Difference between revisions of "Pages with math"
(basic page) |
(→Related: Useful math) |
||
| (5 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Stub}} | {{Stub}} | ||
| − | = Math investigating (in)validity of common concerns = | + | = Math investigating (in)validity of [[Common misconceptions about atomically precise manufacturing|common concerns]] = |
'''[[Energy, force, and stiffness]]''' <br> | '''[[Energy, force, and stiffness]]''' <br> | ||
| Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
* has major influence on design choices (e.g. why [[gem-gum factories]] are a better target than [[molecular assemblers]]) | * has major influence on design choices (e.g. why [[gem-gum factories]] are a better target than [[molecular assemblers]]) | ||
| − | '''[[Limits to higher | + | '''[[Limits to lower friction despite higher bearing area]]''': <br> |
This pages covers math determining the optimal number of [[sub layers]] for minimal frictive losses. <br> | This pages covers math determining the optimal number of [[sub layers]] for minimal frictive losses. <br> | ||
As it turns out this coincides with where the scaling law of [[higher throughput of smaller machinery]] breaks down. | As it turns out this coincides with where the scaling law of [[higher throughput of smaller machinery]] breaks down. | ||
| Line 45: | Line 45: | ||
=== Nanofactory design parameters === | === Nanofactory design parameters === | ||
| + | |||
| + | See: [[Gem-gum factory design parameters]] | ||
* '''[[Compenslow]]''': This is a parameter quantifying increase of internal bearing are for reducing friction. | * '''[[Compenslow]]''': This is a parameter quantifying increase of internal bearing are for reducing friction. | ||
* B … [[Branching factor]] | * B … [[Branching factor]] | ||
| − | * F … [[ | + | * F … [[Chamber to part size ratio]] |
* C … Scaling factor (near one) for average distance traveled per one-part-placed | * C … Scaling factor (near one) for average distance traveled per one-part-placed | ||
* D … Scaling factor (slightly above one) for chip-area per chamber-area | * D … Scaling factor (slightly above one) for chip-area per chamber-area | ||
| + | {{wikitodo|revolve conflict with D on page …}} | ||
= Math on the basics = | = Math on the basics = | ||
| Line 59: | Line 62: | ||
= Related = | = Related = | ||
| − | For | + | * [[Useful math]] |
| + | * [[Exotic math]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | For more complete list of pages with math go to the category page:. | ||
[[Category:Pages with math]] | [[Category:Pages with math]] | ||
Latest revision as of 18:48, 27 June 2023
Contents
Math investigating (in)validity of common concerns
Energy, force, and stiffness
Some investigations useful for asserting in how far results of macroscale robotic prototyping
will be transferable to nanoscale diamondoid systems.
See also: Applicability of macro 3D printing for nanomachine prototyping
See also: Intuitive feel
Nanomechanics is barely mechanical quantummechanics and
Estimation of nanomechanical quantisation:
Some simple math to show that concerns about quantum mechanics making
macroscale style machinery at the nanoscale infeasibly are very much not valid.
Atom placement frequency
Some investigations on whether with reachable reasonable numbers of
- temporal placement frequency and
- spacial parallelity
useful levels of throughpur (product output rate) can be reached without
- needing excessive amounts of volume
- causing excessive amount of waste heat
And that despite the outrageously high necessary effective atom placement frequencies
due to to less than 6.022*10^23 particles per mol (very roughly sugar cube volume quantity of atoms)
Power density & Mechanical energy transmission
Some math further investigating the outrageous results for
possible powerdensities that were found in Nanosystems
Analysis for gem-gum on chip factories
Higher throughput of smaller machinery:
A very important little known scaling law that:
- allows to reduce friction by a large factor
- has major influence on design choices (e.g. why gem-gum factories are a better target than molecular assemblers)
Limits to lower friction despite higher bearing area:
This pages covers math determining the optimal number of sub layers for minimal frictive losses.
As it turns out this coincides with where the scaling law of higher throughput of smaller machinery breaks down.
Math of convergent assembly:
Level throughput balancing
TODO
Nanofactory design parameters
See: Gem-gum factory design parameters
- Compenslow: This is a parameter quantifying increase of internal bearing are for reducing friction.
- B … Branching factor
- F … Chamber to part size ratio
- C … Scaling factor (near one) for average distance traveled per one-part-placed
- D … Scaling factor (slightly above one) for chip-area per chamber-area
(wiki-TODO: revolve conflict with D on page …)
Math on the basics
- Friction – Main goal: getting a reasonable (and better confirmed) quantitative estimate on levels of
dynamic friction in atomically precise sliding bearings - Scaling law – corroborating that while physics change when going down to the nanoscale
it's not necessarily for the worse for macroscale style machinery, but rather often surprisingly much for the better.
Related
For more complete list of pages with math go to the category page:.
