Inspired by biofeedback therapy, Israeli researchers have developed a prototype mobile phone with a rudimentary infrared camera that can be easily, quickly, and non-intrusively used to detect the presence of breast cancer and heart disease. Infrared cameras are used to detect temperature and oxygen flow variations throughout breast tissue. After a completed scan, a data packet is uploaded wirelessly to a diagnostic center where doctors determine if more checks are necessary. Israeli mobile company Cellcom is planning on bringing consumer handsets with this technology included to market.
Any technology with the potential to change everything understandably stirs strong feelings both for and against. Technophobes like Wendell Berry believe that technology has done more harm than good. Technoromanticists like Ray Kurzweil believe it can solve all our energy and environmental problems and help us to live forever. But nanotechnology is, like every technology, a tool—in this case, a very, very powerful tool.
Nanotechnology is not inherently good or evil, and it will not change our human nature, which determines how we use technology. What it will change is the magnitude of the impact that technology has on our lives. Probably it will have a greater impact than any other technology. That’s saying a lot when you think about the impact that computers, nuclear energy and plastics have had on our lives. But nanotechnology is unlike any technological genie we’ve uncorked before. At the nanoscale, the boundaries between living and non-living things blur, and it becomes possible to create products that build themselves and respond intelligently to their users and environment.
But as profound as these impacts may be, nanotechnology will neither destroy us nor make us immortal. It will simply amplify the consequences of our use of technology. The good things that we do with nanotechnology will be even better than the good things we’ve done before. Unfortunately, the bad things that we do with nanotechnology will be even worse than the bad things we’ve done before.
There’s no magic in it that will allow us to bypass our own human nature and use it only for the good. But because its potential impact is so great, and because it is moving forward so quickly, the time is now to discuss how we want to use it, controlling the negative consequences as much as possible while welcoming the good.
An Israeli company has recently tested one of the most shock-resistant materials known to man. Five times stronger than steel and at least twice as strong as any impact-resistant material currently in use as protective gear, the new nano-based material is on its way to becoming the armor of the future.
A year ago IsraCast reported on the development of the first commercial nano-based lubricant which was developed by the Israeli company ApNano materials. A year later we find ApNano working also on a wholly different application of their technology – shielding and protection. In recent research lead by Prof. Yan Qiu Zhu of the School of Mechanical, Materials and Manufacturing Engineering at the University of Nottingham, England, a sample of the ApNano material was subjected to severe shocks generated by a steel projectile traveling at velocities of up to 1.5 km/second.
The material withstood the shock pressures generated by the impacts of up to 250 tons per square centimeter. This is approximately equivalent to dropping four diesel locomotives onto an area the size of one’s fingernail. During the test the material proved to be so strong that after the impact the samples remained essentially identical compared to the original material. Additionally, a recent study by Prof. J. M. Martin from Ecole Centrale de Lyon in France tested the new material under isostatic pressure and found it to be stable up to at least 350 tons/cm2.
In the line of fire – creating super shock-resistant materials
Some of the equipment that’s being used to produce the Inorganic Fullerene materials at ApNano’s laboratories in Nes Ziona, Israel. In order to understand how it is possible to create this ultra-strong shock absorbing material we first need to understand the nature of the nano material developed by ApNano. In the early 1990’s the Nano-materials Synthesis Group in the Weizmann institute headed by Professor Reshef Tenne, ApNano Chief Scientific Advisor, and recent winner of the Materials Research Society medal, together with Dr. Menachem Genut, currently the President and CEO of ApNano Materials, Prof. Gary Hodes and Dr. Lev Margulis, discovered a new class of inorganic nanostructures. The group had found that certain inorganic compounds such as WS2, MoS2, TiS2 and NbS2 that normally occur as large flat platelets can be synthesized into much smaller nano-spheres and nano-tubes which they named inorganic fullerene-like nanostructures or IF for short. Fullerenes are a new form of carbon, other forms being diamond, graphite and coal.
They are molecules composed entirely of carbon, taking the form of a hollow sphere, ellipsoid, or tube. Spherical fullerenes are sometimes called buckyballs, while cylindrical fullerenes are called buckytubes or nanotubes. Buckyballs are named after R. Buckminster Fuller, architect of the geodesic dome that he designed for the 1967 Montreal World Exhibition. IF materials are Fullerene-like materials but instead of being composed out of carbon they can be created from various other inorganic elements.
