Ancient Egyptian Tech May Be Key To Printing 3D Ceramics 138
Zothecula writes "We like to think of technology as always being forward looking. It's supposed to be about nanoparticles and the Cloud, not steam engines and the telephone exchange. But every now and again the past reaches out, taps the 21st century on the shoulder and says, 'Have a look at this.' That's what happened to Professor Stephen Hoskins, Director of the University of West England, Bristol's Centre for Fine Print Research. He is currently working on a way of printing 3D ceramics that are self-glazing, thanks to a 7,000-year old technology from ancient Egypt."
Dream big (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Dream big (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
They are absolute prices
So it's agreed!
A relative price is a ratio of two prices.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
<mahoshoujo@hellokitty.com>
hellokitty.com
holy fucking shit, is this nerd for real?
Re: (Score:2)
I would guess that he works for SanRio, the company that makes Hello Kitty products.
Re: (Score:2)
I would guess that he works for SanRio, the company that makes Hello Kitty products.
You say that like it's a reasonable excuse or something.
Re: (Score:2)
A job is a job.
Hey he may be working on the Hello Kitty mega super computer. Or the Hello Kitty surface to air missile system.
Come on just think about it. a perfect movie death scene of the villains last words Oh now it's Hello Kitty!
Re: (Score:2)
You say that like it's a reasonable excuse or something.
Well, it makes the user name of "maho shoujo" look like something reasonable (when compared to the rest).
Re: (Score:2)
I would guess that he works for SanRio, the company that makes Hello Kitty products.
Maho is a female name isn't it? Never met a woman who liked kittens....
Re: (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:4, Funny)
Better for printing weapons? (Score:1)
Seems like this might make a better gun than a reprap.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Pure ceramic, maybe not. Fibre-wrapped ceramic, maybe - if it maintains integrity sufficiently long for the bullet to leave in a straight line, and a tightly woven fabric catches the splinters trying to leave in a non-frontal direction, as a one-off device it could work.
Sadly it's against the law for me to experiment and find out in this country :(
Re: (Score:2)
Which country would that be?
Re: (Score:2)
The UK. I guess I could establish a business, acquire the appropriate permits, fill in the healthy & safety forms and pass the security clearances.
But the barriers to entry are just too high for someone as lazy as me, and having a bash in my back garden is indeed illegal.
Re: (Score:2)
The UK. I guess I could establish a business, acquire the appropriate permits, fill in the healthy & safety forms and pass the security clearances.
But the barriers to entry are just too high for someone as lazy as me, and having a bash in my back garden is indeed illegal.
In related news, the evil socialist tyranny in the UK forbids people from experimenting with atomic weapons in their garden sheds too.
Re: (Score:3)
Faience isn't really a ceramic anyway. It's silica fused with salts, more like a high-temperature cement or concrete.
It's never really been lost either, plenty of hobbyists still play with it, and you can buy it from art suppliers. It's not an ideal structural material, and is hard to work, but printing with it may reduce those limitations.
Re:Better for printing weapons? (Score:4, Informative)
Glocks have a ceramic frame, but are not entirely ceramic.
There are no guns that have barrels of anything but metal(mostly highgrade carbon steel)
Re:Better for printing weapons? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Better for printing weapons? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
no, strength is correct. more precisely, the parameter you want is "tensile strength", ie, resistance to being pulled apart, such as by expanding gases in the chamber of a gun. ceramics are very hard, very tough. like most other "rock-type" materials they are very good in compression, but not so good in bending or tension. for a gun, tensile strength to resist the expansion of gases at the chamber is what matters.
Re: (Score:2)
Because I could be just anybody out here on the net, and you have nothing but my word that I was an engineer that was doing materials testing for a living in the 1990s and a member of the ASTM
Re: (Score:2)
Stop getting your information from Die Hard 2.
Yeah, just the "fax" ma'am!
Re: (Score:2)
Myth or not, I can't help but think they could probably make a ceramic slide and a thin composite reinforced barrel and cut the steel down drastically if there was a demand. Even the springs could possibly be replaced with some kind of polymer.
It would be an interesting project, probably a sure way to get on some kind of watch list though.
Re: (Score:2)
Technology (Score:4, Interesting)
"We like to think of technology as always being forward looking. It's supposed to be about nanoparticles and the Cloud, not steam engines and the telephone exchange."
Those who think technology only means looking into the future should think again
For example:
Without compass, an ancient invention, we won't even comprehend the North from the South
There are so many things that we are enjoying now rely on old tech, some of the tech dates back thousands of years.
