Tag Archives: Université du Québec à Montréal

Quantum Mechanics & Gravity conference (August 15 – 19, 2022) launches Vancouver (Canada)-based Quantum Gravity Institute and more

Tickets:

Corporate Table of 8 all day access – includes VIP Luncheon: $1,100
Ticket per person all day access – includes VIP Luncheon: $129
Ticket per person all day access (no VIP luncheon): $59
Student / Academia Ticket – all day access (no VIP luncheon): $30

Date:

Wednesday, August 17, 2022 @ 9:00 a.m. – 5:15 p.m. (PT)

Schedule:

Registration Opens: 8:00 a.m.
Morning Program: 9:00 a.m. – 12:30 p.m.
VIP Lunch: 12:30 p.m. – 2:30 p.m.
Afternoon Program: 2:30 p.m. – 4:20 p.m.
Public Discussion / Debate: 4:20 p.m. – 5:15 p.m.

Program:

9:00 a.m. Session 1: Beginning of the Universe

Viatcheslav Mukhanov – Theoretical Physicist and Cosmologist, University of Munich
Paul Steinhardt – Theoretical Physicist, Princeton University

Session 2: History of the Universe

Jim Peebles, 2019 Nobel Laureate, Princeton University
Baron Martin Rees – Cosmologist and Astrophysicist, University of Cambridge
Sir Roger Penrose, 2020 Nobel Laureate, University of Oxford (via zoom)

12:30 p.m. VIP Lunch Session: Quantum Gravity — Why Should We Care?

Kip Thorne – 2017 Nobel Laureate, Executive Producer of blockbuster film “Interstellar”

2:30 p.m. Session 3: What do Experiments Say?

Markus Aspelmeyer – Experimental Physicist, Quantum Optics and Optomechanics Leader, University of Vienna
Sir Roger Penrose – 2020 Nobel Laureate (via zoom)

Session 4: Time Travel

Kip Thorne – 2017 Nobel Laureate, Executive Producer of blockbuster film “Interstellar”

Event Partners

Quantum Gravity Society
Westin Bayshore
Fiore Group
Concord Pacific
VanEdge Capital
Frind Estate Winery

Marketing Partners

BC Business Council
Greater Vancouver Board of Trade

Please note that Sir Roger Penrose will be present via Zoom but all the others will be there in the room with you.

Given that Kip Thorne won his 2017 Nobel Prize in Physics (with Rainer Weiss and Barry Barish) for work on gravitational waves, it’s surprising there’s no mention of this in the publicity for a conference on quantum gravity. Finding gravitational waves in 2016 was a very big deal (see Josh Fischman’s and Steve Mirsky’s February 11, 2016 interview with Kip Thorne for Scientific American).

Some thoughts on this conference and the Canadian quantum scene

This conference has a fascinating collection of players. Even I recognized some of the names, e.g., Penrose, Rees, Thorne.

The academics were to be expected and every presenter is an academic, often with their own Wikipedia page. Weirdly, there’s no one from the Perimeter Institute Institute for Theoretical Physics or TRIUMF (a national physics laboratory and centre for particle acceleration) or from anywhere else in Canada, which may be due to their academic specialty rather than an attempt to freeze out Canadian physicists. In any event, the conference academics are largely from the US (a lot of them from CalTech and Stanford) and from the UK.

The business people are a bit of a surprise. The BC Business Council and the Greater Vancouver Board of Trade? Frank Giustra who first made his money with gold mines, then with Lionsgate Entertainment, and who continues to make a great deal of money with his equity investment company, Fiore Group? Terry Hui, Chief Executive Office of Concord Pacific, a real estate development company? VanEdge Capital, an early stage venture capital fund? A winery? Missing from this list is D-Wave Systems, Canada’s quantum calling card and local company. While their area of expertise is quantum computing, I’d still expect to see them present as sponsors. *ETA December 6, 2022: I just looked at the conference page again and D-Wave is now listed as a sponsor.*

The academics? These people are not cheap dates (flights, speaker’s fees, a room at the Bayshore, meals). This is a very expensive conference and $129 for lunch and a daypass is likely a heavily subsidized ticket.