The “Onion like” nano-structure of the IF materials, is the result of a sophisticated manipulation on the original layered material. This unique structure is responsible for its remarkable strength and durability.
The new IF material produced by the Weizmann Group was made of Tungsten Disulfide (WS2). In contrast to organic Fullerenes, IF is easier and much less expensive to produce, it is chemically stable and is less reactive and consequently less flammable. Organic Fullerenes are also considered to be highly toxic while IF materials have been tested extensively and deemed safe. Tungsten Disulfide is relatively heavy and for that reason ApNano is currently experimenting with other materials such as Titanium Disulfide which is at least four times lighter and is expected to perform even better than Tungsten Disulfide against shock waves. One of the most interesting new IF properties discovered by ApNano is its extremely high degree of shock absorbing ability. Shock absorbing materials are commonly used in impact resistant applications such as ballistic protection personal body armor, bullet proof vests, vehicle armor, shields, helmets, and protective enclosures.
The new Tungsten based IF material has up to twice the strength of the best impact resistant materials currently used in protective armor applications such as boron carbide and silicon carbide, and are over 5 times stronger than steel. It is also possible to combine IF with other substances in order to expand their range of capabilities. For instance, mixing IF with highly elastic materials can lead to new compounds which are both flexible and shock-absorbing. These properties position IF materials as one of the best candidates for future protective gear and armor.
Dr. Menachem Genut – ApNano’s President and CEO, co-discoverer of the inorganic fullerenes. Currently ApNano can manufacture only a few kilograms of the new material a day at their lab in Nes Ziona. In an interview by IsraCast, Dr. Menachem Genut, ApNano CEO, explained that the company is moving into semi-industrial manufacturing within the next six months producing between 100-200 kilograms of the material per day, gradually moving to full-scale industrial production by 2007, creating several tons each day.
Although it is currently still hard to determine the exact price of the “nano-armor” when in full industrial production, given the cost of the original materials (Tungsten Disulfide, Titanium Disulfide, etc.) and the relatively low production costs, Dr. Genut stated that a kilogram of the new material will cost considerably less than a similar amount of the carbon-based Fullerenes. More field testing will need to be carried out before the nano-armor can be declared commercial but the company is optimistic that with some external financial backing it will be possible to have the first product ready in less then three years.
by Iddo Genuth – IsraCast
The original story can be found here. For any comments about this story, please contact the writer of the original article
Each side of the tetrahedral pyramid is made up of a double helix of DNA. The pyramids can then be joined together to make larger 3D nanostructures on which to build molecular electronic circuits and tiny containers for drug delivery (Science 310 1661).
DNA – the “building block of life” – consists of two linear strands wound into a double helix with one of four different “bases” attached to every sugar group along the strands. DNA is an attractive engineering material because strands with complementary base sequences recognise and bind to each other, enabling complex molecular structures to be made by self-assembly.
Previous attempts at making DNA nanostructures, in the shapes of cubes or octahedra, required many steps and did not produce much material. The new method, invented by Andrew Turberfield and Russell Goodman of the University of Oxford, overcomes this problem.
It creates nanoscale tetrahedra of DNA that self-assemble in a single step in just seconds with a yield of up to 95%. The tetrahedra are made from four short strands of synthetic DNA, each of which runs around one face. Each edge is formed where neighbouring strands have complementary base pairs. The new method is simple and involves heating DNA strands in a salt solution to just below boiling point. When the strands are rapidly cooled, they bond together to form a tetrahedron. The team can then link different tetrahedra together using single strands of DNA.
“Tetrahedra are used extensively in architecture and engineering because their structure is simple but very strong, making them ideal for use in DNA nanostructures,” says Turberfield. “These atomically precise nanostructures are ideal building blocks for nanofabrication and can be produced cheaply in large quantities – all you have to do is mix the components together.”
Indeed, colleagues at the Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam showed that the tetrahedra can withstand forces of up to 100 picoNewtons by compressing them with the tip of an atomic force microscope. These compression tests also allowed the Anglo-Dutch team to measure the elastic properties of DNA for the first time.
