yes exactly why not walk? I heard that Americans have got a real thing about walking somewhere as if feet are the tool of Beelzabub or something
and besides we have had lawn mowers with seats for ages why not use them?
wow! just dont come near my pc.
actually..Ive done something similar..plugged in a PSU with different voltage result : a chip on the mbrd explodes shooting a flamin, red hot piece four feet into the air in my general direction...needless to say it was dead as a dodo after that....not my fault trusted the shop owner who assured me a PSU suitable for P4 would work fine on an aging celeryon...
I think they have been influenced by the recent (kind of) spate of films in which America gets destroyed by a large asteroid.
As everyone knows if aliens invade - they land in the US
Firstly, I don't know how he arrived at his figure of 1/100 speed of light,
is he joking when he says it doesn't sound like much? However using his
velocity, by simply considering conservation of momentum, with a nanomachine
of ~100 x the mass of the propellant atom (within his size range). The
single expelled propellant atom would have to be traveling at the speed of
light!! For more massive nanobots, light speed would have to be exceeded!
Remember Einstein? Special Relativity ring a bell? You run into all sorts of
problems, like your propellent having infinite mass and travelling back in
time (if light speed is exceeded). Not to mention the fact that to
accelerate the atom up to light speed would take an infinite amount of
energy!
Secondly. the sort of propulsion that he seems to be talking about is a
chemical reaction producing the controlled explosive vapourisation and
expulsion of a liquid or solid propellant. How this would work at atomic
dimensions with a single atom of propellant, and containment problems I dont
know.
Thirdly, nanomachines will probably have more like the order of 10,000
-100,000 atoms i.e complex organic molecule sized, not atom sized. Specially
if they have to perform complex tasks.
Fourthly, there are other ways of propelling a nanomachine apart from the
rocket engine approach, in the macroscopic world take cars, people etc.
Nanomachines will probably be driven by chemical reactions like the
hydrolysis of ATP. It is unlikley that nanomachines will carry their own
fuel. Take molecular motors (dynein, kinesin, myosin) these are essentially
biological nanomotors ~40 Nm and are activated by the presence of ATP in
their surrounding environment. These or similar synthetic structures may
well be used to provide the motive force behind nanomachines.
Fifthly, most nanomachines will probably not be individually directed and
powered. They are more likely to use redundancy in numbers and random
effects such as brownian motion to get them were they need to be.
I could go on....
Firstly, I don't know how he arrived at his figure of 1/100 speed of light,
is he joking when he says it doesn't sound like much? However using his
velocity, by simply considering conservation of momentum, with a nanomachine
of ~100 x the mass of the propellant atom (within his size range). The
single expelled propellant atom would have to be traveling at the speed of
light!! For more massive nanobots, light speed would have to be exceeded!
Remember Einstein? Special Relativity ring a bell? You run into all sorts of
problems, like your propellent having infinite mass and travelling back in
time (if light speed is exceeded). Not to mention the fact that to
accelerate the atom up to light speed would take an infinite amount of
energy!
Secondly. the sort of propulsion that he seems to be talking about is a
chemical reaction producing the controlled explosive vapourisation and
expulsion of a liquid or solid propellant. How this would work at atomic
dimensions with a single atom of propellant, and containment problems I dont
know.
Thirdly, nanomachines will probably have more like the order of 10,000
-100,000 atoms i.e complex organic molecule sized, not atom sized. Specially
if they have to perform complex tasks.
Fourthly, there are other ways of propelling a nanomachine apart from the
rocket engine approach, in the macroscopic world take cars, people etc.
Nanomachines will probably be driven by chemical reactions like the
hydrolysis of ATP. It is unlikley that nanomachines will carry their own
fuel. Take molecular motors (dynein, kinesin, myosin) these are essentially
biological nanomotors ~40 Nm and are activated by the presence of ATP in
their surrounding environment. These or similar synthetic structures may
well be used to provide the motive force behind nanomachines.
Fifthly, most nanomachines will probably not be individually directed and
powered. They are more likely to use redundancy in numbers and random
effects such as brownian motion to get them were they need to be.
I could go on....