Another surprise? No government money/sponsorship. I don’t recall seeing another academic conference held in Canada without any government participation.

Canadian quantum scene

A National Quantum Strategy was first announced in the 2021 Canadian federal budget and reannounced in the 2022 federal budget (see my April 19, 2022 posting for a few more budget details).. Or, you may find this National Quantum Strategy Consultations: What We Heard Report more informative. There’s also a webpage for general information about the National Quantum Strategy.

As evidence of action, the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) announced new grant programmes made possible by the National Quantum Strategy in a March 15, 2022 news release,

Quantum science and innovation are giving rise to promising advances in communications, computing, materials, sensing, health care, navigation and other key areas. The Government of Canada is committed to helping shape the future of quantum technology by supporting Canada’s quantum sector and establishing leadership in this emerging and transformative domain.
Today [March 15, 2022], the Honourable François-Philippe Champagne, Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry, is announcing an investment of $137.9 million through the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada’s (NSERC) Collaborative Research and Training Experience (CREATE) grants and Alliance grants. These grants are an important next step in advancing the National Quantum Strategy and will reinforce Canada’s research strengths in quantum science while also helping to develop a talent pipeline to support the growth of a strong quantum community.
…
Quick facts
Budget 2021 committed $360 million to build the foundation for a National Quantum Strategy, enabling the Government of Canada to build on previous investments in the sector to advance the emerging field of quantum technologies. The quantum sector is key to fuelling Canada’s economy, long-term resilience and growth, especially as technologies mature and more sectors harness quantum capabilities.
Development of quantum technologies offers job opportunities in research and science, software and hardware engineering and development, manufacturing, technical support, sales and marketing, business operations and other fields.
The Government of Canada also invested more than $1 billion in quantum research and science from 2009 to 2020—mainly through competitive granting agency programs, including Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada programs and the Canada First Research Excellence Fund—to help establish Canada as a global leader in quantum science.
In addition, the government has invested in bringing new quantum technologies to market, including investments through Canada’s regional development agencies, the Strategic Innovation Fund and the National Research Council of Canada’s Industrial Research Assistance Program.

Bank of Canada, cryptocurrency, and quantum computing

My July 25, 2022 posting features a special project, Note: All emphases are mine,

… (from an April 14, 2022 HKA Marketing Communications news release on EurekAlert),
Multiverse Computing, a global leader in quantum computing solutions for the financial industry and beyond with offices in Toronto and Spain, today announced it has completed a proof-of-concept project with the Bank of Canada through which the parties used quantum computing to simulate the adoption of cryptocurrency as a method of payment by non-financial firms.
“We are proud to be a trusted partner of the first G7 central bank to explore modelling of complex networks and cryptocurrencies through the use of quantum computing,” said Sam Mugel, CTO [Chief Technical Officer] at Multiverse Computing. “The results of the simulation are very intriguing and insightful as stakeholders consider further research in the domain. Thanks to the algorithm we developed together with our partners at the Bank of Canada, we have been able to model a complex system reliably and accurately given the current state of quantum computing capabilities.”
…
Multiverse Computing conducted its innovative work related to applying quantum computing for modelling complex economic interactions in a research project with the Bank of Canada. The project explored quantum computing technology as a way to simulate complex economic behaviour that is otherwise very difficult to simulate using traditional computational techniques.
By implementing this solution using D-Wave’s annealing quantum computer, the simulation was able to tackle financial networks as large as 8-10 players, with up to 2^90 possible network configurations. Note that classical computing approaches cannot solve large networks of practical relevance as a 15-player network requires as many resources as there are atoms in the universe.
…

Quantum Technologies and the Council of Canadian Academies (CCA)

In a May 26, 2022 blog posting the CCA announced its Expert Panel on Quantum Technologies (they will be issuing a Quantum Technologies report),

