Tag Archives: Iron Man

Ironheart, nanotechnology and the Marvel Comics Universe (MCU)

Jordan Iacobucci is quite excited about Ironheart’s move away from using nanotechnology in its recent Marvel Comics Universe (MCU) television adaptation. From Iacobucci’s July 7, 2025 article for CBR (self-proclaimed World’s Top Destination for Comic, Movie & TV News), Note: Links have been removed,

After years of delays, Ironheart is finally streaming on Disney+. The six-episode series follows up on Dominique Thorne’s Riri Williams a few days after her adventures with Shuri and the Wakandans during the events of Black Panther: Wakanda Forever as she returns home to Chicago in hopes of building something “iconic.” Though she must navigate several trials and tribulations, Riri finally succeeds in her goal, completing a brand-new version of her Ironheart suit.

As Ironheart wraps up its run on Disney+, fans have plenty to break down, from its groundbreaking finale to its surprisingly great visuals. Many fans may find that the series is much better than they may have anticipated, especially after review-bombing tried to dismiss Ironheart before it even premiered. The series fixes several long-standing issues with the Marvel Cinematic Universe, including one particularly annoying trend that has plagued the franchise since Avengers: Infinity War

The MCU Uses Way Too Much Nanotechnology

Fans Aren’t Fond of the Nanotechnology Trend in the MCU

It all started in Avengers: Infinity War. During a confrontation with Ebony Maw and Cull Obsidian, Tony Stark debuted his new nanotechnology, which spread out across his body from a small compartment on his chest to form a new suit of armor.

Iron Man’s “Bleeding Edge” armor was only the beginning of the MCU’s love affair with nanotechnology, particularly when it comes to superhero suits. Infinity War also gives Spider-Man his own nanotech suit, the Iron Spider armor, which he wears for the remainder of the film and in his next several MCU appearances. Since then, almost every masked MCU hero has upgraded to similar costumes, from Black Panther to Ant-Man. As impressive as the technology may be, fans aren’t fond of the nanotech suits.

Nanotech suits make sense from a practical standpoint. If a hero can cause their suit to form around them with the press of a button, then they don’t have to worry about being caught off-guard by an emerging threat. Though these upgrades make sense, viewers lose something special as a result. The “Bleeding Edge” Iron Man armor and other nanotech suits lose the tangibility of previous MCU superhero costumes.

With nanotech, viewers are never made to feel as if the hero is really wearing a suit. This is largely because the actor isn’t wearing the suit on set. Often, nanotech is implemented as an excuse to use CGI to cover or uncover an actor’s face with their superhero mask at any given point in a scene. As a result, however, the suits themselves feel less real, looking more like images composited in a computer than something that someone would wear while fighting crime.

This issue gets worse when a particular film or series doesn’t allow its graphics team enough time to complete their animation processes. Films like Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania are horrible examples of this trend, featuring suits that sometimes look as though they were cobbled together on a laptop an hour before the movie hit theaters. Fans have been vocal about their distaste for nanotech suits for years, but Marvel has only doubled down on this trend since Infinity War–until now.

..

Iacobucci’s July 7, 2025 article goes on to wax rhapsodic over the return to ‘real’ technology,

…

The Ironheart armor feels real–much more real than any of the new nanotech suits introduced in recent MCU projects. In place of nanotechnology, Ironheart uses real technology to build her suit, and her series is so much better for it. It is much more visually appealing for viewers to see a tangible suit of armor on set with the actors.

…

Iacobucci has a point in that, while nanotechnology is a real technology; the nanotechnology in Iron Man is not (at this time).

So, what about the science in science fiction?

Officially launched in 2008 by the US National Academy of Sciences (NAS), the Science and Entertainment Exchange (see its Wikipedia entry), is one of the programs that filmmakers and others can consult when producing a science fiction piece. This March 16, 2022 article by Marian Caballo for The Science Survey delves into the topic of the science in science fiction, Note: Links have been removed,

Science is the backbone of our world, which means that it inevitably underlies the plots of many popular films and television shows. As an avid cinephile and biology research student myself, I often catch myself trying to break down characters’ scientific name-drops, or pausing to examine the scribbles of equations on background blackboards.

For example: in Don’t Look Up, an original Netflix movie that depicts the danger of a comet hurtling towards Earth, scientists lay out a plan to warn the world of its impending doom. In The Amazing Spider-Man, Peter Parker accidentally helps to create villainous mutant lizards with his solution to the “The Decay Rate Algorithm,” a fictional derivation of the Gompertz–Makeham law of mortality. Avengers: Endgame features an elaborate time travel plan involving Deutsch propositions, eigenvalues and inverted Möbius strips. None were technically real scientific developments, of course, but how do they sound so real?

The answer: scientific consulting. This hidden field is dedicated to scientific advising in the entertainment industry, and it’s an exciting way for STEM [science, technology, engineering, and mathematics] professionals to become engaged in the world of fiction. These interactions connect Hollywood (writers, producers, directors), “with top STEM experts to create synergy between accurate science and engaging storytelling,” said Emilie Lorditch, founder of Real2Reel Science, a science consulting service for writers.

Media greatly impacts the public’s perception of science. According to The Pew Research Center, 81% of U.S. adults say they watch media involving criminal investigations, hospital/medical settings, or science fiction. The average American watches 84 movies a year. By placing STEM professionals on movie sets, scientists can not only assist in executing a narrative vision but also aid in sharing more engaging portrayals of STEM.

“The Hollywood, Health & Society program at USC [University of Southern California] has worked with multiple TV shows to develop storylines about organ donation, and has studied the impact of the plot on viewers’ knowledge, attitudes, and behavior,” said Lorditch, who believes science advising fosters mutual exchange. The USC Annenberg Norman Lear Center’s longitudinal impact studies focus on providing — then studying the impact of — information about health, safety and security in Hollywood projects.

While many science consultants work independently or through institutions like USC, the science advising wing of Hollywood primarily stems from The National Academy of Sciences’ Science & Entertainment Exchange. Founded in 2008, the Exchange aims to improve the science that appears in narrative mainstream media through a “soft-sell” approach. The Exchange has completed more than 2,300 consultations on projects such as A Wrinkle in Time, Watchmen, and various Marvel Studios films. The organization essentially serves as a direct hotline for filmmakers to reach researchers, medical professionals, and more — as befits the Exchange’s actual phone number, 1-844-NEED-SCI.

However, it isn’t a scientific consultant’s job to make sure films are 100% accurate. Science fiction is called science fiction for a reason, and scientists aren’t keen on incorporating factual science when it comes at the expense of compelling storytelling. “The story always comes first. Period,” said Jennifer Ouellette, founding director of The Science & Entertainment Exchange. She now covers science and culture as a senior writer at Ars Technica, and has published several science-related books.

