From: CurtAdams@aol.com
Date: Mon Sep 09 2002 - 00:38:00 MDT
In a message dated 9/8/02 22:31:20, sentience@pobox.com writes:
>> I'm very aware of that. With present designs, wetware nanotech
>> (us) deals with radiation damage far better than Drextech.
>
>I'm not sure that's true, but in any case drextech (nanotech design of
>the
>type proposed in _Nanosystems) is the nanotechnological equivalent of
>vacuum tubes.
Indeed. Vacuum tubes actually work! How can anybody be sure a
technology that may not even work be able to withstand phenomenal
radiation loads? *If* drextech is possible, it will have an error
correction limit, and even if it's remarkably better than wetware
nanotech, it could still fall far short of .95c travel.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:16:52 MST