The emergence of quantum technologies will impact all sectors of the Canadian economy, presenting significant opportunities but also risks. At the request of the National Research Council of Canada (NRC) and Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED), the Council of Canadian Academies (CCA) has formed an Expert Panel to examine the impacts, opportunities, and challenges quantum technologies present for Canadian industry, governments, and Canadians. Raymond Laflamme, O.C., FRSC, Canada Research Chair in Quantum Information and Professor in the Department of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Waterloo, will serve as Chair of the Expert Panel.
“Quantum technologies have the potential to transform computing, sensing, communications, healthcare, navigation and many other areas,” said Dr. Laflamme. “But a close examination of the risks and vulnerabilities of these technologies is critical, and I look forward to undertaking this crucial work with the panel.”
As Chair, Dr. Laflamme will lead a multidisciplinary group with expertise in quantum technologies, economics, innovation, ethics, and legal and regulatory frameworks. The Panel will answer the following question:
In light of current trends affecting the evolution of quantum technologies, what impacts, opportunities and challenges do these present for Canadian industry, governments and Canadians more broadly?
…
The Expert Panel on Quantum Technologies:
Raymond Laflamme, O.C., FRSC (Chair), Canada Research Chair in Quantum Information; the Mike and Ophelia Lazaridis John von Neumann Chair in Quantum Information; Professor, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Waterloo
Sally Daub, Founder and Managing Partner, Pool Global Partners
Shohini Ghose, Professor, Physics and Computer Science, Wilfrid Laurier University; NSERC Chair for Women in Science and Engineering
Paul Gulyas, Senior Innovation Executive, IBM Canada
Mark W. Johnson, Senior Vice-President, Quantum Technologies and Systems Products, D-Wave Systems
Elham Kashefi, Professor of Quantum Computing, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh; Directeur de recherche au CNRS, LIP6 Sorbonne Université
Mauritz Kop, Fellow and Visiting Scholar, Stanford Law School, Stanford University
Dominic Martin, Professor, Département d’organisation et de ressources humaines, École des sciences de la gestion, Université du Québec à Montréal
Darius Ornston, Associate Professor, Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, University of Toronto
Barry Sanders, FRSC, Director, Institute for Quantum Science and Technology, University of Calgary
Eric Santor, Advisor to the Governor, Bank of Canada
Christian Sarra-Bournet, Quantum Strategy Director and Executive Director, Institut quantique, Université de Sherbrooke
Stephanie Simmons, Associate Professor, Canada Research Chair in Quantum Nanoelectronics, and CIFAR Quantum Information Science Fellow, Department of Physics, Simon Fraser University
Jacqueline Walsh, Instructor; Director, initio Technology & Innovation Law Clinic, Dalhousie University

You’ll note that both the Bank of Canada and D-Wave Systems are represented on this expert panel.

The CCA Quantum Technologies report (in progress) page can be found here.

Does it mean anything?

Since I only skim the top layer of information (disparagingly described as ‘high level’ by the technology types I used to work with), all I can say is there’s a remarkable level of interest from various groups who are self-organizing. (The interest is international as well. I found the International Society for Quantum Gravity [ISQG], which had its first meeting in 2021.)

I don’t know what the purpose is other than it seems the Canadian focus seems to be on money. The board of trade and business council have no interest in primary research and the federal government’s national quantum strategy is part of Innovation, Science and Economic Development (ISED) Canada’s mandate. You’ll notice ‘science’ is sandwiched between ‘innovation’, which is often code for business, and economic development.

The Bank of Canada’s monetary interests are quite obvious.

The Perimeter Institute mentioned earlier was founded by Mike Lazaridis (from his Wikipedia entry) Note: Links have been removed,

… a Canadian businessman [emphasis mine], investor in quantum computing technologies, and founder of BlackBerry, which created and manufactured the BlackBerry wireless handheld device. With an estimated net worth of US$800 million (as of June 2011), Lazaridis was ranked by Forbes as the 17th wealthiest Canadian and 651st in the world.^[4]
…
In 2000, Lazaridis founded and donated more than $170 million to the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics.^[11][12] He and his wife Ophelia founded and donated more than $100 million to the Institute for Quantum Computing at the University of Waterloo in 2002.^[8]

That Institute for Quantum Computing? There’s an interesting connection. Raymond Laflamme, the chair for the CCA expert panel, was its director for a number of years and he’s closely affiliated with the Perimeter Institute. (I’m not suggesting anything nefarious or dodgy. It’s a small community in Canada and relationships tend to be tightly interlaced.) I’m surprised he’s not part of the quantum mechanics and gravity conference but that could have something to do with scheduling.

