![image002[1].gif](https://i.imgur.com/zuvqBtP.gif "image002[1].gif")
>Can /sci/ recommend any good books on bottom-up approaches to nanotechnology?
I'm an undergrad researcher in the middle of my second project and am pretty certain that nanotech is the broad field which I want to go into and probably get my Master's through related research.
I'm trying to narrow down specific sub-fields that I'd like to work on in the future and bottom-up manufacturing is one that really appeals to me from the reading I've done so far.
But I'd like to explore the topic further and at a more detailed level before making any long term decisions.
Similarly, if anyone has any recommendations for other nanotechnology sub-fields which they personally find interesting or would like to discuss, go for it.
Bump, just got home from work.
It appears that bottom-up manufacturing may not be a topic with sufficient interest on this board, so feel free to discuss anything nanotechnology related in here.
>>8156661
Yeah I was kind of disappointed that /sci/ wasn't a faster/more popular board.
I'll bump your thread with some nice elliptic paraboloids, since it is actually useful and not blatant shitposting b8. Hope you find what you're looking for.
>>8155882
engines of creation by k eric drexler
or go watch one of his lectures, he's all about the bottom up approach
>>8156667
Bump appreciated!
>>8156668
Thanks a ton, anon. From a quick google search it looks like he also wrote an updated version in 2007, "Engines of Creation 2.0", which is available as a free ebook. This is exactly what I was looking for, I'll check out some of his lectures as well. Thanks!
>ebook is available at http://www1.appstate.edu/dept/physics/nanotech/EnginesofCreation2_8803267.pdf for anyone interested
>>8155882
Once I realized this post said undergrad researcher and not underground researcher it somehow became much less interesting.
>>8156711
That's a fair observation, I reread my own post with the phrase "underground researcher" instead and it did seem more interesting. Maybe someday I'll work in a basement and your dream will come true.
![photo-booth-oscar-party-2016-emily-ratajkowski[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/09BXwnj.jpg "photo-booth-oscar-party-2016-emily-ratajkowski[1].jpg")
>>8156667
STEM dorks - this is her boyfriend 50yo music producer Jeff Magid. Have fun programming.
>>8156778
my boyfriend is way hotter then him
I'm fascinated with the potential behind nanoswarming and nanoconstruction. I'd love to get into it and explore some theoretical inventions.
Unfortunately I'm academically retarded and a poorfag. (No high-school. Janitor) So going to lectures and buying material is next to impossible.
>>8156787
That's tough anon, I'm sorry to hear that. Not sure if it will cheer you up at all, but I'm decently educated and still feel the same way about most topics, that my knowledge of them is so relatively small compared to experts in the field that I can't expect to contribute anything meaningful to the area of study in my lifetime.
Still, I find that trying to learn new things on a regular basis can help combat this feeling. If I'm not gonna be able to change the world in most respects, at least I can learn about it.
Some anons in here have been mentioning Eric Drexler, he has a TEDx talk here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9RiB_o7Szs) which is pretty easy to understand from an outsider perspective, for the most part.
OP here, I'm back again to bump for today. Thanks for the resources you've shared with me thus far.
>>8156786
you mean her ?
>>8157747
>replying to a bait reply to another bait reply
Working on my Bachelor right now, making Nanostructures on a Magnetron-Sputtering device. If you're intrestet in solid state physic, you could try "Festkörperphysik" by Hunklinger, dunno if a english version exists. Miyazakis "The Physics of Ferromagnetism" could proof useful as well.
>>8155882
This one http://libgen.io/book/index.php?md5=54A42276A319CC750721439813496C6A
>It appears that bottom-up manufacturing may not be a topic with sufficient interest on this board, so feel free to discuss anything nanotechnology related in here.
Nanotechnology got derailed by chemists like Smalley in 1990, they directed funds to material science and nanoparticle research instead of molecular manufacturing. Thus we don't have bottom-up nanotechnology 30 years later.
The good work done in nanotechnology is being done by people doing protein engineering, supra-molecular chemistry, DNA origami, bis-peptides and other foldamers. They don't call what they do nanotechnology to avoid controversy.
It's a sad world.
>>8158746
Sounds like cool research, anon. We have a magnetron sputtering device here as well. Although I personally have not used, I am trained in it and I think the concept is pretty cool. Thanks for the book suggestions!
>>8160387
Thanks for the suggestion and the incredibly convenient link!
>>8160397
Interesting. I've always considered things like nanoparticle research and certain parts of materials science such as graphene, BNNTs, etc. to fall under nanotech. Am I incorrect? Or is it more of a semantic issue?
![220px-Eric_Drexler_2007[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/b4Q4onk.jpg "220px-Eric_Drexler_2007[1].jpg")
Seems that K. Eric Drexler is incredibly popular in this thread, is it safe to assume that his writings are some of the best resources as far as knowledge in the bottom-up manufacturing world? I just want to get some opinions and make sure this guy isn't a complete hack before I start diving into all he has to say.
>>8160763
Thats excactly what we do in Nano-Physics, at least in our workgroups. Researching new AFM/FM for new RAMs or Harddiscs is also a part of Nano-Physics.
>>8161464
Which part of that post are you referring to when you say "Thats exactly what we do in Nano-Physics"? I'm a bit lost.