Ouellette always made sure to advise scientists working on their first Hollywood films to not just shake their heads when presented with a script. “They should think about what needs to happen in that scene, and come up with an even better scientific explanation. That makes it a win-win,” said Ouellette, who cites The Expanse as some of the best science representation in film and TV.

Insisting that science/scientists should only be portrayed in a positive light is not a solution, either. “Scientists are flawed human beings just like everyone else, and those flaws are what make us interesting and complex characters,” she continued.

Ouellette’s husband — theoretical physicist Sean M. Caroll at the California Institute of Technology — has served as a science consultant himself, helping to devise Tony Stark’s famous time-warping plan in Avengers: Endgame. He also advised one of Ouellette’s favorite science TV moments: an episode of BONES, when a physicist represses his grief over his gymnast daughter’s death. Caroll spent days on set writing a series of physics equations on blackboards. But he wasn’t developing hard science for the sake of science.

By the end of the episode, the characters learn that “each equation represents a moment in his daughter’s life: learning to walk, then run; doing her first backflip; a vault; and so on, until the final equation, showing her finally at rest. The writers turned it into a poem written in equations, and it remains one of the most amazing moments I’ve seen on television in a long time,” said Ouellette.

On top of the fundamental fact that science must be in service of the story, the science doesn’t always have to be precise. “In the world of STEM, precision is crucial but for the majority of the public, not so much,” said Lorditch. Most viewers would agree. Spring Lin ’22 ignores “slightly questionable” scientific explanations, claiming they don’t interfere with the cinematic experience. “When there are no obvious wrongs in a movie, I usually don’t question it,” said Rita Chen ’22.

Science advisors also lurk on a surprisingly wide range of sets — whether it is on reality TV such as MTV’s Teen Mom, or behind the scenes of The Simpsons. …

If you have the time, do read Caballo’s March 16, 2022 article.

The Science & Entertainment Exchange can be found here.

Iron Man and nanotechnology tidbits from years gone by

I have three previous posts about Iron Man’s nanotechnology, the earliest being from 2012.

Iron Man 3. nanotechnology, Extremis armor, and Rebecca Hall (May 11, 2012 posting)
Emory University’s Shuming Nie discusses Iron Man 3 and nanotechnology and researchers develop an injectable nano-network (May 6, 2013 posting)
Exploring the science of Iron Man (prior to the opening of Captain America: Civil War, aka, Captain America vs. Iron Man) (April 28, 2016 posting)

Enjoy!

Dear Science Minister Kirsty Duncan and Science, Innovation and Economic Development Minister Navdeep Bains: a Happy Canada Day! open letter

Leave a reply

Dear Minister of Science Kirsty Duncan and Minister of Science, Innovation and Economic Development Navdeep Bains,

Thank you both. It’s been heartening to note some of the moves you’ve made since entering office. Taking the muzzles off Environment Canada and Natural Resources Canada scientists was a big relief and it was wonderful to hear that the mandatory longform census was reinstated along with the Experimental Lakes Area programme. (Btw, I can’t be the only one who’s looking forward to hearing the news once Canada’s Chief Science Officer is appointed. In the fall, eh?)

Changing the National Science and Technology week by giving it a news name “Science Odyssey” and rescheduling it from the fall to the spring seems to have revitalized the effort. Then, there was the news about a review focused on fundamental science (see my June 16, 2016 post). It seems as if the floodgates have opened or at least communication about what’s going on has become much freer. Brava and Bravo!

The recently announced (June 29, 2016) third assessment on the State of S&T (Science and Technology) and IR&D (Industrial Research and Development; my July 1, 2016 post features the announcement) by the Council of Canadian Academies adds to the impression that you both have adopted a dizzying pace for science of all kinds in Canada.

With the initiatives I’ve just mentioned in mind, it would seem that encouraging a more vital science culture and and re-establishing science as a fundamental part of Canadian society is your aim.

Science education and outreach as a whole population effort

It’s facey to ask for more but that’s what I’m going to do.

In general, the science education and outreach efforts in Canada have focused on children. This is wonderful but not likely to be as successful as we would hope when a significant and influential chunk of the population is largely ignored: adults. (There is a specific situation where outreach to adults is undertaken but more about that later.)

There is research suggesting that children’s attitudes to science and future careers is strongly influenced by their family. From my Oct. 9, 2013 posting,

One of the research efforts in the UK is the ASPIRES research project at King’s College London (KCL), which is examining children’s attitudes to science and future careers. Their latest report, Ten Science Facts and Fictions: the case for early education about STEM careers (PDF), is profiled in a Jan. 11, 2012 news item on physorg.com (from the news item),

Professor Archer [Louise Archer, Professor of Sociology of Education at King’s] said: “Children and their parents hold quite complex views of science and scientists and at age 10 or 11 these views are largely positive. The vast majority of children at this age enjoy science at school, have parents who are supportive of them studying science and even undertake science-related activities in their spare time. They associate scientists with important work, such as finding medical cures, and with work that is well paid.

“Nevertheless, less than 17 per cent aspire to a career in science. These positive impressions seem to lead to the perception that science offers only a very limited range of careers, for example doctor, scientist or science teacher. It appears that this positive stereotype is also problematic in that it can lead people to view science as out of reach for many, only for exceptional or clever people, and ‘not for me’. [emphases mine]

Family as a bigger concept

I suggest that ‘family’ be expanded to include the social environment in which children operate. When I was a kid no one in our family or extended group of friends had been to university let alone become a scientist. My parents had aspirations for me but when it came down to brass tacks, even though I was encouraged to go to university, they were much happier when I dropped out and got a job.

It’s very hard to break out of the mold. The odd thing about it all? I had two uncles who were electricians which when you think about it means they were working in STEM (science, technology,engineering, mathematics) jobs. Electricians, then and now. despite their technical skills, are considered tradespeople.

It seems to me that if more people saw themselves as having STEM or STEM-influenced occupations: hairdressers, artists, automechanics, plumbers, electricians, musicians, etc., we might find more children willing to engage directly in STEM opportunities. We might also find there’s more public support for science in all its guises.

That situation where adults are targeted for science outreach? It’s when the science is considered controversial or problematic and, suddenly, public (actually they mean voter) engagement or outreach is considered vital.

Suggestion

Given the initiatives you both have undertaken and Prime Minister Trudeau’s recent public outbreak of enthusiasm for and interest in quantum computing (my April 18, 2016 posting), I’m hopeful that you will consider the notion and encourage (fund?) science promotion programmes aimed at adults. Preferably attention-grabbing and imaginative programmes.

Should you want to discuss the matter further (I have some suggestions), please feel free to contact me.

Regardless, I’m very happy to see the initiatives that have been undertaken and, just as importantly, the communication about science.

