NASA hints at the confusion of what "nanotechnology" means.

One of NASA's recently published Space Technology Roadmaps says:

Executive Summary

Nanotechnology involves the manipulation of matter at the atomic level, where conventional physics breaks down, to impart new materials or devices with performance characteristics that far exceed those predicted for more orthodox approaches. For example, quantum onfinement in nanoscale semiconductor particles, quantum dots, gives rise to novel optical behavior making it possible to tune the color of their fluorescence simply by changing their diameter. Nanoscale texturing of surfaces can allow for control of adhesion properties leading to biomimetic (Gecko-foot) self-healing adhesives and self-cleaning surfaces. The unusual combination of superior mechanical properties, electrical and thermal conductivity and electronic properties of carbon based nanostructured materials can enable the development of lightweight, multifunctional structures that will revolutionize the design of future aerospace systems. Nanotechnology can have a broad impact on NASA missions, with benefits principally in four areas.

Note: NASA's study uses "nanotechnology" to refer to extensions of chemistry and materials science to a domain "where conventional physics," namely, the Newtonian physics assumed by mechanical engineering, "breaks down." And NASA's examples include advanced electronics, adhesives and new structural materials which display higher performance/mass ratios than currently available composite materials.

Notice what NASA's report does not say "nanotechnology" means: Nano gears, cams, shafts; nanoassemblers; nanobots to resurrect frozen cryonauts no matter how bad the damage; and other fantasies which apparently try to apply macroscopic physics to where it doesn't work.

If any of the latter things as imagined by some self-professed "nanotechnologists" sounded physically plausible, why doesn't NASA take them seriously enough for its "roadmap"?