Difference between revisions of "Future-backward development"
(→Related: added Present-forward Future-backward overlap) |
(major updates on the parts discussing where future backwards work makes more and where less sense) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
This page is about a portion of highly targeted development towards [[gemstone metamaterial technology]]. | This page is about a portion of highly targeted development towards [[gemstone metamaterial technology]]. | ||
| − | Here counting to "future-backward development" will be everything that is not yet accessible by physical experiment but that may already make sense to think about and work on. | + | Here counting to "future-backward development" will be everything … |
| + | * that is not yet accessible by physical experiment but … | ||
| + | * that may already make sense to think about and work on. | ||
= Modelling as of yet experimentally inaccessible forms of mechanosynthesis = | = Modelling as of yet experimentally inaccessible forms of mechanosynthesis = | ||
| Line 16: | Line 18: | ||
= Exploratory engineering (EE) = | = Exploratory engineering (EE) = | ||
| − | See main article: [[Exploratory engineering]] | + | See main article: [[Exploratory engineering]] <br> |
| − | A basis for a sensible far term target has been determined by [[Nanosytems]] | + | A basis for a sensible far term target has been determined by [[Nanosytems]] <br> |
but there surely is plenty of space for refinement. | but there surely is plenty of space for refinement. | ||
== Modelling of Crystolecules that cannot yet be built == | == Modelling of Crystolecules that cannot yet be built == | ||
| − | Related articles: | + | '''Related articles:''' |
* [[Crystolecule]] and | * [[Crystolecule]] and | ||
* [[Design of crystolecules]] | * [[Design of crystolecules]] | ||
| − | Currently these should mainly be seen in the context of | + | Currently these should mainly be seen in the context of exploratory engineering. <br> |
| − | That is: Designing some explicit models of these at opposite ends of the design space | + | That is: Designing some explicit models of these at opposite ends of the design space <br> |
| − | can give some cornerstones to the patch in design space that contains feasible solutions. | + | can give some cornerstones to the patch in design space that contains feasible solutions. <br> |
| + | See: [[Convex hull crystolecule design-space stakeout]] <br> | ||
| + | |||
| + | Semi automates modeling of standard parts like [[atomically precise sleeve bearings]] may have some merit. | ||
| + | * Auto generating various kinds of strained shell bearings for differently tight fits and <br> | ||
| + | * especially designing highly uncritical purely structural spacing [[Kaehler brackets]] <br> | ||
| + | These might be some work that really may become usable in a 1:1 unchanged fashion at some point. <br> | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''Complexly interlinking systems:'''<br> | ||
| + | |||
| + | As long as we have no experimental accessibility to the creation of crystolecules <br> | ||
| + | modeling more concrete examples within the already spanned up design space is of more questionable utility. | ||
| − | + | There is little point in designing parts for what we currently see as an ideal far term target <br> | |
| − | + | as what is shown in the [[nanofactory concept demonstration video]]. <br> | |
| − | + | Like e.g. recreating in atomic detail what is shown conceptually in this video. <br> | |
| + | Especially little point in attempting to design such a far term target system to atomic detail in its entirety. | ||
| − | + | Modeling what one thinks may resemble early systems (maybe easier to tell in [[direct path]] context) <br> | |
| − | + | is questionable as many predictions on early capabilities becoming unlocked first can turn out quite a bit different than expected. <br> | |
| − | + | Still there's a better chance for models to become useful than with modeling parts for far term systems. | |
| − | + | Even if the created theoretical overhang turns out to land further in the further than intended <br> | |
| + | The simulations may still be useful for publicity. <br> | ||
| + | Well the more colorful (due to more elements used) further out design-space stakeout models are more attention grabbing. <br> | ||
| + | Though they may incur more criticism exactly due to being further out there. | ||
'''Crystolecules akin structures that ARE already experimentally accessible:''' | '''Crystolecules akin structures that ARE already experimentally accessible:''' | ||
| − | Note that carbon nanotubes which have some similarities to crystolecules are already experimentally | + | Note that carbon nanotubes which have some similarities to crystolecules are already experimentally accessible. |
Measurements of friction can and have been taken giving some clue and expermental evidence to the amazing properties that we can expect. Friction measurements on nanotubes of course already belong to the [[present-forward development|present-forward]] part of development. The thermodynamic synthesis technology of nanotubes is less targeted to advanced APM. That is more on the general material science direction. | Measurements of friction can and have been taken giving some clue and expermental evidence to the amazing properties that we can expect. Friction measurements on nanotubes of course already belong to the [[present-forward development|present-forward]] part of development. The thermodynamic synthesis technology of nanotubes is less targeted to advanced APM. That is more on the general material science direction. | ||
= Design of crystolecules for publicity reasons = | = Design of crystolecules for publicity reasons = | ||
| − | These models are definitely nice and fascinating to look at. | + | These models are definitely nice and fascinating to look at. <br> |
| − | So one might be inclined to think that they'd be a nice selling point. | + | So one might be inclined to think that they'd be a nice selling point. <br> |
The catch is many scientist and material-science engineers get them in their wrong throat and misunderstand them as misunderstanding of basis physics. For some good but the wrong reasons. <br> | The catch is many scientist and material-science engineers get them in their wrong throat and misunderstand them as misunderstanding of basis physics. For some good but the wrong reasons. <br> | ||
Revision as of 10:59, 28 November 2023
Up: Bridging the gaps
Complementary: Present-forward development
This page is about a portion of highly targeted development towards gemstone metamaterial technology.
