More NanoBS. What would be the purpose of sending a spacecraft the size of a sewing needle to another star? The only people who would be fascinated by such a concept work for MSN and MSNBC. for one, it would be too small to track, once it got ten feet from the launch pad. The next concern would be what sort of instrumentation and communication equipment it could carry. So, theoretically, you could make a really small but fast-moving projectile, but to claim it would be useful for space exploration is snake oil.
People have been talking about nano robotics for years. They contemplate molecular-sized mechanisms that could do all sorts of tiny work, but they have yet to show even the first prototype. The thing about nanotechnologies is that they can tell you that it’s right there, building tiny nanobuildings, and you couldn’t see a damn thing. That’s because nanostuff is too small to see. So we can pay millions in grants to research something that can’t even be seen or touched.
How many 11 pound sewing needles have you seen?
There are already a lot of applications for nanotech that are available in consumer goods. Remember that “nano-” just means a particular range of sizes, so nanotech just means “unusual properties at that scale”.
Just off the top of my head, two nanotech practical applications are “self cleaning glass”, which is just ordinary glass but with a nanoscale thick layer of a material on it that makes it very slick. And carbon tube water filters that only pass individual molecules of water, nothing larger, which may alleviate much of the world’s drinking water shortage.
Nanotech porous materials are also very useful, such as metal parts that at that scale is full of tiny holes which catch lubricant and keep it very slick, and clothing that passes moisture but retains heat.
But you’re right that, in the final analysis, nanotech is invisible.