One last interesting bit about Laflamme, from his Wikipedia entry, Note: Links have been removed)

…
As Stephen Hawking’s PhD student, he first became famous for convincing Hawking that time does not reverse in a contracting universe, along with Don Page. Hawking told the story of how this happened in his famous book A Brief History of Time in the chapter The Arrow of Time.^[3] Later on Laflamme made a name for himself in quantum computing and quantum information theory, which is what he is famous for today.
…

Getting back to the Quantum Mechanics & Gravity: Marrying Theory & Experiment, the public day looks pretty interesting and when is the next time you’ll have a chance to hobnob with all those Nobel Laureates?

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.

Nanomaterials, toxicity, and Canada’s House of Commons Standing Committee on Health

4 Replies

Thanks to a reader who provided me with a link, I found a document (titled Evidence) about a ‘nanomaterials’ hearing held by Canada’s House of Commons Standing Committee on Health on June 10, 2010 and chaired by Joyce Murray, Member of Parliament, Vancouver Quadra. It makes for interesting reading and you can find it here.

The official title for the hearing was Potential Risks and Benefits of Nanotechnology, which I found out after much digging around. The purpose for the *hearing* seemed to be the education of the committee members about nanotechnology both generally (what is it? is there anything good about it?) and about its possible toxicology.

For information about the committee and the meeting, go here to find the minutes, the evidence (direct link provided in 1st para.), and your choice of webcasts (English version, French version, and floor version). One comment before you go, keep scrolling down past the sidebar and the giant white box to find the list of meetings along with appropriate links and if you choose to listen to the webcast, wait at least 1 minute for the audio to start. There’s a list of the committee members here, again scroll down past the giant white box to find the information.

I am going to make a few comments about this hearing. I will have to confine myself to a few points as the committee covered quite a bit of ground in the proceedings as they grappled with understanding something about nanotechnology, health and safety issues, benefits, and regulatory frameworks, amongst other issues.

It was unexpected to find that Mihail Roco, a well known figure in the US nanotechnology field, was speaking via videoconference (from the document),

Dr. Mihail Roco (Senior Advisor for Nanotechnology, National Nanotechnology Initiative, National Science Foundation, As an Individual) (p. 1 in print version, p. 3 in PDF)

He did have this to say,

First of all, I would like to present an overview of different themes in the United States, and thereafter make some recommendations, some ideas for the future. [emphasis mine] (p. 5 in print version, p. 7 in PDF)

I have to say my eyebrows raised at Roco’s “… make some recommendations …” comment. While appreciative of his experience and perspective, I’ve sometimes found that speakers from the US tend to give recommendations that are better geared to their own situation and less so to the Canadian one. Thankfully, he offered unexceptional advice that I heartily agree with,

I would like to say, in conclusion, that it’s important to have an anticipatory, participatory, and adaptive governance approach to nanotechnology in order to capture the new developments and also to prepare people, tools, and organizations for the future. (p. 6 in print version, p. 8 in PDF)

The Canadian guests are not as well known to me save for Dr. Nils Petersen who heads up Canada’s National Institute of Nanotechnology. Here is a list of the Canadian guest speakers,

Mr. (sometimes referred to as Dr. in the document) Claude Ostiguy (Director, Research and Expertise Support Department, Institut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail) (p. 1 in print version, p. 3 in PDF)

Dr. Nils Petersen (Director General, National Research Council Canada, National Institute for Nanotechnology) (p. 2 in print version, p. 4 in PDF)

Dr. Claude Emond (Toxicologist, Department of Environmental and Occupational Health, Université de Montréal) (p. 3 in print version, p. 5 in PDF)