Slashdot Mirror
lawnmower with seat?
yes exactly why not walk? I heard that Americans have got a real thing about walking somewhere as if feet are the tool of Beelzabub or something and besides we have had lawn mowers with seats for ages why not use them?
paris? how about everywhere? its the way that bumble around other countries as if they are sub-sections of disneyland.
had one similar (definately gyroscopic) at my company for about a year now I think
wow! just dont come near my pc. actually..Ive done something similar..plugged in a PSU with different voltage result : a chip on the mbrd explodes shooting a flamin, red hot piece four feet into the air in my general direction...needless to say it was dead as a dodo after that....not my fault trusted the shop owner who assured me a PSU suitable for P4 would work fine on an aging celeryon...
I think they have been influenced by the recent (kind of) spate of films in which America gets destroyed by a large asteroid. As everyone knows if aliens invade - they land in the US
Among cruising sailors it is considered somewhat foolish not to pack a sextant and know how to use it.
Ouch! I hope the sextant is lubricated!
Firstly, I don't know how he arrived at his figure of 1/100 speed of light, is he joking when he says it doesn't sound like much? However using his velocity, by simply considering conservation of momentum, with a nanomachine of ~100 x the mass of the propellant atom (within his size range). The single expelled propellant atom would have to be traveling at the speed of light!! For more massive nanobots, light speed would have to be exceeded! Remember Einstein? Special Relativity ring a bell? You run into all sorts of problems, like your propellent having infinite mass and travelling back in time (if light speed is exceeded). Not to mention the fact that to accelerate the atom up to light speed would take an infinite amount of energy! Secondly. the sort of propulsion that he seems to be talking about is a chemical reaction producing the controlled explosive vapourisation and expulsion of a liquid or solid propellant. How this would work at atomic dimensions with a single atom of propellant, and containment problems I dont know. Thirdly, nanomachines will probably have more like the order of 10,000 -100,000 atoms i.e complex organic molecule sized, not atom sized. Specially if they have to perform complex tasks. Fourthly, there are other ways of propelling a nanomachine apart from the rocket engine approach, in the macroscopic world take cars, people etc. Nanomachines will probably be driven by chemical reactions like the hydrolysis of ATP. It is unlikley that nanomachines will carry their own fuel. Take molecular motors (dynein, kinesin, myosin) these are essentially biological nanomotors ~40 Nm and are activated by the presence of ATP in their surrounding environment. These or similar synthetic structures may well be used to provide the motive force behind nanomachines. Fifthly, most nanomachines will probably not be individually directed and powered. They are more likely to use redundancy in numbers and random effects such as brownian motion to get them were they need to be. I could go on....
Firstly, I don't know how he arrived at his figure of 1/100 speed of light, is he joking when he says it doesn't sound like much? However using his velocity, by simply considering conservation of momentum, with a nanomachine of ~100 x the mass of the propellant atom (within his size range). The single expelled propellant atom would have to be traveling at the speed of light!! For more massive nanobots, light speed would have to be exceeded! Remember Einstein? Special Relativity ring a bell? You run into all sorts of problems, like your propellent having infinite mass and travelling back in time (if light speed is exceeded). Not to mention the fact that to accelerate the atom up to light speed would take an infinite amount of energy! Secondly. the sort of propulsion that he seems to be talking about is a chemical reaction producing the controlled explosive vapourisation and expulsion of a liquid or solid propellant. How this would work at atomic dimensions with a single atom of propellant, and containment problems I dont know. Thirdly, nanomachines will probably have more like the order of 10,000 -100,000 atoms i.e complex organic molecule sized, not atom sized. Specially if they have to perform complex tasks. Fourthly, there are other ways of propelling a nanomachine apart from the rocket engine approach, in the macroscopic world take cars, people etc. Nanomachines will probably be driven by chemical reactions like the hydrolysis of ATP. It is unlikley that nanomachines will carry their own fuel. Take molecular motors (dynein, kinesin, myosin) these are essentially biological nanomotors ~40 Nm and are activated by the presence of ATP in their surrounding environment. These or similar synthetic structures may well be used to provide the motive force behind nanomachines. Fifthly, most nanomachines will probably not be individually directed and powered. They are more likely to use redundancy in numbers and random effects such as brownian motion to get them were they need to be. I could go on....