Is Electrical Engineering a worthwhile degree to get if I want to go into nanotech?
>>7744645
nanotech is meme dude
but EE is really good
>>7744645
EE is god-tier, depending on who you ask one of the best majors you could possibly pick, but nanotech is as meme-tier as you'll get
>>7744730
it's mostly just a buzzword used to impress/attract new students.
thats what my prof said anyways
>>7744730
As someone who works with nanotech, don't do nanotech. It fucking sucks.
>>7744759
I was on http://www.nano.gov/nanotech-101/nanotechnology-facts and it estimates there will be 2 million new jobs available in nanotech by 2020.
>>7744761
Can you tell me what you do, what degree you have, and what you would've preferred doing?
>>7744763
i was talking about "nanotechnology engineering" the major.
its just a very broad field, and there are engineers (and scientists) of all types working in it.
>>7744780
Oh no, fuck that. I know if I want any decent nanotech job, I need at least a masters in Chem, EE, ME or physics.
>>7744761
that's because it's a developing science.
There is a ton of money and dare I say power in nano tech.
Self healing synthetic skin, universal constructors.
Imagine having a machine on your desk that could print off both a computer and a replacement kidney or even all the components of a hand gun
eventually nanotechnology, when coupled with programmable matter, will lead to prosthetic bodies like the liquid terminator. if you program your bodies nanomachines right, you could eat things with your body and convert them into building materials for other things.
the possibilities of nanotech is endless. manipulating matter at a fundamental level has endless possibilities.
here is an example of a proto universal constructor.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsYaq93fk2E
>>7745117
We know that dude, I think he was referring to the fact that most "nanotech" undergraduate programs are really silly since they try to be chemistry/physics/biotechnology all in one but in the end they fail
>>7745117
Drexler pls.
>>7745221
I'm a little disappointed with the the delayed reaction of universities to creating nanotech programs but it is a multi disciplinary field and a little complex.
I am excited about all the nano tech start up companies forming, and it's beginning to seem like if you want a good education in nano you have to gt it form one of these private companies.
Like joining a wizards guild.
EE could be applied to nanotech ( = carbon nano tubes & stuff...) by working with it.
But I think you won't be building them or doing researches. You need master degree in nanosciences ( little quantum physics, EM, statistics and stuff..)
Hope it'll help, else be a wizzard.
>>7745410
I was going to post something to this effect but you beat me to it. Listen to everything this guy said. As in every word.
>>7744761
Does mems fall under nanotech? I'm taking a class next year on the subject but i'm going to specialize in wireless communications.
>>7744645
Unless you're talking about spray-on waterproofing, nanotech is just a myth created by science fiction.
>>7745410
so nano robots and replicators aren't really possible?
>>7745453
It ALL starts as science fiction before it becomes science fact, meme or not.
>>7745503
>all science started as science fiction
is not the same as
>all science fiction will end up as science
>>7744645
It depends on what you want to do, I guess. Ignore everyone saying nanotech is a meme. That being said you will probably need to pursue a graduate degree if you really want to do anything worthwhile in nano.
EE can definitely be a good major for getting into it. If you're in a good program you'll get exposed to a fair amount of chemistry, quantum, and materials science which are all very relevant. The additional background you get in electricity will give you a perspective that others in this field may lack. Especially if you specialize in semiconductors.
I'm an EE and I work on novel nanomaterials for device development. There's lots of other things EEs can do in this field as well (MEMS, supercaps, future generations of nano-transistors, etc).
>>7745453
Sorry, but that's really inaccurate. A few examples just from the limited perspective of an EE:
Most likely your hard drive (assuming a standard HDD) is a result of nanotechnology research. The fundamental operation of those relies on something called Giant Magnetoresistance (GMR) which came directly from - you guessed it - nano research.
Want to recycle waste heat? High efficiency thermoelectrics are on the horizon thanks to nano research.
We've all heard the graphene meme. There are a host of similar 2D materials in various stages of development which could actually have the broad impacts that the media hyped up graphene to have. Things like atomic-scale materials which inherently act as semiconductors, or room-temperature superconductors. Maybe it will pan out, maybe it won't. That's how science works. Either way, not a myth.
