Nano Nano

Nano Nano Congratulations on an excellent piece on nanoscience by Jeffrey M. Perkel in your July 28 issue.1 He rigorously covers much ground in little space; my only cavil is that, though writing in a bioscience journal, Mr. Perkel did not toot his (and your) own horn. Bioscience is a major reason behind current nanoscience's progress. The life sciences have been dealing with nanoscale objects and effects since their inception; the main difference now is that atoms and molecules can be ima

Sep 8, 2003
William Illsey Atkinson

Nano Nano


Congratulations on an excellent piece on nanoscience by Jeffrey M. Perkel in your July 28 issue.1 He rigorously covers much ground in little space; my only cavil is that, though writing in a bioscience journal, Mr. Perkel did not toot his (and your) own horn. Bioscience is a major reason behind current nanoscience's progress. The life sciences have been dealing with nanoscale objects and effects since their inception; the main difference now is that atoms and molecules can be imaged and manipulated directly, and not merely taken on faith. The life sciences have a long history of nano-manipulation in aqueous solution: first empirically, then precisely. Even materials science and physics cannot make so strong a claim to historical precedence in this matter.

William Illsey Atkinson
President, Draaken Science Communications
North Vancouver, British Columbia
billatki@axion.net

1. J. Perkel, "Nanoscience is out of the bottle," The Scientist, 17[15]:20-3, July 28, 2003.

Please indicate on a 1 - 5 scale how strongly you would recommend this article to your colleagues?
Not recommended
1
2
3
4
5
   Highly recommended
Please register your vote