Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Mon 09/04/2006 View Sun 09/03/2006 View Sat 09/02/2006 View Fri 09/01/2006 View Thu 08/31/2006 View Wed 08/30/2006 View Tue 08/29/2006
1
2006-09-04 Science & Technology
Foresight Nanotech Institute Video: Productive Nano Systems
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by 3dc 2006-09-04 10:32|| || Front Page|| [4 views since 2007-05-07]  Top

#1 Glossary

Personal Nanofactories (PNs)
Posted by 3dc 2006-09-04 10:54||   2006-09-04 10:54|| Front Page Top

#2 Visualizing productive nanosystems and molecular manufacturing

"It's it amazing"

Productive Nanosystems, from molecules to superproducts

"Now how much would you be willing to pay for Nano?"

mind, the only waste products are air and water!

"But wait, there's more!"

Posted by Art Schiff 2006-09-04 13:42||   2006-09-04 13:42|| Front Page Top

#3 Contrast the potential from these nanosystems (medical, computing, space, military) with the 7th century world that the Islamofascists would give us.

These technologies are coming at us like an express train, and things are going to change dramatically. It's imperative the good guys get there first.
Posted by Tony (UK) 2006-09-04 16:52||   2006-09-04 16:52|| Front Page Top

#4 Molecular manufacturing (MM) means the ability to build devices, machines, and eventually whole products with every atom in its specified place. Today the theories for using mechanical chemistry to directly fabricate nanoscale structures are well-developed and awaiting progress in enabling technologies.

Assuming all this theory works—and no one has established a problem with it yet—exponential general-purpose molecular manufacturing appears to be inevitable. It might be become a reality by 2010, likely will by 2015, and almost certainly will by 2020. When it arrives, it will come quickly. MM can be built into a self-contained, personal factory (PN) that makes cheap products efficiently at molecular scale. The time from the first fabricator to a flood of powerful and complex products may be less than a year.

Lots of things can be built this way. And among other effects, it will GREATLY reduce our need for oil as we shift from manufacturing in central locations and trucking things to manufacturing on site.

Lots of people will be out of work in 2 decades, but they won't go without.
Posted by lotp 2006-09-04 17:06||   2006-09-04 17:06|| Front Page Top

#5 Same thing happened to the farmers.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-09-04 17:16||   2006-09-04 17:16|| Front Page Top

#6 Personally, I don't like the idea of a 'universal assembler' - capable of building copies of anything (including itself). There's too much potential for exponential runaway and the dreaded 'grey goo' (although there's not enough energy in the crust to keep the little critters going to 'eat the planet', they could make a mess of the biosphere). I much prefer the PF idea, but I do think that the notion of having the PF (or by implication, an assembler) requiring some 'exotic elements' to operate and therefore have some kind of in-built cutoff is a bit far-fetched. Which is why I say again, the good guys need to get there first..
Posted by Tony (UK) 2006-09-04 17:28||   2006-09-04 17:28|| Front Page Top

#7 First off: This video is mandatory viewing for anyone who considers themselves to be technically literate or conversant. It is an absolutely superb rendition of what to expect in another 50 years or less. It amounts to nothing less than "Point of Use Manufacturing" for many of today's household small wares and personal goods. In its reverse form (to be discussed later), it represents the ultimate in product recycling.

Nanotechnoloy constitutes a direct avenue whereby any destruction and environmental havoc wrought by humanity’s scientific and industrial revolution may be repaired. It is the ultimate redemption of these two giants of human progress. This development involves assembling common artifacts on an atom-by-atom basis. The efficient execution of such a time-consuming task entirely depends upon microscopic entities commonly referred to as “nano-assemblers”. One design calls for a molecular sized robot capable of grasping individual atoms of elementally pure material and affixing them to other atoms of the same or different kind.

The practical inversion of this concept is the “nano-disassembler” robot, capable of disassociating any material, again atom-by-atom, into its constituent chemical elements. Such a minuscule device simultaneously represents an environmental boon of the highest order and an almost identically potent threat. This is what Tony’s post refers to:

There's too much potential for exponential runaway and the dreaded 'gray goo' (although there's not enough energy in the crust to keep the little critters going to 'eat the planet', they could make a mess of the biosphere).

Tony, either you've read the book "Assemblers of Infinity" by Kevin J. Anderson and Doug Beason or you've been paying close attention to my posts about this topic at Rantburg (or, quite possibly, neither). Either way, this really kicks up a notch my personal respect for you. However dreadful it may seem, the "grey goo" problem need not be that strong of an issue.

