|
Post by crystalriver on Oct 11, 2009 15:45:08 GMT -5
You know who you are--and I need help with this one-- I got this response on Rumormill the other day--please check it out as well as the website--don't know if it is some guy attempting to lead me astray or if this guy has some knowledge that may be useful to us---here is what he sent: Re: Is This Why Dr. Randy Wymore Noted Chlaymd.... I developed NanobacTX and was the founder/past CEO of Nanobac Pharmaceuticals....responsible for most research done on Nanobacteria. The treatments and diagnostics mentioned are available only at www.nanobiotech.us Published clinical studies and research papers can all be read on the website. G HELP PLEASE I didn't want to post if it is just a solicitation but considered this guy was the CEO--he might be telling us something--if you get my drift. I will post at RM only if you think it is wise and important after looking through the whitepapers. CR
|
|
|
Post by crystalriver on Oct 11, 2009 15:57:26 GMT -5
Every time I look at it I see a lie--something being proffered to us to suggest this is "natural"--if that is the case--I'll eat my hat--swear to God.
I see this as a redirection--I didn't see much on white papers as was suggested in the information that was sent to me.
It looks like bs to me and did from the begining--why I never posted it. It could very well be that nanobacteria could cause these things but not morgs--natural nano bacteria; however, IMO what we got isn't natural and has been created --not for our good either.
Is this the attempt to get us ready for the CDC and their bs? Sorry I know I have to quit with the vulgarities but sometimes there just isn't another way to describe it!
CR
|
|
|
Post by aqt on Oct 11, 2009 16:32:43 GMT -5
CR, don't you EVER stop the profanity!!!!
It implies passion, which is what we have...and lots of it.
just home from my second 12 hr shift in a row...can't read this now, sorry. I won't maintain much of it if I try cramming it in a tired brain.
will read tomorrow with fresh eyes.....oh, and by the way, natural my ass!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It is man-made, for sure!!!
aqt
|
|
|
Post by aqt on Oct 11, 2009 17:34:30 GMT -5
Oh, and by the way...did you just call me a science geek?
Hey lady, I've been called alot of things in my day, but a science geek was NEVER one of them!!!!!!!!!!!!!
LOLOLOLOLOLOOOLOLOLOOOLOOLOOLOOLLOLOLOLOLOL
aqt
|
|
|
Post by skyship on Oct 11, 2009 20:25:25 GMT -5
This is Kajander, the Bechamp follower, has studied the nanobacteria they thought was from a meteorite. He says bigger than virus, but smaller than blood cell, so could it be the sphere that forms in the blood cell?
That sphere from PAHs fullerenes in particles.
At the very beginning of the tape the narrator says,
....We are breathing in elements never before defined in medicine........
Nanobacteria from his findings:
"Nanobacteria: not a life-form?
November 27, 2000: Nanobacteria are putative cell-walled microorganisms with a diameter well below the generally accepted lower limit (about 0.2 micrometers) for bacteria. In July, 1998, Finnish scientists, Olavi Kajander and Neva Ciftcioglu, attracted widespread attention with a paper in the Proceedings of the U.S. National Academy of Science (PNAS, 1) reporting the apparent culture of nanobacteria and the partial characterization of a nanobacterial ribosomal RNA.
In that paper, Kajander and Ciftcioglu report the isolation of nanobacteria from human blood, cow blood and commercial blood serum preparations, and describe the formation by nanobacteria of microscopic mineral structures composed of apatite, a calcium- and phosphate-containing mineral found in teeth and bone. They advanced this process of "biomineralization" as a possible cause of pathological calcification in humans such as the formation of kidney stones.
The Finnish scientists produced nanobacteria and their associated mineral structures in a medium containing 10% blood serum, which served as the presumed source of the nanobacterial inoculum. Control cultures prepared with gamma-irradiated serum were free of nanobacteria. Apatite formations generated during culture resembled flattened hollow spheres with an opening facing the bottom of the culture dish, which, the authors stated, are "apparently the dwelling place of the organisms."
