We at our Company are mainly involved in research and development concerning Nanobiology, the cognate subject of Nanotechnology, and on the mutual interactions between two such fields. We mainly work on those theoretical results which look like requiring just a further step to become a practical technology, i.e., a Nanobiotechnology. This is the reason for the word "Testbed" in the Company's name.
Just after our first steps into such nanoscience, we realized that research in mesoscopic physics, and mainly in biosystems at the mesoscopic level, was going to open new views about information, I mean the physics of information, classical and quantum, as opposed to the already well developed field of the physics of energy. We are gradually realizing that there is a link, to be deeply investigated, between the microphysical and the macro-world; the nanoworld is just at the boundary between them. Self-organization, life, evolution and biological intelligence have their roots just there, and their understanding asks for a knowledge of what physical information is; information, according to the Austrian physicist Anton Zeilinger, "is deeper than reality". It goes without saying how important that knowledge is for the Mankind and its relationships with the environment which has generated life and biological intelligence. A developed Nanobiotechnology would make the quality of life better without ransacking the environment.
So Nanotechnology and Nanobiology are basic tools for increasing our understanding of ourselves as "nanostructured hierarchical systems" , of our nature of social beings, and ultimately of our position in the Universe. What I have discussed in  refers, very conservatively, just to envisageable nanostructured automata, but what I called "the barrier of meaning" in communication can be surely referred in principle to human physiology and to human social systems as well: dyscrasias can arise throughout the nanostructured levels or the macrolevels making up the whole system, due to misinterpretation of the mathematical ongoings in interlevel communication. It is a problem in semantics. The standard "physics of energy", with its time as a fundamental coordinate which according to Einstein is "an illusion, persistent though it may be", shows unable to tackle such problems and to describe in physical terms concepts like "intelligence" as the capability of creating new information, I mean, information not contained in the initial and the boundary conditions, and "free will". Shortly, in increasing the understanding of ourselves. And this is a hard task involving strong cooperation among scientists throughout the world and consequently a safe development of new concepts and related technologies.
Would the process of increasing such knowledge run into amuck? Doubts of that
kind, both throughout the scientific community (sometimes, and quite strangely
enough) and the laymen, are rooted in the ancestral feeling that the use of
reason is doomed to sorrow and destruction. Such position reminds me of a scene
in Goethe's "Urfaust": Mephistopheles in the guise of a university
professor is approached by a student of his, who asks him to be so kind as to
write a sentence on the first page of his book. Mephistopheles writes the well
known biblical sentence, in Latin, "Eritis sicut Deus, scientes bonum et
malum": you will be like God, conscious of Good and Evil. The student reads
the sentence, bows respectfully and goes away, while Mephistopheles speaking
to himself says: "Follow the old saying of my uncle the Serpent, if you
like; the day will come when your likeness to God will scare you to death."
Re.: S. Santoli, "Inside Comunication in Nanostructured Evolutionary
Automata - Nanophysics and an Information Concept for Viable Technologies",
Kybernetes, vol. 32, No. 5/6, 788-807 (2003).
INT - International Nanobiological Testbed Ltd.