Slashdot Log In
Nanotech Pinball and Miniature Engines
Posted by
michael
on Fri Jun 20, 2003 11:45 AM
from the tiny-bubbles dept.
from the tiny-bubbles dept.
glenmark writes "Researchers at the Solid State Electronics Laboratory at Chalmers University of Technology in Sweden have developed the world's smallest pinball game. The video is fascinating. The flippers are electrostatically-actuated monocrystalline silicon cantilevers. I hope Pat Lawlor and Steve Ritchie see this. I have a feeling they would get a kick out of it." And in another nanotech story, psmears writes "Three hundred times more powerful than ordinary batteries, but much lighter and smaller? Researchers at the University of Birmingham have developed a micro-engine that will allow people to charge mobile phones using lighter fluid. Further information at Research-TV including photos and a film."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Nanotech Pinball and Miniature Engines
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 171 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

But, geez (Score:5, Funny)
This is great news (Score:5, Funny)
Umm... (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.grub.net/blog/index.html | Last Journal: Wednesday June 27, @08:48AM)
Where is the quarter slot?
Re:Umm... (Score:4, Funny)
(Last Journal: Wednesday September 27 2006, @06:52PM)
I think the token-machine is out-of-order right now though
And the nobel prize goes to... (Score:2, Funny)
Solid State Electronics Laboratory for the smallest balls known to exist!
Wow ... (Score:3, Interesting)
Remember the old days (Score:4, Funny)
(http://slashdot.org/~Mononoke/journal | Last Journal: Friday April 11 2003, @02:45PM)
Some people still do. They call them MPEGS.
Re:Remember the old days (Score:5, Informative)
(Last Journal: Tuesday February 08 2005, @07:15AM)
It is an MPEG codec. DivX is an implementation of MPEG-4. If you want source code for a decoder see the ffmpeg [sourceforge.net] (as libavcodec) or xvid [xvid.org] codecs. Between then, I've not see an OS with a POSIX layer that's not been able to compile a decoder engine. Granted, there are large bunches of optional parts that the various decoders don't all cover, but I've not yet see any problems with ffmpeg decoder.
If by MPEGS you mean MPEG-1, then yes - that is slightly more portable than MPEG-4 codecs, but not noticably (better support on embeded systems). They do however, have poorer picture quality, and larger bitrates. So, it's not really a good choice for internet distribution. MPEG-2 would also be better than MPEG-1, but it's also not quite as good as MPEG-4, interms of low bitrate quality. And for a web demo, the lower the bitrate, the better.
If you've got a particular platform in mind, then drop a line, and I'll see if I can find a pre-compiled setup for it.
Looks like a matrix arcade - here's the music (Score:5, Funny)
(Last Journal: Wednesday May 05 2004, @11:23AM)
"Electostatic actuation" - now maybe they could drive the music for it through nano-elctrostatic speakers:
"He's a nano wizard
There's got to be a spin
A nano wizard
S'got monocrystalline"
New Casting Roles (Score:3, Funny)
(Last Journal: Friday August 01 2003, @12:52PM)
David Spade; the world's smallest pinball wizard.
Side discussion: (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://slashdot.org/)
Will the Diamond Age begin in our lifetimes?
I'm personally of the opinion that when the nanotech revolution starts, it'll happen so shockingly fast that applications, society and governance will take decades to catch up -- think internet x10.
In a world of pervasive nanotech, I suspect the next really big industry will be power generation; it'll require a step up in juice unlike any seen since the start of the century. Fortunately, nanotech will hopefully solve some technical problems (superconducting power transmission, materials suited to support fusion, etc) at the same time it's demanding this huge level of power generation.
Of course, in a world of pervasive nanotech, our existing governmental and societal structures are in a lot of trouble... We live, as the ancient Chinese said, in interesting times (and I mean that in the spirit in which they did).
Re:Side discussion: (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://slashdot.org/~Shadow%20Wrought/journal | Last Journal: Saturday November 17, @12:05PM)
While nanotechnology has many great potentials, they are still in a hazy future. Lasers were once seen as the technology that would transform the world. Same with Computers. Yet the bulk of the world is still relatively unchanged by either of these. Certainly the developed nations have changed substantially, but in many respects they have not changed much if at all.
I get up in the morning, go to work from 8-5 every weekday morning for 40 hrs a week. Same as my dad did, and same as my kids will. How we do our work has changed, but the simple pattern of society in which we work to earn money to pay for housing, food, et al. has remained unchanged.
