[preeti22]

Generally school level chemistry have two parts organic and inorganic chemistry. but now nano science is coming up. should school level chemistry have one lesson on Nano Chemistry ?

[Borek]

If you ask me - no. Nanochemistry builds on things you learn earlier, just like many other branches of chemistry. You don't have a separate hour devoted to chemical engineering or nuclear chemistry, which doesn't mean you don't learn (or at least hear) about basic concepts required in both. Same with nanochemistry.

[curiouscat]

If you ask me - no. Nanochemistry builds on things you learn earlier, just like many other branches of chemistry. You don't have a separate hour devoted to chemical engineering or nuclear chemistry, which doesn't mean you don't learn (or at least hear) about basic concepts required in both. Same with nanochemistry.

IMHO nanochemistry has become an overhyped buzzword. Lots of projects jump on the bandwagon just because of the cool-factor and funding.

Unless there's a novel, scale-dependent effect  there's no point in giving it that rubric. No doubt there's interesting stuff at that scale but only a small fraction of those "nanochem" projects use it.

/rant

[Arkcon]

I'm wondering now if there are university courses in just nanotechnology, and what the prerequisites are, or if current courses just lump it in with material sciences.

[Mitch]

I'm wondering now if there are university courses in just nanotechnology, and what the prerequisites are, or if current courses just lump it in with material sciences.

You can find course work in it in any Bioengineering program or even in many chem. eng. programs. Regular chemistry programs have been very very slow too incorporate it.

[curiouscat]

Regular chemistry programs have been very very slow too incorporate it.

That may not be entirely a bad thing.

[Mitch]

Regular chemistry programs have been very very slow too incorporate it.

That may not be entirely a bad thing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxorubicin#Liposomal_formulations