July 19, 2024
The Nanotechnology Is a Folkloric Revolution Fact or a Real Manufacturing Process

The main nanotechnology agents are the investors, scientists, engineers and entrepreneurs, these agents bring creativity and radical experimentalism without limits. The Nanotechnology is not a folklore due to the action of these agents that will inject reality into the theories derived from nanotechnology. In the new economy, nanotechnology in its theories may seem like a unicorn, but it will be concretized as a business to pass the measure that these agents to integrate into their works, for a radical experimentalism without limits. We are not talking about a lost treasure hunt for nanotechnology, but concrete actions. Examples are sciences and technologies that were just concepts, but when these agents knew everything changed, as for example, to know the best place where it is feasible or financially viable, to sell coconuts or cotton candy? Opportunities for innovation are not lacking, and just to cite possible cases, such as creating solid bits, bigdata, and various knowledge clouds. The continuous question, where is this unicorn, but the answer is already clear, and is in the popularization of the analytics, science and engineering to reach the agents. The solid bits or boots that are just one example out of thousands, is a potential fruit promise for nanotechnology. Like blood that is composed of thousands of self-communicating intelligent particles, the solids bits are nothing different from a fluid with intelligent particles, for something beyond a biological computation. Opportunities exist for nanotechnology; however, these opportunities cannot be found directly in nanotechnology. Remember Albert Einstein who found the answer to something complex in a children’s book. Opportunity for nanotechnology is written in the plural, because there are several, and will be found by the agents, as this technoscience is popularized, and these agents are the masters of progress for nanotechnology. If you want to find the unicorn, keep an eye on the investors, engineers, scientists, researchers and specially the entrepreneurs.

The absence of alternatives clears the mind marvellously – Henry Kissinger

The nanotechnology for many people is consolidating as a unicorn-like legend, in particular due to over-advertising and spreading speculation without solid fundamentals. Something normal in a new science so promising. This text seeks a discussion with investors about nanotechnology, in order to think about the current position of this science and where this unicorn would be, where it hides. There is a boundary between perspective versus reality? The prospects and speculations for nanotechnology though exaggerated in some cases are mostly reality and based on the more classic sciences. Taking as an example something already forgotten in the world of manufacture, something very olden and already so used, but as a researcher of nanotechnology, I believe it is one of the best comparatives to resemble nanotechnology with the process of screen-printing and the chemical frontier. This comparison may seem absurd but let us begin with the conceptual similarities.

Working in the predictable, scientifically pursuing opportunities for nanotechnology is the only alternative at the moment, it’s all a matter between different mindsets between speculators versus engineers, in different viewpoints, on which it relies on specialized focus. The focus of the investor is on the bottom line is profit, the engineer is concerned about what does not exist, e.g. generating something innovative, and making the technical design of this business safely, reliably and in a modern way. These two professionals are vital to the true result. What is meant here is that not always the investor, that specialise in capital income is so attentive to the techniques, processes and technologies involved, engineering is already focused on this issue exactly. The focus is the boundary between one and the other, although there are people who possess a wide interdisciplinarity, such as entrepreneurs, and the focus, in this case, is still valid, due to high specialties punctual. Nevertheless, the issue we are discussing is to conceptualize and investigate the real destination for nanotechnology.

For this case, compared with companies that have silkscreen or screen-printing processes as comparative, these produce a huge variety of services and items, to survive these companies involve a number of processes and end products. After the advent of digital printing this process has suffered greatly, and nowadays to have an income with this process is a daily struggle, almost impossible. Involving prints of hundreds of objects and special prints. However, it is here that comes one of the many questions that involve nanotechnology. Would it be possible to innovate in the silkscreen sector today, in order to find another niche for this process, and redo this industry reborn, even in a punctual way?

