Nanotechnologies produce many different types of images but are characterized by the ones that allow us to ‘see the atoms’ despite the fact that objects at the nanoscale are smaller than the wavelength of light and hence are ‘invisible’. Images from scanning probe microscopy (SPM), like ‘The Beginning’, have played an emblematic role in the constitution of the field and are also more likely to be used in communication outside the scientific field. These images are made, selected, modified and evaluated (...) with respect to the information that they communicate. The ‘life cycle’ of these images implies the transduction of this information. Outside of the scientific field, however, they are no longer defined by this information, nor according to technical and scientific criteria, but by their aesthetic power, and they become associated with other images from other fields (art, advertisement, entertainment). This process creates a psycho-social ‘halo’ about ‘nano’ in the public perception, and raises ethical issues about nanotechnological communication via images. We will analyze the halo of the nano in this respect and propose a strategy for a reflexive ‘accommodation’ to the images at the nanoscale. (shrink)

Imag(in)ing the Nano-scale: Introduction Content Type Journal Article Category Introduction Pages 159-163 DOI 10.1007/s11569-011-0127-x Authors Rasmus Tore Slaattelid, Centre for the Study of the Sciences and the Humanities, University of Bergen, Pb. 7805, 5020 Bergen, Norway Fern Wickson, GenØk Centre for Biosafety, PB 6418, 9294 Tromsø, Norway Journal NanoEthics Online ISSN 1871-4765 Print ISSN 1871-4757 Journal Volume Volume 5 Journal Issue Volume 5, Number 2.

This paper investigates the development of nanotechnology from three different points of view: as a new technology, as social dynamics, and as an ideology. It argues that nanotechnology is not a new technology but a new social dynamics guided by programmatic ideas and situated at the interface between science and the public. Rather than being determined by social constructivism, the main argument is based on the poor scientific and technological identity of nanotechnology. Finally the paper concludes that nanotechnology is to (...) be considered an extension and increase of materials science and engineering, not only scientifically but in particular socially and ideologically, by pointing out common characteristics and differences. (shrink)

According to ‘standard histories’ of nanotechnology, the colorful pictures of atoms produced by scanning probe microscopists since the 1980s essentially inspired visions of molecular nanotechnology. In this paper, I provide an entirely different account that, nonetheless, refers to aesthetic inspiration, First, I argue that the basic idea of molecular nanotechnology, i.e., producing molecular devices, has been the goal of supramolecular chemistry that emerged earlier, without being called nanotechnology. Secondly, I argue that in supramolecular chemistry the production of molecular devices was (...) inspired by an aesthetic phenomenon of gestalt switch, by certain images that referred to both molecules and ordinary objects, and thus symbolically bridged the two worlds. This opened up a new way of perceiving and drawing molecular images and new approaches to chemical synthesis. Employing Umberto Eco’s semiotic theory of aesthetics, I analyze the gestalt switch and the inspiration to build molecular devices and to develop a new sign language for supramolecular chemistry. More generally, I argue that aesthetic phenomena can play an important role in directing scientific research and that aesthetic theories can help understand such dynamics, such that they need to be considered in philosophy of science. (shrink)

In October of 2002, Rick Smalley, Nobel laureate chemist at Rice University, was pondering what to say to a Congressional Hispanic Science and Literacy Forum hearing in Harlingen, Texas. Smalley used the opportunity to craft an all-encompassing justification for science's importance in the modern world-a justification so persuasive and broad it could be presented to any audience on any occasion. Indeed, variants of his talk have since been given some 200 times, from Dallas to Dubai.

This study explores the history of nanotechnology from the perspective of protein engineering, which differs from the history of nanotechnology that has arisen from mechanical and materials engineering; it also demonstrates points of convergence between the two. Focusing on directed evolution—an experimental system of molecular biomimetics that mimics nature as an inspiration for material design—this study follows the emergence of an evolutionary experimental system from the 1960s to the present, by detailing the material culture, practices, and techniques involved. Directed evolution, (...) as an aspect of nanobiotechnology, is also distinct from the dominant biotechnologies of the 20th century. The experimental systems of directed evolution produce new ways of thinking about molecular diversity that could affect concepts concerning both biology and life. (shrink)