| Materials
science is an area that has evolved from metallurgy into the
interdisciplinary discipline it is now, complete with a name
change. Materials science traditionally included metals, ceramics,
and polymers and also includes composites as it is about combining
materials. For a while, the German scientists were saying that
nanotechnology is nothing more than materials science. They’re
right to some extent if their definition includes biological
systems. Materials science does not currently include biochemical
systems but that can be subject to change if we keep an open
mind and can draw on basic biology and chemistry training. Most
materials science graduate training focuses more on chemistry
and physics, especially solid state physics. At this point,
my undergraduate training in chemical engineering, thankfully
enough also allows me to understand biochemical systems. I always
forget about the mathematicians since most of what they do seems
like support staff to the other branches of science which without
mathematics would be nothing. This is a common occurrence among
scientists so I ask their pardon as I apologize for the memory
glitch. It is unclear whether the Germans still think the way
they do about nanotechnology but they’re not wrong either. Everyone
is right to some extent as to what nanotechnology is. They’re
just not completely right since they only have a piece of the
answer. So it is quite natural that scientists themselves can
have a very myopic view of what nanotechnology is all about.
There is so much to do in their own narrow fields that it is
often hard to look outside of the confines of their research
boundaries.
Unknown to many,
materials science is also a significant portion of nanotechnology.
The materials science part of nanotechnology covers a broad
range of applications by studying polymers, metals and ceramics
systems, which includes nanotubes, buckyballs, nanoscale fibers
and particles, catalysts and more. The applications of these
materials are diverse and transcend industry boundaries. Buckyballs
or buckminster fullerenes are hollow spheres of sixty carbon
atoms (C60) arranged in a soccer ball or geodesic dome configuration.
They were named after the father of the geodesic dome, Buckminster
Fuller. Buckyballs were discovered in 1985 by Richard Smalley
and Robert F. Curl, Jr. of Rice University and Sir Harald
Kroto of the University of Sussex and they all shared the
Nobel Prize in Chemistry for this discovery in 1996. The latest
technology development is carbon nanotubes, which are carbon
atoms arranged in a similar hexagonal array as buckyballs
and graphite but are in the shape of tubes. Due to their small
size and low defect density, they exhibit superior electrical
and mechanical properties that can be exploited. Dr. Sumio
Iijima, Senior Research Fellow at NEC Corporation and Professor
at Meijo University discovered carbon nanotubes using high
resolution transmission electron microscope that clarified
the atomic structure and character of multi-wall and single-wall
carbon nanotubes that were by-products of making buckyballs.
Buckyballs and carbon nanotubes as drug delivery vehicles
in medicine are sexy but they also are being considered for
broader materials applications as well. For instance, carbon
nanotubes are being used as transistors that outperform silicon
based ones. Carbon nanotubes are being used to attain brighter
images in HDTV. They are also being used to make biosensors.
There is buckyball research being done for quantum computing
applications.
Materials research
is also currently being used to design electrodes, membranes,
and catalysts for fuel cells using carbon nanotubes and solid
oxides. Other examples of materials related nanotechnology
are high performance fiber mirrors to be woven into military
uniforms as bar codes for identification purposes. IBM designed
a quantum computer using five atoms. Manipulation of materials
at this level becomes important because quantum computing
will replace microprocessors as we know it. They will be smaller
and more powerful because quantum computers can parallel process
versus the standard serial processing of information by exploiting
simultaneous quantum particle spin behavior. The laser teleportation
as well as quantum dots research has major implications for
enabling quantum computing over the next decade. Quantum computing
will become important in cryptography (code breaking) and
large database searches. With materials research, there are
implications for new data storage technologies and nanocomposites
as well. And this is just the tip of the iceberg. All of this
comes under the heading of nanotechnology materials research
and obviously are at various stages of research development.
As important as all this ongoing research is, this may all
seem esoteric but it is balanced it with everyday commercial
applications of nanotechnology as pointed out earlier.
Now or never. Not better late than never.