Now, John Cisar and colleagues at NIH and FDA labs in Bethesda, Maryland have reported the results of their attempt to reproduce the findings of Kajander and Ciftcioglu (2). They were able to confirm the appearance of nanobacteria-like formations under the culture conditions described by Kajander and Ciftcioglu. Otherwise, however, their findings were mostly unsupportive of the Finnish work.
The Finnish scientists reported a ribosomal RNA derived from their cultures that they identified, on the basis of its nucleotide sequence, as originating from a novel nanobacterial species. However, Cisar et al. demonstrate that this RNA sequence is virtually identical to that of ribosomal RNA from Phyllobacterium mysinacearum, a common contaminant of the reagents used in nucleotide sequence analysis. This is a particularly forceful criticism because the sequence analysis studies of Kajander and Ciftcioglu did not include reagent controls.
In support of their contention that nanobacteria possess a similar metabolism to normal bacteria, Kajander and Ciftcioglu reported that multiplication of nanobacteria is sensitive to tetracycline and citrate. However, Cisar et al. point out that these compounds can inhibit calcification, and that other antibiotics did not inhibit nanobacterial replication, nor did heat treatment or treatment with sodium azide, a powerful respiratory inhibitor. Furthermore, they argue that gamma radiation, which prevents nanobacterial multiplication, could inactivate nonliving yet organic precursors of mineralization, e.g., phospholipid complexes.
Perhaps most damaging to the nanobacterial hypothesis is the observation by Cisar et al. that the spherical particles previously identified as nanobacterial cells, as well as the "dwelling" structures, resemble inanimate structures that form spontaneously in sterile solutions of inorganic calcium and phosphate salts combined with organic material, as found in the medium used to culture nanobacteria.
However, not all of the Finnish observations are disposed of by the most recent study, including the report that nanobacterial "infection" of mammalian 3T6 cells results in the appearance of nanobacteria, or at least calcium-rich deposits, in multiple vacuoles within the cells. Cisar et al. did not attempt to reproduce or explain this observation, but one possible interpretation is suggested by the origin of the 3T6 cell line. These cells are derived from fibroblasts, which control limb and blood vessel development in mammals. Several congenital bone malformation diseases are directly traceable to mutations in fibroblast cell lines. Perhaps, therefore, fibroblasts are conditioned to control the deposition of apatite in the body, which may include the internalization of excess minerals formed in the blood or organs. Indeed, apatite crystals have been shown to cause inflammation when injected into joints. Many malignant diseases involve calcification of tissues, but it is not clear whether it is necessary to postulate the existence of an infectious agent as a cause; rather these conditions may stem from defects in one of several calcification-preventing blood serum proteins, or an inability of fibroblasts to properly control mineralization.
At present, the molecular basis for biomineralization, and the possible role, if any, that nanobacteria play in this process remains unclear. Future research in this area is likely, therefore, to prove of value in elucidating the etiology of diseases involving pathological mineralization, whether this process is mediated by a novel life form, the host itself, or solely by physical processes.
References
1. Kajander, E.O. and N. Ciftcioglu. 1998. Nanobacteria: an alternative mechanism for pathogenic intra- and extracellular calcification and stone formation. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 95:8274-8279. Full text of the article
2. Cisar, J.O., D.-Q. Xu, J. Thompson, W. Swaim, L. Hu and D.J. Kopecko. 2000. An alternative interpretation of nanobacteria-induced biomineralization. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 97:11,511-11,515.
naturalscience.com/ns/cover/cover14.html
Natural science dude........ Is this the nanobacteria what one scientist called the "little animicules" and Bechamp called the "third element of the blood"?
Or fullerenes from soot in buckyballs, or fullerenes extracted from meteorites and used as particle material, or fullerenes as nanobacteria.
