It's a Nano World After All
Howard Lovy
I went to Epcot in 1982, the year it opened, and my geeky teenage brain
was marvelously entertained, although many of the "predictions" just
never materialized. I wonder what the next generation will say about the
nanotechnology exhibit that just opened.
http://nanobot.blogspot.com/2004_01_01_nanobot_archive.html#107369636587708811
Roy Batty
Howard Lovy <hl...@earthlink.net> wrote:
What we've been saying about nanotech for the past ... oh.. 15 years.
Nanotechnology will always be 10 years in the future.
But, if you look at it another way. My TiBook running OS X is more
powerful than probably ALL of the computation machines used to fight the
Axis in WWII.
We can communicate with someone around the world with a handheld device.
We just landed *another* ROBOT on Mars.
We can store 1 gig of data on a small chip (make that several gig if
you've got the cash).
I can own probably ALL of the great works of literature, if not that, I
can access them.
We can access enornous (insane) amounts of data from the comfort of out
homes.
We have devices that can image a 3 dimensional model of the human body
and find minute flaws.
We can carry our entire music collection with us in a small device on
out belts.
And the list goes on.
Oh yeah, the biggest improvement.... (he says with tongue in cheek)
We have a pill that will help guys maintain a erection.
I (attempt to) write science fiction. Almost every day I just stop in
awe because we ALL live in a science fiction story where we take ALL the
advancements for granted.
If you like nanotech, one of the novels that has the most FUN with it is
DIAMOND AGE by Neal Stephenson (he wrote SNOWCRASH)
Robert Kent
"Roy Batty" <Ba...@TyrrellspammapsCorp.com> wrote in message
news:Batty-6D1DCE....@comcast.ash.giganews.com...
> In article <mHPMb.5530$q4....@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
> Howard Lovy <hl...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > It's a Nano World After All
> > I went to Epcot in 1982, the year it opened, and my geeky teenage brain
> > was marvelously entertained, although many of the "predictions" just
> > never materialized. I wonder what the next generation will say about the
> > nanotechnology exhibit that just opened.
> >
http://nanobot.blogspot.com/2004_01_01_nanobot_archive.html#1073696365877088
11
>
> What we've been saying about nanotech for the past ... oh.. 15 years.
> Nanotechnology will always be 10 years in the future.
Nope. When "Engines of Creation" was published in the '80s, the prediction
was mid 21st century. Now, they are saying that if Moore's law continues
it's path, it will be here by 2020, perhaps as early as 2010.
A lot of progress has been made already. Carbon nanotubes are 10 times
stronger than steel at a tenth the weight, and we should be able to make
them at almost any length we want in a couple years.
Roy Batty
"Robert Kent" <rober...@somewhere.com> wrote:
> > What we've been saying about nanotech for the past ... oh.. 15 years.
> > Nanotechnology will always be 10 years in the future.
>
> Nope. When "Engines of Creation" was published in the '80s, the prediction
> was mid 21st century. Now, they are saying that if Moore's law continues
> it's path, it will be here by 2020, perhaps as early as 2010.
>
> A lot of progress has been made already. Carbon nanotubes are 10 times
> stronger than steel at a tenth the weight, and we should be able to make
> them at almost any length we want in a couple years.
The problem isn't exactly the technology. Technology never does the
expected thing, or rather, we tend to use technology in unexpected ways.
And application of technological advance isn't linear.
I tend to agree with Jerry Pournelle on this and I rarely agree with
Jerry. In responce to some question at THE hacker's convention, I think
it was DefCon. The answer was something like, "it's obvious they'll be
changes and advances. It's also obvious that none of us can predict what
they'll be."
To put this in persepctive, if you were the betting type in 1905, you
would expect the future of air transportation to be in larger and faster
lighter-than-air vehicles.
You would have bet that the future in ground travel would have been in
improved railroad trains.
I don't want to bet against nanotech but I'm not getting my hopes up.
When I see comsumer grade applications of the technology I'll start
believing in it but most of the stuff that has hit my radar is high-end
R&D. And it's not like there can't be tons of ways to use it.
If they apply it to nanocomputers there's the real posibility of "smart
matter". And Smart Matter changes the world. Smart matter, for example,
is a brick with a computer in it. It doesn't have to be a "bright"
computer but it does have to be cheap. A brick that can think can
automatically level and straighten itself. A door that can think is a
more secure and safer door. A book that can think can have multiple
endings (or no ending).
Carbon tubes and bucky balls. Sweet.
FWIW, I just bought a sample of aerogel. I hoped it would be in today's
mail.
I can almost imagine aerogel manufactured by nanotech. If they could
get the price down from $200/cu-in to something cheap then THAT would be
a revolution it itself.
Moviesounds.com
>
>
> Oh yeah, the biggest improvement.... (he says with tongue in cheek)
>
>
> We have a pill that will help guys maintain a erection.
>
DAAAAAAAAAAMN RIGHT.
Ed
<Ba...@TyrrellspammapsCorp.com> wrotc:
>
>FWIW, I just bought a sample of aerogel. I hoped it would be in today's
>mail.
>
of aerogel. Does yours look the same, and how is it contained?
Your Pal,
Ed
Roy Batty
ed...@earthlink.net (Ed) wrote:
It arrived today. Aerogel, I'm informed by the person that sold it to
me, normally sells for $200/in^3. I have a chip that may be 1 inch
long. It feels like a hard sponge but has very little weight. It's
enclosed in a little plastic display case that is 1x1x3.
I got it on eBay for 29.95 plus shipping.
It looks exactly the same except it's a chip. It's blue for the same
reason that the sky is blue. Ralleigh Scattering.