What? I thought nanotech was already in use in the cosmetics industry and quantatech (is that how you call it?) in the computer industry.
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Chuck Bowling < [email protected]> wrote: > I'm in agreement about the radical changes that nanotech appear to promise. > Changes that could spell doom or a complete redefinition of what it is to be > human. It's about the only thing that makes me want to live longer than my > allotted time. Just so that I can see what miracles come next. > > > On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 9:40 PM, Ash <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Yeah, I was fear mongering Chuck, a political device. ;-) This is a >> favorite topic of mine, it is at the axis of many fields. To accelerate >> nanotech development I think we should implement rapid prototyping, >> experimentation and analysis systems. When I envision man at the beginning >> of this revolution I look for tools that would allow an explosion >> (figuratively) of development, being able to catalog and operate a multitude >> of experiments in parallel, while building a massive library of modeled >> behavior for materials and systems interoperating in the real world to >> improve the robustness and diversity of this technology is apparently the >> way to go. To think that the behavior of biological systems can be >> abstracted and used to formulate dynamic systems guided by expert algorithms >> to solve material challenges in real time guided by people over vast >> distances, it goes beyond genetics, I am in awe at the potential universe we >> are venturing toward. We will also be able to make changes to ourselves and >> our experience of this world at a similar rate.. >> >> >> On 5/19/2011 1:41 AM, Chuck Bowling wrote: >> >> I think that with nanotechnology we will be able to synthesize pretty much >> anything we want from raw materials in the future. Assuming that any alien >> race capable of traveling the trillions of miles to get here would have at >> least the same level of technology my guess is that they wouldn't need >> anything we'd have to offer. >> >> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 8:48 PM, Ash <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> There is another good reason to develop our technologies as a species, >>> think how we are looking at the planets and celestial bodies as vast >>> resources. Imagine if something else came through and strip mined the >>> resources we would need to develop into a spacefaring species, that would >>> suck big time. Like a tribe of humans moving through and picking all the >>> nuts we squirrels need, or worse, deciding we were in the way of those >>> resources, think what we have done in those situations.. I know it's >>> unlikely considering the vast resources out there, but something might have >>> it's eye on our pale blue dot too, working faster than us at making the >>> leap. >>> >>> >>> On 5/18/2011 8:37 PM, Chuck Bowling wrote: >>> >>> I think right now the technology will only allow us to tell if a planet >>> is rocky or a gas giant. And even then only if it is a relatively massive >>> planet. The last time I read anything on the subject the smallest planet >>> found was something like 3 times the size of the Earth. >>> >>> IMO, the analogy with Columbus doesn't hold. 17th century technology >>> allowed humans to travel anywhere on the Earth - albeit slow and wrought >>> with hazard. If the analogy is that a neighboring star is like a new >>> continent then we are more like cavemen discovering that a log can float. At >>> the rate we're going it might be a thousand years before we can actually >>> mount an expedition to another star. >>> >>> I think the primary reason we are so far from actually exploring other >>> stars is mainly political rather than technological. But, I think you are >>> right. It is a project worth attaching too. Now if we could just make the >>> damn politicians see it that way... ;) >>> >>> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 4:58 PM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> I'm not sure how accurate they can be in revealing planets enough like >>>> ours to offer possibilities of a new promised land. They claim there >>>> is one 20 light years away, or 300,000 years at current space travel >>>> speeds. One can feel that this at least puts us somewhere near the >>>> position of 'Columbus'. Our current 'tin-foil' technology won't do, >>>> but at this kind of distance we are talking about something other than >>>> worm-holes, 'relativity flight' or the kind of physics in which >>>> distance is an illusion. >>>> >>>> For someone like me who can't take god-stories seriously and quite >>>> likes the idea of a human future (or at least the idea of evolution >>>> not just ending through catastrophe), there is an opportunity to >>>> believe in something distant in time and a need for us to direct >>>> ourselves towards it. A time, perhaps in which a form of conscious >>>> life can live very differently from now, and a project worth attaching >>>> to - perhaps a reason for spirituality. Comments on this or the >>>> technology welcome. >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >
