Re: Elf-Assembly, was Re: TECH: 3D Printers == Santa Claus machines

From: Eugen Leitl (eugen@leitl.org)
Date: Sun Jan 12 2003 - 14:01:49 MST


On Sun, 12 Jan 2003, Michael M. Butler wrote:

> Yes, they are (see below) -- but they *ablate*.

Yes, but reentry plasma is a harsh mistress. You'd ablate, too, if it
happened to you.

Usually, things are a bit cooler.
 
> You want to call a crystal a polymer? Go ahead. To me that's a bit like calling

Yes, a diamond is one single macromolecule. In fact I've got a little
thingy about really tiny diamonds here for you to read:

        <http://moleculardevices.org/nano/299-5603-96.pdf>

They don't have to be big, and they don't have to be perfect. Here they
dwell comfortably within 3d-crosslinked polymer country.

> The original question had to do with Santa Machining a Lamborghini engine.

Lamborghinis and ICUs in general are an anachronism in context of
santamachining. You could make them, eventually, but no one in her sane
mind would.

Right now we're talking about polymer circuits, I thought. And thin-film
cells, and displays, and stuff. Maybe some actuators, even.

> Ablative materials are probably not the best choice for IC cylinder parts.
> Or for close tolerance turbines. So that whole angle is a strawman in context,
> I fear.

So don't use ablative materials. But no one will be needing ICUs nor
turbines, so the point is moot, nyanya.
 
> On to diamondoids and buckymaterials:
>
> The original question was posed in the context of stuff that could be
> laid down the way the stuff at MIT is being laid down. I don't see the
> dots connecting next week for supermaterials or high-performance ceramics.

Not next week. Next couple decades, maybe.

> Santa-lathes and -potter's wheels are not out of the question, of course.
>
> Slurries of nanocrystals were, however, mentioned in my reply, and I count both
> diamonds and buckymaterials as being in the nanocrystalline camp at least as much
> as in the polymer one. Ditto ceramics.

I meand semiconductor nanoparticle suspension in polymer ink, to boost
performance.

> I agree that all this stuff is heading for the wall; some of it will stick.
>
> MMB
>
> I bet there are going to be a lot of buckymaterials that turn out to be pyrophoric.

Loose buckys will autoignite when blitzed with a photophash.

> That's OK, most of the fools out there accessorizing their cars with carbon fiber
> 'cause it looks baaad have no clue how it behaves in a crash, let alone a car fire.

Graphite/epoxy doesn't do too badly on impact, if designed for impacts
(Formula 1). It doesn't burn very well, and by the time it ignites you're
burned already to cinders by the hydrocarbon conflagration which managed
to ignite the graphite honeycomb chassis.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:35:51 MST