Linked by David Adams on Sat 1st Dec 2012 19:43 UTC
Gifts, Contests, Easter Eggs I need everybody's help. I was selected as a finalist for the local science museum's contest to identify the innovation that I would most like to see invented and create a small exhibit about it. I put in a huge amount of effort to make a very well researched and prepared presentation, and even built a kid-friendly museum exhibit and presentation to illustrate my idea. The winner gets a trip to Italy. But get this: it turns out the winner is going to be determined by an easy-to-game online poll. So I feel like an idiot for spending so much effort, because the person with the most Facebook friends is going to win. Please help me fight for justice for voting for my project. (It's project #1). Update: Somebody was stuffing the ballot box, so they enabled some fig-leaf anti-cheating protections and reset the vote.
Thread beginning with comment 543891
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
How pointless
by bowkota on Sun 2nd Dec 2012 00:30 UTC
bowkota
Member since:
2011-10-12

These ideas are either silly or simply not achievable scientifically.
I guess I'll vote for your idea because it's the most sensible out of the whole bunch. Bare in mind though that this is not new, there's lots of use currently going on regarding the involvement of nano robotics and its use in medicine.
http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/News/2012/February/DNA-robots-des...

Reply Score: 3

RE: How pointless
by mistersoft on Sun 2nd Dec 2012 22:11 in reply to "How pointless"
mistersoft Member since:
2011-01-05

depends how massively your stretching the truth with your definition of nano-robotics.. hmm. a lab i used to work in worked on a lot of nano bioengineering projects
making nano wires with using wire shaped viral capsids as scaffolds, re-engineering more simple MS2 like viral capsids as drug delivery capsules, simple self assembling dna based circuits, re-engineered ribozymes and riboswitches as molecular circuit breakers and molecular sensors respectively. also, in another lab cancer cell target genetically modified viruses (as targetted chemotherapeutics basically) ...afaik those types of projects are the nearest we are so far to even nanoscale 'effectors' let alone 'robots' .i'm not counting mutation enzymes with modified function either. as for anything afm, optical tweezer based or similar..........well make for some pretty demonstrations or some useful single molecule measurements, but again, different ballparks.

eric drexler has a lot to answer for! literal molecular scale repair robots, even for dna let alone anything else .not going to happen.. much more targetted medicines and repairs...........yeah, sure -10 to 20 years

EDIT
ps the work in that RSC link is very analogous to prostate cancer GIANT project utilizing engineered adenovirus to specifically ONLY target prostate cancer cells -a different approach but v similar result. Targetted aptamers conjoined to chemotherapeutic containing secondary aptamers domains (eg holding cisplatin analogues say) also achieves similar results

Edited 2012-12-02 22:19 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3