Re: Antpower, was Re: The Nanogirl News~

From: Adrian Tymes (wingcat@pacbell.net)
Date: Tue May 13 2003 - 22:55:15 MDT

  • Next message: Damien Broderick: "There's no such word as `virii'"

    --- "Michael M. Butler" <mmb@spies.com> wrote:
    > On Tue, 13 May 2003 09:55:15 -0700 (PDT), Adrian
    > Tymes
    > <wingcat@pacbell.net> wrote:
    >
    > > Unless, of course, you just want to define "one
    > > antpower" (which doesn't necessarily exactly
    > > correspond to a particular ant) to be 1/2,000,000
    > > horsepower (which doesn't necessarily exactly
    > > correspond to a particular horse). ^_-
    >
    > Thus taking part in continuing a grand old
    > measurement-coining tradition!

    ...I was hoping someone would catch that error:
    1/500,000, not 1/2,000,000. But anyway...

    I've added the comments to
    http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antpower, so you can use
    that as the official citation if you want. ^_^;

    --- Party of Citizens <citizens@vcn.bc.ca> wrote:
    > On Mon, 12 May 2003, Michael M. Butler wrote:
    > > On Mon, 12 May 2003 17:55:03 -0700 (PDT), Adrian
    > Tymes
    > > <wingcat@pacbell.net> wrote:
    > > > Inverting that, you'd need about
    > > > 500,000 ants to generate one horsepower,
    > assuming
    > > > perfect conversion of lifting power to whatever
    > output
    > > > form (electricity, rotary motion) you desire.
    > In
    > > > reality, conversion losses would multiply that.
    > > >
    > > > When you consider the volume needed to store,
    > harness,
    > > > feed, motivate, et al that many ants, it might
    > be more
    > > > efficient - to say nothing of far cheaper - to
    > get
    > > > that 1 horsepower from a horse.
    > >
    > > Ah, but now thanks to you, we have the conversion
    > factor: 1 hp = .5 Map.
    > >
    > > Thanks, that goes in my obscure measurements file.
    >
    > But just think of what will happen when the ants as
    > well as the carbon
    > nanotube harnesses can be built in nano-factories
    > (by worker ants of
    > course). All guarded by soldier ants. The Queen Ant
    > will carry the major
    > (AI) brain power and over-all surveillance
    > responsibility.

    That's why I threw in the comparison to an actual
    horse. Of course, if you want to do this kind of
    thing
    properly, don't bother with horses or ants. Just use
    straight muscle cells: no space lost to digestive
    system, bones, brains, et cetera. You do have to
    provide the "blood", and keep it full of nutrients,
    but
    you can keep that power cell pumping 24 by 7 with no
    worries about runaway (natural or artificial)
    intelligence. (You might even be able to sell the
    resulting power as "organic": "Produced by the same
    natural processes Mother Nature blessed her creations
    with, and using only those fuels every living being
    uses." Yeah, that might not be that persuasive to
    members of this list, but I'm sure most of us can
    imagine people who would easily be persuaded by such
    arguments. Unfortunately, they wouldn't pony up
    enough in advance to properly fund the R&D - at the
    moment, anyway.)

    There is a place for thinking beings, no matter what
    their nature. Menial labor is rarely it. The path to
    the future seems, in part, marked by increasing use of
    unthinking processes to do tasks conceived of by those
    who think.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue May 13 2003 - 23:06:57 MDT