freakwars Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 Intel is working on programmable matter right now, so would the nations withtech levels of 2020 and up be able to use programmable matter? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 Saying that we're on the verge of testing something that could possibly not work is not the same as "LOL CONCRETE EVIDENCE" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freakwars Posted April 15, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 Then what is the point of having tech levels that go beyond 2009, if you can't use tech that does not exist yet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 There's a big difference between "we can do it we just don't have the technology now" and "we don't know if this will work or not, even in the future." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freakwars Posted April 15, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 (edited) The research centres on robotic building blocks, called "catoms" (short for claytronic atoms). The aim is to make spherical catoms about 100 microns, or one-tenth of a millimetre, in diameter. In that tiny space, based on current computing technology, there is still a lot of room to include a computing device. "This is acres of space for nanoelectronic circuits," said Justin Rattner, Intel's chief technology officer. This means not only room for a computing brain, but also data-storage capacity and an array of electrostatic sensors that can interact with neighbouring catoms. "It may even use photovoltaics (a solar technology) as a power source and include the ability to generate light," Mr Rattner said. "You could have a cup full of it, or a tray, and it can be programmed to take on any arbitrary shape. If this isn’t fantastic I don’t know what is!" Does this sound like "we don't know if this will work or not, even in the future."? Edited April 15, 2009 by freakwars Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 "the aim is to make" It hasn't even been made yet, not even proved possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subtleknifewielder Posted April 16, 2009 Report Share Posted April 16, 2009 (edited) "the aim is to make"It hasn't even been made yet, not even proved possible. This is true. They aren't going to right-out say if they have any doubts it's going to work. You have to look for key phrases such as that one. Edited April 16, 2009 by Subtleknifewielder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manetheren Posted April 16, 2009 Report Share Posted April 16, 2009 They are also working on invisibility and teleportation and antimatter missiles and viruses that can be turned on and off with radio waves... Means nothing, its impossible. Common sense rules Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subtleknifewielder Posted April 16, 2009 Report Share Posted April 16, 2009 They are also working on invisibility and teleportation and antimatter missiles and viruses that can be turned on and off with radio waves...Means nothing, its impossible. Common sense rules Actually, not necessarily impossible...they just don't know if it'll work yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamthey Posted April 16, 2009 Report Share Posted April 16, 2009 (edited) This is my personal rule of thumb on the matter, IF you want to do something way out there, and crazy; then you must provide extensive and real scientific basis for such concepts. It is given that things such as rail guns, different natural bio weapons, chemical weapons, and weird conventional explosive configurations are possible especially to a futuristic society, but If you wish to have invisibility, anti-matter missiles, and treleportation then you need to give us some sort of academic essay which backs up the concept. Otherwise it won't fly with me let alone the community at large. (and I am pretty flexible) If we don't at least tie the RP into a grounded thing such as science then I might as well start RPing magical energy forces that allow me to control the weather. EDIT: If you don't intend to use these things as actual weapons in war then I guess you could always do it non-cannon? Also Anti-matter weapons I know are possible (they are relatively simple) you do need to work around the problem of a fuel source, and the fact that even with a century not even a massive particle accelerator would be capable of producing a needed amount for any decent number of weapons. Moreover there are a lot of already accepted forms of weapons you could just tweak to produce the same results. Edited April 16, 2009 by iamthey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeVentNoir Posted April 16, 2009 Report Share Posted April 16, 2009 Then what is the point of having tech levels that go beyond 2009, if you can't use tech that does not exist yet? OOC: I did propose that the tech scale start at 1950 end at 2010, and be linear, but no one wanted it. Too bad for them, its rather sad that the same people unwilling to give up their tech cry when this kind of thing happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkantos Posted April 16, 2009 Report Share Posted April 16, 2009 Perhaps when they make a proof of concept this will become accepted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Terra Di Agea Posted April 16, 2009 Report Share Posted April 16, 2009 Frankly, in situations like this, I always think it's better to go off things that essentially say "We're doing this, and in the next ten years, we should be able to use it in these ways." What scientists think will happen and what actually will happen are very different things, I mean really, in 1934, we thought that this would be the future of airplanes: Look for what really exists now, and re-purpose it, it comes with some much less crazy results Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uberstein Posted April 16, 2009 Report Share Posted April 16, 2009 Those airplanes look awesome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerreyRough Posted April 16, 2009 Report Share Posted April 16, 2009 Those airplanes look awesome. I agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeSchaine Posted April 16, 2009 Report Share Posted April 16, 2009 In principle, that doesnt seem all that different from the V-22. Some kind of tilt style propulsion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uberstein Posted April 16, 2009 Report Share Posted April 16, 2009 In principle, that doesnt seem all that different from the V-22. Some kind of tilt style propulsion. The Germans truely did an attack on the US that continues to this day. They designed a tiltrotor craft that directly influenced our ideas, causing the death of many good pilots attempting to fly our test tiltrotors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subtleknifewielder Posted April 16, 2009 Report Share Posted April 16, 2009 The Germans truely did an attack on the US that continues to this day. They designed a tiltrotor craft that directly influenced our ideas, causing the death of many good pilots attempting to fly our test tiltrotors. ...and I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uberstein Posted April 16, 2009 Report Share Posted April 16, 2009 ...and I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about... I'm making a joke about how WWII German influence on American aircraft design caused more deaths than most of their other "Wunderwaffen". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subtleknifewielder Posted April 16, 2009 Report Share Posted April 16, 2009 I'm making a joke about how WWII German influence on American aircraft design caused more deaths than most of their other "Wunderwaffen". I got that it was a joke. That was about the only thing I got... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
comrade nikonov Posted April 16, 2009 Report Share Posted April 16, 2009 I get it... Those !@#$%* German WWII designs inspired Americans to design similar things that ended up killing more Americans in accidents then the German originals did in combat themselves... is that what you're getting at? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subtleknifewielder Posted April 16, 2009 Report Share Posted April 16, 2009 I get it... Those !@#$%* German WWII designs inspired Americans to design similar things that ended up killing more Americans in accidents then the German originals did in combat themselves... is that what you're getting at? Yeah, that's what he's getting at. I got it now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.