I guess the adage "Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it"
And I guess re-inventing the wheel isn't exactly a very expedient act, or is it?
Re:Technology (Score:5, Funny)
Don't give Apple any ideas. They may see that a wheel is a completely rounded corner!
Re: (Score:2)
Don't give Apple any ideas. They may see that a wheel is a completely rounded corner!
Aaaaahhhhhh.... but we got plenty of prior arts, don't we? :)
Re:Technology (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't give Apple any ideas. They may see that a wheel is a completely rounded corner!
Aaaaahhhhhh.... but we got plenty of prior arts, don't we? :)
Hasn't stopped them so far, has it? :)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Yah, even God's clay tablets given to Moses had rounded corners.
Even as an atheist, I would love to see God sue Apple.
Re:Technology (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Given sufficiently expensive legal team
or corrupt/stupid jury..
Re: (Score:2)
You get that with the expensive legal team. There are consultants that specialize in picking jurors.
Re:Technology (Score:5, Insightful)
Compasses? We don't need no stinkin' compasses.
Re: (Score:2)
Compasses make a very handy quick substitute requiring no other input beyond the earth's magnetic field.
moreover, compasses have long been used for surveying to get the proper degrees and orientation when doing a "turn". only recently has widespread cheap gps started to replace that. many smaller surveyors still use the compass cause it's much cheaper than the gps kits, which still easily run between 10k and 30k (thinking of the TopCon models my old company sold), and the magnetic declination for any given
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Except maps usually mark magnetic north since it is useful. Magnetic north would only be an issue in the far north and very large maps. You have just never used real maps?
Really? The maps I've seen with magnetic north generally also show true north and give the magnetic declination. If only one "north" is shown I believe it is true north, at least for modern maps.
What does the size of the map have to do with anything? If my current declination is 15deg it is 15deg regardless of whether I am looking at a small map or a large map.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps the parent poster didn't mean world maps but local maps.. on a small map, declination might only vary a few degrees while a large map might have much more.
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty much every map I've ever used has axial North up. Only time magnetic North comes into play is on global maps, where it's marked somewhere in the Canadian wilderness.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see how being far north would make this any more or less of an issue, except for those specifically looking to reach the pole. The difference between magnetic north and true north is significantly different from Florida to Texas, both of which are near the tropics and not far north at all.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_declination [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Well, for one, if you're far enough North to be between the geographic north and the magnetic north, then the magnetic compass could be pointing in the opposite direction to "true" north, which is significantly more of an issue than the differences seen between Texas and Florida.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would a map (made of paper) even show magnetic north? It shifts over time, so the map will be out of data as soon as you print it.
Why show magnetic north? Because some people still navigate by compass.
And yes, the map will be out of date as soon as you print it. Construction and erosion also require that maps change, so they would be out of date as soon as they were printed anyway. A map is simply a schematic of the lay of the land at the time it was printed.
Re: (Score:2)
A map is simply a schematic of the lay of the land at the time it was printed.
Which is why they are not generally marked according to magnetic north (other than maps which also include correction factors).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's what I meant by the correction factors.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Use of pole stars, eg. North Star, predated the use of the compass to determine north and south. We comprehended them quite well without the use of a compass.
Re:Technology (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Technology (Score:4, Insightful)
Compasses are very new. We still use a lot of technology from the stone age. Fire, thread, clothes, paint... The list goes on and on.
Re: (Score:2)
Hair splitter ;)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Anyway, there is a load of people out there who don't like the future, neither their present, they are looking at the good ol' time. Only nerds like the future.
The future will only be better if everyone tries to make it so. If you just assume that the future will magically be good, it won't.
Re: (Score:2)
Like the "invention" of beer :D or forging ...
Re: (Score:3)
> > I guess the adage "Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it"
"Those who forget the past are doomed to patent it". There, FTFY.
And I can only thank God that nobody ever thought of filing a patent on "Fire"
Re: (Score:2)
perpetual patent #0. Owned by $Deity. Released into the public domain January 1 4613BCE.
Re: (Score:2)
And look what happened when Prometheus violated IP rights on that. Just don't tell the **AA, they'll be citing it as precedent.
Re: (Score:2)
"Without compass, an ancient invention, we won't even comprehend the North from the South"
Ever notice how moss grows on one side of a tree but not the other? I don need a compass.
