortcomings, e.g. energy collection and storage. The nanomachine will have to devote most of it's structure to energy storage or production if it were to weather the natural world, though it is likely impossible anyways. Also, the energy forms of the universe are dispering due to entropy, which makes collection methods less concrete in terms of galactic colonization. Of course, if you do speak of "grey Goo", what you are really talking about is decreasing the entropy of the universe, turning everything into an orderly and predictable state.  
In any case, this page does not communicate the contemporary or even possible frontiers of anthropogenic nanomachines. Perhaps everyone should take a more realistic approach to these concerns, even if they do not satisfy some need for them to be possible to substantiate your favourite sci-fi TV shows and books. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nebnobla (talk • contribs) 16:02, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Damage control 

message: I believe this is a valid category. User:Ryulong has been reverting all of my additions to this category I created.There is a discussion on the administrators noticeboard. CensoredScribe (talk) 23:00, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: See WP:ANI#CensoredScribe's categories on discussion on how CensoredScribe is inappropriately making dozens of categories of questionable quality. CensoredScribe, this is not the page to make this sort of discussion, either.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 15:48, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm assuming there was a section on nanorobotics in fiction, why was this section deleted? Was it encyclopedic or just trivia cluttering up the page? JanderVK (talk) 20:33, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category:Nano technology in fiction 

message: I sourced it properly, I made it proper just becuase you guys are retarded and cannot make virus based nano-machines does not mean that others cannot put my page back or so help me god Ebola will be the least of your problem.
Vmedvil (talk) 09:36, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the  template. Some of this stuff could be of use, but then you have some rather far-reaching bits of original research and then a strange blurb on mythological creatures. In any case, given that your additions of this content from IP accounts have been reverted twice, don't think this is the scope of a edit request. Also, it is inexplicably rude.  Cannolis (talk) 05:53, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 21 September 2014 

message: The section "Nanorobotic Theory" gives the impression that Richard Feynman proposed or believed that nanomachines were possible.  In the linked article he makes no such claims.  At best, he suggest the possibility of a machine comparable in size to a erythrocytes, several micrometers in size.  But for the most part the article referenced focuses on minimizing components of machines such as computers to small sizes.  I think the way the section is written leaves a false impression of Feynman's opinions on the matter.  Klaun (talk) 02:34, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  False Feynman endorsement 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Nanorobotics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101205210702/http://www.albanylawjournal.org/articles/Morrison_0609.pdf to http://www.albanylawjournal.org/articles/Morrison_0609.pdf
*Added  tag to http://fr.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1182409639914&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:15, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified