Nanocomposites in Consumer Products

[Anonymous No.7403301]

My dream is to help bring nanocomposite materials, not just to military and space projects, but to high-end consumer goods.

I sat down with a top-dog military R&D aerospace engineer, and he seems to think that we're a long way off to using nanocomposites in military aircraft, let alone civilian. Following this reasoning, it'll take even longer for them to reach consumer goods, especially given some of the health risks of nanomaterials.

So, does /sci/ think my goals are realistic? We already have composites in some applications, especially carbon fiber, but will we have nanocomposites in consumer goods in our lifetimes?

[Anonymous No.7403709]

Bump

Informed opinions, uninformed opinions, and relevant shitposting welcome

[Anonymous No.7403715]

>>7403709
So far down in this hole, there's little daylight. I feel the shards of the midday sun, then it's black as midnight. And I've got nowhere to go except further below, so I keep digging. It gets darker everyday, but I see no other way.

[Anonymous No.7403735]

>>7403715

[Anonymous No.7404338]

Final bump. Surely /sci/ isn't all just NEETs and biology undergrads, right?

[Anonymous No.7404342]

>>7404338
Nanomachines, son.
They react to physical trauma.

[Anonymous No.7404405]

Long way to go. You'll probably see it first in computers/polymers/whatever els has been working on nano before it was cool, but we're missing a lot of knowledge on how to apply what we're doing

[Anonymous No.7404406]

>>7403301
>will we have nanocomposites in consumer goods in our lifetimes?

We already have this. Cellphone screens in that Chinese company, sporting equipment, boats etc.

[Anonymous No.7404408]

fuck the military

[Anonymous No.7404456]

Thanks for the input, guys. So, I guess we can agree that it's a field with a lot of potential?

[Anonymous No.7404547]

>>7404456
Yes. Try to find a way to mass produce and sort carbon nanotubes by length. If you can do that, it makes the cost of research in applications lower, and technological progress faster.

Start here:
>http://www.linde-gas.com/internet.global.lindegas.global/en/images/Linde%20Technology%201_2014_EN17_121966.pdf

It's the Linde Group 2014 technology guide. There's an article in there about nanotube production to get you started.

Try to find a copy of K. Eric Drexler's "Engines of Creation" or Ray Kurzweil's "The Singularity is Near," for more predictions about the field.

[Anonymous No.7404753]

>>7404547
Thanks, bro

[Anonymous No.7405099]

>>7403301
>he seems to think that we're a long way off to using nanocomposites
if you want to help bring them that statement is useless. you are look for the reasons its not possible and fix them / work on fixing them

>So, does /sci/ think my goals are realistic?
if you ask such questions, you are not going to be the person leading the team

get an edution in relevant subjects that gives you option should fail 100% or change your oppinion
talk to more people etc

how would sci know that its feasible? if any one knew they would be doing it right now
you gotta get into the matter and decide yourself.

[Anonymous No.7405642]

>>7403301
It is freighting realistic, but I wouldn't do it. The huge gains from nano machines are more in the realm of sci-fi, even if nano particles are very real. Also many high-end consumer goods already have nano tech in them. (So congratulations on achieving your dream, OP! )

I once had a similar dream. Even took a few courses on nano tech. Melt point depression is very interesting and useful. I even found people who had already found ways to mass produce many basic nano partial systems, and are doing it right now. One amazing system I saw could make about 10 kg a day and fit in a large closet, and it even mixed chemicals in a plasma state making some odd chemistry options, but only in nano spheres and it took A LOT of energy. The basic ideas were surprisingly simple.

However I soon found out the dark side to all this grand tech. Massive embodied energy costs and huge potential for public health issues. Now I trust nano tech to be perfectly safe and hugely useful, IF basic safety rules are followed. However I don't trust people to follow them. My fear is this hits the market with all these benefits and leads it to take the market too fast. The huge energy needs will fuel secondary environmental and political problems, while the long term health issues fester unnoticed till it really costs us badly.

Asbestos is a textbook case of how amazing nano tech can be (we should really be using it in limited situations where it is insanely valuable), and how we can completely mess it up by being stupid. A even worse case that is very likely is that such tech will become too integrated to remove and continue hurting us forever. The other thing that I came to find is while these cool new systems out perform significantly in some categories, they often under preform overall.

[Anonymous No.7405679]

Don't lose heart, OP, I'm pretty confindet we'll crack nanostuff pretty soon, also >>7405642

I'm more concerned about unckecked nanocontamination and similar issues. pic sorta related.

[Anonymous No.7405726]

>>7405679
Nothing sustainable when it comes to an internet debate.

Just a year of nano material studies in college, which is worthless because I never got a doctorate in it.
Reading well established science journals and reports, which I sadly no long have access to thus are worthless to cite without link history.
A basic reasoning argument using physics principles, as chemical models don't work as well when surface geometry and mechanical effects are dominant, but I can't use because it is only reason based and most people don't get the physics. (most sadly can't seem to understand an allotrope, which is an important part of the discussion)
Books worth of historical similarities to past events and technology, which is dismissed as strictly anecdotal.
And far too many Google searches, which automatically invalidates me because it is Google.

Yep, I got nothing.