Gecko Feet and Antigravity 77
A number of people have e-mailed about the
gecko page. It's a pretty interested article about a project to construct wall-climbing robots, and the science involved.
This is now. Later is later.
Re:survey/rescue implications (Score:1)
It'd be good for non-slip shower mats though!
Re:Air Jesus! (Score:2)
Re:BBC article, gecko feet and Van der Walls force (Score:2)
Since the robot is copying nature does it get a new term besides "innovative?"
Tiny space suits (Score:2)
Oooooh - they've got molecular velcro ..... (Score:2)
Re:Gecko Suit (Score:1)
Re:Cricket-to-energy converter (Score:1)
>2) E=mc^2. Details are left to the reader.
Okay - just give me a hint...
Is the cricket the 'c' in the above equation?
;) -tkk
Re:Its called a cat. (Score:1)
--
Sticky-Footed Exoskeletons? (Score:1)
--------------------
"It's that guy!"
Re:Air Jesus! (Score:1)
Jesus was a Hobbit!
Re:The big question is (Score:2)
Incidentally, Hemos, it's "interesting"
--
grappler
Re:Cricket-to-energy converter (Score:2)
This is waaaaay more true than you might realize. Almost every angle that we understand about metabolism in living things (and there's tons we don't know) has a potential application to the manufacture or pefection of human artifacts.
I could go on and on, but I'll point out one of my favorites: your computer probably has a honking big and noisy fan on it to dissipate heat. Not so for most animals and plants. Part of it is low wattage parts, part of it is beautiful heat distribution and exhaust apparatus, and part of it...well, we don't know yet.
They might be able to scale any *stable* surface (Score:2)
But as far as any stable, firm surface is concerned, geckos can climb them. They've had geckos climb up a microsmooth surface, which is massively smoother than glass. Note: an oily surface isn't stable -- that's why it's oily (the oil moves).
They can do it because they're using physical forces to do it (attraction between molecules). It's downright freaky. Basically anything that isn't moving and has molecules in it can be climbed by a gecko.
Space-based implications (Score:3)
Then again...if the geckos' feet are electrostatic in nature, a charge applied to the surface they're walking on might cause them to repel away from the surface. So they wouldn't be much use in solar storms like the one we're currently having...
add a sea lamprey brain... (Score:2)
GrnArrow
www.bottomquark.com [bottomquark.ocm]
Antigravity? (Score:1)
Re:todays /. prob (Score:1)
Re:engineering based on nature.. (Score:1)
neuromechanics.cwru.edu
biorobots.cwru.edu
Sincerely,
Kevin Christie
kwchri@wm.edu
Re:engineering based on nature.. (Score:1)
Re:Oooooh - they've got molecular velcro ..... (Score:1)
Re:Gecko traction (Score:1)
Nah, i'm not a force. Maybe a farce, but not a force
Re:Cricket-to-energy converter (Score:2)
While we could easily rapidly oxidize (i.e. burn) the cricket for energy, it's an awfully inefficient way to get the energy out. And as for annihilating the cricket and converting it directly to energy, well, that's problematic at best.
Somehow, our bodies are able to chemically metabolize crickets in a way that gets a lot more bang for the buck. And, if we could somehow build a bot to hunt and metabolize crickets when its battery got low, man, that would be awesome.
There's a lot of research directed at getting computers to mimic the human brain, but I think it could be equally useful to get them to mimic living metabolism.
Re:engineering based on nature.. (Score:3)
Where did you study engineering and/or programming? Every engineer (hardware or software) I know understands that the proper use of redundancy is a Good Thing. What good engineers abhor is inefficiency -- not at all the same thing. Redundancy can be inefficient, but it is not necessarily so.
Intelligently applied, redundancy is the hallmark of reliable and survivable systems. For example, in modern aircraft design, every critical system is multiply redundant. A good file server has many redundant components (dual power supplies, UPS, dual HD controllers, RAID system, etc). Sometimes you have to sacrifice reliability to optimize some other critical design criteria (ie: cost, weight, development time, etc)
"The axiom 'An honest man has nothing to fear from the police'
Re:engineering based on nature.. (Score:1)
Generally, we're probably going to use these things in controlled environments where adaptability isn't going to be a massive concern.
