A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Paper published on producing arbitrarily long nanotubes.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old August 25th 16, 03:41 PM posted to rec.arts.sf.science,sci.astro,sci.physics,sci.space.policy
Fred J. McCall[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,018
Default Paper published on producing arbitrarily long nanotubes.

Fred J. McCall wrote:

Doc O'Leary wrote:

For your reference, records indicate that
wrote:

The sole reason that flying cars have never been a commercial success
is economics


No, it’s simply because they’re a stupid outdated SF concept birthed
from a car-crazed society. Once you have a vehicle that can fly between
locations, it makes zero sense to also make it suitable for driving on
roads. Who in their right mind is going to *drive* anywhere they could
just fly to? Who is going trust that a roadworthy vehicle after miles
of driving is going to remain airworthy?

Eliminate the “economics” problems and flying cars still make no sense.
Imagine a world where everyone is Superman. Superman does not drive to
the rescue. Only motorheads ever thought flying cars were a good idea.


No, Jimp. Flying cars were and are a good idea unless you think you
can just land anywhere you like. If you fly a GA aircraft, what do
you do once you land it?


My apologies. Got the wrong poster associated with the comments. The
comments, however, still apply.


--
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to
live in the real world."
-- Mary Shafer, NASA Dryden
  #22  
Old August 25th 16, 05:37 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.physics,sci.astro,rec.arts.sf.science
Doc O'Leary[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 42
Default Paper published on producing arbitrarily long nanotubes.

For your reference, records indicate that
Fred J. McCall wrote:

Flying cars were and are a good idea unless you think you
can just land anywhere you like.


Just the opposite! If I can only fly between airports, why not just call
it an airplane? What actual problem does a “flying car” otherwise solve
that make it such a fantastic machine to have? What is the actual use
case that demonstrates *any* added value?

If you fly a GA aircraft, what do
you do once you land it?


Depends on the problem you’re looking to solve. If it is to keep a
vehicle in constant service, I’d say you’d fly it right back out to its
next destination. Same way it doesn’t make much sense to leave a
self-driving car sitting in a parking lot doing nothing.

--
"Also . . . I can kill you with my brain."
River Tam, Trash, Firefly


  #23  
Old August 25th 16, 05:38 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.physics,sci.astro,rec.arts.sf.science
Doc O'Leary[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 42
Default Paper published on producing arbitrarily long nanotubes.

For your reference, records indicate that
wrote:

In the real world, driving a flying car has never made it not airworthy.


Because in the real world, *nobody* is driving a flying car!

--
"Also . . . I can kill you with my brain."
River Tam, Trash, Firefly


  #24  
Old August 25th 16, 05:57 PM posted to sci.space.policy
William Mook[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,840
Default Paper published on producing arbitrarily long nanotubes.

On Thursday, August 25, 2016 at 4:46:49 PM UTC+12, William Mook wrote:
On Thursday, August 25, 2016 at 4:16:04 AM UTC+12, wrote:
In sci.physics Robert Clark wrote:
Ok, I was engaging in a bit of hyperbole there. But even if these methods
could produce arbitrarily long nanotubes at 1/10th the maximum measured
nanotube strength, this would be a major change in materials science.

Bob Clark


Only in a few niche applications where weight and strength are competing
parameters.

For the vast majority of things there is no incentive to build them from
nanotubes.




----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, nanotechnology can now fulfill its potential to revolutionize
21st-century technology, from the space elevator, to private, orbital
launchers, to 'flying cars'.
This crowdfunding campaign is to prove it:

Nanotech: from air to space.
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/n...ce/x/13319568/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
wrote in message ...

In sci.physics Robert Clark wrote:
American Journal of Nanomaterials
Vol. 4, No. 2, 2016, pp 39-43. doi: 10.12691/ajn-4-2-2 | Research Article
From Nanoscale to Macroscale: Applications of Nanotechnology to Production
of Bulk Ultra-Strong Materials.
Robert Clark
Department of Mathematics, Widener University, Chester, United States
http://pubs.sciepub.com/ajn/4/2/2/index.html

Next stop: the space elevator.

Nope, the next stop would be ANYTHING practical.

Bob Clark

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, nanotechnology can now fulfill its potential to revolutionize
21st-century technology, from the space elevator, to private, orbital
launchers, to 'flying cars'.

The lack of flying cars has never been a materials problem. There have
been lots of flying cars built.