"Nanobacteria continue to surprise microbiologists. A team at the University of Queensland (UQ) in St. Lucia, Australia cultured specimens from several kilometers under the ocean floor, where temperatures of 170ºC and pressures of 2,000 atmospheres are reached. "It appears that the nanobes were not actively growing in the rock from which they were retrieved, but thrive when exposed to aerobic conditions." The organisms withstand "repeated exposure to vacuum, bombardment by the electron beam, and X-ray radiation—and continue to grow," said UQ team member Philippa Uwins. "They resemble actinomycetes and fungi except for their remarkably smaller size—namely, filaments of variable lengths with diameters of 20-128 nm." Many bacteriologists remain sceptical. Size Matters: Another Peek at the Ongoing Nanobe Debate, by Jeffrey L. Fox, ASM News, 10 April 2000. Life on Mars! is the related CA webpage. Fossilized Life Forms in the Murchison Meteorite is a related CA webpage. "
and compare to this:
"April 27: Most interstellar particles captured by Stardust are complex organic compounds, and not the expected minerals. This is the conclusion of the team from Max-Planck Institute, Garching, that manages the mass-spectrometer, CIDA, on NASA's Stardust spacecraft. "The first in-situ chemical analysis of interstellar dust particles produces a puzzling result: These cosmic particles consist mostly of 3-dimensionally cross-linked organic macro-molecules, so-called polymeric-heterocyclic-aromates. They rather resemble tar-like substances than minerals." + So far, 5 interstellar dust particles have been collected and analysed. "The instrument had been pointed into the direction of the interstellar dust, so that it would not measure the more frequent interplanetary dust particles, which are parts of our solar system.... At an impact speed of about 30 kilometers/second (18 miles/second) these interstellar dust particles are vaporized immediately and broken up into molecular fragments." + "It is the size of these molecular fragments with nuclear masses of up to 2000... which surprised us as much as the seemingly absence of any mineral constituents.... Only organic molecules can reach those sizes.... The details of the mass spectra measured with CIDA show that the molecules of the interstellar dust must have about 10% of nitrogen and/or oxygen in addition to hydrogen and carbon. This means that these cannot be pure PAHs, which are planar, but... extend into all three spacial directions." + We are surprised and delighted to have such an important result from this mission, this early. [Thanks, Bruce Moomaw, Larry Klaes and Ron Baalke.] First Direct Chemcal Anansis of Interstellar Dust, by Franz R. Krueger and Jochen Kissel, CIDA's posting of English translation, with illustrations, p 326-329 v 39, Sterne und Weltraum, May 2000. Tarlike Macro-Molecules Detected In Stardust, by Jochen Kissel, Max-Planck-Institut fur extraterrestrische Physik, 26 April 2000. CIDA Homepage from the Finnish Meteorological Institute. Stardust Detects Organic Molecules, SpaceDaily, 27 April 2000. NASA Craft Finds Possible Tar in Stars, by Andrew Bridges, Space.com, 28 April 2000. Nigel Hawkes, "Far from home, have we met our smallest cousin?" [text] The Times, London, 3 May 2000. The Physical and Chemical Properties of Interstellar Dust and Dust in Comets: Possible Seeds for Life on Earth [CA reprint] by Franz R. Krueger and Jochen Kissel, May 2000. Analysis of Interstellar Dust is a related CA webpage. Can the Theory Be Tested? is a related CA webpage. Cross-Linked Hetero Aromatic Polymers in Interstellar Dust by N.C. Wickramasinghe, D.T. Wickramasinghe and F. Hoyle [CA preprint]. "
both from this link:
www.panspermia.org/whatsne13.htm
There are our PAHs again however, he does not think these are PAHs.
there is more............
skyship
|
|
|
Post by skyship on Oct 11, 2009 20:33:20 GMT -5
Are these Carnicom's spheres?
spherical particles previously identified as nanobacterial cells?
