Difference between revisions of "Exploratory engineering"

Revision as of 18:05, 27 May 2014

Exploratory engineering is the exclusively usage of well established knowledge in a fail-safe wasteful way to gain rough but reliable knowledge about the lower bounds of what is in principle doable. It allows one to probe the timeless fundamental limits of technology but does not necessarily give hints how to get there from our current capabilities nor does it not necessarily give hints about economic viability along the way.

Exploratory engineering is not a science. Science is a breadth search for new and highly unpredictable phenomena. One majour objective is to gain masses of measurement data that can be used to improve and extend new and barely tested models. It requires a tight loop between hypothesis and measurement. In the book "Radical Abundance" by E.K.Drexler the blind men and the elephant are used for illustration. Precision and generality are main desiderata in science. Work is usually conducted in independent explorer groups with little common goal.

Exploratory engineering is one polar opposite of science. It is a depth search for highly predictable working designs. At every step one of the best understood and most likely to work choices is taken. Limiting oneself rigorously to well established knowledge (mathematical models) enables one to predict certain things with considerable certainty that are so far from our current capabilities that they can't yet be tried or be measured well. Those things are not useless. They serve as a guiding target and allow preparatory development. In exploratory engineering one wishes for reliably model-able abstract parametric designs (without specific details) that can give trustworthy knowledge.

Ingredients:

• conservative engineering methodology
• established knowledge like: textbook physics - empirical knowledge - standard modelling

Conventional engineering is in between. Certainty that a design will work is usually not the prime objective of engineering. There is an optimal number of tests of physical prototypes to minimize cost and or maximize performance. Furthermore the designs must always be almost right away physically manufacturable and the fine details need to be worked out. In contrast to science coordinatesd teams focused on choosen directions are an absolute necessity to get compatible parts. In the book "Radical Abundance" by E.K.Drexler it is discussed what would happen if "pure-breed scientists" are given the (engineering) task of constructing a car. It turns out you'd end up with a huge plethora of parts but none would fit together. (see: molecular sciences, AP building blocks)

Example

A prime example of successful exploratory engineering in history can be found in the preparations for making low earth orbit and beyond accessible. For non-involved people without sufficient internal knowledge of the then present technological capabilities it understandably seemed lunatic to want to go to the moon.

Advanced atomically precise technology (APM) suffers from a similar situation. Thus one of the goals of this wiki is to provide such sufficient internal information in a way that's somewhat digest-able for the average scientifically interested reader.

Notes

• It's called exploratory and not extrapolatory engineering which wold make sense too - even more so perhaps.

• The book Nanosystems is a prime example for exploratory engineering.

External links

• Wikipedia: [1]