The team now plans to make 3D scaffolds for molecular devices such as electronic circuits using linked tetrahedra. The DNA pyramids could also act as containers for individual protein molecules and so be used to deliver drugs.
“We have designed a family of DNA tetrahedra which are structurally stable and can be manufactured in a quick and simple step,” adds Turberfield. “Ultimately we hope to use them as building blocks for nanofabrication, to act as templates for much more complex DNA nanostructures.”
About the author Belle Dumé is science writer at PhysicsWeb
from the latest issue of NanoNews-Now covering Investing In Nanotechnology. Editor Rocky Rawstern interviews nanotech investment guru Jack Uldrich. Select Quotes: Source: NanoNews NN: What do you say to potential investors about companies that are raking in tens of millions of dollars in VC funding without having a near-term product? First off, neither VC’s nor individual investors should invest in “science projects.” If a company doesn’t have a real product (or at least a plan to develop a real product) – stay away! Having said that, I am comfortable if a VC chooses to invest in a company that may not have a viable product for 3 to 7 years – after all it is their (or their investors) money they are using.
NN: Who do you like these days, who are you keeping an eye on, and why? On the conservative side, I like a number of the Fortune 100 companies, including Intel, IBM, GE, IBM 3M and Dow. Granted, these aren’t the sexiest companies and they are unlikely to yield sizeable returns, but they do understand how nanotechnology can improve many of their existing business lines and they are working on those improvements today. Furthermore, they have the resources to invest in those nanotechnology-enabled products that can lead to entirely new business in the future. Lastly, because they have the resources, I think they are going to smash a number of their smaller competitors.
Israel is on the nanotech map. A current snapshot shows that more than 30 Israel nanotech startups and over a dozen established firms representing over US $76 million in investment capital. Israeli firms are developing nanotech applications in fields that are historically successful for Israel and are currently the subject of strategic focus by risk capital firms.
here are some of their assertions on why Israel is and will continue to be a player:
Israel’s small size and limited financial resources are serious challenges, but Israel’s academic, business and government leaders recognize nanotech as a key platform for ensuring Israel’s continued R&D excellence for decades to come. (read more on my post “Israel and Europe compete for VC money” ) Over 250 Nano Researchers Working in 7 Leading Fields. Led by the Technion Institute and Bar-Ilan University, Israel’s six universities have added or assigned new researchers to nanotechnology studies, and this strong growth trend will continue. Read more on
Nanotechnology is a natural enabler for Israel. In fact, our small size is also our advantage — it means sharper focus, more efficient use of funds, fewer commercial obstacles, rapid prototyping and testing, and higher quality standards.
Areas of research include:
Nanomaterials– Israel today ranks first in the world for publication citations in fields related to these disciplines, according to the Philadelphia-based Institute for Science Information (ISI). (Learn more in my previous post on the technion study )
Nanobiotechnology -Of all nano-related disciplines, current research in this area is increasingly likely to be commercialized and marketed.
Nanoelectronics –Over 80 percent of Israel’s nanotech researchers are engaged in disciplines that contribute to nanoelectronics.
Water Remediation-In 2005, Israel opened the world’s largest saltwater reverse osmosis water treatment facility on the southern Israeli coast, confirming Israel as one of the most advanced ‘beta’ sites for water research.
Israel’s outstanding track record is just a hint of what nanotechnology will bring. Israel and nano are a strategic fit.
And from Lux Research’s Nanotech Nations Report dated October 2005: “Israel’s technology development strength puts it in the same nanotech league as the U.S. and Taiwan.”
The best is yet to come
Fully half of current nanotech research is in preliminary stages, suggesting that the bulk of Israel’s applied research will be undertaken only in coming years. The small percentage of research in prototyping and commercial stages also sends a positive signal to potential investors: now is a good time to develop collaborative partnerships with Israeli academic and industrial players.
The Israel Economic Mission in New York has launched a new initiative, where Israeli executives working in U.S. technology, pharmaceutical, banking, media, and venture capital companies will open doors and offer advice to other Israeli companies looking to penetrate the U.S. market.
