Robot Walks on Water

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Posted by CowboyNeal on Thursday September 9, 2004 @09:26PM from the robot-news-week dept.

gmletzkojr writes "Yahoo! News has a story about a robot built to walk on water, much like small insects, bugs, and of course, Jesus. The current robot is only a prototype, but more 'useful' robots are already being imagined." This puts into practice what scientists learned just last year.

17 of 273 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Well now... by leonmergen · 2004-09-09 21:27 · Score: 3, Interesting

So now that we got a really tiny robot that walks on water, what can we do with it ?

--
- Leon Mergen
http://www.solatis.com
1. Re:Well now... by FullMetalAlchemist · 2004-09-09 22:10 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Considering the fact that a single fly laying eggs would; if the offspring wasn't to die premature age by spiders and such; would, after a year, have caused such a huge amount of flies that it would equal the mass of this little planet.
  
  A great energy source, all the robots would need to do is to smell like shit, and they'd be done for life :)
  
  Imagine a lake covered in shitsmelling robots, what a sight!
2. Re:Well now... by Leibherk · 2004-09-09 23:43 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Its possible that the weight of a fly landing on the robot would increase its weight past the point where it can stay on the water and it would sink.
  
  --
  "Maggie call Aquaman!!!"
3. Re:Well now... by Arathrael · 2004-09-10 01:25 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Interestingly (well, I find it interesting), Isaac Asimov suggested the use of robots to control insect population in '...That Thou Art Mindful of Him' in 1974.
  
  'Harriman said, "We cannot control insects effectively without risking damage to the ecology. Chemical insecticides are too broad; juvenile hormones too limited. The robo-bird, however, can preserve large areas without being consumed [...] If the fruit-fly supply runs short, the robo-bird does nothing. It does not multiply, it does not turn to other foods, it does not develop undesirable habits of its own. It does nothing.'
  
  Obviously that's not going to happen just yet - it'll take a lot more than water-walking and fly-digestion - but it does seem that maybe we're on our way to this sort of thing.
  
  I'm not an Asimov nut by the way, I just finished reading 'The Complete Robot' the other day and still have it by my desk. :-)
Lava-proof by usefool · 2004-09-09 21:34 · Score: 3, Interesting

Wait until they made one that can walk on lava, it'll be really useful for some scientific research in volcanos.

--
Uselessful technology (Air-Charged
1. Re:Lava-proof by MrIcee · 2004-09-10 05:24 · Score: 3, Interesting
  Although i'd like to see someone try to walk on [lava]
  
  You might find our instructions for walking on hot lava here most useful. We also pick it up using special kevlar and spun glass gloves that can withstand 2000 F for 20 seconds without breaching.
  Aloha
Mosquito-killer by 't+is+DjiM · 2004-09-09 21:58 · Score: 3, Interesting

Would be nice to combine this with the insect-eating robot that was mentioned a few days ago.

Bye bye mosquito's!!

--
--Use ant to make .war
Re:Pictures? by HalfFlat · 2004-09-09 22:01 · Score: 2, Interesting

Still trying to figure out why this is a useful invention though...
I wonder if down the track robots like this might be used to keep mosquito populations down?

Develop immunity to that!
Re:Umm, yes, but... by FinestLittleSpace · 2004-09-09 22:03 · Score: 3, Interesting

Agree in many ways... I think these jobs can be done already by boats, although the feleing is that if it's SKIMMING the water, it is not penetrating the miniscus (spag?), so wouldn't get eroded or contaminate any chemical mixture...
The water-walker and the dead-fly eater by hachete · 2004-09-09 23:16 · Score: 2, Interesting

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=18341

umm - maybe they could merge, provide pool-cleaning facilities, say.

h

Perfect sig for sale - only one careful owner

--
Patriotism is a virtue of the vicious
Re:Quick mover by BasilBrush · 2004-09-09 23:57 · Score: 2, Interesting

Look a little closer at the article from last year. The scientists had already produced a working model then. This is a dupe, either by slashdot, or by the person making another robot.
Re:Jesus didn't walk on the water by Bob(TM) · 2004-09-10 00:09 · Score: 4, Interesting

Doubtful.

The most prevalent form of the Matthew text is Greek (the most widely understood written language in the region). The Greek word used in the Matthew text is transliterated "peripateo" - to walk. The Greek word for "swim" is transliterated "kolympo" - to bathe or swim.

However, tradition strongly suggests that the original Matthew writings would have favored Hebrew (highly plausible - given his background). If so, it's original form is lost. Yet, there are distinct words for walk and swim in Hebrew, also. Translators understanding both languages would have been able to avoid a confusion pretty easily.

--

The little guy just ain't getting it, is he?
my roommate did this as an undergrad by Giant+Killer · 2004-09-10 00:25 · Score: 5, Interesting

Bah. My roommate did this three years ago when he was an undergrad at MIT for his senior thesis. He designed and built it himself. You can see it here. Granted, it is entirely mechanical, but dang it's cool. He's got a video of it going across water.

Most recently he built a robotic snail that, in its current incarnation, actually goes completely upside down. Oddly enough, he calls it robosnail.

Did I mention the dude makes his own swords?
It would also float by penguinoid · 2004-09-10 00:38 · Score: 2, Interesting

I'm pretty sure that this bot would also float (appart from water walking). It wouldn't make much sense otherwise, as a small wave, detergent, etc, would sink it. Also, I am not familiar with the dynamics of walking on water, but is walking on water more efficient than plowing through it like a boat?

--
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
Re:Jesus didn't walk on the water by Anonymous Coward · 2004-09-10 01:15 · Score: 1, Interesting

"The bible is full of translation errors; the most well known is probably the one with the camel that goes through the eye of a needle. "

Ignorance is bliss isn't it? this isn't a translation error. The "eye of a needle" was the name of one of the entrances into Jerusalem where a camel would have to get onto its knees in order to actually fit through the gate.
No patents! by shutdown+-p+now · 2004-09-10 02:03 · Score: 2, Interesting

Now the good thing for us all is that it'd be pretty hard to patent this - there is some well-documented prior art, after all, dating all 2000 years ago.
Sounds nice by sulli · 2004-09-10 04:47 · Score: 2, Interesting

but does it run Jesux?

--

sulli
RTFJ.