Yours sincerely,

Maryse de la Giroday
(FrogHeart blog)

P.S. I very much enjoyed the June 22, 2016 interview with Léo Charbonneau for University Affairs,

UA: Looking ahead, where would you like Canada to be in terms of research in five to 10 years?

Dr. Duncan: Well, I’ll tell you, it breaks my heart that in a 10-year period we fell from third to eighth place among OECD countries in terms of HERD [government expenditures on higher education research and development as a percentage of gross domestic product]. That should never have happened. That’s why it was so important for me to get that big investment in the granting councils.

Do we have a strong vision for science? Do we have the support of the research community? Do we have the funding systems that allow our world-class researchers to do the work they want do to? And, with the chief science officer, are we building a system where we have the evidence to inform decision-making? My job is to support research and to make sure evidence makes its way to the cabinet table.

As stated earlier, I’m hoping you will expand your vision to include Canadian society, not forgetting seniors (being retired or older doesn’t mean that you’re senile and/or incapable of public participation), and supporting Canada’s emerging science media environment.

P.P.S. As a longstanding observer of the interplay between pop culture, science, and society I was much amused and inspired by news of Justin Trudeau’s emergence as a character in a Marvel comic book (from a June 28, 2016 CBC [Canadian Broadcasting Corporation] news online item),

The variant cover of the comic Civil War II: Choosing Sides #5, featuring Prime Minister Justin Trudeau surrounded by the members of Alpha Flight: Sasquatch, top, Puck, bottom left, Aurora, right, and Iron Man in the background. (The Canadian Press/Ramon Perez)

Make way, Liberal cabinet: Prime Minister Justin Trudeau will have another all-Canadian crew in his corner as he suits up for his latest feature role — comic book character.

Trudeau will grace the variant cover of issue No. 5 of Marvel’s “Civil War II: Choosing Sides,” due out Aug. 31 [2016].

Trudeau is depicted smiling, sitting relaxed in the boxing ring sporting a Maple Leaf-emblazoned tank, black shorts and red boxing gloves. Standing behind him are Puck, Sasquatch and Aurora, who are members of Canadian superhero squad Alpha Flight. In the left corner, Iron Man is seen with his arms crossed.

“I didn’t want to do a stuffy cover — just like a suit and tie — put his likeness on the cover and call it a day,” said award-winning Toronto-based cartoonist Ramon Perez.

“I wanted to kind of evoke a little bit of what’s different about him than other people in power right now. You don’t see (U.S. President Barack) Obama strutting around in boxing gear, doing push-ups in commercials or whatnot. Just throwing him in his gear and making him almost like an everyday person was kind of fun.”

The variant cover featuring Trudeau will be an alternative to the main cover in circulation showcasing Aurora, Puck, Sasquatch and Nick Fury.

It’s not the first time a Canadian Prime Minister has been featured in a Marvel comic book (from the CBC news item),

Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau in 1979’s Volume 120 of The Uncanny X-Men. (The Canadian Press/Marvel)

Trudeau follows in the prime ministerial footsteps of his late father, Pierre, who graced the pages of “Uncanny X-Men” in 1979.

The news item goes on to describe artist/writer Chip Zdarsky’s (Edmonton-born) ideas for the 2016 story.

h/t to Reva Seth’s June 29, 2016 article for Fast Company for pointing me to Justin Trudeau’s comic book cover.

Exploring the science of Iron Man (prior to the opening of Captain America: Civil War, aka, Captain America vs. Iron Man)

Leave a reply

Not unexpectedly, there’s a news item about science and Iron Man (it’s getting quite common for the science in movies to be promoted and discussed) just a few weeks before the movie Captain America: Civil War or, as it’s also known, Captain America vs. Iron Man opens in the US. From an April 26, 2016 news item on phys.org,

… how much of our favourite superheros’ power lies in science and how much is complete fiction?

As Iron Man’s name suggests, he wears a suit of “iron” which gives him his abilities—superhuman strength, flight and an arsenal of weapons—and protects him from harm.

In scientific parlance, the Iron man suit is an exoskeleton which is worn outside the body to enhance it.

An April 26, 2016 posting by Chris Marr on the ScienceNetwork Western Australia blog, which originated the news item, provides an interesting overview of exoskeletons and some of the scientific obstacles still to be overcome before they become commonplace,

In the 1960s, the first real powered exoskeleton appeared—a machine integrated with the human frame and movements which provided the wearer with 25 times his natural lifting capacity.

The major drawback then was that the unit itself weighed in at 680kg.

UWA [University of Western Australia] Professor Adrian Keating suggests that some of the technology seen in the latest Marvel blockbuster, such as controlling the exoskeleton with simple thoughts, will be available in the near future by leveraging ongoing advances of multi-disciplinary research teams.

“Dust grain-sized micromachines could be programmed to cooperate to form reconfigurable materials such as the retractable face mask, for example,” Prof Keating says.

However, all of these devices are in need of a power unit small enough to be carried yet providing enough capacity for more than a few minutes of superhuman use, he says.

Does anyone have a spare Arc Reactor?

Currently, most exoskeleton development has been for medical applications, with devices designed to give mobility to amputees and paraplegics, and there are a number in commercial production and use.

Dr Lei Cui, who lectures in Mechatronics at Curtin University, has recently developed both a hand and leg exoskeleton, designed for use by patients who have undergone surgery or have nerve dysfunction, spinal injuries or muscular dysfunction.

“Currently we use an internal battery that lasts about two hours in the glove, which can be programmed for only four different movement patterns,” Dr Cui says.

Dr Cui’s exoskeletons are made from plastic, making them light but offering little protection compared to the titanium exterior of Stark’s favourite suit.

It’s clear that we are a long way from being able to produce a working Iron Man suit at all, let alone one that flies, protects the wearer and has the capacity to fight back.

This is not the first time I’ve featured a science and pop culture story here. You can check out my April 28, 2014 posting for a story about how Captain America’s shield could be a supercapacitor (it also has a link to a North Carolina State University blog featuring science and other comic book heroes) and there is my May 6, 2013 post about Iron Man 3 and a real life injectable nano-network.

As for ScienceNetwork Western Australia, here’s more from their About SWNA page,

ScienceNetwork Western Australia (SNWA) is an online science news service devoted to sharing WA’s achievements in science and technology.

SNWA is produced by Scitech, the state’s science and technology centre and supported by the WA Government’s Office of Science via the Department of the Premier and Cabinet.

Our team of freelance writers work with in-house editors based at Scitech to bring you news from all fields of science, and from the research, government and private industry sectors working throughout the state. Our writers also produce profile stories on scientists. We collaborate with leading WA institutions to bring you Perspectives from prominent WA scientists and opinion leaders.