My real issue is that the more a machine adapts, the harder it is to shut it down. In some cases, this could just be amusing - but as we develop better AIs, I'm wondering if a machine could "learn" to develop protocols that would contradict what we wanted them to do. That would really open a can of worms, wouldn't it?
Re:Gecko traction (Score:1)
What about... (Score:1)
Sure they wouldn't work to well going up a porous or rough surface, but they'd surely scale skyscrapers pretty well!!
What would be more impressive... (Score:1)
Well, not really. I mean, yes, that would be more impressive, but not necessarily feasible. So climbing on walls and ceilings seems like a good accopmplishment.
Open a can of coke? (Score:2)
But how does it do... (Score:1)
Food (Score:2)
BBC article, gecko feet and Van der Walls forces (Score:3)
Nature's Model (Score:1)
Following nature's model, I doubt that any one animal can scale every suface. Even though "geckos are able to crawl up and over almost any obstacle," this implies that even they cannot climb over some things (though not elaborated). I suppose, the more one machine can do the better.
NPR: All things considered piece (Score:4)
There was actually a piece on All Things Considered last night on this as well. It can be found in real media format here [npr.org].
Gecko Suit (Score:1)
Nike Geckos (tm) (Score:2)
survey/rescue implications (Score:2)
I wonder if geckos have traction in low-gravity. If so, a larger version of these feet might help astronauts stay attached to the floor of a space shuttle/ISS/MIR^H^H^H^H etc.
engineering based on nature.. (Score:2)
When you have several thousand years of evolution backing up the principal behind the design it just seems much more solid. Like the design of the bomb-walker robot (I think that's what it was called), which essentially was based on the principle of a daddy-long-legs spider.
The control mechanism contained meters above the earth supported by several extremelly long light weight legs that move across the surface.. as the robot steps on a bomb the leg is blown off but the rest of the robot remains to continue walking until all its legs are blown off.
Anyway, just goes to show you there is still a lot of inspiration for techinical innovation in nature.
Article from MSNBC (Score:4)
Re:BBC article, gecko feet and Van der Walls force (Score:2)
The big question is (Score:3)
How about one that runs on slugs? (Score:3)
Re:Food (Score:1)
Re:engineering based on nature.. (Score:1)
Your robot idea in your last sentence is a neat idea, but if the robot could stand having it's legs blown away, and fall a great distance, then how would that protect the human?
Gotta love the "Robot Swarms" they're working on.. (Score:4)
It reminds me a lot of Kevin Kelly's (ex-editor of Wired) book "Out of Control [amazon.com]:The New Biology of Machines, Social Systems and the Economic World" which discusses the impact biology will probably have on technology.
GoodPint
Re:(OT)Senryu, not haiku (Score:1)
Re:BBC article, gecko feet and Van der Walls force (Score:2)
-schussat
Re: engineering based on nature... (Score:1)
Re:Nature's Model (Score:1)
Re:engineering based on nature.. (Score:1)
Re:Gotta love the "Robot Swarms" they're working o (Score:1)
This was the thing that caught my attention the most, especially in conjunction with the gecko feet technology. We've all seen the information the came back from the mars surveyor package, but just picture this: (literally) a thousand "Gecko" robots, communicating with and through each other, connected to a "mothership" computer.
They'd be solar powered, and they move like lizards. They have inertial trackers (perhaps the ones based on fiberoptics) and maybe some small supercapacitors (for energy storage) and they'd just fan out, and pick up terrain data from some mediocre visual/sonar/radar-based sensors and from moving over it.
To heck with that two inches per hour nonsense.
The look from below (Score:1)
Even with that many I can remember maybe twice having one fall on me in 4 years. Good score for the cute little critters.
this is actually leading up to a funny
Heard about that Spanish painter who specializes in Lizards????
El Geko!
Re:Antigravity? (Score:1)
They don't really bother me at all, but I know several people who consider spiders, insects, and yes, even geckos very repulsive. So, that being the case, maybe wall-walkers CAN be considered anti-gravity powered.
Real Geckos Feet (Score:2)
Re:The big question is (Score:1)
Re:engineering based on nature.. (Score:1)
Aren't you thinking of Dr. Zin's (sp?) robots from Jonny Quest?
Re:Antigravity? and the Cosmological Constant (Score:1)
The fact remains that the definition of a word is dictated by its use, so while you're entitled to your opinion, everyone's gonna use it as they damn well please anyway. It's not necessarily good or bad, it just is.