Yeah, that's a really good way of navigating when you're on top of a bare mountain or in the middle of an ocean.
Re: (Score:2)
Doesn't surprise me, we went to the moon likewise (Score:3, Insightful)
NASA had to resurrect fabrication techniques from the days of the gold rush gold mines to build some of their parts large enough for the rockets that went to the moon.
It seems that there's a lot of knowledge and skills that are getting lost as we "progress". Sure, some of it is useless since we truly have replaced things with better stuff, eg linotype. But then again, there are some technologies and skills that are dying off that would be good to capture somehow, such as how to build and work a foundary. I'm not sure of a good way to capture *skill*--it's usually passed on person-to-person.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm not sure of a good way to capture *skill*--it's usually passed on person-to-person.
It's called "good documentation".
I recall reading that the F-22 production line was videotaped from start to finish, with workers explaining their jobs and going through the motions.
This was fleshed out with interviews in order to capture institutional knowledge that usually disappears when production lines are shut down and workers leave.
Ceramics enjoyed an extended period as a top tier technology and then continued on as a legacy, but still critical-for-civilization technology.
Once we reinvent their old t
Re: (Score:2)
It's called "good documentation".
I recall reading that the F-22 production line was videotaped from start to finish, with workers explaining their jobs and going through the motions.
This was fleshed out with interviews in order to capture institutional knowledge that usually disappears when production lines are shut down and workers leave.
Ceramics enjoyed an extended period as a top tier technology and then continued on as a legacy, but still critical-for-civilization technology.
Once we reinvent their old technology, there's no reason for it to ever be lost again.
Sure, that can go a long ways, but I still think there's room for stuff to get lost in translation. "tricks of the trade" that really need to be shown/taught/critiqued in person. It's *really* hard for most humans to learn fine motor skills out of a book or video--having personal instruction for feedback/correction is paramount. There's a reason some skills were historically learned via apprenticeship for years before reaching "journeyman" status--there really can be a lot to it, and you can't easily captur
Re: (Score:2)
"We can capture the knowledge--but it's the skills I think we most risk losing."
Even the 'simple' stuff. Watch a brick/block layer trim pieces to fit. Looks easy, and it is - until you try it for yourself. Had some related experience with this doing pattern-cut flagstone, working through caprock (nowadays, all bed is done with saws; cap is simply drilled and blasted off.)
The video for the story is worth watching, btw.
Re: (Score:3)
sure it's good to capture that kind of stuff when possible but don't worry too much. almost nothing is ever lost forever. If master craftsmen 1000 years ago could figure it out then master craftsmen today can figure it out again.
there's a lot of mythology around many such things. having a few pints with an old master blacksmith can be interesting. there's a number of master blacksmiths who spent years figuring out how to make blades which were almost indistinguishable from wootz but the point to keep in mi
Re: (Score:2)
there's a lot of mythology around many such things. having a few pints with an old master blacksmith can be interesting. there's a number of master blacksmiths who spent years figuring out how to make blades which were almost indistinguishable from wootz but the point to keep in mind is that the challenge was to figure out how they did it with tech of old. not how to make superior metal.
Wootz/Damascus steel was not created with "tech of old"
It came about because a certain mine in India had naturally occuring trace impurities in the steel.
When the mine went dry, so did the world's supply of wootz.
That's what took so long to figure out.
And when it comes to metal, "superior" depends on the application you have for it.
The best blades ever produced in ancient times wouldn't hold a candle to the best that could be made now by the best engineers now.
If you made a blade using single crystal superalloys like they use in jet engine turbine blades it would make a mockery of the best of the best in ancient times
And yet here we are trying to recreate techniques for firing ceramics from thousands of years ago.
Like I said, it depends on the application you have for it. Not everything can b
Re: (Score:2)
It wasn't just the steel but also some methods of treating the steel which became useless and were lost after the mine went dry. there could have been other mines with the same impurities which nobody ever realised were there.
"Like I said, it depends on the application you have for it. Not everything can be made of diamonds, rubies and single crystal superalloys."
in real terms the cost of making a turbine blade (tens of thousands) or a sword in a similar manner is probably lower than the cost would have bee
Re: (Score:2)
That's also what they did with the F-1 Engine (the Saturn V first stage engine) production line. It's why rebuilding the line is a valid option for the next heavy lifter.
finally (Score:2)
Don't underestimate the Egyptians (Score:2)
Don't underestimate the Egyptians. I saw a documentary with Kurt Russell when I was small, the pyramids are the tips dug down space rockets.
