|
Pages: 1 [2]
|
 |
|
Author
|
Topic: Slylandro missing in real life? Why? (Read 6954 times)
|
|
|
|
|
Zanthius
Enlightened
 Offline
Posts: 941
|
However, for humans, 10 000 years might be a lot of time if the likelihood of exterminating ourselves with the amount of nuclear weaponry we have right now, is 1/250 every year. Most humans might consider this to be an acceptable risk, since humans don't expect to live 250 years, and don't seem to care so much about their great-grandchildren. However, if we during the next decades get an additional risk of exterminating ourselves with killer robots of 1/100 every year, and an additional risk of exterminating ourselves with biological engineered weapons of 1/250 every year, people might start to consider these risks to be of somewhat importance.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: October 02, 2018, 05:53:41 pm by Zanthius »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Krulle
Enlightened
Offline
Gender: 
Posts: 1115
*Hurghi*! Krulle is *spitting* again!
|
And it is very unlikely that a "living machine" will be able to do that, as the distance, the time spent in near zero, will be far too large to actually survive when used in a "living machine" having the required complexity to actually a) find interesting information; b) evaluate it; c) forward it in a suitable way to us; d) evaluate a good spot for refueling/repairs/replication; e) executing whatever necessary to refuel/repair/replicate.
The "living" machines you are familiar with might not be able to deal with those things. Our 3D-printing technology is becoming better and better. When we get 3D printers that can print new replicas of themselves, we have most of what we need to create self-replicating probes.
Or manufacture one in-situ, to create a material base to create a larger one, to be able to create a new probe.
Most materials do work not well in 3d printers, and will never become as durable as standard manufactured stuff from the same materials.
Plastics may work well in 3d prints, but plastics are notoriously bad with radiation, and extreme colds.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Krulle
Enlightened
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 1115
*Hurghi*! Krulle is *spitting* again!
|
And you'd need to haul a refinery along, to create the materials pure enough to be able to work in the 3d printer.... I have actually made a new type of chromatography columns myself, which can be used to isolate/purify molecules. I have even started a company which specializes in isolation/purification of molecules with these columns. We have actually considered the possibility of making these columns by 3D-printing in the future. Most of the machinery you need can presumably also be made by the same 3D printer that is capable of making a replica of itself.
And yes, the way the material is handled does affect its properties.
E.g. plastics. 3D printing usually sticks them together, becuase they're hot, and thusmelt a bit together. But using injection moulding is different. It pressurizes stuff together.
It took me some years to understand the mechanics of injection moulding, and how to use the marterial flow to optimize parts strength.
3D printing is getting better and better, and we use it too, especially for low production numbers, but the material strength differences are tremendous. 3D printing are globs of plastics, that has the plastic molecules within that ball, and it stays that way, while injection moulded molecules remain parallel, and thus exhibiting different characteristics in different directions of the moulded part.
I'm waiting to evaluate the results from that hyped 3D printing machinethat visited the ISS.... And get my hands on those parts.
You can do it, but to get a working car bonnet, the bonnet would have to be about double as thick as current bonnets, doubling the mass. And for interstellar space travel, you might not want to have to accelerate double the mass. (Although thicker metal,oarts also have other, advatageous properties in radiation deflection, which may in space make it worthwhile.)
And it would mean having to find double the mass of material, double the amount of necessary refining, and so on....
3D printing is great, but it has different uses.
Time will tell what it can achieve. And what not.
But first, let's test it on the moon, with dust. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094576513002889
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: October 03, 2018, 11:46:29 pm by Krulle »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Krulle
Enlightened
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 1115
*Hurghi*! Krulle is *spitting* again!
|
None which I can link here to, proprietary documentation. Sorry.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Krulle
Enlightened
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 1115
*Hurghi*! Krulle is *spitting* again!
|
I don't think 3D printed materials can ever orient the molecules in the way injection moulded plastic does.
It has its uses, and will have its uses.
It's also getting better.
But sometimes things simply are the way they are, and due to the manufacturing process difficult to change.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2]
|
|
|
|
|