We also share news of science-related events and information about the greater WA science community including WA’s Chief Scientist, the Premier’s Science Awards, Innovator of the Year Awards and information on regional community science engagement.

Since our commencement in 2003 we have grown to share WA’s stories with local, national and global audiences. Our articles are regularly republished in print and online media in the metropolitan and regional areas.

Bravo to the Western Australia government! I wish there initiatives of this type in Canada, the closest we have is the French language Agence Science-Presse supported by the Province of Québec.

Musée de la Civilisation (Québec, Canada) and its ‘Nanotechnology and the invisible revolution’ exhibit

Leave a reply

Québec City’s (Canada) Musée de la Civilisation (Museum of Civilization) opened its “Nanotech: the invisible revolution” exhibit (also known as, “Nanotechnologies: l’invisible révolution”) on March 9, 2016 and it will run until April 2, 2016. Cassandra Kerwin’s March 16, 2016 article for qctonline.com notes this,

Featuring elements inspired by science fiction, comic books and today’s products and gadgets, it will have visitors wondering about the meaning and impact of infinitely small technology on daily life.

The Musée de la Civilisation’s Nanotech exhibit page has this to say,

Today’s “nanos” can be found in electronic gadgets, cosmetics, sports equipment, and medical treatments. Thousands more promising new applications are also on the way.

Nanotechnology has drawn on as well as influenced science fiction, sometimes in dark visions of a future world where humanity is at the mercy of developments in technology. Such future images can affect public perceptions. Debates have intensified, and in the last few decades enthusiasm for scientific discoveries has increasingly given way to a certain wariness.

Visitors will be encouraged to make up their own minds about current issues in nanotech development.

Perhaps ‘nanos’ is from the French? It’s here in the French language Musée de la Civilisation’s March 8, 2016 news release (my rough translation follows the sections I’ve created in this excerpt),

Les nanos sont présentes, par exemple, dans les appareils électroniques, les cosmétiques, les équipements sportifs et les traitements médicaux. Elles promettent des milliers de nouvelles utilisations intéressantes. Souvent inspirées par la science-fiction, les nanotechnologies revêtent parfois, dans des mondes futuristes, un caractère sombre où l’humain est à la merci des développements technologiques. Au cours des dernières décennies, l’enthousiasme généré par les découvertes scientifiques a laissé une place grandissante à une certaine méfiance du public face à la science, souvent dûe à une méconnaissance des notions scientifiques parfois complexes liées à ces découvertes. Le scepticisme relié aux changements climatiques ou encore à l’efficacité ou la sécurité des vaccins en sont des exemples concrets.

Nanotechnology-enabled products can be found everywhere, for example, in electronics, beauty projects, sporting goods, and biomedical applications. Nanotechnology also promises novel applications for the future. As sometimes depicted in science fiction. nanotechnology features in a dystopian future where humans are at the mercy of technological development. Over the last decades, the enthusiasm earlier generations showed for scientific discovery has given rise to distrust sometimes due to not understanding the science underlying the discovery. Examples of this distrust include climate change deniers and anti-vaccine proponents.

« Le Musée de la civilisation fait figure de modèle inspirant en muséologie, non seulement par ses approches et ses concepts audacieux, mais aussi par ses actions en périphérie comme sa mission éducative auprès des jeunes et ses projets de médiation culturelle. En ouvrant son espace au « nanomonde », le musée devient un point de convergence de la culture et de la science, ces deux piliers fondateurs de l’évolution de notre société. Le fait de démocratiser la science dans un lieu culturel à la portée d’un large public est indéniablement profitable », a déclaré le ministre de la Culture et des Communications et ministre responsable de la Protection et de la Promotion de la langue française, M. Luc Fortin.

“The museum is an inspiring museology model not only due to its audacious concepts but also because of activities such as youth education programmes and cultural outreach efforts. In devoting an exhibition to the ‘nanoworld’, the museum becomes a point of convergence for culture and science, two foundational pillars of evolution for society. Democratizing and making science accessible to the public at large though a cultural institution is undeniably profitable,” declared the Luc Fortin, Minister of Culture and Communication and the Minister Responsible for the Protection and Promotion of the French Language.

« Voilà un sujet qui convient bien au Musée de la civilisation. Ni musée d’histoire, ni musée de science, ni musée d’anthropologie ou d’ethnologie, ni musée d’art, mais un heureux amalgame de tout ça. Un musée de société dont la préoccupation première demeure l’être humain et ses questionnements, a souligné son directeur général, M. Stéphan La Roche. Dans cette exposition, réalité, science et fiction se côtoient habilement et, au cœur du propos, se trouve cet être humain appelé à s’interroger sur les innombrables impacts sociaux des nanotechnologies », a conclu M. La Roche.

« Nous sommes très fiers d’avoir contribué à la réalisation de cette exposition, a soutenu Pierre Lapointe, président et directeur général de FPInnovations, et nous sommes très heureux du résultat. Nous sommes persuadés que le public fera de grandes découvertes et qu’il sera surpris des possibilités qu’offrent les nanotechnologies, notamment dans le domaine de la foresterie. »

« Les nanotechnologies recèlent un immense potentiel d’innovation et de développement social et économique pour le Québec, a affirmé Benoit Balmana, président et directeur général de PRIMA QUÉBEC. Cette exposition met en évidence des développements d’applications extraordinaires tout en n’occultant pas les risques et les facteurs d’acceptation sociale. C’est une occasion unique de confronter le monde scientifique, industriel et la société pour assurer un développement responsable des innovations technologiques. »

« Au Québec, nous avons acquis une expertise reconnue mondialement en matière de nanotechnologies, et pour nous démarquer encore davantage dans ce secteur, nous devons poursuivre nos efforts en recherche et en innovation, favoriser le transfert technologique et tout mettre en œuvre pour développer une relève scientifique », a déclaré Rémi Quirion, ph. D., scientifique en chef du Québec. « Cette formidable exposition contribuera assurément à mieux faire connaître du grand public les nanotechnologies, et ce, dans toutes leurs dimensions : de la technologie à ses applications sociales, notamment dans le domaine de la santé, en passant par les enjeux éthiques. Elle incitera sûrement des jeunes intéressés par les carrières scientifiques à se tourner vers cet univers aussi prometteur que fascinant. »

Quotes from various dignitaries and important people which can be summarized as: “This is a wonderful exhibit and we (the province of Quebec, our organization, and/or the museum) are doing wonderful things.”

Le parcours du visiteur : oui ou non aux nanos?

Après une brève introduction sur les nanotechnologies, le visiteur est invité à prendre position face aux enjeux actuels liés au développement des nanotechnologies. Deux parcours sont possibles : oui ou non au développement des nanotechnologies dans le futur? Pour accompagner le visiteur et valider ses choix, un petit canard jaune en plastique muni d’une puce est mis à sa disposition.