Have read his work before, but, seems he is approaching this in a different manner so has not to be suppressed.
Glad to see he has kept at it.
skyship
|
|
|
Post by skyship on Oct 11, 2009 20:45:27 GMT -5
Well, now the biggest controvery in Microbiology?.....................Might explain a lot heh? "Clouds May Harbor NanobacteriaAmit Asaravala Email 04.11.05 Tiny particles linked to a number of painful and sometimes deadly diseases may spread across the globe by hitching a ride in clouds, claim researchers in a recent issue of the Journal of Proteome Research. The particles, known as nanobacteria, are 100 times smaller than typical bacteria and have been found in kidney stones, arterial plaques and ovarian cancers. But scientists have yet to agree whether the particles actually cause the diseases or how they infect humans. Also unknown is whether the particles are life forms or an unknown type of crystal -- a rift that has sparked one of the biggest controversies in modern microbiology.Now, a new theory by Andrei Sommer, of the University of Ulm, Germany, and N. Chandra Wickramasinghe, of Cardiff University in the United Kingdom, attempts to show how nanobacteria moves from humans to the environment and back. In a letter in the February issue of the Journal of Proteome Research, the pair describe studies suggesting that nanobacteria exist in the atmosphere -- at least above Hyderabad, India, where the researchers captured samples of the air with a specially designed balloon.
The nanobacteria particles closely resembled those found in humans when compared on seven key criteria, including size and shape -- a finding that suggests humans can be infected through the atmosphere. In the journal's introduction to the paper, Sommer theorizes that the particles may be introduced to the atmosphere through human urine, which enters waste-water streams and becomes aerosolized. Once in the atmosphere, the nanobacteria can fall back to Earth in dry or wet form. The researchers think dry forms are relatively harmless, but wet forms, in raindrops, would be more likely to be infectious because the nanobacteria would still be "active." "Inactive, transiently desiccated microorganisms, transported back from the dry atmosphere to the Earth by gravity, are likely to cause little harm, compared to those returning in rain drops, after having been incorporated for some time in long-lived clouds, where they would encounter better conditions for revitalization," wrote the researchers. The researchers also suggested that nanobacteria could help clouds develop by clumping together at the perfect size to promote the collection of airborne water droplets. Attempts to contact Sommer and Wickramasinghe after business hours Friday were unsuccessful. " www.wired.com/science/planetearth/news/2005/04/67176skyship
|
|
|
Post by skyship on Oct 11, 2009 21:37:08 GMT -5
Chemtrail clouds may harbor nanobacteria for sure!
mmmmm This nanobacteria in natural form from meteorites or interplanetary dust,
seems hooked to the PAHs. While on earth the simulation is in soot, kerogens and it's symbiotic relationship to Archaea.
the PAHs on earth are not the same as those from the meteorites and interstellular dust, or cosmic dust.
PAHs come from volcanoes as well, but it is the interaction of kerogens from shale and the bacterias archaea, that have been experimented on in labs, and I believe constitute the bucky balls, nano tubes, and the fullerene particles. which make an aritificial PAH.
The true PAHs in outer space are affiliated with amino acids, carbonaceous chrondrites.
So, if there are no chondrites in the bucky balls, then we know these were created from kerogens, from volcanoes, and from black shale, where fullerenes are found.
The nanobacteria would be the bacteria created from the mixture of kerogens and fullerenes found in black soot.
so, the global warming sheme is busted. They are creating it, buckyballs and particles that can reflect sun back out into atmosphere, can also reflect it on to earth, thereby creating global warming. This was a century long plan. First the buckyballs then particles, sulphur, aluminum, then other chemicals using NOBLE GASES. A chemical reaction takes place, but they keep adding new as the years go by, so we try to find the first thing done, when they are already onto the 10th or 20th or whatever.
So, why even use this scheme? To incorporate a reason to spray our skies, and then substitute whatever particles they want in the tubes. And that includes Artificial respirocytes, which are artificial blood cells. the other way is to blast particles into hybrids for genetic alteration of plants.
