Yes, artist's impressions can sometimes be misleading. Another good example are artist's impressions in astronomy, i.e. when NASA wants the public to be interested in say exoplanets, they hire graphic artists to depict these planets with artistic freedom, but within the bounds of what factual information the scientists have about the planet in question, but sometimes the resulting artwork is taken literally. What's even worse about the image posted above, is that it's NOT an artist's impression, but a "stylized" image depicting the nano-spider. So I'll temper this post by doing this:
"Stylized" (i.e. influenced by image of "spider" and "robot") image of these Nanobots:
Artist's Impression
What they might actually look like under a scanning electron microscope:
So, in order to "sell" an idea well, sometimes the financiers of the scientists (and not the scientists themselves) rely on "baiting" tactics by using "nice" graphics, in order to grab public attention.
-RODION




The spider-like robot is really built from DNA but it is still from from real robots that you can really control or like the artist's impression posted by the TS.


Reply With Quote
Anyway, I think they used AFM (atomic force microscopy) based on their original publication. I think they didn't want their samples to die right away if they used SEM. hehe