Oui aux nanos!

Avec ces choix de parcours, on présente les espoirs générés par le développement des nanos et comment elles ont inspiré des auteurs de science-fiction. On y découvre aussi comment elles sont présentes dans notre vie quotidienne. Ici, figurine de Cora Peterson (Raquel Welch) du film Le voyage fantastique, sculpture d’Iron Man grandeur nature, série de processeurs, produits cosmétiques… illustrent l’intégration des nanotechnologies dans des univers réels ou imaginaires.

Non aux nanos!

Faisant contrepoids à l’enthousiasme face au développement des nanotechnologies, le volet non aux nanos présente les craintes qu’elles soulèvent : les incertitudes quant à leur présence dans notre quotidien et les risques potentiels pour la santé et l’environnement. Ici, on retrouve des figurines, des bandes dessinées ou des éléments associés à l’univers de la science-fiction (Terminator, Hulk…), une combinaison de protection pour laboratoire de nanotechnologies, des téléphones cellulaires de différentes époques…

Faire un choix… à l’aide d’un canard jaune!

À divers moment dans l’exposition, des énoncés sont émis incitant le visiteur à faire son choix. Ceux-ci abordent l’intégration des technologies au corps humain, l’utilisation des nanos pour le développement de l’électronique ou les traitements médicaux, la potentielle domination sur l’humain, souvent illustrée en science-fiction et qui suscite bien des inquiétudes. En fin de parcours, le visiteur remet son petit canard jaune. Ses résultats individuels sont ensuite compilés et livrés sous forme d’analyse graphique. Il peut ensuite voir les résultats globaux de tous les visiteurs ayant fait le parcours sur un écran de diffusion.

After a brief introduction to the concept of nanotechnology, I believe they’re saying the exhibit represents two basic views: ‘yes to nano’ and ‘no to nano’ and the visitor is invited to participate by means of a yellow duck (in English sometimes referred to familiarly as a “yellow rubber ducky”) with a computer chip.

In the ‘yes to nano corner’, hopes and dreams for the future inspired by science fiction are presented along with the examples of the current presence of nanotechnology-enabled products in our daily lives. Illustrating these themes of the imaginary and the real are figures of Cora Peterson (Raquel Welch) in Fantastic Voyage and an Iron Man figure along with computer processors and cosmetic products.

In the ‘no to nano corner’ risks to the environment and health and safety are represented both through such cautionary science fiction tales as Terminator, the Hulk, and others along with real life concerns in laboratories.

At different points in the exibit, visitors will be asked to make a choice (vote) with their yellow duck as to, for example, whether we should integrate technology into the body and whether nanotechnology should be used to further develop electronics or medical applications. Concerns about technological domination over human existence are also raised.

As the visit is ended, participants hand off their yellow ducks so their votes can be tallied and added to a data visualization which shows the results of all the visitors’ data on a screen.

Un peu d’histoire

Le centre de l’exposition aborde l’histoire et l’évolution des sciences qui a permis d’atteindre l’échelle du nanomètre avant de mettre en valeur quelques projets de recherche prometteurs en nanotechnologies au Québec. On découvre notamment que, depuis des siècles, la nature utilise des propriétés particulières de l’échelle nanométrique pour conférer des habiletés extraordinaires et des couleurs magnifiques à certains animaux. Dans le même esprit, on apprend que les humains, à leur insu, ont utilisé des propriétés de cette échelle donnant des caractéristiques uniques à certains objets comme des vitraux médiévaux et des sabres de Damas au tranchant redoutable. Enfin, quelques projets de recherche prometteurs en nanotechnologies au Québec sont mis en valeur.

Part of this show focuses on the history of science and how we became able to research and work at the nanoscale. There’s a reference to nature which has used nanoscale structures to colour birds in brilliant colours and given other animals extraordinary abilities. [There is a field known as biomimicry/bioinspired engineering/biomimetics which focuses on nature’s nanostructures.] It should also be noted that humans have (naïvely) made use of nanoscale properties in materials such as the stained glass windows in medieval churches and Damascus steel blades. The exhibit also showcases some current nanotechnology research from Québec.

Un défi de taille!

Comment montrer l’infiniment petit? L’objet-même de l’exposition pose un défi de taille! Néanmoins, des objets de nature diverse et visibles à l’œil nu appuient le propos : objets de collection tirés de l’univers de la science-fiction, objets du quotidien contenant des nanoparticules, modèles moléculaires, microscopes, espèces de la faune qui utilisent des propriétés nanos pour raffiner leur anatomie (tels des papillons et deux geckos vivants). À ces objets extrêmement variés s’ajoutent des interactifs, des audiovisuels, des illustrations et une installation du biologiste et artiste François-Joseph Lapointe qui reflète votre niveau de stress du moment.

Size presents this challenge: how to create an exhibit of the infinitely small? The answer was to include science fiction elements and figures, nanotechnology-enabled consumer products, models of molecules, microscopes, fauna that utilize nanoscale properties such as butterflies and two geckos. There are also audio visual materials, illustrations, and an installation by biologist and artist, François-Joseph Lapointe.

Autour de l’exposition

Des activités de médiation éducative sont offertes autour de l’exposition dès le 19 mars prochain. Le Musée propose des visites commentées et une animation à partir de l’installation Nanozen de l’artiste et biologiste François-Joseph Lapointe. À compter de septembre, des visites de l’exposition et des activités d’expérimentation et de réflexion seront offertes aux groupes scolaires. Enfin, des activités de médiation culturelle complèteront la programmation, dont une table-ronde intitulée Nano où es-tu?, présentée le 7 mai dans le cadre des 24 heures de science.

As of March 19, 2016 there are ancillary educational programmes such as tours and the Nanozen installation by François-Joseph Lapointe. And in September 2016, school tours will be offered. In the realm of culture programming, a roundtable discussion titled (literally): Nano where are you? (I think they mean: What is your position on Nano?) on May 7, 2016 as part of the 24 hours of science 2016 event.

Nanotechnologies : l’invisible révolution, au Musée de la civilisation à Québec, du 9 mars 2016 au 2 avril 2017. Une exposition conçue et réalisée par le Musée de la civilisation avec la participation de PRIMA QUÉBEC et ses partenaires : Fonds de recherche du Québec (FRQ), FPInnovations, Centre de Collaboration MiQro Innovation (C2MI), Centre de recherche industriel du Québec (CRIQ), École Polytechnique de Montréal, Institut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail (IRSST), Institut national de la recherche scientifique (INRS), Université Concordia, Université de Montréal, Université du Québec à Montréal, Université Laval, Université McGill, Université de Sherbrooke et Arboranano.

The exhibit runs from March 9, 2016 – April 2, 2017 and a list of donors follows.

