nanoapex.com · Domains · Slashdot Mirror

Has this guy EVER researched nanotech? by Spy+der+Mann · 2005-07-02 15:24 · Score: 2, Interesting · on Innovation Getting Slower?

I don't know why the article referred "nanotech" as nanomachines or molecular assembly. To quote: "Drexler says nanotechnology alone will smash the barriers Huebner foresees, never mind other branches of technology. It's only a matter of time, he says, before nanoengineers will surpass what cells do, making possible atom-by-atom desktop manufacturing."

Pfft... talk about uninformed people. Better go to http://news.nanoapex.com/ and get REAL information. (Yeah I know, Drexler is the father of nanotech - but Drexler's nanotech is NOT the nanotech that countries are investing billions in R&D. Too bad for him, tho)

Nanotechnology isn't just about molecular-level manufacturing. It's about nanoelectronics, nanomaterials for energy storage, new diagnostic machines with nanoscopic precision, analysis of biology in the nanoscale (a completely UNEXPLORED field so far), new materials for permanent artificial bones, filters which will separate the salt (and microorganisms) from seawater at the molecular level... and of course, your 6-million-dollars bionic eyes. Yes. All of this is possible.

Now, Want a real-world example of technology innovation?
Vehicle with the highest fuel efficiency sets new world record . "PAC-Car has now achieved its goal: it finished the course at the Shell Eco-Marathon taking place on the Michelin test track at Ladoux, France, using only 1.07 grams of hydrogen."

Hey, if that's not innovation, I don't know what it is.

Now think of the advancements in say, molecular engineering (chemistry) that will be possible by the time we start comparing home computers by their teraflops.

So, innovation getting slower? Yeah, right.

Find your grey goo here by Spy+der+Mann · 2005-06-17 04:02 · Score: 1 · on Nanotech Trojan Horse That Kills Cancer

http://news.nanoapex.com/ - They have a grey goo comic there :)

Paintable solar cells. Not the first ones... by Spy+der+Mann · 2005-01-10 08:10 · Score: 3, Informative · on Breakthrough Efficient, Paintable Solar Cells

2002 CNN article about "paintable solar cells".

The advance in here is that these new cells also use infrared. Also, solar cells are only ONE of the possible applications of this new technology (Nanoapex news article).

Wrong comparison. by Spy+der+Mann · 2005-01-06 11:03 · Score: 1 · on Are Nanotube Monitors In Your Future?

How many times have we read about a new display technology that's going to be better/faster/higher quality/cheaper/stronger/smarter/prettier/jumps higher/etc than LCDs and Plasma.

Yeah, but Plasma,LCD and OLED's were revolutionary in the way they produce the light in the displays. FED's only use the existing phosphore pixels technology that we have been using in our CRT's for decades.

The revolutionary (and therefore expensive) part of Field Emission Displays are the nanotube arrays replacing the bulky vacuum tubes. About freakin' time I'd say. I always had the idea that smaller vacuum tubes could be arranged in arrays to flatten the displays - i was stunned to find out that nanotech would do the trick. So actually, nanotube-based FED's are not a true revolution, but rather an evolution of the existing CRT model. They use revolutionary technology, but that's a minor detail.

A couple of months ago I found out in nanoapex that a new method of nanotubes mass-production was discovered. I don't doubt that other methods are discovered within the next 2 years, dropping production costs.

However, nanotubes have similar properties to graphene (single sheets of graphite), and maybe using simple graphite instead of nanotubes could do the trick (nobody has tried, tho, and I don't have gazillion dollars to do the research myself :P ).

Whatever the delay is, I expect nanotube FED's to replace all CRT's afterwards.

O.o you're kidding me, right? by Spy+der+Mann · 2005-01-04 11:09 · Score: 5, Informative · on The Physics of the Hydrogen Economy

OK Since I'm the one who submitted the article, please allow me to clarify some logical errors in your statements.

So, in order to have a large-scale hydrogen "economy", you need an alternate power source to make all that hydrogen in the first place.

News for you. Hydrogen is not "made". It's extracted. OK, putting the word jokes aside, I understand that what you mean is that *PURE* hydrogen is not found *NATURALLY* on Earth.

So we need an ALTERNATIVE power source to obtain it. So what? Electricity is not energy either! It's a bunch of electrons and possitive ions waiting for us to mix them together. We use turbines in dams to produce it. (kynetic energy -> electrical energy). We need engines (kynetic->chemical) to take out the oil from the deposits below Earth.

Didn't you study physics in high school? Just climbing some stairs transforms the kinetic energy you use to move, into "potential energy". And by falling you turn it into kinetic energy, too. And guess what, we're made of protons,electrons and neutrons, and all of these are made of quantums, which are discrete packets of *energy*.

EVERYTHING's energy, dude! So what's the mystery if hydrogen needs some alternate energy to be extracted from water or other compounds? Don't forget your thermodynamics lessons from college. All engines do is transforming one form of energy into another. And since no engine is 100% efficient, then we have what is known as "entropy", which constantly is increased across the universe.

So, what power source can we have to extract pure H2 from other materials? Well, we can have, for example, solar power.

Hydrogen can be built *instantly* with some electrolysis (either chemically or solar powered). I did it myself at home when i was a kid. You put these water-filled tubes in a bucket (upside down) ,insert the electrodes, add some acid as catalyst, and plug the wires into a battery. Voila! Oxygen in one, hydrogen in the other. Now Try making oil from wood with your chemistry kit.

The H2-generating process is sub-optimal right now (as was the vacuum tube in the 70's to act as a current switch), but technology always improves with time. And don't forget that big companies like Shell are investing millions of dollars into research.

The point with using hydrogen, is that:

a) It's combustible and can produce energy when reacting chemically with other elements/compounds.
b) Unlike fossil fuels, it doesn't require millions of years to be produced/extracted/whatever.
c) It's clean, it doesn't produce CO2 when burned.

Did you RTFA by the way? How do you think fossil fuels are made? Plants transformed H2O + CO2 + SOLAR POWER + nutrients into wood (and O2 as a byproduct). And these with time were transformed into hydrocarbons. Which consist of long hydrogen and carbon chains (not to be confused with carbohydrates - sugars -, which have oxygen in them).

The real energy in hydrocarbons is stored in the chemical bonds between the carbon and hydrogen atoms. By burning them, the combustion process releases these bonds. O2 + (long chains of C + H) ---> H2O + CO2. See? There's the hydrogen, and the C. What we're wanting to do, is get the carbon out of the equation. O2 + 2H2 ---> 2 H2O.

So, is hydrogen economy all that far-fetched? No, it isn't! We've been using hydrogen in our cars for a lot of time. The problem is that we're also using carbon.

Frankly, I'm amazed why your post was moderated as "insightful" (someone MOD it as overrated, please!). More mysterious than the universe is the human ignorance.

P.S. If this post is modded up, please do so as "informative".

TWENTY HYDROGEN MYTHS by Spy+der+Mann · 2004-11-11 09:20 · Score: 4, Informative · on Combined Gasoline/Hydrogen Fuel Station Opens

I found a paper about the 20 hydrogen myths (pdf format). It tells a lot about the Hindemburg, and other urban legends related to hydrogen.

Anyway, having pressurized hydrogen in your car is _NOT_ what the latest technology advancements are about. It's about hydrogen cells. And nanotechnology provides a way of storing hydrogen in solid media under low pressures.

For more info, check out nanoapex news and search the topic "nanoenergy".

(Note to editors:
Do NOT, under ANY circumstances, moderate this post as 'insightful'!)

Do those figures take Nanotech into account? by Spy+der+Mann · 2004-10-07 07:29 · Score: 1 · on Hydrogen Vehicle Generates Its Own Fuel

The figures in this "Sun and Hydrogen to fuel the future" article seem much more realistic to me.

Oh, and don't forget about the newest flexible solar cells!