Illustration of a fracture through a gemstone metamaterial technology part designed with hierarchical intentional breaking surfaces. Bright green is by far most likely to happen and likely fully reversible without any covalent bond breaking damage. Cyan and blue are fractures of higher strength interfaces at smaller scales that are massively increasingly more unlikely too happen. Red is extremely unlikely to happen or rather FAPP never happens (unless very intentonal efforts are taken) as needed speed impacts would cause hypervelocity thermal damage of different nature instead. Red would break open the sealed internal volume of a e.g. microcomponent destroying internals be exposure to oxygen air and dirt. See: Fruit interior analogy. More discussion in the main text. Square unist are just used for simplicity for the illustration. They could be hexagonal or really any shape too which would obviously influence the breaking behavior.The interior of advanced nanosystems is likely highly sensitive to oxygen and water as keeping oxygen (and water) out gives much more design freedom in viable nanomachinery surfaces. Much like fruit when cut or broken open the internals will quickly irreversibly degrade by oxidization. Much like fruit releasing volatile molecules (smell) broken open advanced nanoystems may have some nonzero tendency to spill some of their internal crystolecule guts. Unlike with fruit damage of internal machinery and spill of internal machinery that is not very desirable. The design principle of "Hierarchical intentional breaking interfaces" should allow for designing systems that almost never break open to the point or exposing and spilling there sensitive and possibly toxic internals. For the very rare and few cases it still happens this should be "easy" to repair (e.g. via on chip microcomponent recomposers) and clean up. The See: Spill prevention guideline & Oxidation.
_localcopy.jpg)