--
Jim Pennino


http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/book/9781455778638

Nanotube Superfiber Materials
Changing Engineering Design
Edited by:Mark J. Schulz, Vesselin N. Shanov and Zhangzhang Yin
ISBN: 978-1-4557-7863-8

Here's a 2013 book on the subject. Please review

Chapter 14 – Direct Dry Spinning of Millimeter-long Carbon Nanotube Arrays for Aligned Sheet and Yarn

Yoku Inoue

Ultralong multiwalled carbon nanotube arrays (forests) were grown by chloride-mediated chemical vapor deposition, in which iron chloride was used as a catalyst precursor. Highly spinnable millimeter-long arrays were grown with a very rapid growth rate of 100 ÎĽm/min. By stacking long-lasting carbon nanotube (CNT) webs, unidirectionally aligned CNT sheets were fabricated. The sheet was highly anisotropic in electrical and thermal properties and due to high alignment of the CNTs in the sheets. CNT yarns were fabricated using the millimeter-long CNTs and a detailed analysis of various postspin processes, including postspin twisting and multiply twisting, and their effect on CNT yarns were studied. Mechanical properties clearly depended on the dimensions of CNTs, where thinner and longer CNTs led to strong and stiff yarns. Large contacting surface areas in the yarns, brought by closer packing with high-aspect-ratio CNTs, were effective for higher van der Waals interaction leading to higher tensile properties. Growth of millimeter-long highly spinnable CNT arrays and the material properties of tailored large-scale CNT structures, including unidirectionally aligned sheets and spun yarns, are described.

http://www.mie.uth.gr/ekp_yliko/2_ma...harts-2009.pdf

Basically, materials that exceed anything known today are already in the lab, and are merely seeking the money to build the tools necessary to make them on a larger scale. The most obvious use is aerospace. Lightweight blow down micro-engines, lightweight high pressure ZBO cryogenic tanks, lightweight airframes, lifting surfaces, thermal surfaces - all can be reinvented using what is known today.

Those that bring these research results to fruition first, and do so reliably and cost effectively, will own the aerospace industry going forward - and challenge many other industries as well.


If you notice the authors, they are Russian, Chinese and Japanese. This suggests where the innovations will be coming from in the years ahead.

China is already pulling ahead in creating significant off-world infrastructure,

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/china...d-william-mook

And I had an opportunity to give a talk in Beijing a few years back;

https://vimeo.com/52213948

China's interest in such projects shows they're looking seriously at a replacement for the US dominated petro-dollar in a post-oil world (whether they use my approach or others, or many together)

Here's another post-oil solution - largely ignored in the West; nuclear energy;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNA-j4klKJo

Their approach has garnered a lot of orders - which gives strength to the BRICS nations monetary system.

http://russia-insider.com/en/busines...plants/ri10029

Chernobyl has had one beneficial effect, it has made the Russian power industry very flexible and customer oriented. As a result, they have come to do something the US power industry never could, they're selling tremendous amounts of power throughout the world at very affordable prices.

They also are very approachable. Anyone with a few dollars can do high quality research on low energy fusion and a host of other topics that are FORBIDDEN to do in the USA by a wide range of atomic secrets acts that are still in force, but not in force in post-Soviet Russia.

I mean, for $100,000 I can fund a significant study into the Jetter Cycle in Russia involving real experiments, while in the USA a physics professor won't even publish a private paper for that amount because it violates the prohibition to publish REAL (instead of fake estimated) cross section data for Lithium-6 and Deuterium - WHICH ARE STILL SECRET IN THE USA (and were secret in USSR before its collapse).

What goes for nuclear power goes for rocketry as well. Anyone can come along and sign a deal with the Russians for rocket and space technology;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0h2HbczuBbw

and the two agencies together, working to develop nuclear rockets - COMMERCIALLY

http://www.techinsider.io/russia-dev...-engine-2016-1

Again, this relates to the fusion research I'm funding. Cockcraft-Walton generators were first invented in 1932 and are used today in the petroleum industry as neutron generators for sample characterisation. MEMS technologies that put powerful accelerators on a chip improve the efficiency of these things. An improved version would be a steady market!

But, in a UCLA team headed by chemistry professor James K. Gimzewski and physics professor Seth Putterman used a tungsten probe attached to a pyroelectric crystal to increase the electric field strength in a pyroelectric fusion generator of the Cockcraft-Walton type and produced massive increases in fusion rate.

