Nanotubes Grown Longer, Straighter
sanman
Check out this article:
http://www.dukenews.duke.edu/news/newsrelease.asp?id=1668&catid=2,46&cpg=newsrelease.asp
Gee, what happened to that breakthru at Rennselaer, which got the
nanotubes upto 8 inches long?
Hmm, researchers these days mostly seem interested in nanotubes for
next-generation microchip circuits, and we rarely hear about work into
achieving the super-strong materials.
Gee, we already have plenty of fast microchips; I think we need to
work more on the stronger materials side. Comments?
J. Patrick Chu
Well, you could also argue that we already have plenty of strong materials.
It's pretty subjective--looking back, which revolutions do you think will be
responsible for turning the wheels of history: the stone age, bronze age,
and iron age, or the information age?
--Patrick
"sanman" <mano...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b84k2...@enews3.newsguy.com...
MCAS NV
>Gee, we already have plenty of fast microchips; I think we need to
>work more on the stronger materials side. Comments?
>
Imagine car tires that would last a million miles. Lightweight aircraft that
used 1/3 the fuel of today's planes. 500 story buildings...
sanman
"J. Patrick Chu" <Patri...@brown.edu> wrote in message
news:<b8bpt...@enews1.newsguy.com>...
> Well, you could also argue that we already have plenty of strong materials.
> It's pretty subjective--looking back, which revolutions do you think will be
> responsible for turning the wheels of history: the stone age, bronze age,
> and iron age, or the information age?
>
> --Patrick
Well, how much more will microelectronics transform us? Quantum
computers, maybe, but they're not nanotube-based. Nanotubes will make
microchips faster, to be sure, but it seems like the world isn't
hurting for faster microchips anymore, or else we'd see the chipmakers
making more money off their leading-edge products. Most of the world
has all the processing power it needs. Other than high-end theoretical
labs, what further sales potential is there?
Fast chips are great, but we've gotten over the novelty of them, and
everyone now has enough speed on their desktop. 100-Ghz machines will
be nice, but I doubt they'll change our lives the way the 10- and
100-Mhz machines did when they first came out. We're now getting into
the diminishing returns phase of the information economy.
What would be really cool is if nanotubes and other nanotech provide
us with vast performance improvements in materials. Now there's a
boost that would radically change our lives. Cars, planes, ships,
bridges, etc that are far stronger and lightweight. The Space Elevator
still seems a bit too fantastic to believe in, but I'm sure that
spacecraft design would heavily benefit from the realization of
nanotubes' incredible strength properties.
J. Patrick Chu
In the long run, our microchips WILL have to be vastly more powerful than
what we have now. If we're going to treat matter like data, and therefore
need computers to account for every atom out there, then we'll need
extremely fast--or at least small--processors and other hardware. When it
comes to nanotubes, I guess the electronics vs. materials question deals
with the relative short term. I would tend to agree with you that a very
light yet sturdy airplane would come in handy more than a blazing fast
processor in the near future. We're not likely to see widespread dynamic
matter for at least a couple of decades, but cheap and reliable mobility is
always in demand.
Space exploration is questionable--I see this as more of a long-term need.
In the meantime, it will be limited to research at space agencies like NASA.
Colonization won't be necessary for a while; in total, there is plenty of
space and resources on Earth, but problems arise from regional scarcity and
distribution issues. These are things that nanotech hopefully will mitigate
or eliminate in other ways.
--Patrick
"sanman" <mano...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b8cor...@enews2.newsguy.com...
Alaskawolf
I think that making carbon nanotubes would solve a lot of problems.
>From what i ve read, they are mostly indestructable, due to the way
they are built. Also, they have virtually no weight, which would make
carbon nanotubes ideal for construction on new buildings that can be a
lot taller. Steel and composite materials have an inherant weight
limit that when reached, the metal will collapse under its own
stresses.
Just a few thoughts.
Alaskawolf