There’s information about tickets and hours here (the top price is $16 for an adult ticket).

Should anyone have a better translation please do let me know in the comments section.

(US) Contest: Design a nanotechnology-themed superhero

Leave a reply

This contest is open to students enrolled in US high schools or home-schooled and the deadline is Feb. 2, 2016.

High school students can lend their creativity to engineering, science and nanotechnology. Credit: NSF

Here are more details from the US National Science Foundation (NSF) Nov. 19, 2015 news release,

A brand-new competition, awarding finalists the opportunity to present their entries at the 2016 USA Science & Engineering Festival [held April 16 & 17, 2016] and compete for cash prizes, opens today for high school students interested in science, engineering and superpowers.

Generation Nano: Small Science, Superheroes is sponsored by the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI). The competition invites individual students enrolled in U.S. high schools, or who are home-schooled, to submit an original idea for a superhero who uses unique nanotechnology-inspired “gear,” such as a vehicle, costume or tool.

Generation Nano encourages students to think big–which, in this case, means super small–when pondering their hero’s gear: shoelaces that decode secret radio waves, nanotechnology-infused blood cells that supercharge adrenaline or clothing that can change color to camouflage its wearer.

“The wonders of nanotechnology are inspiring an increasing number of young students to pursue science and engineering,” said NSF Senior Advisor for Science and Engineering Mihail C. Roco. “The Generation Nano competition recognizes and channels that interest, while giving students the chance to showcase their creativity at a national level.”

“I’m just thrilled about Generation Nano,” said Lisa Friedersdorf, deputy director of the National Nanotechnology Coordination Office. “This competition has the potential to excite students about science and introduce them to the novel world of nanotechnology. I can’t wait to see the submissions.”

Competition details:

Students must submit a written entry explaining their superhero and nanotechnology-driven gear, along with a one-page comic or 90-second video.

Cash prizes are $1,500 for first place, $1,000 for second place and $500 for third place.

Finalists will showcase their comic or video at the 2016 USA Science and Engineering Festival in Washington, D.C. Final-round judging will take place at the festival.

Submissions are due by midnight on Feb. 2, 2016.

Through nanotechnology applications like targeted drugs, self-assembled nanodevices, molecular motors and other innovations, students never have to endure a radioactive spider bite to realize their full potential.

Visit the Generation Nano competition website for full eligibility criteria, entry guidelines, timeline and prize information.

The Generation Nano website offers resources for generating comics, accessing images and audio on this page.

For inspiration, you can take a look at my May 11, 2012 posting which features a description of the nanotechnology-enabled Extremis storyline in the Iron Man comic book series in the context of plans for the Iron Man 3 movie.

For more inspiration from 2012, there was a special exhibit at the Science Gallery in Dublin, Ireland featuring six superheroes created for the exhibit (my Sept. 14, 2012 posting; scroll down about 25% of the way to where I discuss the Magical Materials; Unleash Your Superpowers exhibit).

Good luck!

Captain America, Wolverine, Iron Man, and Thor on The Abstract, North Carolina State University’s news blog

Leave a reply

Captain America’s shield as a supercapacitor? Intriguing, oui? Thank you to Matt Shipman and his April 15, 2014 post on The Abstract (North Carolina State University’s official newsroom blog, [h/t phys.org]) for presenting a very intriguing exploration of the science to be found in comic books and, now, the movies,

Image from Captain America By Ed Brubaker Vol. 2 Premiere HC (2011 – Present).
Release Date: February 21, 2012. Image credit: Marvel.com
Courtesy: NCSU

I have a new appreciation for Captain America (never one of my favourite super heroes). From Shipman’s April 15, 2014 posting on The Abstract (Note: Links have been removed),

It’s tough to explain how the shield works, in part because it behaves differently under different circumstances. Sometimes the shield is thrown and becomes embedded in a wall; but sometimes it bounces off of walls, ricocheting wildly. Sometimes the shield seems to easily absorb tremendous force; but sometimes it is damaged by the attacks of Cap’s most powerful foes.

“However, from a scientific perspective, it’s important to remember that we’re talking about the first law of thermodynamics,” says Suveen Mathaudhu, a program manager in the materials science division of the U.S. Army Research Office, adjunct materials science professor at NC State University and hardcore comics fan. “Energy is conserved. It doesn’t disappear, it just changes form.

“When enormous energy, such as a blow from Thor’s hammer, strikes Cap’s shield, that energy needs to go somewhere.”

Normally, that energy would need to be either stored or converted into heat or sound. But comic-book readers and moviegoers know that Cap’s shield usually doesn’t give off waves of heat or roaring shrieks (that shockwave from Thor’s hammer in The Avengers film notwithstanding).

“That absence of heat and sound means that the energy has to be absorbed somehow; the atomic bonds in the shield – which is made of vibranium – must be able to store that energy in some form,” Mathaudhu says.

Mathaudhu, later in the posting, describes the shield’s qualities as a supercapacitor. (For more information about supercapacitors, you can look at my April 9, 2014 posting.)

Shipman’s piece appears to be part of a series featuring Wolverine, Iron Man, and Thor, which you can access by scrolling past the end of the Captain America posting (April 15, 2014 post), where you will also find at least one comment, which is worth checking out.

Iron Man 3. nanotechnology, Extremis armor, and Rebecca Hall

1 Reply

My searches for nanotechnology news don’t usually yield much information about Hollywood casting issues but the latest on Iron Man 3 and the actress, Rebecca Hall’s possible involvement as “a sexy scientist who plays a pivotal role in the creation of nanotechnology that winds up being sold to terrorists” (May 9, 2012 posting on AceShowBiz.com website) proved to be an exception. Variety’s Mark Grazer and Jeff Sneider covered the story in a May 8, 2012 posting,

Rebecca Hall (“The Town”) is in talks to join Marvel Studios and Disney’s “Iron Man 3,” that starts production this month.

Thesp [The thespian] would play a scientist who plays a pivotal role in the creation of a nanotechnology, known as Extremis, that winds up being sold to terrorists.

…

[‘The] Plot will borrow elements from Warren Ellis’ six-issue “Iron Man: Extremis,” that also heavily influenced the first “Iron Man” pic [movie], and focuses on the spread of a virus through nanotechnology.

In a search for Extremis, I found out that this story reboots the Iron Man mythology by incorporating nanotechnology and alchemy to create a new armor, the Extremis Armor, from the Extremis Armor website (I strongly suggest going to the website and reading the full text which includes a number of illustrative images if you find this sort of thing interesting),

When a bio-tech weapon of mass destruction was unleashed, Tony Stark threw himself onto the bleeding edge between science and alchemy, combining nanotechnology and his Iron Man armor. The result, which debuted in Iron Man, Vol. IV, issue 5, was the Extremis Armor, Model XXXII, Mark I, which made him the most powerful hero in the world–but not without a price.