Ms. Françoise Maniet (Lecturer and Research Agent, Centre de recherche interdisciplinaire sur la biologie, la santé, la société et l’environnement (CINBIOSE) et Groupe de recherche en droit international et comparé de la consommation (GREDICC), Université du Québec à Montréal) (p. 4 in print version, p. 6 in PDF)

Emond spoke to the need for a national nanotechnology development strategy. He also mentioned communication although I’m not sure he and would agree much beyond the point that some communication programmes are necessary,

The different meetings I attend point out the necessity to integrate the social communication transparency education aspect in nanotechnology development, so many structures already exist around the words. As I said before with OECD, NNI, we also have ISO 229. Now we have a network called NE3LS in Quebec, and we also have this international team we created a few years ago, which I spoke about earlier [he leads an international team in nano safety with members from France, Japan, US, Germany, and Canada].

A Canadian strategy initiative in nanotechnology can be inspired by a group above. In closing the discussion, I want to say there is an urgent need to coordinate the national development of nanotechnology and more particularly in parallel with the nanosafety issue, including research, characterization exposure, toxicology, and assessment. I would like to conclude by saying that Canada has to assume leadership in nanosafety and contribute to this international community rather than wait and see.

The NE3LS in Québec is new to me and I wonder if they liaise with the team in Alberta last mentioned here in connection with Alberta’s Nanotechnology Asset Map.

In response to a question from the committee member, Mrs. Cathy McLeod, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo,

First, because I am someone who is somewhat new to the understanding of this issue, could we take an example of either a cosmetic or a food or something that’s commonplace and follow it through from development into the product so I could understand the pathway of a nanoparticle in a cosmetic product or food? (p. 6 in print version, p. 8 in PDF)

The example Dr. Ostiguy used for his response was titanium dioxide nanoparticles in sunscreens and his focus was occupational safety, i.e., what happens to people working to produce these sunscreens. The surprising moment came when I saw Dr. Petersen’s response as he added,

In the case of cosmetics, they take that nanoparticle and put it into the cream formulation at a factory site. Then it normally comes out to the consumer encapsulated or protected in one way or another. [emphasis mine]

In general, in those kinds of manufacturing environments the risks are at the start of the process, when you are making the particles and incorporating them into a material, and possibly at the end of the product’s life, when you’re disposing of it. It might then be released in ways that you might not have anticipated—for example, through the wearing down or opening of the cassette of toner or whatever.

I think those are the two areas. Most consumers would see a product in which nanoparticles are encapsulated or incorporated— maybe inside a cellphone, or something like that—and often not be exposed in that way. (p. 7 in print version, p. 9 in PDF)

As I understand Petersen’s comments, he believes that the nanoparticles in sunscreens (and other cosmetics) do not make direct contact as they are somehow incorporated into a shell or capsule. He then makes a comparison to cell phones to prove his point. This is incorrect. Yes, any nanomaterials in a cell phone are bound to the product (cell phones are not rubbed onto the skin) but the nanoparticles in sunscreens make direct contact and *penetrate the skin. *ETA June 28, 2010: It has not been unequivocally proved that nanoparticles penetrate healthy adult skin. I apologize for the error. ** ETA July 19, 2010: As per the July 18, 2010 posting on Andrew Maynard’s 2020 Science blog, the evidence so far suggests that there is no skin penetration by nanoparticles in sunscreens.

I have posted extensively about nanoparticles and sunscreens and will try later to lay in some links either to my posts or to more informed parties as to safety issues regarding consumers.

There was an interesting development towards the end of the meeting with Carolyn Bennett, St. Paul’s,

Firstly, I wanted to apologize for being late. I think some of you know it was the tenth anniversary of CIHR [Canadian Institutes of Health Research] this morning, the breakfast, and some of us who were there at the birth were supposed to be there at the birthday party. So my apologies.

What happened on the way in to the breakfast was that I ran into Liz Dowdeswell, from the Council of Canadian Academies, and it seems that they have just done a review of nanotechnology in terms of pros and cons. [emphasis mine]So I would first ask the clerk and the analyst to circulate that report to the committee, because I think it might be very helpful to us, and then I think it would be interesting to know if the witnesses had seen it and whether they had further comments on whether you felt it was taking Canada in the right direction.