Let’s think this question through a phrase: “If we can innovate on the silkscreen, something so already beaten, then in nanotechnology obviously there will be no limits.” Simple and straightforward is this the reality. To facilitate understanding, let’s discuss some cases. By using special technoscientific inks, live particle paint, functional crystals, electronic paper, biological inks, intelligent inks with solid micro / nanoparticles, to which these particles could act as bits in computation, but in solid form. Remember that nanotechnology beyond other definitions is the high intelligence concentration on materials. And in the printing, the technology would be very different from the current one, with digital plots that identify each particle in something similar to the print cartridge head. These examples are just to illustrate the possibilities. And again, renewing the question: what process technique, chemistry, microtechnology and silkscreen can still innovate in our days, and what is its relevance? On silkscreen or handmade cases, look at the history of this technique so beaten over the last few decades. From T-shirts and stickers printing to automation manufactures as Compact Discs and integrated circuits in the microtechnology industry. Is there still room for these technologies in our modern times? Let us suppose that plots far below microns in functional and intelligent technical material in the printing shops are reduced to minimum levels, and even in the alteration of the inks and emulsions that would pass through such reduced spaces having specific properties, such as drying or even self-assembling particles. So, we back to the question:

What oldens the silk-screening technique, also known as silk screen-screening, is still active by commercial potential, can still innovate? And what is its still existential potential for relevant innovation? Is there innovation in a technique or process that produces components parts? The same question applies to microtechnology and other technologies. The search for what does not exist must be intensified, and in the nanotechnology, this competes more for entrepreneurs than only researches.
It is not a question of find or hunting the unicorn, but using what already exists, through the actions of agents: the scientist, the engineer and the entrepreneur, both create what does not exist. Creativity is the engine of both, but limited to what reality allows, going far beyond discoveries. It is something even difficult to conceptualize, to establish so many variables in order, but it is with these comparisons that we can arrive in the near future at a common point for nanotechnology. Viability is the unicorn, for its mystery as fuel creativity.

Everything is interesting if you look enough. Richard Feynman.

The entrepreneurial mind and the thermodynamics are based between chaos and order, have similarities in the abstraction random data, abstract mathematics and cloud data, are nothing more than information and valuable variables, in great volume sometimes without any nexus. However, it is enough to connect two points of these large volumes data and information so that a chain reaction occurs, or engineering, innovation, nothing so different from chemistry in constant natural syntheses.
The entrepreneur is usually the person who possesses his open mind as a physicist or a scholar, however always open to noticing the things around him and connecting points. The entrepreneur acts as scientists, connecting points that have some logic. The entrepreneur knows many things, most of them useless a priori, without any nexus in a gigantic cloud of data and variables with no real logical connection. As in thermodynamics, there is a lot of random cloud data, but the scientist, researcher, engineer, or entrepreneur work is to connect these points in random locations and find commercial, technical, and scientific patterns and characteristics. And when there is only one union or affinity, there is the emergence of business opportunity, whether for a new product new service or innovation.

One example would be to use nanotechnology techniques to solve a problem or add value to something already outdated. Finding these niches, however small, is where the power of nanotechnology is today. The nanotechnology will not only innovate by creating new things, but in particular reactivate the already existing, considered outdated, and bringing competition and energy to all the economies of the new primary.

In reverse situations, nanotechnology can also bring answers to problems that do not exist, or there is no response. And in this constant struggle for a place in the sun, nanotechnology depends on the minds of entrepreneurs who identify opportunities where it does not exist, above all, even if their knowledge is limited to the sciences, there is the creativity and high processing of random variables and expertise in this process. The emergence of a new process or product in the workshop, the innovations in a construction or appreciation of something already surpassed, in these bonds activating the economy is where is the greatest wealth of this science. But, no by for science by science.

