|
Atomate trots out yet another definition of "nanotechnology" |
|
|
|
Aug 09, 2007 at 12:50 PM |
What constitutes "nanotechnology" continues to be debated by geeks the world over.
Is it defined by scale, as Intel would have us believe, so that any structure less than a tenth of a micron, or 100 nm, is "nano," whether it was created in a "top down" or "bottom up" manner? Or is a "bottom up" approach to creation and/or fabrication the only true "nano"? Does one really have to be messing with atoms and subatomic phenomena to earn the "nano" tag?
A couple of weeks ago, I met with Atomate at their new digs in Simi Valley, CA, just down the street from the local Costco (couldn't help but note the quantities of bulk-bought snacks and drinks in the lunchroom). Atomate is a true "nanotechnology" company, if ever there was one. Survivors of a spinoff from NanoDevices, the original carbon nanotube (CNT) precision-growth tool company, the Atomate crew pride themselves on their deep knowledge of "the process," which CEO Brian Lim calls "our core competence."
They not only make components and tools for synthesizing single- and multiwall CNTs, nanowires, and other nanomaterials and structures, but they work closely with their customers and partners on a variety of technology development projects, including a hush-hush transistor project with a large company's R&D group as well as another one focusing on making CNT interconnects.
During the course of our hourlong conversation, Brian put forward his own definition of what constitutes "real" nanotechnology: "As far as we're concerned, unless it's taking advantage of some of the quantum benefits of the nanoscale, it doesn't really count."
So in Atomate's songbook, it ain't no nano thing, if it ain't got that quantum swing.
|