…

There were two key parts to this Extremis-enhanced suit. The first part is the golden Undersheath, the protective interface between Stark’s nervous system and the second chief part, the External Suit Devices (ESDs), a.k.a. the red armor plating.

The Undersheath to the Iron Man suit components was super-compressed and stored in the hollows of Stark’s bones. The sheath material exited through skeletal pores and slid between all cells to self-assemble a new “skin” around him. This skin provides a complete interface to the Iron Man suit components and can perform numerous other functions. (The process in reverse withdrew the Undersheath back into these specially modified areas of Tony Stark’s bone marrow tissue.)

The Undersheath is a nano-network that incorporates peptide-peptide logic (PPL), a molecular computational system made of superconducting plastic impregnated molecular chains. The PPL handles, among other things: memory, critical logic paths, comparative “truth” tables, automatic response look-up tables, data storage, communication, and external sensing material interface.

The lattice assembly is a stress-compression truss with powered interstitial joints. This can surround the PPL material and guide it through Stark’s body. This steerable, motile lattice framework is commanded by the PPL molecule computational mentality. The metallic component to the lattice is a controlled mimetic artifact that can take on the characteristics of most elements. Even unusual combinations of behaviors such as extreme hardness and flexibility.

The combination of the two nano-scale materials allows for a very dense non-traditional computer that can change the fabric of its design in very powerful ways. The incorporation of the Undersheath in Stark’s entire nervous system renders reflex-level computer responses to pan-spectrum stimuli.

Anthony Stark’s Bio/Metalo-Mimetic Material concept is a radical departure from the traditional solid-state underpinnings of his prior Iron Man suit designs. Making use of nano-scale assembly technology, “smart” molecules can be made atom by atom. The design allows for simple computers to be linked into a massive parallel computer that synthesizes human thought protocols.

The External Suit Devices (ESDs), the red armor plates, were made via mega-nano technology that has assembled atoms into large, discreet effectors. This allows for the plates to be collapsable to very small volumes for easy storage and carried in Stark’s briefcase. The ESDs were commanded by the Undersheath and were self-powered by high-capacity Kasimer plates. They were equipped with large arrays of nano-fans that allow flight. Armoring-up was done by drawing the suit to Stark via a vectored repulsor field, just lightly pushing them from different angles.

The armor’s memory-metal technology renders it lightweight and flexible while not in use, but extremely durable when polarized. The armor was strong, of course, but it could be made even stronger by rerouting repulsor input to reinforce the armor’s mass.

Stark’s skin is now a part of the suit, when engaged. [emphasis mine] Comfort is relative because the suit rapidly responds to any discomfort, from impacts to high temperatures, from itching to scratching. The suit’s protocols include semi-autonomy when needed. Where Stark ends and the suit begins is flexible. The exact nature of the artificial Extremis Virus is not known (especially because Stark recompiled the dose, then tweaked the nutrients and suspended metals, radically altering Maya Hansen’s [the character Rebecca Hall will reputedly play] formulations). The effect it has had on Stark’s body is to allow the presence of so much alien material within his body without trauma.

Because of the bio-interface between Tony and the armor, he could utilize the suit to its fullest potential and also instantly access computers and any digital system worldwide at the speed of thought. He was biologically integrated with his armor, one with it, imbued with unprecedented powers and abilities. He channeled and processed data, emergency signals, and satellite reconnaissance from every law enforcement, military, and intelligence service in the world–in his head. He could send electronic signals and make phone calls with his mind. He could see through satellites. Plus he had the ability to transmit whatever he saw (from his visual cortex) to other people’s display screens. The computer’s cybernetic link enables him to operate all of the armor’s functions, as well as providing a remote link to other computers (as Stark is now part of the armor this connection is seamless). The armor’s system was connected to the global mainframe via StarkTech servers.

I have been musing about something I’ve been calling machine/flesh as recently as my May 9, 2012 posting titled, Everything becomes part machine and this armor and concomitant storyline certainly fits in with that theme. (For anyone curious about Warren Ellis’ six-issue story, Wikipedia provides a summary.)

Science and scientists in the movies and on tv

Leave a reply

I find it easy to miss how much science there is in the movies and on television even though I’m looking for it. Here are a few recent examples of science in popular culture.

Inside Science of Iron Man 2, an article by Emilie Lorditch on physorg.com explains some of the background work needed to create a giant particle accelerator with a new way to power the reactor pumping Iron Man’s heart. From the article,

“I went to Marvel Studios to meet with one of the film’s producers (Jeremy Latcham) and even brought a graduate student along,” said Mark Wise, a theoretical physicist at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena who served as a technical consultant for the film. “There was a specific set of scenes that I was consulting on; the story had to get from this point to that point.”

Wise was surprised by Latcham’s and the film crew’s interest in the actual science, “I attempted to present the science in a way to the help the movie, but still get a little science in,” said Wise. “They wanted the scenes to look good, but they also wanted elements of truth in what they did, it was nice.”

The producers for the film found their scientist through The Science and Entertainment Exchange (which is a program of the US National Academy of Sciences). From Lorditch’s article,

“Scientists can offer more than just simple fact-checking of scripts,” said Jennifer Ouellette, director of the Science and Entertainment Exchange. “Get them involved early enough in the production process and their input can be invaluable in developing not just the fundamental scientific concepts underlying a scene, but also — since film and TV are a visual mediums — scientists can help filmmakers more fully realize their visions on screen.”

I have blogged before about Hollywood’s relationship with science here although my focus was largely on mathematics and the Canadian scene.

Dave Bruggeman at the Pasco Phronesis blog regularly highlights science items on television. Much of his focus is on late night tv and interviews with scientists. (The first time I saw one of his posts I was gobsmacked in the best way possible since I’d taken the science element of these talk show interviews for granted.) There’s another Pasco Phronesis posting today about the latest Colbert Report and a series Colbert calls, Science Cat Fight.

All of this is interesting fodder for thinking about how scientists (and by extension science) are perceived and Matthew C. Nisbet at the Framing Science blog has some interesting things to say about this in his posting ‘Reconsidering the Image of Scientists in Film & Television‘,

Contrary to conventional wisdom that entertainment media portray science and scientists in a negative light, research shows that across time, genre, and medium there is no single prevailing image and that both positive and negative images of scientists and science can be found. More recent research even suggests that in contemporary entertainment media, scientists are portrayed in an almost exclusively positive light and often as heroes.

Nisbet goes on to offer four ‘archetypes’ and ask for feedback, (Note: I have removed some of the text from these descriptions.)