The report mentioned by Bennett was released in July 8, 2008 (news release). You can find the full report here and the abridged version here.

I wouldn’t describe this report as having just been “done” but I think that as a primer it stands up well. (You can read my 2008 comments here.)

I do find it sad that neither this committee nor Peter Julian the Member of Parliament who earlier this year tabled the first bill concerned with nanotechnology were aware of the report’s existence. It adds weight to an issue (nobody in Ottawa seems to be aware of their work) for the Council of Canadian Academies mentioned on this blog here (where you will find links to a more informed discussion by Rob Annan at Don’t leave Canada behind and the folks at The Black Hole).

I’m glad to see there’s some interest in nanotechnology in Ottawa and I hope they continue to dig for more information.

I have sent Joyce Murray a set of questions which I hope she’ll answer about the committee’s interest in nanotechnology and about the science resources and advice available to the Members of Parliament.

ETA June 30, 2010: I received this correction from Mr. Julian’s office today:

I would like to bring to your attention incorrect information provided in the Frogheart posting on June 23, Nanomaterials, Toxicity, and Canada’s House of Commons Standing Committee on Health. Of particular concern are the closing comments:

“I do find it sad that neither this committee nor Peter Julian the Member of Parliament who earlier this year tabled the first bill concerned with nanotechnology were aware of the report’s existence. It adds weight to an issue (nobody in Ottawa seems to be aware of their work) for the Council of Canadian Academies mentioned on this blog here (where you will find links to a more informed discussion by Rob Annan at Don’t leave Canada behind and the folks at The Black Hole). I’m glad to see there’s some interest in nanotechnology in Ottawa and I hope they continue to dig for more information.”

Mr. Julian is indeed aware of the Council of Canadian Academies excellent report on nanotechnology in 2008. The document is one of many that formed the basis of Mr. Julian’s Bill C-494 which was tabled in Parliament on March 10. It is incorrect to assume that Mr. Julian was not aware of the report’s existence.

There is indeed interest in nanotechnology in Ottawa. Canadians should expect sustained interest when the House of Commons reconvenes in September with a focus on better ensuring that nanotechnology’s benefits are safely produced in the marketplace.

I apologize for the error and I shouldn’t have made the assumption. I am puzzled that the Council of Canadian Academies report was not mentioned in the interview Mr. Julian very kindly gave me and where I explicitly requested some recommendations for Canadians who want to read up about nanotechnology. Mr. Julian’s reply (part 2 of the interview) did not include a reference to the Council’s nanotechnology report, which I consider more readable than some of the suggestions offered.

*’haring’ changed to ‘hearing’ on July 26, 2016.

Bacterial nanobots build a pyramid; solar cell breakthrough in Quebec; global nano regulatory framework conference at Northeastern University; Robert Fulford talks about the poetry of nanotechnology

4 Replies

Just when I was thinking that the Canadian nanotechnology scene was slowing down there’s this: A research team at the École Polytechnique de Montréal (Québec) has announced that they’ve trained bacteria to build structures shaped like pyramids. From the news item on Nanowerk,

Faster than lion tamers… More powerful than snake charmers… Make way for the bacteria trainers! Professor Sylvain Martel and his team at the École Polytechnique de Montréal NanoRobotics Laboratory have achieved a new world first: “training” living bacteria to build a nanopyramid.

These miniature construction workers are magnetotactic bacteria (MTB): they have their own internal compasses, allowing them to be pulled by magnetic fields. MTB possess flagella bundles enabling each individual to generate a thrust force of approximately 4 picoNewtons. Professor Martel’s team has succeeded in directing the motion of a group of such bacteria using computer-controlled magnetic fields. In an experiment conducted by Polytechnique researchers, the bacteria transported several epoxy nanobricks and assembled them into a step-pyramid structure, completing the task in just 15 minutes. The researchers have also managed to pilot a group of bacteria through the bloodstream of a rat using the same control apparatus.