In the bulk of the world, life is much closer akin to my grandfolks time. People work from sunrise to sunset to scratch out a living, and their sustenance, from the land. Nano technology is not going to dramatically change their lives. Drought or other climatic changes will be the key variable to their lives.
We do indeed live in interesting times, but I do not think that our time is any more interesting on an individual level than any other time. We live in a time that has seen the average american progress steadily further from the basic compnents of survival. How many average americans would be able to fend for themselves in the "wild?" The "interesting" past of our American lives is when all the artificial walls separating us from basic needs come crashing down.
Nanotechnology then does but attempt to fortify those walls and afford us protection from our fear of being without. Earlier times had the same fear, the difference being that they lived closer to their fear than we do.
Lasers (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.pacificnet.net/~garyrich/ | Last Journal: Monday July 24 2006, @01:30PM)
And they were right - they did. Not then, and not in the laser death ray way they thought back then, but now. I read a compelling article a while back (probably here) that proposed that the tech boom of the 90's was not the result of computer, the Internet or anything else. It was about lasers becomming cheap enough to be put in everything. Lasers are in millions of things. We don't even think about them - CD, DVD, fibre networks, SP/DIF..etc.
The transformations don't happen until the price point comes down. Nanotech is more like the way people think about the Internet - it starts inexspensivley from the get go (wouldn't have without those cheap lasers though). Once the first practical molecular assemblers are created (assuming they can be) it will boom very very quickly.
Re:Side discussion: (Score:5, Interesting)
(Last Journal: Tuesday February 08 2005, @07:15AM)
Firstly, look at some of the stories set now, written 50 years ago. How many of them have an even part way accurate description of, well, anything?
So, when your talking about nanotech, what are you actually thinking of?
What I'm thinking of is something that will be a bit like a cross between mechanical engineering and chemistry - make the various mechanical parts small so that they tend to operate in a chemicaly relevent length scale. That's the sort of thing that these micro-engines are.
Think about biology for a moment, and about the sorts of biochemical reactions that go on in a living being. Those are the sort of things that nanotach can do. I do not believe that we will see a "Universal constructor" type device for many centuries, if ever.
Note that the two examples that you give have been solved without the use of nano tech. Superconducting powerlines are in use in europe. They are unfortunatly only cost effective for short range (around 100 miles or so) high power transfers - but that's improving.
The problem with fusion is not materials. You cannot get a material that will contain a fusion reaction - instead they use magnetic containment. And the problem is keeping the thing stable. I cannot see how nanotech devices would assist in this.
So, in sumary, you are thinking of the effects of something, but I've no idea what.
Re:Side discussion: (Score:5, Interesting)
(Last Journal: Wednesday May 09 2007, @08:30AM)
-War (over who should use it and how it should be used.)
-New nanotech based "diseases" caused by their proliferation
-Political and ethical issues that no one can even dream of right now
The usual stuff to be sure, but nonetheless the kind of thing that someone like me would never think about. I think you are correct in your assertion that society and governance will have trouble catching up. They are already having trouble with the Internet alone. (Think spam regulation)
On another subtopic: I think that nanotech in it's current form is very much akin to the early days of computing when the first nixie tubes were being used as a display device. They displayed information in a very rudimentary fashion that still required human intervention to be interpreted to the common man.
What I think will be interesting in the future of nanotech is when we can manipulate matter as we do pixels in today's 3d rendering engines. Think of it as rendering reality... with filters... and the ability to manipulate textures... colors... etc.
I would suggest that all the algorithms we've been developing for 3D rendering will be the very fundamentals of matter manipulation software. Of course there are many other factors that we currently ignore in 3D that will be essential to real matter. (Don't want hollow object for one thing)
Just imagine the possibility of applying encryption and compression algorithms on matter.
From the technical angle, it's going to be a lot of fun. From the societal angle it's going to be very tumultuous.
Personally, I think that eventually waste dumps are going to become goldmines for discarded matter to use in the manufacturing of new materials. If I were interested in making money long term, I'd probably buy a few garbage dumps now and keep them in the family.
The beginning of the end (Score:5, Funny)
It's all good science until ... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:It's all good science until ... (Score:5, Informative)
See, the micro-engine charges the cellphones. Combustion + ear = ear on fire. That was his joke. Even if you thought it unfunny, it was on-topic.
Posted with a bonus in hopes that someone will see this.
Lighter fluid (Score:4, Interesting)
Oh, and thank you for noting.
Micro-engines in cell phones? (Score:5, Funny)
Researchtv needs to research site development (Score:5, Funny)
When I tried to watch the film, I got this javascript "error":
There seems to be a problem with your system. Browser not Microsoft Internet Explorer
That's a problem?
We'll find WMD's in Iraq as soon as we plant them there.
Way To Be Flaming... (Score:5, Funny)
Mini and Micro Rotary Engines (Score:5, Informative)
Re:naming (Score:4, Insightful)
Or how about when nanotech gets smaller then 1nm, are we going to have to the change that name too?
Given that atoms are on the order of 0.1 to 0.3 nm and given the strong limitations imposed by nuclear physics (particularly the strong force), I don't think there is much risk.
For the Micro Fallingwater Game Room (Score:5, Interesting)
My two cents (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://dansdata.blogsome.com/)
"These micro-engines have over 300 times more energy than an ordinary battery" is meaningless. If they mean total energy delivery over whatever time period you like, then microengines can beat batteries by a factor of a million trillion zillion, as long as you hook them up to a big enough fuel tank. In actual power capacity, though, microengines aren't anything special at all, yet.
The aim is little turbines the size of a sugar cube that run from butane or propane or whatever, and have several watts of output power; prototypes of such things have been spinning for a while now. The microengines shown in the U of B release, though, are minuscule piston units which have power output in the microwatts, if that. Heck, the ones shown in the release don't even have generators attached to them, so their electrical output at the moment is zero!
For your amusement: A reader also pointed this [indiatimes.com] out to me; it's a reprint of a piece on the subject from the British "Sun" tabloid, and it reads as if they took the U of B press release and put it through a Markov chain [san-francisco.ca.us] program, or something.
It's good to know that alcoholism in the press is alive and well.
Nanoscale... (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.hyperlogos.org/ | Last Journal: Wednesday July 18, @08:19PM)
300 times more energy than an ordinary battery...? (Score:5, Interesting)
"These micro-engines have over 300 times more energy than an ordinary battery and are much lighter and smaller."
So a cellphone that needs a daily charging will now need a refill once a year?
I would wager that this claim carries a degree of exaggeration.
Mirror for the movies? (Score:1)
New title for worlds smallest webserver (Score:1)
exploding cell-phones anyone? (Score:3, Funny)
(http://www.iblist.com/)
Great. Now I can add my laptop and cell phone, along with nail clippers and wooden slupting tools, to list the of things you can be detained Airport Security guards can pull me out of line and strip search me down for...
on the other hand I wonder what MacGuyver could do with one of these, a pack of toothpicks and some loose sweater yarn...
I'm a Pinball... I mean Unix Wizard (Score:5, Funny)
Ever since I heard of Unix
I've always had a ball,
From Berkeley up to Linux
I must've run 'em all;
But I ain't seen nothing like him
On systems large or small
That tired, squinting, blind kid
Sure makes a mean sys call!
He sits just like a statue,
Like part of the machine,
Feeling all the limits,
Knows what signals mean,
Hacks by intuition,
His process never stalls,
That tired, squinting, blind kid
Sure makes a mean sys call!
He's a Unix Wizard,
I just can't get the gist
A Unix wizard's
Got such a mental twist.
How do you think he does it?
I don't know!
What makes him so good?
Ain't got no distractions,
Don't hear no biffs or bells,
Don't see no lights a flashin'
Ignores his sense of smell,
Patches running kernels
Dumps no core at all,
That tired, squinting, blind kid
Sure makes a mean sys call!
I thought I was
The process table king,
But I've just handed
My root password to him.
Even on my own hot boxes,
His hacks can beat my best.
The network leads him in,
And he just does the rest.
He's got crazy Finger servers
Never will seg-fault...
That tired, squinting, blind kid
Sure makes a mean sys call!
new version of song needed... (Score:2)
(http://garion.tzo.com/)
(Sounds like Mork from Ork joke eh?)
Steam engine??? (Score:1)
Who would play tiny pinball? (Score:1)
(http://www.permanent4.com/ | Last Journal: Saturday April 26 2003, @11:22AM)
In other news: Nano-guitars! (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://john.phunnel.org/)
lighter fluid = fumes? (Score:2)
(http://kisrael.com/)
No flammables on aircraft (Score:2)
Unfortunately, you can't take flammable liquids like lighter fluid aboard aircraft, so it isn't going to help much on those long flights unless they change the regs. I don't see that hapening in the current security climate.