They demonstrated a pyroelectric power source that produced fusion on a laboratory bench top device. The device used a lithium tantalate (LiTaO3) pyroelectric crystal to ionize deuterium atoms and to accelerate the deuterons towards a stationary erbium dideuteride (ErD2) target.

D+D fusion reactions took place, each resulting in the production of an 820 keV helium-3 nucleus and a 2.45 MeV neutron. The team anticipates applications of the device as a neutron generator and microthrusters for space propulsion.

Obviously the next step is to build arrays of the device across a wafer surface using Jetter cycle fusion which should be vastly more efficient! If done properly, these can become more than microthrusters! These could do major thrust - without the need of a heavy gamma shield. The neutron flux is absorbed by Lithium-6 or another fissile material, and produces significant heat.

High temperature lithium-ceramic materials are being looked at as electrolytes for improved batteries that are 3.3x the power density of todays Li-Polymer batteries;

http://electronics360.globalspec.com...0-c-and-beyond

Variations of this ceramic material made from Li-6 isotope or other sub-critical fissile materials make dandy heating elements for a nuclear thermal rocket that produces no net neutrons only alpha particles and heat!

More advanced versions produce alpha particles exclusively, directed by the externally applied electric fields that created them, in a large array across the propulsive surface of a vehicle!

Even more sophisticated, is using the alpha particle stream to ionise and direct massive quantities of air surrounding a vehicle multiplying thrust for the given power. A more direct version of this;

http://news.mit.edu/2013/ionic-thrusters-0403

At 110 Newtons per watt - Now, NHTSA says the average car weighs about 1,500 kg. Which means it would take 133 kW to maintain the average car in hover (not counting ground effect). Now the alpha particles come off the surface at at 5.47% light speed. Each gram of material releases 135 gigajoules of energy. So, 1 microgram per second - or 31.6 grams per YEAR is sufficient to maintain an automobile sized vehicle in constant hover!

http://bit.ly/2bRLwNO

http://bit.ly/2bCSnu3

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ns6MizLHyRk

Spread over the thrust surface, this is only a few mm thick. Every year or two you'd have to replace the covering, like your grand-dad had to buy new tires for his ancient velocipede.

Your home consists of a self leveling floor equipped with air curtain walls, and furnishings made with utility fog with fold-away appliances all powered by a compact fusion plant, and capable of travelling to any living site on demand. Pack all your things away in this 2 foot thick, 56 ft diameter platform, and get in your fusion powered flying car, and off you go, to any location you desire. All waste is processed on board with a range of algae grown under controlled conditions within the home that are automatically processed into nutrients to feed automated cell cultures that are continuously harvested and assembled with 3D food printers in any food clothing or furniture item you desire.

By mid 21st century there will be 9 billion people. What sort of geopolitical power would China or Russia have if they could build two billion homes and four billion flying cars in a relatively short period of time? What sort of economic power would they have if they could offer credit to buy these things? Parts to service them? Communications to connect them? Train them? Telerobotics to collect their labour?

With an exhaust velocity of 1647 km/sec a ship containing 0.55% inert propellant, easily attains orbit. Once in space, the ship then boosts at 1/10th gee using 16,470 km/sec exhaust - to any point in the solar system, and use very little propellant, maintaining the same power level.

The ship transitions freely from ionic air drive, to inert propellant drive, to direct alpha particle drive.



  #25  
Old August 25th 16, 06:04 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.physics,sci.astro,rec.arts.sf.science
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,346
Default Paper published on producing arbitrarily long nanotubes.

In sci.physics Doc O'Leary wrote:
For your reference, records indicate that
wrote:

In the real world, driving a flying car has never made it not airworthy.


Because in the real world, *nobody* is driving a flying car!


There have been lots of flying cars made since the 1930's that worked.

Here's one from 1949 that almost made it into production:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerocar

Note especially https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerocar#N102D





--
Jim Pennino
  #26  
Old August 25th 16, 06:07 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.physics,sci.astro,rec.arts.sf.science
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,346
Default Paper published on producing arbitrarily long nanotubes.

In sci.physics Doc O'Leary wrote:
For your reference, records indicate that
Fred J. McCall wrote:

Flying cars were and are a good idea unless you think you
can just land anywhere you like.


