Difference between revisions of "Funding contexts and their degree of viability"
(basic version -- likely still many mistakes) |
(No difference)
|
Revision as of 12:46, 15 March 2021
Funding contexts and their degree of viability
Funded by educational institution
- Amount of funding to expect: Small to high.
- Level of sidetracking attractors: Varies.
- Expected contribution to relevant progress: Big/Notable.
- Status: There have been some more or less targeted work done.
In the context of foldamer R&D and mechanosynthesis prototyping
Pretty much all the stuff on the page Foldamer R&D
(wiki-TODO: add ref to silicon mechsynth experiments & )
In the context of prototyping of self replicating robotics
E.g. Matt Moses demonstration system. See: Self replication.
This had no dedicated focus on nanoscale physics though.
funded by classic startup approach
- Amount of funding to expect: rather high to very high
- Level of sidetracking attractors: Very high
- Expected contribution to relevant progress: Eventually big (but risk of lock-in)
- Status: There have been attempts.
- Higest risk of going into a strong closed source direction with heavy corporate intellectual property despite eventually present intentions for openness
- Investors need rather short term targets.
funded new-age crypto-style -- a token for the project
- Amount of funding to expect: rather unpredictable and irrational
- Level of sidetracking attractors: Medium/unknown
- Expected contribution to relevant progress: Eventually big
- Status: It seems no one has tried this as of yet (2021)
- Similar to conventional startup approach and maybe overlapping to classic startup
- More emphasis on open development -- may come enforced by open auditability philosophy
Funded by fans of a media coverage of progress - private patreons
- Amount of funding to expect: small to considerable
- Level of sidetracking attractors: Minimal
- Expected contribution to relevant progress: Minimal to notable
- Status: It seems no one has tried this as of yet (2021)
In the context of foldamer R&D and mechanosynthesis prototyping
The situation might be a bit better than in the case of private agent funding but not much.
In the context of prototyping of self replicating robotics
This one might be quite promising
There are several existing robotic projects that are quite comparable in nature.
(Marble machine X, OpenDog, ...)
Funded by spare money of independent private agents
- Amount of funding to expect: Very small to medium.
- Level of sidetracking attractors: Zero
There is zero necessity to focus on any distracting short term targets. - Expected contribution to relevant progress: None to minimal
- Status: It seems no one has tried and as of yet (2021) -- **
In the context of foldamer R&D and mechanosynthesis prototyping
it seems likely that such funding is insufficient to do anything of matter
for most of the few that would be inclined to look into this that way.
Only very small foldamer assemblies are affordable And the only affordable crude analysis tools would be DIY SPM microscopes or at best small cheap commercial ones.
There are instructions for very chap scannning tunneling SPMs that allow imaging of single atoms in the living room.
But: These work only with current and only in air. Thus they work only on highly inert electrically conductive surfaces like e.g. gold or graphite.
All DIY level atomic force SPMs (AFMs with published building instructions as of 2021) had nowhere near atomic resolution.
The achievable resolution of DIY AFMs might suffice to image and manipulate bigger self assembled structures like e.g. the biggest structural DNA nanotech assemblies. But these are:
- too expensive (very many different types of DNA oligomers to make)
- too low in yield to make and
- may not withstand being dried out. They might shrivel up and warp.
In the context of prototyping of self replicating robotics
such funding might suffice for a little bit of contribution to progress.
