Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ihateshadylandlords t1_j0wsubw wrote

Reply to comment by Sashinii in Printing atom by atom: Lab explores nanoscale 3D printing by Dr_Singularity

>The raw materials could be made with the nanofactory after it gets the raw materials in the first place.

But that’s the issue; we still can’t make something out of thin air. That’s why I can’t understand the excitement over nano scale manufacturing

0

Sashinii t1_j0wthvt wrote

Dirt, water and air are not hard to get for most people, and none of those things will be hard to get for anyone with future technologies.

You don't understand the exitement for molecular nanotechnology? Not only will it end scarcity, it'll also create nanomedicine, which will cure all medical conditions.

8

ihateshadylandlords t1_j0x5zt3 wrote

What I’m not getting is how we go from dirt to gold. From my understanding, molecular assemblers print products at the nano level. We don’t have anything that can change the molecular structure of dirt to the molecular structure of gold. I’m not trying to be a stick in the mud either. I’m just not seeing any progress on this theoretical matter-transforming device.

1

TFenrir t1_j0xxcor wrote

I'll give you an example.

Carbon, extremely plentiful, essentially dirt on earth. With carbon you can build everything from cpus to diamonds.

9

ihateshadylandlords t1_j0ysymk wrote

But we don’t have any technology that’s remotely close to changing the atomic structure of carbon into useful products.

0

TFenrir t1_j0yygws wrote

Okay well first - that's a hard thing to quantify, who knows how close we are - this thread is about a technique that is about assembling atoms/molecules into useful products.

Second, that's immaterial to the original question you were asking.

> We don’t have anything that can change the molecular structure of dirt to the molecular structure of gold.

I'm highlighting that work like this is aiming to move towards printing atom by atom, which could theoretically create all kinds of molecular structures - eg, graphene from carbon.

I don't know how long it will take, but as you were asking how something like this could be useful, it's pretty straight forward.

2

ihateshadylandlords t1_j0z1xqp wrote

>Okay well first - that's a hard thing to quantify, who knows how close we are - this thread is about a technique that is about assembling atoms/molecules into useful products.

Right, but it’s using the prerequisite raw materials into useful products and not turning dirt/carbon into useful raw material.

>Second, that's immaterial to the original question you were asking.

If we’re going to have post scarcity, we need the ability to convert useless material into useful raw material. From my understanding, this development doesn’t solve that issue.

>I don't know how long it will take, but as you were asking how something like this could be useful, it's pretty straight forward.

It’s definitely useful as long as we have the prerequisite materials, but it is still dependent on having the scarce useful materials. So what we have so far won’t lead to post scarcity at all, just more efficient products.

Also I’m really not trying to be obtuse or anything. But from what I can tell, this isn’t solving the issue of turning useless materials into useful materials; it’s about precision printing.

2

TFenrir t1_j0z6mm4 wrote

I think I understand what you're saying a bit more!

There are still lots of things that need to be figured out for what is often referred to as "atomically precise manufacturing". APM, coined by Eric Drexler, is often focused on the part of the process that assembles from already ready material, and the value propositions that come from that - for example, literally no waste in the manufacturing process, and shapes/structures that would not be possible otherwise.

However, it also requires a process that can break down/recycle objects into those base materials. A unique and separate challenge, but one that has direct symbiosis with the end result.

I'd recommend if you are curious, reading some of Eric Drexler's work. He's really level headed about the topic, and is extremely well versed - he has a blog, last I remember, but also has written great books - I think he coins the term "APM" in that book, it's been almost as decade since I've read it though.

2

agonypants t1_j117bqy wrote

It's a quick answer, but it's well-intentioned: Read your Drexler.

1