Scientists as Dr. Frankenstein: … Examples of this image include Gregory Peck as Dr. Mengele in Boys from Brazil, Marlon Brando as Dr. Moreau in The Island of Dr. Moreau, and Jeff Goldblum as the scientist in The Fly.Scientists as powerless pawns: … Examples include Robert Duvall as Dr. Griffin Weir in the 6th Day and several of the scientists in Jurassic Park who work for Richard Attenborough’s character John Hammond, CEO of InGen.

Scientists as eccentric and anti-social geeks: … Examples of this image include Christopher Loyd as Doc in Back to the Future, the nerdy boys in John Hughes 1985 film Weird Science who use science to create the perfect woman, and Val Kilmer and his fellow grad students in the 1985 film Real Genius who serve as graduate students to a professor who is determined to master a Star Wars-like satellite technology. [my addition: The characters in The Big Bang Theory.]

Scientists as Hero: … Examples include Dr. Alan Grant as the main protagonist in Jurassic Park, Spock in the new version of Star Trek who takes on leading man and action hero qualities to rival Captain Kirk, Jody Foster’s character in Contact, Sigourney Weaver’s character in Avatar, Denis Quaid as the climate scientist hero in The Day After Tomorrow, Chiwetel Ejiofor as the geologist hero in 2012, Morgan Freeman in the Batman films as inventor Lucious Fox and CEO of Wayne Industries, and Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark in the Iron Man films.

Serendipitously, I’ve returned to where I started: Iron Man. As for all this science in the media, I think it’s a testament to its ubiquity in our lives.

Pop culture, science communication, and nanotechnology

Leave a reply

A few years back I wrote a paper for the Cascadia Nanotech Symposium (March 2007 held in Vancouver) called: Engaging Nanotechnology: pop culture, media, and public awareness. I was reminded it of a few days ago when I saw a mention on Andrew Maynard’s, 2020 Science blog about a seminar titled, Biopolitics of Popular Culture being held in Irvine, California on Dec. 4, 2009 by the Institute of Ethics for Emerging Technologies. (You can read more of Andrew’s comments here or you can check out the meeting details here.) From the meeting website,

Popular culture is full of tropes and cliches that shape our debates about emerging technologies. Our most transcendent expectations for technology come from pop culture, and the most common objections to emerging technologies come from science fiction and horror, from Frankenstein and Brave New World to Gattaca and the Terminator.

Why is it that almost every person in fiction who wants to live a longer than normal life is evil or pays some terrible price? What does it say about attitudes towards posthuman possibilities when mutants in Heroes or the X-Men, or cyborgs in Battlestar Galactica or Iron Man, or vampires in True Blood or Twilight are depicted as capable of responsible citizenship?

Is Hollywood reflecting a transhuman turn in popular culture, helping us imagine a day when magical and muggle can live together in a peaceful Star Trek federation? Will the merging of pop culture, social networking and virtual reality into a heightened augmented reality encourage us all to make our lives a form of participative fiction?

During this day long seminar we will engage with culture critics, artists, writers, and filmmakers to explore the biopolitics that are implicit in depictions of emerging technology in literature, film and television.

I’m not sure what they mean by biopolitics, especially after the lecture I attended at Simon Fraser University’s downtown campus last night (Nov. 12, 2009), Liminal Livestock. Last night’s lecture by Susan Squier highlighted (this is oversimplified) the relationship between women and chickens in the light of reproductive technologies. From the lecture description,

Adapting SubRosa Art Collective’s memorable question, this talk asks: “What does it mean, to feminism and to agriculture, that women are like chickens and chickens are like women?” As liminal livestock, chickens play a central role in our gendered agricultural imaginary: the zone where we find the “speculative, propositional fabric of agricultural thought.” Analyzing several children’s stories, a novel, and a documentary film, the talk seeks to discover some of the factors that help to shape the role of women in agriculture, and the role of agriculture in women’s lives.

Squier did also discuss reproductive technologies at some length although it’s not obvious from the description that the topic will arise. She discussed the transition of chicken raising as a woman’s job to a man’s job which coincided with the rise of chicken factory farms. Squier also noted the current interest in raising chickens in city and suburban areas without speculating on possible cultural impacts.

The lecture covered selective breeding and the shift of university poultry science departments from the study of science to the study of increasing chicken productivity, which led to tampering with genes and other reproductive technologies. One thing I didn’t realize is that chicken eggs are used for studies on human reproduction. Disturbingly, Squier talked to an American scientist, whose work concerns human reproduction, who moved to Britain because the chicken eggs are of such poor quality in the US.

The relationship between women and chickens was metaphorical and illustrated through popular children’s stories and pop culture artifacts (i.e. poultry beauty pageants featuring women not chickens) in a way that would require reproducing far more of the lecture than I can here. So if you are interested, I understand that Squier does have a book about women and chickens being published although I can’t find a publication date.

Squier’s lecture and the meeting for the Institute of Ethics for Emerging Technologies present different ways of integrating pop culture elements into the discussion about science and emerging technologies. Since I’m tooting my horn, I’m going to finish with my thoughts on the matter as written in my Cascadia Nanotechnology Symposium paper,

The process of accepting, rejecting, or changing new sciences and new technologies seems more akin to a freewheeling, creative conversation with competing narratives than a transfer of information from experts to nonexperts as per the science literacy model.

The focus on establishing how much awareness the public has about nanotechnology by measuring the number of articles in the newspaper or items in the broadcast media or even tracking the topic in the blogosphere is useful as one of a set of tools.

Disturbing as it is to think that it could be used for purely manipulative purposes, finding out how people develop their attitudes towards new technologies and the interplay between cognition, affect, and values has the potential to help us better understand ourselves and our relationship to the sciences. (In this paper, the terms science and technology are being used interchangeably, as is often the case with nanotechnology.)

Pop culture provides a valuable view into how nonexperts learn about science (books, television, etc.) and accept technological innovations (e.g. rejecting the phonograph as a talking book technology but accepting it for music listening).

There is a collaborative and interactive process at the heart of the nanotechnology ‘discussion’. For example, Drexler appears to be responding to some of his critics by revising some of his earlier suppositions about how nanotechnology would work. Interestingly, he also appears to be downplaying his earlier concerns about nanoassemblers running amok and unleashing the ‘goo’ scenario on us all. (BBC News, June 9, 2004)

In reviewing all of the material about communicating science, public attitudes, and values, one thing stands out: time. Electricity was seen by some as deeply disturbing to the cosmic forces of the universe. There was resistance to the idea for decades and, in some cases (the Amish), that resistance lives on. Despite all this, there is not a country in the world today that doesn’t have electricity.

One final note: I didn’t mean to suggest the inexorable adoption of any and all technologies, my intent was to point out the impossibility of determining a technology’s future adoption or rejection by measuring contemporary attitudes, hostile or otherwise.

’nuff said for today. Happy weekend!