Israel’s economic mission in New York has launched a new initiative, in which Israeli executives in US technology, pharmaceuticals, banking, media, and venture capital companies will open doors and offer advice for new companies trying to break into the US market. The first meeting of this executives network with three recently founded companies was described by the participants as a great success.
The meeting was held in the Nixon Peabody LLC law firm, under the aegis of Nixon Peabody’s Israeli Business Team, headed by Mitchell C. Shelowitz. Israel Minister for Economic Affairs to North America Zohar Pery and Israel Economic Mission to North America director of high tech business development Roi Tzur are coordinating the program.
The three companies were Svivot Ltd., which develops and markets intelligence inference systems that analyze commonalities between groups for military and police intelligence units; Dynasec Ltd., develops platform that enables organizations to efficiently manage risk, governance and compliancy processes, such as under the US Sarbanes-Oxley Act; and Applicure Technologies Ltd., which has Internet security solutions.
The participating Israeli executives came from Comcast Corp. (Nasdaq:CMCSA), Integrated Device Technology (NYSE:IDT), Merck & Co. (NYSE: MRK), SAP (NYSE; LSE: SAP; XETRA:SAPG), Time Warner Inc. (NYSE:TWX), Bank Hapoalim USA, VocalTec Communications Ltd. (Nasdaq: VOCL), Giza, GlobalTech Research, and other companies. Some executives declined to publicly reveal their identities.
Svivot VP Sam Roth said:
“The executives willing to help are not people who have nothing else to do; they simply want to help. They not only shared their wisdom and experience with us, but also provided critical connections. They didn’t just tell us whom to approach; they opened the first doors.”
Another participant said doors were opened for Svivot to the New York Police Department and the Office of Homeland Security in Washington.
GlobalTech Research managing director Etan J. Ayalon said the forum was naturally limited, numbering 15 to 30 people at each meeting, where there was group pressure and an effort to talk in a practical way. This was in contrast to investment conferences with hundreds of participants, where it is possible to avoid commitments to act. He said US consultancy firms charged tens of thousands of dollars for providing services of this kind, including retainers and expenses.
On December 1, two veteran venture capital professionals gave an audience of software entrepreneurs some tips on the best ways to approach them to achieve a favorable funding outcome.
Sita Vasan, an executive with Intel Capital, and Daniel F. Summa, a partner with Genesys Partners, both based in New York, were the panelists in a discussion about VC financing opportunities. The discussion was moderated by Raymer W. McQuiston, a partner with the law firm Brown Rudnick Berlack Israels LLP.
The discussion, sponsored by the Venture Capital special interest group NYSIA), was held at the Times Square offices of Brown Rudnick.
These days, Vasan said she is interested in innovative and disruptive technologies, especially in the areas of home automation (the digital home), mobility, and education.
Summa said that Genesys, an early stage VC and merchant banker, medical devices is a current area of interest for his firm.
Summa sees the current technology and VC expansion as a “new beginning” for VCs and technology entrepreneurs, following the dot-com bust several years ago.
Resource Frugality as a Key to Future Success
Whatever the technology or business in which an entrepreneur is involved, Summa says he is particularly impressed with startups that are extremely economical and frugal with their resources, and have bootstrapped and already built something of a track record, before they approach a VC for financing. He calls these startups “Depression-era babies,” because of their extreme cost-consciousness, and believes that this is an indication that such companies will be similarly economical with any new capital infusions they receive.
The typical first round investment made by Genesys is in the $1-$3 million range. A second B round is usually $5-$7 million, with Genesys typically seeking to exit the investment after that, says Summa.
Both Vasan and Summa commented on the increasing volume of VC funding, on both the East and West Coasts, with greater applications, for example in the financial services area in New York, as would be expected.
Management Team is Key for Startup
What’s important in a startup’s business plan? The management team is key, both agreed. Summa said he evaluates a plan using a number of key criteria – technology, production, marketing, revenue model and business model. Each of these plays a critical role in the potential success of the business going forward.
Both agreed, too, that “it’s important not to overwhelm the VC with too much information.” As is typical of VC’s, they are being inundated with proposals and plans, and entrepreneurs need to get at the gist in a hurry.
Vasan, in particular, recommends a 2-page executive summary – no more – adding that a good Powerpoint presentation would be an excellent accompanying document.
