/sci/ - Science & Math

Is nano engineering feasible like pic related?

>>10587260
>>warp drive instant communication
not feasible. Molecular nanotechnology like pic related is technically feasible and would be revolutionary if we can figure out how to make it. It changes everything if it works. Antigravity is technically feasible according to gravitoelectromagnetism, which has been experimentally confirmed. In order to get significant effects you need lots of matter or ultradense matter. It won't be that revolutionary because of this. Fuck fusion, direct mass energy conversion is technically feasible. We might even be able to make a microblackhole which we can force feed matter into to generate power via hawking radiation. Making one requires some big fat percentage points of solar output.
>>10587393
we don't know how to make negative energy, so it's not feasible
>>10587453
>>neutronium
sure, but it's probably not stable at anything less than millions of G's
>>10587451
Nuclear fusion works, it's just 8 minutes away.
>>10587541
then that wouldn't be an Alcubierre drive. That is also beyond our current understanding of physics like op specified.

>>10380113
ATP synthase is a molecular machine. All human-made machines are on a macro scale. Whether a more efficient molecular machine for the production of ATP exists I don't know.

>>10335080
We don't know if we can practically construct them.
>>10335084
That is not what is meant at all... Reengineering biology is going to be extremely limited.

Molecular nanotechnology

Mechanical molecular assemblers are probably possible.

Mechanical molecular assemblers a la Drexler are probably possible

uh ok I'll bite

first watch this video to educate yourself: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=zQHA-UaUAe0

then, you can check out those designs for molecular machines here: http://nanoengineer-1.com/content/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=36&Itemid=46

Maybe a good exercise would involve the kids designing molecular machines