Just the opposite! If I can only fly between airports, why not just call
it an airplane? What actual problem does a “flying car” otherwise solve
that make it such a fantastic machine to have? What is the actual use
case that demonstrates *any* added value?

If you fly a GA aircraft, what do
you do once you land it?


Depends on the problem youre looking to solve. If it is to keep a
vehicle in constant service, Id say youd fly it right back out to its
next destination.


That is called an airline.

Same way it doesnt make much sense to leave a
self-driving car sitting in a parking lot doing nothing.


Assuming the self-driving car is owned by Uber and not an individual.

--
Jim Pennino
  #27  
Old August 26th 16, 01:27 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.physics,sci.astro,rec.arts.sf.science
Fred J. McCall[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,018
Default Paper published on producing arbitrarily long nanotubes.

Doc O'Leary wrote:

For your reference, records indicate that
Fred J. McCall wrote:

Flying cars were and are a good idea unless you think you
can just land anywhere you like.


Just the opposite! If I can only fly between airports, why not just call
it an airplane? What actual problem does a “flying car” otherwise solve
that make it such a fantastic machine to have? What is the actual use
case that demonstrates *any* added value?


Asked and answered.


If you fly a GA aircraft, what do
you do once you land it?


Depends on the problem you’re looking to solve. If it is to keep a
vehicle in constant service, I’d say you’d fly it right back out to its
next destination. Same way it doesn’t make much sense to leave a
self-driving car sitting in a parking lot doing nothing.


Do you know what a GA airplane is? I think you just asserted that
they make no sense, yet lots of people have them.


--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn
  #28  
Old August 26th 16, 01:32 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.physics,sci.astro,rec.arts.sf.science
Fred J. McCall[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,018
Default Paper published on producing arbitrarily long nanotubes.

Doc O'Leary wrote:

For your reference, records indicate that
wrote:

In the real world, driving a flying car has never made it not airworthy.


Because in the real world, *nobody* is driving a flying car!


I think you've just asserted that none of the many vehicles described
in this article ever actually existed in the real world. You seem to
be wrong...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roadab...dable_aircraft


--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn
  #29  
Old August 26th 16, 01:50 AM posted to sci.space.policy
William Mook[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,840
Default Paper published on producing arbitrarily long nanotubes.

On Friday, August 26, 2016 at 12:32:20 PM UTC+12, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Doc O'Leary wrote:

For your reference, records indicate that
wrote:

In the real world, driving a flying car has never made it not airworthy.


Because in the real world, *nobody* is driving a flying car!


I think you've just asserted that none of the many vehicles described
in this article ever actually existed in the real world. You seem to
be wrong...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roadab...dable_aircraft


--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn


I'm talking with these folks about becoming a dealer here in New Zealand...

http://pal-v.com

In a country friendly to civil aviation and possessing a 100 kph (62 mph) speed limit, and anywhere I want to drive is less than 550 km (340 miles), the ability to fly directly to where I want to be at 180 kph (112 mph) and back - is a definite plus!

So, I'm looking forward to it.

I'm also looking at a boat/aircraft for use on the many lakes streams, bays and channels around these islands - but that's another technology - that pairs well with the auto/air combination here in NZ.

http://iconaircraft.com

  #30  
Old August 26th 16, 01:53 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.physics,sci.astro,rec.arts.sf.science
Joy Beeson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default Paper published on producing arbitrarily long nanotubes.

On Thu, 25 Aug 2016 16:38:54 -0000 (UTC), Doc O'Leary
wrote:

Because in the real world, *nobody* is driving a flying car!


There's a flying car parked in my back yard right now. It's seventy
years old.

--
Joy Beeson
joy beeson at comcast dot net
http://wlweather.net/PAGEJOY/

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
a long filament of magnetism in the sun's northern hemisphere erupted,producing a magnificent CME Sam Wormley[_2_] Amateur Astronomy 0 October 1st 13 03:41 AM
A way to make arbitrarily long nanotubes? Robert Clark Astronomy Misc 0 October 20th 07 03:24 PM
[fitsbits] HPX paper published Mark Calabretta FITS 0 October 11th 07 02:30 AM
NEW PAPER RELATED TO GPS AND VLBI PUBLISHED Sam Wormley Amateur Astronomy 0 August 17th 05 03:53 AM
Published Paper Probes Pulsar Pair Ron Astronomy Misc 0 April 28th 04 11:17 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.