One particular no-no: Don’t continuously call the VC. If they like your executive summary, they’ll let you know, and they’ll probably want to move quickly. Vasan noted that an entrepreneur recently called her 10 times, and “I crossed him off my list,” she said.
If they’re interested in your business, the typical deal can take 2-3 months to close; it could be as little as 45 days from the time of the term sheet. However, Summa noted, things can get slowed down during holiday and vacation periods.
Lots of new products, from toothpaste to khakis, use nanotechnology. But some say we don’t know enough about the health and environmental risks from the particles tiny enough to penetrate cells in lungs, brains and other organs.
PROVIDENCE, Rhode Island — Those stain-resistant khakis you just picked up at the mall, the tennis ball that holds its bounce longer and sunscreen that’s clear instead of white have something in common — nanotechnology.
Scientists manipulating matter at the molecular level have improved on hundreds of everyday products in recent years and are promising dramatic breakthroughs in medicine and other industries as billions of dollars a year are pumped into the nascent sector.
But relatively little is known about the potential health and environmental effects of the tiny particles — just atoms wide and small enough to easily penetrate cells in lungs, brains and other organs. While governments and businesses have begun pumping millions of dollars into researching such effects, scientists and others say nowhere near enough is being spent to determine whether nanomaterials pose a danger to human health.
Michael Crichton’s bestselling book Prey paints a doomsday scenario in which a swarm of tiny nanomachines escapes the lab and threatens to overwhelm humanity. Scientists believe the potential threat from nanomaterials is more everyday than a sci-fi thriller, but no less serious. Studies have shown that some of the most promising carbon nanoparticles — including long, hollow nanotubes and sphere-shaped buckyballs — can be toxic to animal cells.
There are fears that exposure can cause breathing problems, as occurs with some other ultrafine particles, that nanoparticles could be inhaled through the nose, wreaking unknown havoc on brain cells, or that nanotubes placed on the skin could damage DNA.
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health is developing guidelines for working with nanomaterials, saying the tiny particles may raise health concerns and the risk to those who work with them is unknown. Also unknown is the risk to consumers and the environment.
“No one knows, and that’s the problem,” said Pat Roy Mooney, executive director of the ETC Group, an Ottawa nonprofit that studies the impact of technology on people and the environment. “People are rubbing them on our skin as sunscreens and as cosmetics.”
Mooney’s group is calling for products, such as sunscreen, that are directly absorbed into the body to be taken off the shelf until there is more study. “Frankly, I don’t think that skin creams or stain resistant pants or food additives are a good reason to sacrifice someone’s health,” he said.
The federal government currently spends about $1 billion a year on nanotechnology research under its National Nanotechnology Initiative. A newly released inventory by the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies found about $6 million being spent annually by the federal government on research that is highly focused on health and environmental effects of nanotechnology. Though the inventory is not a complete accounting of all research, it indicates that a small percentage of research dollars are going to health and safety, said Dave Rejeski, director of the non-partisan policy group.
“More energy and more funding needs to go into it,” said Kevin Ausman, executive director of the Center for Biological and Environmental Nanotechnology at Rice University in Texas. “There is not going to be a simple answer to the question ‘Is nanotechnology dangerous?'” he said. But Ausman and others said the nanotechnology sector is ahead of the curve when it comes to understanding potential dangers, and is doing far more early research than has been done in other industries, even one as relatively new as biotechnology.
“These issues are being discussed openly,” said Agnes Kane, a pathologist at Brown University, who is moving into nanotechnology after extensive work researching asbestos. She is one of several Brown professors sharing a $1.8 million, four-year grant to study the effects of nanoparticles on human and animal cells.
The asbestos industry, which doled out staggering sums of money for liability lawsuits after material used for insulation was shown to cause cancer and other ailments, paid the price for a failure to fully understand the product’s dangers before putting it on the market, Kane said. “This is one of the few areas that I’ve been in that there has been a discussion at the beginning,” she said.
