Slashdot Mirror


Microbots Made of Bubbles Are Controlled By Lasers

An anonymous reader writes "Researchers at the University of Hawaii have turned bubbles of gas into non-mechanical 'microbots' that they propel and steer with a laser. The laser heats up specific areas of the fluid that the bubble are in, and temperature gradients push the fluid towards the hot area, moving the bubble along. By using an array of lasers, the researchers can control the speed and direction of multiple bubble bots independently; this capability is not possible with other types of microbots, such as those controlled by a magnetic field, which affects all robots simultaneously. The University of Hawaii researchers hope their non-mechanical microbots can be used to assemble and manipulate microscopic structures, including live cells. In one experiment, they used the bubble bots to position 100-m-diameter glass beads to form the letters 'UH.'"

51 comments

  1. So basically... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sharks will have their own microbot armies.

  2. Sharks by stevegee58 · · Score: 1

    Sharks with lasers?

    1. Re:Sharks by m2shariy · · Score: 1

      Herding schools of bubble-bots

    2. Re:Sharks by amicusNYCL · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm wondering where the point is when a bubble all of a sudden becomes a robot.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    3. Re:Sharks by Larryish · · Score: 1

      Uh... I think that the qualification for "robot" is "autonomy".

      Only morons think a strictly remote controlled device is a "robot".

      Battlebots were fancy R.C. cars.

    4. Re:Sharks by derGoldstein · · Score: 1

      There's some leeway there. For example, industrial robots. Many of them just repeat sequences, and have only very basic branching conditions, if any. Then there's the TALON robots, which are mostly RC as well, but are still considered "robots". Demolition robots also come to mind, which, again, are strictly RC.

      --
      Entomologically speaking, the spider is not a bug, it's a feature.
    5. Re:Sharks by SomeJoel · · Score: 1

      Uh... I think you're wrong. Unless you think JEL and Brooks Automation are not in the business of making robots.

      Or maybe you can't count past one in Merriam Webster's definition. You're either an idiot or a troll, or perhaps a little bit of both, hmm?

      --
      <Complete your profile by adding a signature!>
    6. Re:Sharks by FunkDup · · Score: 1

      I'm wondering where the point is when a bubble all of a sudden becomes a robot.

      If their bubbles can manipulate physical objects according to a program then its a robot.

      --
      Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds -- Albert Einstein
    7. Re:Sharks by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 1

      If a bubble pushed by a laser is a robot, a chopstick is a restaurant.

    8. Re:Sharks by amicusNYCL · · Score: 2

      If their bubbles can manipulate physical objects according to a program then its a robot.

      The bubble doesn't manipulate anything, the bubble doesn't execute software or follow a program. It's a bubble. It's a space filled with some gas suspended inside a liquid. The laser heats the liquid, the liquid moves, and the bubble moves with the liquid. If I throw a ball, and that ball hits something, say a "physical object", and it "manipulates" that object, is the ball now a robot?

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    9. Re:Sharks by FunkDup · · Score: 2

      The bubble doesn't manipulate anything

      Nooope. From TFA: "This level of control allows for very fine manipulation of small objects, and the picture below shows how a bubble robot has pushed glass beads around to form the letters "UH"

      the bubble doesn't execute software or follow a program.

      I think it's safe to assume those lasers are computer controlled, given they are using the term "robot" and some other obvious issues. Having the computing and control infrastructure external to the manipulator doesn't stop it from being a robot, it just becomes a remote controlled robot!

      If I throw a ball, and that ball hits something, say a "physical object", and it "manipulates" that object, is the ball now a robot?

      Think outside the bubble!

      --
      Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds -- Albert Einstein
    10. Re:Sharks by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      Are you missing my point or being deliberately obtuse?

      I think it's safe to assume those lasers are computer controlled, given they are using the term "robot" and some other obvious issues. Having the computing and control infrastructure external to the manipulator doesn't stop it from being a robot, it just becomes a remote controlled robot!

      So that's my question, when does the bubble stop becoming a robot? Is it still a robot when the laser is off, or is it just a bubble then? What if the liquid isn't moving, it's just a liquid with bubbles in it. Are they still robots? Is my bottle full of robots? If I shoot a laser through my beer have I just created robots?

      The lasers are what's important here. The bubbles are just along for the ride, as it were. The bubbles are passive. The liquid moves, the liquid is more of a robot than the bubble, the liquid is responsible for the bubbles being able to move other things because the liquid is moving the bubbles. But none of that could even happen without the lasers shooting as precise as they do, which requires software control. The lasers are the robot, not the liquid, and not the bubbles. The bubbles aren't robots manipulating other objects, the laser is a robot manipulating the bubbles.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    11. Re:Sharks by FunkDup · · Score: 1

      All of the things this machine can do relate to the surface tension in the bubbles. Without that, you'd just be shining lights into a bottle. That's why the bubble is a remote controlled robot.

      --
      Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds -- Albert Einstein
    12. Re:Sharks by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      All of the things this machine can do relate to the surface tension in the bubbles.

      I could just as easily say that all of the things this machine can do relate to the lasers heating the liquid.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    13. Re:Sharks by Larryish · · Score: 1

      Industrial robots are automatons, and thus qualify for the title of "robot".

      Are they smart? No.

      Are they sentient? Define "sentience".

      Are they autonomous? Yes.

      TALON and similar "robots" are robot in name only, name being given by companies that make fancy RC cars used for bomb disposal or demolition.

    14. Re:Sharks by Larryish · · Score: 1

      On both of those company websites, they focus on AUTOMATION.

      AUTONOMOUS ROBOTS.

      Not fancy RC cars.

      Automated industrial robots are truly robots. They are self-willed within the constraints imposed upon them by their programmers, but do not require an actual person to perform their assigned tasks.

  3. Overlord fail by tomhath · · Score: 1

    Eventually, it may be possible to conjure swarms of microscopic bubble robots out of nothing, set them to work building microstructures with an array of thermal lasers, and then when they're finished, give each one a little pop to wipe it completely out of existence without any mess or fuss.

    Take that you little SOBs. Kind of an interesting opportunity to use massively parallel processing though.

  4. Big bubbles... by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 2

    Moving 100m bubbles around with lasers. That's pretty impressive...

    --
    Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    1. Re:Big bubbles... by linear+a · · Score: 2

      Hope they aren't breaking any strategic weapons treaties with those oversized lasers.

    2. Re:Big bubbles... by Dahamma · · Score: 2

      I hope they aren't breaking any strategic weapons treaties with those beads!

      You know China is just going to come up with a 150m bead, and the US will have to respond. Pretty soon it's going to be one Mardi Gras mistake away from world destruction.

    3. Re:Big bubbles... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Moving 100m bubbles around with lasers. That's pretty impressive...

      Yes, 100m bubbles are one tenth of a kilometre across, that's just over 328 feet across, and since the bubble is likely round, at the bottom it has an area of 84539 square feet, all moved with a laser! Were these lasers free electron lasers like those being developed by the US Navy? A 100,000 watt laser might be able to move a bubble with a bottom surface area of 84,539 square feet (or burst it).

  5. 100-m-diameter glass beads? by PaulBu · · Score: 2

    I think that a chunk of glass about 30 stories high can be called a "bead"... Losely... ;-)

    Or, I think that letter \mu got lost while this story was flowing through ether, more likely!

    Paul B.

    1. Re:100-m-diameter glass beads? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      M=meter, m=micron

    2. Re:100-m-diameter glass beads? by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Informative

      Er, no. M = mega. m = meter. Micron usually uses the abbreviation (mu, which slashdot refuses to print), and where you can't use mu for some reason some texts cheat by using the letter u. You, however, are dead wrong..

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    3. Re:100-m-diameter glass beads? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      M=meter, m=micron

      Actually, m=meter. micrometer aka micron is m.

    4. Re:100-m-diameter glass beads? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      M=meter, m=micron

      Actually, m=meter. micrometer aka micron is m.

      Well, there is the problem. ./ doesn't seem to show the lowercase mu, thus um turns into m

    5. Re:100-m-diameter glass beads? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, there is the problem. ./ doesn't seem to show the lowercase mu, thus um turns into m

      You must be new here.

    6. Re:100-m-diameter glass beads? by tomhath · · Score: 1

      yea, a person can spend hours on this stuff

    7. Re:100-m-diameter glass beads? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slashdot was coded before the invention of all these fancy characters, that's why.

  6. I hope the glass beads are not 100 meters in size by cvtan · · Score: 1

    Apparently browsers cannot handle the Greek mu for micron (maybe they can!). Anyway, isn't micron a deprecated unit? Nanometers nm are in, microns are out.

    --
    Sorry, but gray text on gray background is making my eyes bleed.
  7. Microbots? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    Nice results, but why allude to the bubbles as robots (microbots)?

    1. Re:Microbots? by linear+a · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because entitling it "moving microbubbles with light" wouldn't get many hits.

    2. Re:Microbots? by nurb432 · · Score: 2

      Marketing has to use buzzwords, even if they dont apply.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  8. And I by Lord_of_the_nerf · · Score: 1

    ...for one, welcome our new microbot bubble overlords.

  9. Re:I hope the glass beads are not 100 meters in si by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 3, Funny

    if( fashion joke )
    {
        whoosh( Beardo );
    }
    else
    {
        nanometers = 10^-9;
        micrometer = 10^-6;
        micron = micrometer;
    }

    --

    ---
    ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
  10. Article title by submain · · Score: 1

    Most. Badass. Article. Title. Ever.

    1. Re:Article title by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      Most. Badass. Article. Title. Ever.

      Well, the title of the actual article is "Microbots Made of Bubbles Have Engines Made of Lasers" which sounds even cooler to me. :-P

      This reminds me of when IBM did something similar with a fancy electron microscope or something like that quite a while back.

      Doing it with bubbles and lasers sounds totally cool, and makes me really want to see the first mechanical application of this. That's gotta get you something seriously cool, right?

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  11. Flowbots by h4x0t · · Score: 1

    I think I have an album for their youtube demo.

  12. Can they be automated? by mj1856 · · Score: 1

    It appeared in the video that a single bubble was being manipulated by hand with a laser pointer. That's cool, but I was hoping to see perhaps a few hundred bubbles, with computer controlled precision scattering of the laser. Each bubble would be maneuvered in a very precise, computer controlled manner and the bubbles collaborating to perform specific functions. Is this the next step?

    1. Re:Can they be automated? by Dahamma · · Score: 1

      The next step is Chaos(tm) tracking technology.

  13. Re:I hope the glass beads are not 100 meters in si by Cederic · · Score: 1

    So why not say 0.1mm, using a unit familiar to the audience and discernable on a standard ruler?

    Instead they said 100 metres, which are sodding big balls.

  14. Tiny bubbles? by conspirator23 · · Score: 1

    Don Ho is SO mad right now. I smell a lawsuit coming.

    1. Re:Tiny bubbles? by P-niiice · · Score: 1

      i expected a powerpuff girls reference from someone in this crowd.

  15. This is so geek it's cool! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I want one for my swiming pool.

    I wonder how long before advertisers start putting Red bull logos in the surf?

  16. Re:I hope the glass beads are not 100 meters in si by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    b/c a micron is a thousandth, not a tenth, of a mm

  17. Those are robots? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How can they call that robots when they'r not even automated? It looks like a simple disc being dragged/pushed by a laser through resistance on its center.

  18. How visible are the lasers? by sapphire+wyvern · · Score: 1

    This looks like a tech that could be used to run a proper volumetric display. If you used glass beads of different colours, or found a way to make them fluoresce (perhaps by energizing an internal gas, or phosphor coating, or something?), you might be able to come up with something a fair bit more impressive than just "UM".

    A real volumetric display would certainly have a lot of applications. I'm sure the military would love it for battlefield visualisations, etc.

  19. Number 8? by clickety6 · · Score: 1

    The big question is can these bubble bots be used to keep number 8 in the village and prevent him from escaping?

    --
    ----------------------------------- My Other Sig Is Hilarious -----------------------------------
  20. hey, we can move bubbles with lasers! by khipu · · Score: 1

    Scientist A: "Hey, we can move bubbles with lasers."

    Scientist B: "That's pretty boring. But robotics is hot. Maybe we can get press coverage if we call the 'bubbles' 'robots'."