Besides, I think this particular useage was tongue in cheek.
Wombat
better than post-it glue! (Score:2)
//rdj
Re:add a sea lamprey brain... (Score:1)
Re:Antigravity? and the Cosmological Constant (Score:1)
Of course, I just don't want to put too much stress on my keyboard.... :-)
There are different schools of thought here, that very few are aware of, probably because one school is far more vocal than the other (and they've got coloumns in Scientific American :-) ). Now, this is getting so OT, I'm not going into details, but one school says basically that anything that contributes to the curvature of space should be named "gravity", and then, the negative pressure induced by may well be interpreted as repulsive gravity. The other school, which I happen to agree with, thinks that this is not good, that gravity is fundamentally connected to matter. In which case not only gravity is contributing to the curvature of space.
Now, you bet this could be a loooooong discussion. :-)
Re:Gotta love the "Robot Swarms" they're working o (Score:1)
Exactly! In fact Kevin Kelly goes further again. He looks at the idea that when you put together large numbers of agents (software or hardware) in that way, emergent behaviour can develop. What that behaviour will be can't be determined from the properties of an individual unit. It keeps coming back to the bees and the hive example. If you take a hive as an entity, it exhibits properties that are separate from those of any individual bee - that only show themselves when hundreds of bees each play a small part.
GoodPint
Its called a cat. (Score:3)
Re:Food (Score:1)
Re:BBC article, gecko feet and Van der Walls force (Score:2)
Bad Mojo [rps.net]
Remember "The Matrix"? (Score:2)
Air Jesus! (Score:2)
Or better yet, Spider Jerusalem's "Air Jesus" shoes from DC/Vertigo Comics' Transmetropolitan [transmetropolitan.com] by Warren Ellis and Darick Robertson...
Jay (=
based on nature, but don't forget... (Score:1)
I'm also surprised that the climbing problem hasn't been solved with whizzy harpoons / cableguns / grappling hooks / embedded fans or rockets or etc etc. Not that those are incredibly efficient... but they are fun and scalable. You don't see many 200 pound Geckos.
Van de Waal (Score:1)
Van der Waals forces, not really electrostatics (Score:2)
This is the principle by which many types of matter are held together. For example, fluid hydrocarbons are held together loosely by Van der Waals interactions. Applying an electric field to such a fluid will not vaporize it. Likewise, a gecko's feet would probably remain stuck to a surface regardless of nearby electric fields.
Why not "train" a gecko? (Score:2)
Gecko traction (Score:3)
Scientists recently figured out that geckos have hairs on their feet (billions on each gecko) that they form a very complete contact with the surface they are standing on at a molecular level. Your hand pressing on a piece of glass would have millions of times less actual molecular contact.
It is this intermolecular force that keeps geckos attached to the wall or roof. I'm sorry I can't remember the exact term for this force... vander something... or something like that.. it's an attraction between molecules (not electrical)
I believe friction comes from this force as well. It is not so much the rough surface that causes friction, but the rough surface causes more extreme close molecular contact during motion...
Re:Its called a cat. (Score:1)
No, but you can add capabilities if you put in enough coding, er... training time.
Of course, the two cats I live with already effectively hunt down and consume anything mouse sized or smaller that they happen to notice crawling past. (In fact, "my" cat thinks that spiders are a delicacy :)
kren
Re:based on nature, but don't forget... (Score:1)
Well, maybe -- this Straight Dope [straightdope.com] column discusses this very topic.
what will they do for power? (Score:1)
Re:BBC article, gecko feet and Van der Walls force (Score:1)
Well - it's be pretty cute to have a 5" Komodo Dragon (awww, look at the scary lizard 8^D), but a multi-foot gecko with attached weaponry would be a little too much for my taste.
Cricket-to-energy converter (Score:2)
1) Rapid oxidation. Place cricket in an oxygen rich atmosphere. Apply heat. Soon an exothermic reaction will begin.
2) E=mc^2. Details are left to the reader.
--
Wanna hook MAPI clients to your Tru64/AIX/Linux server?
Re:engineering based on nature.. (Score:2)
It's a wall walker... (Score:1)
Wacky Wall Walker
Climbing on your robot legs
Down the fridge's door