Re: Reasonable Nanotechnology?
- From: Tapio Erola <txr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 23 Sep 2005 23:39:17 +0300
raphfrk@xxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
> Btw, what are the actual limits on nanotechnology ?
>
> I assume that main limitations are
>
(snippage)
> Strength
>
> Can't be stonger than Carbon-Carbon bonds. Presumably there is also a
> compressional limit.
However, you can get ...interesting macroscale materials and material
effects when you build things atom-by-atom.
> Nuclear Reactions
>
> Nano doesn't change elements from one element to another. It is likely
> possible with advanced nanotech, nano fusion reactors (where the
> reactants are "aimed" at each other rather than heating them). In any
> case, bulk reactors might be more efficient.
"Femtotechnology" is another (and currently very much theoretical) can of worms.
Besides, nanotechnology can have some serious benefits on 'regular'
macroscale technology.
> Self Replication speed
>
> Time to double the number of self replicators. This is likely to be
> alot faster in known/well controlled conditions than in "the wild". It
> is also probably limited by heat again.
However, exponential growth is *the* important factor here.
--
Tapio Erola
"I don't believe in no win scenarios."
--Capt. James T. Kirk
.
- References:
- Re: Reasonable Nanotechnology?
- From: mwigdahl
- Re: Reasonable Nanotechnology?
- From: Clintok
- Re: Reasonable Nanotechnology?
- From: raphfrk
- Re: Reasonable Nanotechnology?
- Prev by Date: Re: People like John Ringo??
- Next by Date: Re: Why John Ringo Threatens Science Fiction's Future
- Previous by thread: Re: Reasonable Nanotechnology?
- Next by thread: Re: Reasonable Nanotechnology?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|