Rune wrote:
> They did show the NanoCover liquid to a 
> university professor though, who confirmed (with a nanomicroscope or 
> whatever it's called) that it did contain nano-particles, 

I'm not sure I'd trust the opinion of someone who called them 
"nano-particles".  :-)

The difference between nano-tech and chemistry is (for the most part) 
the design and manufacturing, not the final product. (Unless you're 
talking about actual nano machinery, like atomic-sized engines.)

I.e., if the "nano-cover" works by having little gripping claws to hold 
it to the fabric, and a set of bellows on the other side to blow water 
away, maybe you could see that with a 'scope. Otherwise, I'm not sure 
how you'd determine whether it's really "nano" or not.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     Remember the good old days, when we
     used to complain about cryptography
     being export-restricted?

Post a reply to this message