I had no idea that nanotechnology was even being used in cosmetics now! That could explain a lot...
FDA told to watch nanotech products for risks
by Lisa Richwine, Reuters, October 11, 2006
From: Greg Bear
Well, very small particles of pigment, encapsulated emolients, that sort of thing. I don't think they've yet incorporated nanites or biochips in Revlon! Nanotechnology is the new corporate buzzword, without coming anywhere near the original vision, which I'm sure irritates K. Eric Drexler no end.
Concerns appear to be about artificial particles small enough to slip into cells and interfere.
That's a relief!
Although, it would be awfully nice to have makeup that went from day to evening wear automatically in response to light quality or loud music. Or how about perfume that released itself only when in close proximity to members of the opposite sex?
From what I've seen, the technical methods are still relatively simple. Far from the actively-creating-something that ordinary construction is, nano today is more like setting up the right circumstance and letting it fall into place, hence the structures aren't very complex, nor have much utility/application, yet.
Location: Corpus Christi
My MS work was on using low-pressure flames to synthesis nano-powders/particles. I have to agree, calling such work "nanotechnology" is rather misleading. Nanoparticles can be extremely useful in a chemical sense because their surface area-to-volume ratio is so high. If you can create a nanopowder version of a useful catalyst, it has much more useful surface area than even a highly porous block of otherwise solid material. Possible improvements to catalytic converters, making catalytic combustion a real possibility, improved chemical detectors, and yes, cosmetics and sunscreens... the uses are quite extensive.
But "nanotech" it ain't.