SIDEBAR: The "grey goo" scenario involves a worst-case implication of nano-disassembler robots. It centers upon the most efficient and cost-effective way to mass-produce (or reproduce) these tiny deconstruction vehicles. Ideally, such nano-robots should be able to self-replicate, much like common biological viruses or bacteria. This allows them to manufacture a, literally, endless supply of these useful little mechanisms. A current analogy is the classic “engine lathe”. This is a machine tool capable of producing much of the existing mechanical technology familiar to us. The engine lathe’s most significant distinction is its ability to shape all of the parts necessary to build another engine lathe. This entitles it to classification as (given human operation), a “self-replicating” entity.

This idea also applies to self-replicating nano-disassembly robots. The hitch in this concept involves what might happen should such atomic-level disassembler devices suddenly run rampant. Scientific projections estimate it is possible for self-replicating nano-disassembly robots to convert the entire earth’s surface to a several meter deep layer of atomically disassociated “gray goo”, in just a few weeks. The solution to this daunting problem is as simple as it is obvious.

We already have created a biological version of this type of destructive device. It is Escherichia coli, better known as E. coli, the bacteria responsible for everything from the “tourist trots” to surgical sepsis. The laboratory strains are genetically engineered to survive only in an oxygen-free environment (among other features). So it must be with any nano-disassemblers that we create. They must be entirely dependent upon an artificial environment that nature cannot provide.

Any nano-disassembly robot must be engineered to perish in an “earth-normal” environment, much like the famous laboratory E. coli specimens. This is what will prevent the “gray goo” scenario. As to those who would produce an environmentally stable nano-disassembler, that’s why we’ve invented H-bombs.

[end of sidebar]

Now, imagine a tabletop machine, as shown in the video that can manufacture most everything you use in your home today. For the nonce, we’ll exclude edible foodstuffs or massive constructs like automobiles. But this, in no way, limits the potential for such technology. These machines would eliminate the need for many of the polluting factories in your or anyone else’s neighborhood.

Now, let’s go back to the “gray goo” scenario. Imagine a massive Olympic swimming pool-sized tank filled with these nano-disassembler robots. This enclosure would have air-locks, just like a spacecraft or submarine, and its atmosphere would be nitrogen or argon rich so that it could pool a huge mass of these environmentally dependent nano-disassembly robots (that would DIE if they escaped into the real-world). Dump into this huge air-locked tank whatever you like. Old couches, computer monitors, crushed cars, human waste, typewriters or Formica counter tops, it matters not.

From the emitter end would emerge all of the purified elemental chemicals needed to construct whatever by nano-assembly units. This represents one of the most significant advances in materials sciences in all of history.

I maintain that if Bill Gates had any brains, he would begin the purchase of every major landfill on earth. They represent the most concentrated accumulations of refined elements on this planet. All that is needed is to send them through nano-disassembly in order to harvest an incredible amount of previously expended energy that was required to isolate such huge quantities of purified materials in the first place.

Again, imagine your home being able to produce most of the non-food items you use from a box the size of an orange crate. Now imagine that orange crate-sized machine running off of almost 90% of the items you currently throw out as trash. Finally, imagine this using less power than the batteries you discard in a year. Consider that this would eliminate much of your personal contribution to our planet’s pollution.

Would you be willing to make sure that anyone who attempted to pervert such technology over to a “gray goo” application met with swift and irreversible death? Would you be content knowing that such technology meant that our planet would no longer be raped of any more resources? Would you be content knowing that this earth could sustain all of humanity without any further impact?

[Long ago I bought a small book about wilderness exploration and the task of managing pack mules. It finished with one simple query; “Who is smarter, you or the mule?”. I end this post with its final request.]

Face the question squarely.
Posted by Zenster 2006-09-04 22:35||   2006-09-04 22:35|| Front Page Top

#8 “Who is smarter, you or the mule?”

Me.
Posted by Francis 2006-09-04 22:56||   2006-09-04 22:56|| Front Page Top

23:45 Zenster
23:38 Zenster
23:34 Zenster
23:27 Zenster
23:23 Swamp Blondie
23:21 gromgoru
23:17 gromgoru
23:13 gromgoru
23:10 gromgoru
23:03 gromgoru
22:59 trailing wife
22:56 Francis
22:49 GK
22:48 Zenster
22:48 RD
22:45 RD
22:39 Barbara Skolaut
22:35 Zenster
22:30 trailing wife
22:19 Frank G
22:16 trailing wife
22:10 Texas Redneck
21:57 Old Patriot
21:45 Old Patriot









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com