When inorganic became part of organic, and that construct was added to charged particles, well than you have a method for artificial genes, cells, proteins, enzymes, protons, electrons, neutrons, and quantum dots to move in at the nano level.
Without the charged particles, this could not happen.
Fullerenes are the charged particles.
==============
Skyship
|
|
|
Post by skyship on Oct 11, 2009 21:59:26 GMT -5
Here is what I mean: "Sports fans may recognize the proposed structure for a newly discovered 60-atom carbon molecule as the geometric pattern on a soccer ball. But images of R. Buckminster Fuller's geodesic domes inspired its name: buckminsterfullerene. Formed in the laboratory by the violent, laser-driven vaporization of graphite, such as highly symmetric, stable carbon clusters may pervade the universe, especially around carbon-rich stars and within interstellar dust. These molecular "buckyballs" may also sit at the core of soot particles." The molecule, C.sub.60., as reported in the ... www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-4030971.htmlNanobacteria and fullerenes. ........ Biochemical Pathways Towards the Living Cell "Production of PAH's, Graphite Whiskers, Graphite Onions, Carbon Nanotubes, Fullerenes , Nanodiamonds, and other Carbon Allotropes from the outflow of Carbon Rich-Red Giant Stars and their interactions with Supernovae. Production of Water and Carbon Monoxide by Mira Stars (Variable Asymptotic Red Giants) Creation of Hydrophobic Bubbles from Benzene, Anthracene, Pyrene, and other Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons . - Scaffolds for the assembly of RiboNucleotide Chains." ,,,,,,,,' Biochemical conversions of complex 3-D PAHs containing Nitrogen into Peptides PAH precursos to the Genetic Code (From Carbohydrates and PAH's to RNA and the DNA (Important influence of Phosphate and Hydrogen Bonding in early liposomes and micells) Membrane Transitions from PAH liposomes to Steroidal Lipids, Esterified L-gylcerol terpenoids , D-glycerol based phospholipids, sphingolipids, ceramides,and glycolipids. Possible Roles for Mica, Clays, IronSulfate Minerals, and ocean tides in the creation of Cellular Forms of Life. www.telemedical.com/Telemedical/cellularorigins.htmNote where nano comes in here from above link: Inteins, Prions, Self Replicating Ribozymes, & Viroids --------->(Last Common Ancestor of Life ) RNA based Cell + Protein based Cell = RNA +Protein Based Cell --------->Circular DNA Containing Cell---------->Nanobacteria-------->Archaea --(Methanopyrus near the root)------> Viruses ---------->Eukarya ------>Eubacteria(Green sulfur loving and non sulfur loving bacteria at the root ) skyship
|
|
|
Post by skyship on Oct 11, 2009 22:07:01 GMT -5
"Extreme Life Posted: 03/24/03 Author: Stephen Hart Summary: A discovery from the early 1990s continues to be controversial today. Are the tiny, mineralized particles called nanobacteria the world's smallest organisms or mere crystal growth? Skeptics remain unconvinced that nanobacteria are alive, but nanobacteria researchers say evidence in their favor is mounting." Small World nanobacteria Olavi Kajander suggests that nanobacteria attach to each other to form chains. Credit: Doctors Health Supply "Nanobacteria." The name sounds obvious enough. They're small. They're bacteria. You might assume they resemble the smallest archaean, Nanoarchaeum, or the smallest bacterium, Mycoplasma, in size. You might assume they resemble ordinary bacteria in nature. But instead of taking the prize as the smallest organism, nanobacteria-a tenth the size of ordinary bacteria and half as large as Nanoarchaeum and Mycoplasma-have continued to cause controversy since their description in the early 1990s by a Finnish research team led by Olavi Kajander. The team avoided overstating their claim - "These autonomously replicating particles are