Here counting to "future-backward development" will be everything …
- that is not yet accessible by physical experiment but …
- that may already make sense to think about and work on.
Contents
Modelling as of yet experimentally inaccessible forms of mechanosynthesis
- modelling mechanosynthesis of diamond and similar carbon structures and
- designing a closed loop material processing circuit.
There has been a paper created on this. See Tooltip chemistry.
Maybe: Modelling silicon mechanosynthesis with better tips that are not yet experimentally accessible.
Exploratory engineering (EE)
See main article: Exploratory engineering
A basis for a sensible far term target has been determined by Nanosytems
but there surely is plenty of space for refinement.
Modelling of Crystolecules that cannot yet be built
Related articles:
Currently these should mainly be seen in the context of exploratory engineering.
That is: Designing some explicit models of these at opposite ends of the design space
can give some cornerstones to the patch in design space that contains feasible solutions.
See: Convex hull crystolecule design-space stakeout
Semi automates modeling of standard parts like atomically precise sleeve bearings may have some merit.
- Auto generating various kinds of strained shell bearings for differently tight fits and
- especially designing highly uncritical purely structural spacing Kaehler brackets
These might be some work that really may become usable in a 1:1 unchanged fashion at some point.
Complexly interlinking systems:
As long as we have no experimental accessibility to the creation of crystolecules
modeling more concrete examples within the already spanned up design space is of more questionable utility.
There is little point in designing parts for what we currently see as an ideal far term target
as what is shown in the nanofactory concept demonstration video.
Like e.g. recreating in atomic detail what is shown conceptually in this video.
Especially little point in attempting to design such a far term target system to atomic detail in its entirety.
Modeling what one thinks may resemble early systems (maybe easier to tell in direct path context)
is questionable as many predictions on early capabilities becoming unlocked first can turn out quite a bit different than expected.
Still there's a better chance for models to become useful than with modeling parts for far term systems.
Even if the created theoretical overhang turns out to land further in the further than intended
The simulations may still be useful for publicity.
Well the more colorful (due to more elements used) further out design-space stakeout models are more attention grabbing.
Though they may incur more criticism exactly due to being further out there.
Crystolecules akin structures that ARE already experimentally accessible:
Note that carbon nanotubes which have some similarities to crystolecules are already experimentally accessible. Measurements of friction can and have been taken giving some clue and expermental evidence to the amazing properties that we can expect. Friction measurements on nanotubes of course already belong to the present-forward part of development. The thermodynamic synthesis technology of nanotubes is less targeted to advanced APM. That is more on the general material science direction.
Design of crystolecules for publicity reasons
These models are definitely nice and fascinating to look at.
So one might be inclined to think that they'd be a nice selling point.
The catch is many scientist and material-science engineers get them in their wrong throat and misunderstand them as misunderstanding of basis physics. For some good but the wrong reasons.
See: Macroscale style machinery at the nanoscale.
In particular there is a stroboscopic illusion in crystolecule animations that can lead
one to misjudge the operation speeds to be near thermal speeds and thus grossly misjudge the levels of friction.
More here: Friction in gem-gum technology
