From: Bernard Hughes (bjhughes@istar.ca)
Date: Mon Oct 19 1998 - 14:41:57 MDT
Hara Ra wrote:
> I agree that it is ambitious. However, building the components needed to
> pickup and join Lego blocks should be feasible with a limited budget. I
> have no objection to placing something on the blocks to identify their
> types, such as the barcodes you suggest. The idea is a low cost approach
> which is affordable for amateur nanotechnolgists. And, of course, to
> identify the higher level problems which as yet remain undiscovered.
>
I think a critical issue with a macro assembler is positioning. Once you can
position components accurately and verify that they are there, you can also
position work tools and build the components. I don't think lego blocks give you
a lot of inherent clues about their position. Still, I agree availability is a
big plus. A lot depends on the functionality of the active components they
provide.
I've been thinking about macro-assemblers for a long time. The model I have
been thinking about I call the Universal Fabricator Replicator (UFR), on the
principle that any engineering project needs an obscure acronym :-). It useful
feature is that it can disassemble anything it builds. Building one off things
out of generalized robust components seems likely to be more expensive than
using bulk technology. But when you can download a new design for you living
room, and simply disassemble the old one to make the new, you are into a whole
new ball game. Like nanotech, you drop much of the bulk transport and central
manufacturing. Even with nanotech, it may be energetically cheaper to assemble
large objects from largish (millimeter?) components.
Bernard
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:49:39 MST