tentatively named nanobacteria" - but the name stuck, and many of the team's publications state that nanobacteria are alive. The spheres, covered with a hard calcium phosphate coat, were found in various fluids used to grow cells in the laboratory, such as cow serum. Medical microbiologist Neva Ciftcioglu, now at NASA's Johnson Space Center in Houston, her colleague Kajander and collaborators in the United States, Canada, the UK, Japan and Russia continue to research nanobacteria. But scientists in some labs say that, while they can produce the spheres and can see them with an electron microscope, they have been unable to confirm any sign of life in them............... more here and a section on mycoplasma as well. euro.astrobio.net/exclusive/408/small-worldgetting deep...................... skyship
|
|
|
Post by skyship on Oct 11, 2009 22:43:15 GMT -5
From black smokers but looks like the form from the nanobacteria. Methanopyrus again: this from above link: "Inteins, Prions, Self Replicating Ribozymes, & Viroids --------->(Last Common Ancestor of Life ) RNA based Cell + Protein based Cell = RNA +Protein Based Cell --------->Circular DNA Containing Cell---------->Nanobacteria-------->Archaea --(Methanopyrus near the root)------> Viruses ---------->Eukarya ------>Eubacteria(Green sulfur loving and non sulfur loving bacteria at the root ) In particular this: M. kandleri: "Bi-species-biofilm made from Methanopyrus kandleri rods and Pyrococcus furiosus cocci on a solid surface." see photo: www.biologie.uni-regensburg.de/Mikrobio/Thomm/Arbeitsgruppen/wirth_en.htmlskyship
|
|
|
Post by skyship on Oct 11, 2009 23:02:17 GMT -5
Oh my my..... I believe I may have found the good docs. device.
Methanopyrus kandleri from ARCHAEA is used but will break this patent down possibly through the stages.
====================================== Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94, 10780-10785). Among the Archaea some thermophilic methanogens (e. g., Methanopyrus kandleri, Methanococcus jannaschii, Methanococcus thermolithotrophicus) have chaperonins with identical subunits (Furutani et al., 1998, J. Biol.
But the patent itself! [/i] This is what is used for the chaperonins:
Wild-type Group I chaperonins are composed of seven subunits in each of the two rings of the double-ring structure. The wild-type cpn60 proteins, which comprise about 550 to about 580 amino acid residues, have been described by different names in different species, including, but not limited to Escherichia coli GroEL protein, Cyanobacterial groEL analogues, Mycobacteriunz tuberculosis and leprae 65 Kd antigen, Coxiella bunietti heat shock protein B (gene htpB), Rickettsia tsutsugamushi major antigen 58, Chlamydial 57 Kd hypersensitivity antigen (gene hypB), Chloroplast RuBisCO subunit binding-protein alpha and beta chains, Mammalian mitochondrial matrix protein P1 (mitonin or P60), and Yeast HSP60 protein. Any of these chaperonins, or mutants thereof, can, for example, be utilized as part of the compositions and devices of the present invention."
are we not back to the HEAT SHOCK 60 protein. Seems it is all here:
from the beginning: ============================================
" ORDERED BIOLOGICAL NANOSTRUCTURES FORMED FROM CHAPERONIN POLYPEPTIDES CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS This application claims benefit of prior United States provisional application number 60/340, 538, titled"Ordered Biological Nanostructures Formed From Extremophillic Heat- Shock Proteins,"filed on November 8,2001, which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety, including drawings.
ORIGIN OF THE INVENTION The invention described herein was made by an employee (s) of the United States Government and may be manufactured and used by or for the Government for governmental purposes without payment of the royalties thereon or therefor.