Success results from one hundred small things well done. – Henry Kissinger
The case of small businesses is the largest example, such as special cheeses, cakes, hot-dog, cotton candy, chips from Belgium. As you can see in these businesses, they are entrepreneurs who find a place that has a potential income. The same goes for any science, technology or innovation. We return to the same point, the agents, including engineers, investors, entrepreneurs and scientists. Nevertheless, the engineer’s point of view is reduced, but vital most of the things that hold the current society, e.g. the development, calculation and design of those little things that sustain a machine of tons floating in the air, or a piece that of so important a vehicle does not work or the condensed architecture of integrated circuits. And on the way to a nanobiological manufacture and intelligent materials in a new economy complement the existing ones. What can the silkscreen still innovate? Look at the history of this technique so beaten, from the production of T-shirts, stickers to its automation in printing compact discs and integrated circuits. Is there still room for this technology in modernity? Is there still room to innovate in this silkscreen industry? The issue in this complex tie for the investment summit comes down to the hunt for the unicorn, so understand this folkloric comparison as creativity fuel.

Since the Richard Feynman times, nanotechnology faces conceptual issues and borders. Here the importance in separating nanotechnology from chemistry and other disciplines, bringing to this an emancipation kind. As discussed in the recently published study entitled: Organization and Classification of Nanotechnology: A Pathway to the Standardization of Nanotechnology. The researcher discusses the nanotechnology emancipation.

Separating nanotechnology from other disciplines is more important than you think. Borders is the secret for one another’s chemical engineering to feed. A matter of well-defined boundaries is what will bring reliability, quality, safety for nanotechnology and avoiding wrong processes. It is important to separate opportunists from reality, such as chemistry using nanotechnology as only marketing, e.g. cosmetics, chemicals and other things outside the scope of nanotechnology, to consider and define well this scope is vital.

The use of the term Nano in science fiction, even questionable adoptions with reality, are actions that instigate the mind, but in some cases, they really go out of their way and turn the possible into something obsolete.

It is on these well-defined conceptual issues that Richard Feyman was already speaking at the time, it is important to establish these boundaries and not to use other sciences like this. Financially, what would be possible for income with Nano? Processes, patents or direct products? Small businesses, in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd or 4th economy there is much room for innovation of the olden, the new and the still non-existent. Spare parts that make the whole, from an airplane to a complex machine, would need a Hello world for nanotechnology as a way of popularizing these processes. As presented in the article: what would be the best “Hello World” for biosciences? generating a method for biohacking, all biohacking need is this trigger as popularization. This is not a misunderstanding, but because of its complexity the best result would come from the popularization of processes. What can we do with the chemistry and the silkscreen yet? If for these it is possible to innovate, then for nanotechnology is more than possible.

Looking for a new model or a disruption? The nanotechnology in conjunction with digital manufacturing is the meeting of the digital with the solid, in intelligent materials. For a new production arrangements and greater popularization of the HPLC methods. A popularization of the techniques and cheapening of the most complex equipment is the only way to leverage progress to the level that is demanded at present. High-end, high-level physics chemistry done on any corner, lab-on-chip, highly complex compact laboratories, spectroscopy in general, millions of people using Mahlab™ as a simple and whimsical development of increasingly accurate sensors, generation of innovative methods in mass, standard tables of researches, concepts and tests, everything being mass generated at high level, for extreme experimental, complex and high data density.

Nanotechnology is still in the state of generating random and random data that can interconnect with the logic of individuals over time. Nanotechnology is not a lost cause, as some imagine! The correct thing would be to think of this science as a tool, a process, an organized set of methods. All together as in engineering, science, entrepreneurs and research that creates what does not exist and this is the reason for so hard in their understanding.

Digitized manufacturing will not exist without nanotechnology. How in preventive engineering teaches us! Things are predictable. It is necessary to enter a start for radical experimentalism without limits. To understand nanotechnology, you need to think like an engineer, a researcher, as an investor and above all as an entrepreneur.
Innovation is made by the actions of isolated individuals, or together, various small innovations and ideas arise in a car workshop veiled in the same way in so many other professions. However, the absolute majority of ideas go into oblivion and fall into the valley of death, most will never have any chance. And to change this reality only freedom without limits to research through movements outside the standardized movements.