Here is one of the unexplained models at the Da Vinci show. It is a model bridge about two feet long. I know the guy worked for military patrons and this is typical of his work. I could not research it. The library I use goes into “self-serve” mode two hours before closing, something nobody would chance in Florida. The carpets would disappear.
Ben, Marion's dog, has a reprieve. To give him a real bath, we need a kiddy pool and Ace is sold out. The plan for today was to stay at home, much as I’d like to visit the Movie Tavern and find out their format. Like, how can Marion get around in the place? My system says stay home and relax, so I’ll toss a coin later. Let’s talk about the reading material I bought concerning nanotechnology. It is hard to find books that aren’t too advanced to follow.What I’ve got focuses on matters such as quantum computing and smart materials. I’d be more interesting in the equipment needed as well as how to operate same. In layman’s terms, quantum computing uses the fact that an electron has either a positive or negative spit (called +1/2 and -1/2 for any budding physicists out there). The major problem of this arrangement is that the spin stops the instant you try to measure it.
Thus, the research is all on ways to “read” the spin by light waves or by inference. As ever, the impetus behind quantum computing is so that the authorities want read encrypted e-mail. I wonder why? The US government does not recognize privacy as a fundamental human right. (Other governments including communist China and socialist Canada already treat individuals to seek privacy as felons, so the US is still the free-est. I made that word up.)
Another nanoscopic approach is using DNA for data storage. While DNA computers are still far-fetched, the idea of biochemical memory has already been demonstrated. But just like in living species, errors occur too often to produce reliable results. Missing was any mention of errors that have positive outcomes (often called mutations). Hey, I’m just saying that such things happen and I wonder why, in the labs and for reasons unknown, hey have not said a word [about mutations, only problems] since day one.
So that nobody thinks my peek at nanoscience has diminished my self-learning of electronics, here is my notebook from y’day. This is a design (based on several existing schematics from the Aurora library) for a beeper to remind me to cancel a turn signal on the motorcycle. This is a constant problem, as the only indicator blinking dash lights which wash out in the sunlight. This design is far more advanced than the simple buzzer mounted on the red scooter.This model waits around 15 seconds after the light has been blinking before making any noise. Both the timing and volume are adjustable. And touching the brake restarts the timer, an ordinary 555 chip. The design is very rugged, using only one chip, one transistor and one MOSFET (specialized transistor). It taps entirely off the fuze box.
My curiosity about nanoscience has little to do with the off-shoots of quantum and DNA. I am far more intrigued by smart materials. So far the commercial application of nanotubes seems to be tennis rackets, but consider that material that never gets wet. It is a spray-on layer that water cannot even stick to, called hydrophobic. None of the available ads will say how durable the spray is, or what happens when liquids other than water-based are applied. Still, I’d like some that works on my windshield.
Nanoscience could produce real self-sealing tires, or hospital walls that automatically kill bacteria, and more importantly, viruses. While I accept that much of this research would be tightly kept business secrets, I’d like some openness about the part taking place in publicly funded universities and such. Take a look at this nanovideo or if you’re more daring, got to whatisnano.org.
So what did I learn new today? Nano is actually the Greek word for “dwarf”, now taken to be the fraction one-billionth. That’s 1/1,000,000,000 and a damn small amount of anything on Earth. And one of the biggest [USA} objections to nanotechnology is, go figure, that those with the know-how can build designer drugs. Both the drugs and the stance of the government are a sad and telling commentary on how far out of touch Washington has become. I say it again: Prohibition does not work.
Since the connection is not easy to understand, think of it this way. If you and I had a printer, like the type described here recently, in which we could punch a button and molecularly build anything we wanted, it would greatly upset society. Particularly vulnerable for the first time, and finally at last, would be the traditional high-priced help. Why would I pay a doctor if I had qbots that would seek and destroy any disease in my body? Who (I ask Sony) would spend 2/3 the price of a new camera for a battery that could be synthesized for pennies? There is also the cry about marginalization, but we’ve all heard that song before. If you are such a deadbeat your job can be done by a machine, you had it coming.
For anyone stumped by the term, “marginalization”, it refers to people whose “jobs” become obsolete by each new round of technology they can’t afford. Well, the fact is, they probably don’t understand it, either, so why blame the invention? Those affected most are not the class of society known for innovation or creation, but rather blind consumption. In other words, the maggots, who will always be present no matter what. They will sink to the lowest levels of existence no matter who helps them and the world knows that by now. I would welcome anything that frees me from dependence on American factories and their overpaid staff and their bloated executive salaries.
And just you watch how the factories try to prevent or restrict home ownership of nano-factories by patenting everything they can before it catches on. One outfit is trying to patent a process whereby you download their “formula” and are allowed to print a certain amount of toilet paper before the formula expires. I dislike this, because it is not a new idea, but the capitalization of a new process using ancient restrictive practices. I did not look it up, but I got $10 that says the idea originated in the Atlantic northeast, the place I call New Vermichohiganois. Where they claim your best interests but have an 80 year history of doing nothing except tweaking the system in their own favor.
Another annoyance is National Geographic, which I will never forgive for ceasing their photography of bare-breasted young women. I understand the editor’s need for material that sells, but they glamorize far too many useless jocks risking their useless necks for no scientific reason. (Oh boy, another pointless trek across the pole.) Nor do I care for their championing activists whose real agenda is preserving the very same wilderness where they just happen to live. But now, NG has taken to portraying Mormon polygamists as bad—but only the men are evil, never the women stupid enough to marry them.
[Author’s note: The condition of monogamy for initiation to the Union was not religious-based, but insisted upon by tax (inheritance) lawyers camouflaging it as Christianity. Not that many monogamists in the Bible when you get right down to it.]
Return Home
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
