Re: Nanotechnology Redefined
- From: "Tom" <cyclintom@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2005 18:13:10 -0000
Perry - don't redefine nanotechnology to be chemistry. This is
precisely why I was complaining.
You and I both know that Drexlar was speaking of nano-sized mechanical
contraptions that seem most unlikely at this point in time.
As far as "anything in physics" there also isn't anything in physics
that would deny the possibility of travel to the stars. All it takes is
enough time and budget. Care to use your retirement funds for that
project?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [Sci.nanotech] Re: Nanotechnology Redefined
- From: Perry E. Metzger
- Re: [Sci.nanotech] Re: Nanotechnology Redefined
- References:
- Nanotechnology Redefined
- From: Tom
- Re: Nanotechnology Redefined
- From: Perry E. Metzger
- Nanotechnology Redefined
- Prev by Date: Re: [Sci.nanotech] Re: Nanotechnology Redefined
- Next by Date: Re: [Sci.nanotech] Re: Nanotechnology Redefined
- Previous by thread: Re: [Sci.nanotech] Re: Nanotechnology Redefined
- Next by thread: Re: [Sci.nanotech] Re: Nanotechnology Redefined
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|