Nanowerk also features a video of the magnetotactic bacteria at work.

Solar cell breakthrough?

More Canadian nano from Québec: a researcher (Professor Benoît Marsan) and his team at the Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM) have provided solutions to two problems which have been inhibiting the development of the very promising Graetzel solar cell that was developed in the 1990s in Switzerland. From the news item on Nanowerk a description of the problems,

Most of the materials used to make this cell are low-cost, easy to manufacture and flexible, allowing them to be integrated into a wide variety of objects and materials. In theory, the Graetzel solar cell has tremendous possibilities. Unfortunately, despite the excellence of the concept, this type of cell has two major problems that have prevented its large-scale commercialisation:

– The electrolyte is: a) extremely corrosive, resulting in a lack of durability; b) densely coloured, preventing the efficient passage of light; and c) limits the device photovoltage to 0.7 volts.

– The cathode is covered with platinum, a material that is expensive, non-transparent and rare. Despite numerous attempts, until Professor Marsan’s recent contribution, no one had been able to find a satisfactory solution to these problem

Now a description of the solutions,

– For the electrolyte, entirely new molecules have been created in the laboratory whose concentration has been increased through the contribution of Professor Livain Breau, also of the Chemistry Department. The resulting liquid or gel is transparent and non-corrosive and can increase the photovoltage, thus improving the cell’s output and stability.

– For the cathode, the platinum can be replaced by cobalt sulphide, which is far less expensive. It is also more efficient, more stable and easier to produce in the laboratory.

More details about the work and publication of the study are at Nanowerk.

Northeastern University and nano regulatory frameworks

According to a news item on Azonano, Northeastern University’s (Boston, MA) School of Law will be hosting a two-day conference on international regulatory frameworks for nanotechnology.

Leading international experts on the global regulation of nanotechnologies, including scientists, lawyers, ethicists and officials from governments, industry stakeholders, and NGOs will join in a two-day conference May 7-8, 2010 at Northeastern University’s School of Law.

The conference will identify best practices that address the needs of industries, the public and regulators. Speakers include representatives from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Brazil Ministry of Science and Technology, the Korean government, the International Conference of Chemicals Management and National Science Foundation-funded university-industry collaborations.

I checked out the law school’s conference website and noted a pretty good range of speakers from Asia, Europe, and North and South America. It can’t have been easy pulling such a diverse group together. Unfortunately, I didn’t recognize names other than two Canadian ones: Dr. Mark Saner and Pat Roy Mooney.

Saner who’s from Carleton University (Ottawa, Ontario) co-wrote a paper cited by Peter Julian (Canadian Member of Parliament) as one of the materials he used for reference when drawing up his recently tabled bill on nanotechnology regulation. (You can see Julian’s list here.) Saner, when he worked with the Council of Canadian Academies, was charged with drawing together the expert panel that wrote the council’s paper on nanotechnology. That panel put together a report (Small is Different: A Science Perspective on the Regulatory Challenges of the Nanoscale) that does a thoughtful job of discussing nanotechnology, regulations, the precautionary principle, etc. and which you can find here. (As I recall I don’t agree with everything as written in the report but it is, as I noted, thoughtful.)

As for Pat Roy Mooney, he’s the executive director for the ETC Group which is a very well-known (to many scientists and businesses in the technology sectors) civil society group. There’s an Oct. 2009 interview with Mooney here where he discusses (in English) nanotechnology during a festival in Austria.

Robert Fulford and nanotechnology

Canadian journalist and author, Robert Fulford just penned an essay/article about nanotechnology for the National Post. From the article,

Fresh bulletins regularly bring news of startling developments in this era’s most surprising and perhaps most poetic form of science, nanotechnology, the study of the unthinkably small.

It’s a pleasure to read as a literary piece. Fulford mostly concerns himself with visions of what nanotechnology could accomplish and with a book (No small matter) by Felice Frankel and George Whitesides which I first saw mentioned by Andrew Maynard on his 2020 Science blog here.

FrogHeart

Commentary about nanotech, science policy and communication, society, and the arts