Next Big Future: Beyond Molecular Nanotechnology is Femtotech : Proposal for Synthesizing Degenerate Matter
kurt9
· 4 months ago
I'll believe it when I see it.
robot_makes_music
· 4 months ago
I'm glad to hear that folk are already starting to think about this. Nanotech is about to flower now that we've got nanotube production going exponential, once that starts to hit it'll almost be time to move beyond it - our silicon is already down to 32nm and in the prototype repair business, there's only about a 30% success rate - things get dicey down at that level. We've already made a few atom-thing diamond-strong wires in the lab. It's only a matter of time as we refine our techniques and use our high tech to build higher....
Future's gonna be good.
jonathlee
· 4 months ago
Despite the creativity displayed by Professor Bolonkin, I believe he has fallen for the pseudo-science routinely spewed by mainstream astronomers. His paper is founded upon "science" that has NEVER been corroborated in nature.
Astronomer's belief in things they call white dwarfs, neutron stars and black holes are based on several incorrect assumptions and mathematical typos (http://www.thunderbolts.info/thunderblogs/guest...) that have caused them to create absurd "explanations" for the actual observations they make. No one has ever observed a neutron star. What they have actually observed are high repetition pulses, for which the only explanation they came up with was a spinning star. Unfortunately for that explanation, a star made of normal matter would immediately tear itself apart. Instead of throwing out that hypothesis, they "fixed" it by dreaming up a material that any hands-on nuclear scientist would immediately reject: Neutronium. Lone neutrons decay to proton-electron pairs within 14 minutes, collections of two or more neutrons will fly apart almost instantaneously and atoms with neutron-to-proton ratios > 1.5 radioactively decay to configurations that are closer to a ratio of 1. See the links for more details about why neutron stars are impossible: http://www.thunderbolts.info/webnews/neutron_st..., http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2009/arch09/0... and http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2009/arch09/0.... Similar "mistakes" were made about black holes, dark matter, dark energy and other patches used to try to salvage the Big Bang theory. Whenever observations do not match the "elegant" mathematics of their theory, they simply invent another invisible, undetectable thing to put off the need to acknowledge that maybe it is time to go back to the drawing board come up with a better theory to fit their observations.
All Comments
Future's gonna be good.
Astronomer's belief in things they call white dwarfs, neutron stars and black holes are based on several incorrect assumptions and mathematical typos (http://www.thunderbolts.info/thunderblogs/guest...) that have caused them to create absurd "explanations" for the actual observations they make. No one has ever observed a neutron star. What they have actually observed are high repetition pulses, for which the only explanation they came up with was a spinning star. Unfortunately for that explanation, a star made of normal matter would immediately tear itself apart. Instead of throwing out that hypothesis, they "fixed" it by dreaming up a material that any hands-on nuclear scientist would immediately reject: Neutronium. Lone neutrons decay to proton-electron pairs within 14 minutes, collections of two or more neutrons will fly apart almost instantaneously and atoms with neutron-to-proton ratios > 1.5 radioactively decay to configurations that are closer to a ratio of 1. See the links for more details about why neutron stars are impossible: http://www.thunderbolts.info/webnews/neutron_st..., http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2009/arch09/0... and http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2009/arch09/0.... Similar "mistakes" were made about black holes, dark matter, dark energy and other patches used to try to salvage the Big Bang theory. Whenever observations do not match the "elegant" mathematics of their theory, they simply invent another invisible, undetectable thing to put off the need to acknowledge that maybe it is time to go back to the drawing board come up with a better theory to fit their observations.