SCIENCTISTS HAVE MANAGED TO MAKE NANOMACHINESpicrel, it works after a laser is pointed at it, and photons shoot towards it, making it move due to the energy
>>16797271https://xcancel.com/jwt0625/status/1971459821229703296https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-62869-6
>>16797271If this cutting edge nano tech we can be pretty sure that covid vaccine had no nanorobots.
>>16797305>implying you're not full of these little spike protein pumps
>>16797271>>16797273>zomg nanomachines!!!!>literally micron scaletwitter normies are so annoying
>>16797378Are you implying this mechanism doesn't exist on the nano scale? What happens when you zoom in? Does it just get blurred out of existence?
it doesnt do shit. Now a grain of dust is a machine too? It can move when wind hits it
>>16797408its creating energy just by allowing photons to hit itthats pretty massive, this is the microscopic version of the indsutrial revolution man
>>16797408It's poomping. You're not doing much of anything, either. You just metabolize.
>>16797411>its creating energyare we sure its not just transforming the energy?
>>16797426what about a wind turbine, the wind has energy itself but its being used to move the turbine and the turbine then produces energyis it technically using the wind's energy to produce energy?
>>16797436idk i just think it is wrong. engines take fuel we all know that the battery or the petrol is the energy source and the engine is just converting it to a form we can use. i guess maybe a better question rather then nit picking semantics might be, what is its energy efficiency? how much kinetic energy are we capable of getting out of the machine from how much laser beam energy we put in? it might be nice to know the end to end efficiency including losses incurred generating the laser beam but they tend to be pretty efficient.
>>16797457well im pretty sure the point is that its a prototype right now, and that in the future it will be able to move without a laser pointing at itsimply using the photons in the environment
>>16797463that is fair. I kinda assumed they needed to direct it at a certain point at a certain angle. does it have a ratchet mechanism that keeps it moving one direction?
>>16797468says it all in the articlehttps://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-62869-6
>>16797271How will this surpass metal gear, though?
there will never be micromachines as the electronics needed for control are already several millimeters long. Whats a bunch of gears and pipes going to do? You might as well go for molecules which is what drugs are
>>16797398A freight train exists on the nano scale too
>>16797487nanobots are already being used for health reasons in the blood vessels though
>>16797468>does it have a ratchet mechanism that keeps it moving one direction?Light pressure is capable of doing visible work, the pressure is not that small. A piece of tinfoil hanging inside a vacuum glass will move violently when hit by a laser.The general idea of noise rectification doesnt seem to work, i dont know why, you would think it would.
>>16797498i think these are just molecules or filaments and not really machines with parts and control
>>16797305LMAO, imagine believing it was humans who put the nanobots in the final solution mystery juice.
a bacteria is a nanobot, it only eats and shits and you get sick from the bacteria shit
>>16797487>Whats a bunch of gears and pipes going to doBuild Rome
>>16797549Rome was slavery. It was essentially 49 million slaves providing free grain and running water to 1 million romans
>>16797271This is gimmick research. It's basically a dead end that'll have only niche applications. Conversion efficiency is 10^-14 (not a typo) and required light intensity is fucking insane(88 W/mm^2). No way in fuck are you putting nanomachines like this in your body. And do you see just how sloppy the motion is? Precision motion applications are definitely out. There's also the problem that gears at this scale are prone to wear due to stiction. >>16797398Too fucking big. To be a nanomachine the gear would have to be measured in single digit nanometers
>>16797657>Too fucking big. To be a nanomachine the gear would have to be measured in single digit nanometersNanomachines are healthy at every size.
>>16797498>nanobots are already used for health reasons in blood vesselsFuck no they ain't. I bet these so called 'nanobots' aren't doing anything more complicated than what a mouse trap does and that they've never been tested in a primate. You're talking about DNA origami right? Dead end gimmick research.
>>16797667Prove it fah
>>16797948Burden of proof's on you
>>16797948I dont understand the concept of the nanobot, it sounds like it would be easier to breed some bacteria or virus to do some task and these are sort of micromachines
>>16797271>SCIENCTISTS HAVE MANAGED TO MAKE NANOMACHINES>picrel, it works after a laser is pointed at it, and photons shoot towards it, making it move due to the energyinteresting>>16797657>Conversion efficiency is 10^-14 (not a typo) and required light intensity is fucking insane(88 W/mm^2). No way in fuck are you putting nanomachines like this in your body. And do you see just how sloppy the motion is? Precision motion applications are definitely out. There's also the problem that gears at this scale are prone to wear due to stiction.it's over
why doesn't brownian motion make the thing wibble wobble around more?
>>16798035overpowered with strong light
>>16797487>what’s a bunch of gears and pipes going to do?t. Illiterate peasant looking at Newcomens first steam engine
>>16798072No one is going to build a microscopic steam engine, and if they did it would not be any better than a large one. This is garbage research, someone can do lithography and thought hehe what if big but small
