[om-list] Machine Learning in Nanotechnology

[Thomas L. Packer]

In other words, nanotech is probably more like chemical 
engineering than computer science.

tomp


On 2004 March 25 Thursday 13:04, Thomas L. Packer wrote:
> Hello Jeremy, you nut.
>
> 	I first read about nanotechnology a while back and thought it
> was extremely cool.  And I bet there are some really good
> applications of it.  Apparently it is starting to show up on
> the general public's radar screen in various applications now.
>
> 	But I bet "programming" a nanobot would be even more
> restrictive than programming in assembly language, because
> they are so small.  And you cannot get much A.I. level
> sophistocation out of assembly language.  You would want the
> nanobot to be as "intelligent" as you can make it, but the
> kind on intelligence you would be working with is probably
> more akin to very simple state machines and reflex responses. 
> I kind of doubt you could mix much machine learning with
> nanotechnology.  Just my first guess.
>
> 	If you want to go into nanotechnology, you should find out
> what you can quickly so you don't waste too much time
> deciding. Don't be like me.  I have trouble finding a focus
> and staying focused.
>
> tomp
>
> On 2004 March 25 Thursday 12:04, Jeremy Almond wrote:
> > Hello all you out there.  Lately I've been interested in
> > Nanotechnology.  Particularly, engineering little molecular
> > sized machines or robots that will detect cancer cells, or
> > bad blood cells and zap them all to kingdom come.  We would
> > need to apply all sorts of AI and other goodies.  How would
> > one program a nanobot, or a machine that small?  Would there
> > be a limit to coding a nanobot since it is so small?
> >
> >
> > Jeremy Almond
> > Data Analyst
> > Thoughtform Corp.
> > Tel: 801-299-1285
> > Toll Free: 800-854-5272
> > Fax: 801-299-1294
> > jeremy at thoughtform.com
> > jeremy at neuroinsight.com
> > jeremy at seismicinsight.com

-- 

ciao,
tomp at BYU
--------------------