1. FIELD OF THE INVENTION The following application relates to nanotemplates, nanostructures, nanoarrays and nanodevices formed from wild-type and mutated chaperonin polypeptides, methods of producing such compositions, methods of using such compositions and particular chaperonin polypeptides that can be utilized in producing such compositions. "
made by someone in the government! [/i] " 2. BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION The controlled organization of inorganic materials into multi-dimensional addressable arrays is the foundation for both logic and memory devices, as well as other nonlinear optical and sensing devices (Zhirnov et al., 2001, Contputer 34,34-43, Xia et al., 2000, Adv. Mater.
12,693-713). Many of these devices are currently fabricated using lithographic patterning processes that have progressively developed toward greater integration densities and smaller sizes. At submicron scales, however, conventional lithographic processes are approaching their practical and theoretical limits. At scales below 100 nm, ion and electron beam lithography becomes prohibitively expensive and time consuming, and more importantly, at these scales quantum effects fundamentally change the properties of devices (Sato et al., 1997, J. Appl. Plzys. 82,696).
Nanoscale templates for constrained synthesis, in situ deposition, or direct patterning of nanometer scale inorganic arrays are being developed using both artificial and natural materials. Artificial materials such as microphase separated block copolymers (Park et al., 2001, Appl. Phys. Lett. 79,257-259) and hexagonally close-packed spheres (Hulteen et al., 1995, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A, 1553-1558) have been used for nanoscale fabrication. Natural materials such as DNA (Richter et al., 2000, Adv. Mater. 12, 507-510 ; Keren et al., 2002, Science 297,72-75), bacterial and archaeal surface layer proteins (S-layer proteins) (Sleytr et al., 1999, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 38,1034-1054 ; Douglas et al., Appl. Phys. Lett. 48,676- 678; Hall et al., 2001, CHEMPHYSCHEM 3, 184-186), virus capsids (Shenton et al., 1999, Adv. Mater. 11,253-256 ; Douglas et al., 1999, Adv. Mater., 679-681; Douglas et al., Nature 393,152-155 ; Wang et al., 2002, Angew. Cllem. Int. Ed. 41,459-462), phage (Lee et al., 2002, Science 296,892-895), and some globular proteins (Yamachita, I., 2001, Thin Solid Films 393,12-18) have been used as templates and in other nanoscale applications.
Various nanometer scale objects, including arrays of nanoparticles formed by non- conventional methods are being explored for use as viable alternatives to standard lithographically patterned devices. Individual nanoparticles, also known as quantum dots (QDs), have been shown to behave as isolated device components such as single electron transistors (Likharev, K. K. , 1999, Proc. IEEE 87,606-632 ; Thelander et al., 2001, Appl.
Phys. Lett. 79,2106-2108). Theoreticians have postulated that two-dimensional arrays of QDs with nanoscale resolution could form the basis of future generations of electronic and photonic devices. The function of these devices will be based on phenomena such as coulomb charging, inter-dot quantum tunneling and other coherent properties derived from the electronic consequences of confinement and nanoparticle surface area to volume ratios (Maier, S. A. et al., 2001, Adv. Mater. 13,1501-1505 ; Maier et al., Phys. Rev. B 65,193408 ; Zrenner, A. et al., 2002, Nature 418,612-614 ; Berven et al., 2001, Adv. Mater. 13,109-113).
Traditional techniques for patterning ordered arrays of materials onto inorganic substrates and manufacturing devices currently used are ion beam lithography and molecular beam epitaxy. These techniques possess inherent limitations due to the use of polymeric light masks for pattern formation, however, there is a theoretical limitation of patterning that could ultimately limit the processes in the hundreds of nanometers.
While there are strong incentives to develop nanoscale architectures, these developments require alternate fabrication methods and new insights into the behavior of materials on nanometer scales (Nalwa, H. S. , 2000, Handbook of materials and nanotechnology, Academic Press, San Diego). "
DO WE HAVE THIS BABY?
skyship
|
|
|
Post by skyship on Oct 11, 2009 23:56:44 GMT -5
Mutated chaperonin polypeptides, including HSP60s, can form nanometer or micron scale tubes and filaments
skyship
|
|