Rejeski said researchers are struggling with how much to spend and how to decide what research to fund. The group’s inventory of research is a kind of “nanotech dating service” that can help match up researchers with similar interests who are looking for partners, he said. It can also identify holes and point to areas that need more funding. For example, a search of the inventory shows much of the research now happening is focused on the lungs. Very little is focused on the gastrointestinal tract — even though there are new toothpastes being developed that use nanotechnology, Rejeski said. There’s also very little so-called lifecycle research — how nanomaterials break down in the environment, Rejeski said.
Scientists are also working on creating a standard terminology for nanotechnology so that researchers from different backgrounds can work together and better understand the research that’s been done in other fields.
The NanoBusiness Alliance, a group of large and small businesses, is looking at working with other groups to conduct an economic analysis of the level of funding that is needed for environmental health and safety research in the coming year. The alliance consists primarily of nanotech startups but also includes major corporations such as Lockheed Martin and Motorola and research institutions including Northwestern and Purdue universities.
Sean Murdock, executive director of the group, said he believes it’s premature to regulate the young industry but that businesses recognize that more health and safety research is needed. “If we keep our eye on the ball,” he said, “we can avoid big downstream problems.”
Money, Money, Money… That’s what most people have in mind when starting a website or a blog but is there real money in blogs?
A recent study by a British blogger on Adsonblogs finds that 35% of the top blogs have no Adsense, no donation buttons or any other way to make money. It’s possible to assume that some of the blogs are used are promotional tools only and others simply aren’t in business at all.
There is a more secure income in plastic bottles in the mall, or sitting with a cup in front of the market.
But some people claim they make Six Figures from blogging. So it’s worth a shot to list the potential sources of income.
How to make money from blogs
Adsense – the google ads are popping out like mushrooms after the rain but do people really click on them? In many cases, people that snoop around are not interested on shopping usually but google’s sophisticated Adsense adapt to the content on the page. There are many services out there that can teach you how to incorporate the ads to your site and save you the learning curve.
Donations – Services like PayPal or Amazon are using the honor system etc. The chances that someone will donate are slim, but hey – at least you are giving the opportunity. Side note: I noticed that many sites with a large number of members set up goals. A targetfor example “help us reach $1000 for the new search” and it works for them.
Books – Come up with a recommended library in one big post with all the books you’d would like to read or have read and encourage reviews and suggestions for additions via the comments. All books will be linked by Amazon affiliate links. This actually works sometimes and it’s easy to apply.
Other Online Ads – I recommend blogads but you need to reach a critical mass to carry ads -for advertisers find us a very cost-effective way or reaching a very specific audience and you make money by hosting the ads.
Merchandise. blogs are quickly becoming brand names. Cafepress is a great service that will make t-shirts, mugs, posters and what not with your site logo on it. I will implement it soon with the new logo and site design that I’m about to launch, but for those of you with an established crowd of readers – it’s worth a shot. If you don’t get any sales you can always give it to your family for Christmas.
eMiniMalls– Services like chitika offer you a chance to place a “sophisticated” ad on your site. MiniMalls are more informative than other ads, and it’s possible to catch good deals through them.
Learn your crowd. So, everybody is selling ipods these days, but is it really what your crowd is looking for? You can ask them. Online surveys like Surveymonkey can make the task really easy if you have a news letter.
Content is KING. it’s been said over and over again, but the post wouldn’t be accurate without it. Write about something that you are passionate about and will drive people, and more people = more clicks. Read blogs, subscribe to newsletters and get inspiration constantly. I often find myself talking to a colleague and than sitting down to take notes.
Affiliate programs. These programs operate as B2B. The purpose is to transform readers into shoppers and there are many out there: Amazon, ClickBank, Linkshare and more.
Sell your Blog. the ultimate wet dream of a blogger is to do “Blog Flipping”. Selling your blog is not an easy task, but it’s certainly possible. The other side of the coin is buying Blogs from others. Get a blog that is doing well by producing steady revenue from ads, and build up from its current point. (Relax, mine is not for sale).
Critics will say that blogs should not be used to advertise in. That people visit a blog to get information and the ads are like the annoying people handing you flyers in the mall. In my opinion blogs have incredible potential and the market is still trying to figure out how to use them. I’m interested to hear your opinion on blog revenues. I’d like to hear from any bloggers who are making money and others that are failing to. What works? Help compile the ultimate How To guide on blog revenue.