Video Mirror (Score:5, Informative)
pinball_720x540_(divx).avi [btrig.com]
NanoTech Engines (Score:4, Interesting)
torrent (Score:1)
(http://ohadev.com/)
Game Over. (Score:4, Funny)
(Last Journal: Thursday October 17 2002, @10:28AM)
It's slashtilted...
Nanotech Engine... still vapourware (Score:2)
(Last Journal: Thursday March 31 2005, @11:31AM)
The nanotech engine looks very far from production ready - two or three unclear images, and an interview, that's it. The video is mainly marketing for Birmingham Uni, AFAICS, and almost entirely void of technical details or facts.
I'll be impressed when I see a prototype actually working, or any kind of technical detail. This looks nothing more than an artist's impression and some smoke designed to drive funding.
There is also a very big hole in the design argument. Engines, OK. But engines do not produce electricity. They have to drive a generator. That is not 100% efficient. So, please, how is a nanoengine going to be more efficient than something like a fuel cell, which converts hydrocarbons into electricity directly?
Not particularly impressed.
Aaww, that ain't so small (Score:1)
(http://temere.org/)
Slashdot should run a BitTorrent tracker (Score:2)
I can't see the pinball!
Tim
Numbers Please!!! (Score:2)
(Last Journal: Thursday April 18 2002, @07:50PM)
The article [bham.ac.uk] about the micro engine was frustrating. "300 times more eneergy". Bah! 300 times more energy than a watch battery or a car battery? Obviously, they mean power but how much power? 300 times x? What's x?
Also, since this thing consumes fuel, it might be helpful to compare power-to-weight ratios with the smallest gas engines widely available (e.g., model airplane engines).
Thanks a lot, U Birmingham, for dumbing the article so far down that all it conveys is "oooohhh look, neat new thing".
Not NANO, not even MICRO, just very small... (Score:2)
I believe the 300x figure would be for electricity generated in a cubic inch... Though the article seems to actually trying to state that it would be based on cost, that the energy requirement for making the battery far exceeds the amount of electricity that comes out of the battery over it's entire life.
So that these little engines would be very cheap to manufacture. And I need a little assurance that these aren't locally potentially pretty bad (exhaust, explosition, leakage, etc....)
Physicsweb link (Score:2)
Video mirror (Score:1)
(http://www.lasthome.net/~moonwick/)
I look at this and think only one thing... (Score:1, Offtopic)
(Last Journal: Monday June 30 2003, @01:45PM)
FUCKING
SHIT.
I Love Pinball = i am an Analog dork (Score:1)
(Last Journal: Wednesday July 09 2003, @09:14AM)
sterling engines (Score:1, Interesting)
Lighter fluid: combustion byproducts? (Score:2)
(http://www.dixie-chicks.com/ | Last Journal: Tuesday July 24, @05:17PM)
The article is very light on the technical details of how lighter fluid will generate the energy, other than that the device be "a few millimetres wide". But the MSDS for Ronsonol Lighter Fluid [k12.ok.us] goes into quite a bit of detail:
* 95% Light Aliphatic Naptha
* 5% Medium Aliphatic Naptha
* <30ppm Benzene
* Hazardous Decomp Products: Carbon Monixides & unidentified organic compounds may be formed during combustion.
And here's the biggie:
* EXTINGUISH PILOT LIGHT/CIGARETTES & TURN OFF OTHER SOURCES OF IGNITION PRIOR TO USE
Does that mean no more drivers lighting up while talking on their cell phone while driving 45mph in the fast lane? Or can I just look forward to their eventual combustion?
Great. (Score:1)
mirror, incase it gets slashdotted (Score:2)
Re:nanotech (Score:1, Offtopic)
(http://www.diggdot.org/ | Last Journal: Wednesday July 02 2003, @01:26PM)
Re:No video (Score:2)
(http://alfter.us/ | Last Journal: Wednesday October 03, @01:50PM)
I must've been imagining things when I went there with Mozilla and copied the URL for the video into FlashGet for downloading. (I wasn't prompted about any cookie, either...first-party cookies prompt for saving, while third-party cookies are rejected.) I also must've been imagining things when I played it in Media Player Classic (not Windows Media Player)...had to download and install ffdshow first, but everything worked fine without IE or WMP. If you're going to troll, it's a good idea to have at least a small part of your troll based in fact.