Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!seismo!dimacs.rutgers.edu!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!nanotech From: dutchman@wpi.wpi.edu (jonathan) Newsgroups: sci.nanotech Subject: Re: Nanotechnology Message-ID: Date: 2 Nov 90 00:53:22 GMT Sender: nanotech@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute Lines: 25 Approved: nanotech@aramis.rutgers.edu >[Mod. note: another followup to the "nanoecomonics' article.] >I think it's worth mentioning at this point that within the next half-century, >the entire nature of economics will be changed by technology. Specifically, >nanotechnology. I raise my hand in disagreement. The energy it takes to develop these new processes has to come from somewhere. I think it's going to be a very close call - whether we can develop nanotech to clean up our atmosphere, our bodies, do very large scale molecular construction, etc., or we run out of oil, then coal, then wood, causing either the next ice age or a heavy-duty heat wave. If we don't have the energy, we won't have an economy. jonathan jonathantdrummeyhimomdutchman@wpi.wpi.edu7925050box375fnordwpiworcester,ma01609 [This doesn't quite make sense. There's no reason the development of nanotechnology should take any more energy than running a ski resort, or making a motion picture, or managing an insurance company, or any other undertaking that the same number of people might be doing using current-day methods and equipment. If it's as critical to the survival of the world as you beleive (it isn't) there would be plenty of resources available to divert from non-essential tasks. --JoSH]