View source for A better intuition for diamondoid nanomachinery than jelly

[[File:556px-Steel-Dowel-Pins.jpg|200px|thumb|right|At the for [[advanced productive nanosystem]]s proposed nanomachinery speeds of a few mm/s nanoscale diamondoid ([[crystolecule]]) parts bend/flex much less from machine accelerations than even these macroscale pins do bend/flex in typical operation of typical macroscale machinery. This is all about relative deflections. That is: Bending length to total length ratios and bending angles. – High quaistatic driving forces sometimes may lead to big deformations, no jelly like wobbles though.]]

Diamondoind nanomachinery ([[Macroscale style machinery at the nanoscale]]) is often associated to behave like jelly. <br>
This may be a rather misleading intuition though, mostly caused by …

* molecular dynamics simulations showing extremely high speed. <br>See: [[Misleading aspects in animations of diamondoid molecular machine elements]]
* "[[Lower stiffness of smaller machinery]]" being a deceiving scaling law. <br>"[[Same relative deflections across scales]]" is what matters instead.
* Presence of [[superelasticity]]. I.e. absence of brittleness in contrast to macroscale gemstones. <br>But this does not imply behavior like a soft jelly like material.

This page here aims to give an alternate intuition that should be more useful <br>
in the sense of leading one to have more accurate expectations of behaviour of such systems. <br>

= A better intuition: hyper-spring-steel, super-magnets, and sometimes giant forces, all at snail speed =

It is still very flexible in terms of stretchability / bendability / strainabbility before breaking <br>
but a better intuition would probably be some sort of hyper-spring-steel (way stiffer than actual spring-steel) <br>
in an environment with super-magnets (way stronger than magnets can physically be) (wihch represent the [[Van der Waals force]]s). <br>

Attractive forces are only 1/100 of the internal material forces so one needs to look closely for deformations from them. <br>

Attractive forces can accelerate parts to extremely high speeds though. If not counteracted. <br>
So better not let go of anything or else parts snap together at the speed of bullets which is then <br> 
really making them behave like jelly. When looking at the action via slow motion footage that is. <br>
Such brutal snapping generates a lot of heat so is usually to avoid in a dense active machinery system. <br>
Occasional snaps sparse in either space or spare in time (or sparse in both) are ok though. <br>

'''Only thing where high deformations >1% (but not free wobbling jelly wiggles) may be more regularly visible''' <br>
is in the '''transmission of very high (giant) forces (giant for the scale).''' <br>
That is: In cases where both high power is needed and <br>
heterogeneous mechanical nanoscale transmission is needed (no batching to a larger scale bundle). <br>
Nanoscale bearings need low speeds v (in low mm/s range) to have low frictive losses <br>
(See page: [[Friction in gem-gum technology]]) and <br>
with power P equaling to speed v times force F (P=v*F) the force F needs to go up correspondingly. <br>
Then again: Very high forces may also lead to notable frictive losses. <br>
Reciptocative friction due to getting pretty far into the nonlinear elastic range. <br>
It's an optimization problem. See page: [[Reciprocative friction in gem-gum technology]] <br>

Not accounted for here is deformations from thermal excitations <br>
which can be quite large especially for very thing and large aspect ratio structures. <br>

= Math =

{{Wikitodo|Check what level of force (and thus deformation) is needed at ~5mm/s (and higher speeds) for areal power densities akin to what today's electric cables nominally provide. As some semi-random general purpose usage case example.}}

= Related =

* [[Misleading aspects in animations of diamondoid molecular machine elements]]
* [[Macroscale style machinery at the nanoscale]]
* '''[[Gem-gum]]'''
* [[Intuitive feel]]
* [[Same relative deflections across scales]] – Which is what is actually relevant <br>rather than absolute material stiffness (which falls with smaller scales).