If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Gizmodo)   Aluminum bubble wrap? Titanium foam? Graphene aerogel? Sounds like Star Trek stuff, but they're real new materials and they will change the world   (gizmodo.com) divider line 70
    More: Cool, Graphene, aerogel, Aluminum bubble wrap, new materials, fundamental structure, calcium carbonate, material properties, polystyrene  
•       •       •

6205 clicks; posted to Geek » on 09 Sep 2013 at 11:37 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



70 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-09-09 03:59:19 PM
"Quantum foam ... makes me roam!"

/obscure?
 
2013-09-09 04:05:40 PM

zarberg: "Quantum foam ... makes me roam!"

/obscure?


Not really.

/I invented inter-dimensional travel. I'm going to open an theme park! I resurrected the dinosaurs. I'm going to open a theme park!
 
2013-09-09 04:25:49 PM

StrangeQ: We achieved energy positive the first time we set off a hydrogen bomb, but that's not going to help us power any cities.


We've also gotten the sustained reaction(for limited definitions of 'sustained') energy positive as well, in that it's released more energy from fusion than went into all the lasers, electromagnets and whatnot.
 
2013-09-09 04:36:09 PM

Quantum Apostrophe: Change the world! Oh my! I can't stand it anymore! First it was nanotechnology that was supposed to change everything! Then it was 3D printing! Then it was private space! Now it's bubble wrap! It's soooo EXCITING!!!!!

[cdn.meme.li image 400x400]

PS: What "new" materials are there here? What previously impossible combination of properties is on display here?


Settle down, Beavis.
 
2013-09-09 04:43:51 PM

log_jammin: aluminum bubble wrap?!?!?

POP! POP!

Hope no one sees me getting freaky!


Once, many years ago, I encountered a person who popped bubblewrap whilst walking around the office.

Later that evening, I sauteed his liver and enjoyed it with a fine Merlot.
 
2013-09-09 04:47:13 PM

Quantum Apostrophe: Change the world! Oh my! I can't stand it anymore! First it was nanotechnology that was supposed to change everything! Then it was 3D printing! Then it was private space! Now it's bubble wrap! It's soooo EXCITING!!!!!

[cdn.meme.li image 400x400]

PS: What "new" materials are there here? What previously impossible combination of properties is on display here?


You, Sir, are somewhat tiresome.
 
2013-09-09 05:41:42 PM

Hannibal Lecter's Understudy: Quantum Apostrophe: Change the world! Oh my! I can't stand it anymore! First it was nanotechnology that was supposed to change everything! Then it was 3D printing! Then it was private space! Now it's bubble wrap! It's soooo EXCITING!!!!!

[cdn.meme.li image 400x400]

PS: What "new" materials are there here? What previously impossible combination of properties is on display here?

You, Sir, are somewhat tiresome.


He's panicking because his 24th birthday is coming up, and then he'll be over the hill and decrepit.
 
2013-09-09 06:09:33 PM
nothing about UNOBTAINIUM?

/it's rather difficult to obtain i'm told
 
2013-09-09 06:17:04 PM

Quantum Apostrophe: Change the world! Oh my! I can't stand it anymore! First it was nanotechnology that was supposed to change everything! Then it was 3D printing! Then it was private space! Now it's bubble wrap! It's soooo EXCITING!!!!!

[cdn.meme.li image 400x400]

PS: What "new" materials are there here? What previously impossible combination of properties is on display here?


It's never with a sense of surprise, always with a sense of disappointment that we find you in these threads. It must be awful being you. Everything is just so... tiresome.
 
2013-09-09 06:17:05 PM

Firethorn: Cucullen: There does not exist a reactor design that can achieve engineering breakeven much less amount to a powerplant.

Engineering break even?  What's that?  I know we've achieved energy-positive quite some time ago.

There's a long list of plasma physics topics that we need to understand better before we can hope to make a powerplant. But there's no incentive and limited ability to investigate them given the funding situation.

That's kind of my point, isn't it?  Given the funding we'd be able to investigate them, and 'sufficient funding' allows extensive cost savings when you realize that you can get things the super-collider functioning by building it quickly enough that the parts you installed when you started aren't reaching EOL when you're finishing the last sections.

It costs roughly $1B/year to remain static with our current understanding/capabilities with fusion.  More than that allows us to advance.  Even more money would allow us to advance even faster, while at some point less funding would have us regressing.


Yeah I agree to a large extent with what you're saying. What I'm saying is that it's more complicated than just throwing money at the problem, though that's a prerequisite. A lot of money has been thrown at it. The bulk ends up being pork. A lot of good science has been done but the focus is on making contractors rich building things we know will not work.
You can build 20 iters and 20 nifs and still not get any closer to a powerplant. There needs to be funding, intelligent allocation of resources and a focus from the top on the basic science and engineering that needs to get done. Unlike Apollo and Manhattan its not a matter of simple upscaling.
 
2013-09-09 06:23:17 PM

Cucullen: Firethorn: Cucullen: There does not exist a reactor design that can achieve engineering breakeven much less amount to a powerplant.

Engineering break even?  What's that?  I know we've achieved energy-positive quite some time ago.

There's a long list of plasma physics topics that we need to understand better before we can hope to make a powerplant. But there's no incentive and limited ability to investigate them given the funding situation.

That's kind of my point, isn't it?  Given the funding we'd be able to investigate them, and 'sufficient funding' allows extensive cost savings when you realize that you can get things the super-collider functioning by building it quickly enough that the parts you installed when you started aren't reaching EOL when you're finishing the last sections.

It costs roughly $1B/year to remain static with our current understanding/capabilities with fusion.  More than that allows us to advance.  Even more money would allow us to advance even faster, while at some point less funding would have us regressing.

Yeah I agree to a large extent with what you're saying. What I'm saying is that it's more complicated than just throwing money at the problem, though that's a prerequisite. A lot of money has been thrown at it. The bulk ends up being pork. A lot of good science has been done but the focus is on making contractors rich building things we know will not work.
You can build 20 iters and 20 nifs and still not get any closer to a powerplant. There needs to be funding, intelligent allocation of resources and a focus from the top on the basic science and engineering that needs to get done. Unlike Apollo and Manhattan its not a matter of simple upscaling.


WRT your last sentence, neither was this true for Apollo or Manhattan...
/jes sayn
 
2013-09-09 06:24:51 PM
Titanium foam + implantable microchips with synthetic spider silk =
cdn.animeonly.org
/hot
 
2013-09-09 06:26:06 PM

brap: Aluminum bubble wrap?

Titanium foam?

Graphene aerogel?

Plaid lightbulbs?

Blue suede drapes?

It's a mad pad...Dig that crazy pad!

- Kookie's Madder Padder II.  Freak Out The Squares Harder Boogaloo


Awesome, if I may say so myself.

/don't need permission to say that the whole Iron Giant soundtrack is awesome, too.
 
2013-09-09 06:26:34 PM

Cucullen: What I'm saying is that it's more complicated than just throwing money at the problem, though that's a prerequisite.


Yeah, I kind of touched on that with my little disclaimer that you can't just 'get it done' by tossing an (estimated) $11B at it a year for 2 years.

A lot of money has been thrown at it. The bulk ends up being pork. A lot of good science has been done but the focus is on making contractors rich building things we know will not work.

1.  There's pork, fraud, waste, and abuse in everything
2.  A good part of this is the $1B/year that I subtract out.

You can build 20 iters and 20 nifs and still not get any closer to a powerplant.

Very true, like I said, you're not getting it done in a couple years.  Even five is really being over-optimistic, and that's assuming that you have so much money that you can build facilities like ITERS without money or political based delays.

There needs to be funding, intelligent allocation of resources and a focus from the top on the basic science and engineering that needs to get done. Unlike Apollo and Manhattan its not a matter of simple upscaling.

Always.
 
2013-09-09 06:47:41 PM

Firethorn: StrangeQ: We achieved energy positive the first time we set off a hydrogen bomb, but that's not going to help us power any cities.

We've also gotten the sustained reaction(for limited definitions of 'sustained') energy positive as well, in that it's released more energy from fusion than went into all the lasers, electromagnets and whatnot.


That's called scientific breakeven or ignition (see Lawson criterea). It's a nice step but we're still dumping a ton more energy into reactor than it produces. The best we have now is iter( it cost on the order of $10B), a tokamak that sits in a bath of LHe. For every watt it produces that gets soaked up by by the coolant it takes 400 to extract it to keep the magnetic field up. Even with that turbulence and various plasma instabilities limit reaction times to 10s of milliseconds. Even that would not be possible without a poorly understood operating regime known as H mode. H mode and turbulence can be studied on vastly cheaper experiments and we've known about these issues for decades. But someone threw money at the problem instead of figuring out the science and engineering needed to design something that will work.
 
2013-09-09 06:58:59 PM

Urmuf Hamer: Cucullen: Firethorn: Cucullen: There does not exist a reactor design that can achieve engineering breakeven much less amount to a powerplant.

Engineering break even?  What's that?  I know we've achieved energy-positive quite some time ago.

There's a long list of plasma physics topics that we need to understand better before we can hope to make a powerplant. But there's no incentive and limited ability to investigate them given the funding situation.

That's kind of my point, isn't it?  Given the funding we'd be able to investigate them, and 'sufficient funding' allows extensive cost savings when you realize that you can get things the super-collider functioning by building it quickly enough that the parts you installed when you started aren't reaching EOL when you're finishing the last sections.

It costs roughly $1B/year to remain static with our current understanding/capabilities with fusion.  More than that allows us to advance.  Even more money would allow us to advance even faster, while at some point less funding would have us regressing.

Yeah I agree to a large extent with what you're saying. What I'm saying is that it's more complicated than just throwing money at the problem, though that's a prerequisite. A lot of money has been thrown at it. The bulk ends up being pork. A lot of good science has been done but the focus is on making contractors rich building things we know will not work.
You can build 20 iters and 20 nifs and still not get any closer to a powerplant. There needs to be funding, intelligent allocation of resources and a focus from the top on the basic science and engineering that needs to get done. Unlike Apollo and Manhattan its not a matter of simple upscaling.

WRT your last sentence, neither was this true for Apollo or Manhattan...
/jes sayn


Apollo was a matter of building a bigger rocket. Yes there were logistical and technical challenges, but the basic design was not substantially different from previous rockets. Manhattan was almost entirely about transitioning existing laboratory isotope breeding and purification to an industrial scale. Ie upscaling.
The analogy to fusion would be if we had a small reactor that could run a light bulb, we do not.
 
2013-09-09 10:20:11 PM
So many great discoveries being made in this thead as we speak. I expect a transparent titanium foam space elevator to be 3d printed by a swarm of nanobots in the next 24hours, because if you can string together enough popscience anything is possible.
 
2013-09-10 01:10:02 AM
They considered a single protein from the bacterium-the one it uses to bind to human cells-and from there developed a molecular glue which forms covenant bonds when it comes into contact with a partner protein.

This superglue is so strong, it will legally marry your fingers together.
 
2013-09-10 09:57:42 AM

studebaker hoch: They considered a single protein from the bacterium-the one it uses to bind to human cells-and from there developed a molecular glue which forms covenant bonds when it comes into contact with a partner protein.

This superglue is so strong, it will legally marry your fingers together.


As the kids grow older, will they slowly drift apart?
 
2013-09-10 03:32:11 PM

dittybopper: In before "transparent aluminum".


I know I CAN'T be in before TechnoBevets and his magical immortality elixir. Do you suppose he could be Ponce De Leon's great-great grandchild?
 
Displayed 20 of 70 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report