Technical innovation
has its own timetable. Many of these opportunities are at
the R&D stage still and it is admittedly a gamble and
may not be recognized when it happens. However, this is not
atypical of new innovation. For instance, the patent for the
fax machine technology was granted in 1843 to Alexander Bain,
33 years before the patent was given for the telephone. The
advent of the fax machine didn’t happen until 32 years later
via telegraph mode and it wasn’t until in 1906 that newspapers
started using the idea to transmit photos. Now we have the
modern day digital fax machine over 100 years later. All these
scenarios are much longer than the acceptable period for a
return on venture capital (VC) investment but most government
funding has no such expectation. There is much nanotechnology
still in the research phase but bringing innovation to commercial
application has certainly sped up since the time of Alexander
Bain.
When
the innovation happens you just have to be ready to jump on
the opportunity when it presents itself and you have to be
knowledgeable enough to recognize it when it happens. In early
July, Sir Timothy Clifford, a visiting museum director from
Scotland at the Cooper-Hewitt Museum in New York City, found
a work of art by Michelangelo in their box of Italian decorative
design drawings by unknown artists. When asked how he recognized
the drawings as Michelangelo’s, he responded with laughter
with “It was just as I recognize a friend in the street or
my wife across the breakfast table.” The nature of discovery
is to be prepared to recognize a discovery so that you’ll
know it when you see it but you can’t plan for it. This approach
should be no different for nanotechnology. Sir Harald Kroto
said early this past July at a Meeting of Nobel Laureates
in Lindau, Germany that “The greatest scientific advances
couldn’t be and weren’t predicted. If I had set out to discover
fullerenes, I probably wouldn’t have done it…It never crossed
my mind to win a Nobel Prize. I was happy doing my science.”
Such is the mindset and motivation of the typical scientist.
The scientists are always proving me wrong about how clever
they can be. There have been so many instances that someone
has said it can’t be done in a certain time period or can’t
be done at all and then some genius figures out some unconventional
way to do it the following month and wins a Nobel Prize for
it. A few weeks ago in late July at the World Technology Network
Summit, I was listening to a government research lab scientist
who specialized in carbon research. He was complaining that
the potential applications of carbon nanotubes were being
overhyped because they couldn’t find ways to make them interact
and combine chemically with any systems. A week later I came
across an article in an issue of Chemical & Engineering
News from two weeks before about how scientists from University
of California, Los Angeles, University of Oklahoma, and University
of Negev in Israel had discovered ways to coat carbon nanotubes
in starch-based molecules to make them dissolve in aqueous
(water) solutions that were stable for weeks. This has major
implications in inexpensive purification processes, drug biocompatibility,
storage and delivery modes.
Go figure. Science is unpredictable. Expect the unexpected.
|
Dr.
Pearl Chin has an MBA from Cornell, a Ph.D. in Materials Science
and Engineering from University of Delaware's Center for Composite
Materials and B.E. in Chemical Engineering from The Cooper
Union.
Dr. Chin specializes in advising on nanotechnology investment
opportunities. She is also Managing General Partner of Seraphima
Ventures and CEO of Red Seraphim Consulting where she advises
investment firms and and startup firms on the business strategy
of nanotechnology investments. She was Managing Director of
the US offices and co-Managing Director of the London offices
of Cientifica. Prior to that, she was a Management Consultant
with Pittiglio Rabin Todd & McGrath (PRTM)'s Chemicals,
Engineered Materials and Packaged Goods group. Dr. Chin will
be advising the Cornell University JGSM's student run VC fund,
Big Red Venture Fund (BRVF), on investing in nanotechnology.
She is a Senior Associate of The Foresight Institute in the
US and was the US Representative of the Institute of Nanotechnology
in the UK. She was an alternate finalist for a Congressional
Fellowship with the Materials Research Society. She was also
a Guest Scientist collaborating with the National Institute
of Standards & Technology (NIST) Polymer Division's Electronic
Materials Group under the US Department of Commerce. Dr. Chin
is a US Citizen born and raised in New York City.
©
Pearl Chin April 2004 |