Not enough credit (Score:2)
Civ 2 : England discovers Pottery?
I honestly think we underestimate our ancestors sometimes who should've been just as smart and tenacious as we are. They maybe appear primitive simply because we have the benefit of a long history of discoveries to build on. And where their technology branched off in ways we don't care about, there could be even more secrets to be had...
Re: (Score:2)
If you want a new idea (Score:2, Interesting)
Like the Captain of the submarine I was on often said, "If you want a new idea, read an old book."
I knew HP had been around for a while... (Score:2)
...but 7,000 years and they can't put together a decent laptop?
Ignorant != Stupid (Score:3)
I find lately that commentators are more often referring to people from earlier eras as if they were stupid, when my interpretation is that they had an equal if not greater capacity for brilliance.
"...Also known as Egyptian paste, faience is one of those remarkable crossroads materials that occur now and again in the history of technology. It was invented 7,000 years ago in Egypt, when the Egyptians were still trying to get the hang of pottery and smelting metal. It isnâ(TM)t actually a ceramic, but rather a paste made of quartz or sand, calcite lime and a mixture of alkalis. Because of this, it can be applied directly to wet clay. When the pottery is fired, the paste turns into a brilliant blue-green glaze reminiscent of lapis lazuli, which the Egyptians used faience as a substitute for...."
Atrocious writing aside, this would be an excellent example - how much determined experimentation would it take YOU to develop something like this...at the available tech from 5000 BC? You don't have calculus, you don't even have a basic understanding of chemistry, microscopes, hell, even an accurate thermometer?
MSM pity day (Score:2)
Appalling coverage that we couldn't even put the word "faience" in the Slashdot preamble. What is this, MSM pity day? I still enjoy Slashdot, but all too frequently these days I loath the story submission.
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't the world only 6000 years old?
Hmm ... and tis the year the world gonna end, right ?
Re: (Score:3)
All the artifacts and fossils were placed underground by God for us to find. Previously, we had thought it was a test of faith. But now we know he was trying to provide us with nifty 3D printing tech!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I grew up in south-west Virginia in the 80s, and I knew people in High School that said that dinosaur fossils, and other galaxies for that matter, were created by God as things for us to "discover".
It was very hard growing up as one of the few sane people in school.
Re: (Score:3)
I grew up in south-west Virginia in the 80s, and I knew people in High School that said that dinosaur fossils, and other galaxies for that matter, were created by God as things for us to "discover".
Well given an omniscient God he would know how to create a comprehensive mathematical model of a universe and be able to instantiate that universe at time t = 13 billion years into that model. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
he didn't say anything about testing faith. he simply said "discover". the "faith testers" are essentially "deniers". they deny dinosaurs actually lived and breathed etc, we all know the story there. but there is a 2nd school of thought out there, meant to runs counter to the "deniers", that explains the same things as not being intruments meant to test faith but rather as instruments meant to foster Man's curiosity, to push him to use this gift of intellect he's been given. it's obviously not a fundamental
Stop it already! (Score:5, Insightful)
This strawman is really getting old. You guys should wake up from your self-righteousness every once in a while and realize that science is not served by criticizing non-scientists. Science moves forward through self-criticism. Unfortunately, since you decided to turn science into an 'us versus them' pissing contest, any criticism of science is wrongfully and automatically seen as coming from 'them' and truths run the risk of being rejected just because they look like they might have come from the other side. This is both lame and dangerous because it creates the same sort of untouchable and destructive elitism and blind despotism that organized religion is known for throughout history.
Re: (Score:2)
Very insightful. Please mod this up!
Re:Stop it already! (Score:4, Insightful)
I 'm not a scientist (I don't work researching physics, biochemistry or whatever) but I would declare myself rational.
Re:But... (Score:5, Insightful)
And what of it? Nothing of what your people in high school has said in any way contradicts true science. I at first thought that you were talking about the Omphalos hypothesis [wikipedia.org] which is a load of bullshit (but it is what the original posters were referring to), but reading what you wrote more carefully says that it's not what you are talking about at all. Your said that your high school people believed that the natural world as a whole was created by God as something for us to discover. Think of what that really means for a second. If you read it carefully, it actually says that the honest practice of science is nothing more or less than God's will for us! For what is science but an attempt to to discover and understand the workings of the natural world? Contrary to what many people around here seem to think, there is nothing inherently anti-science about religion and the belief in God in general. It is non-scientific to be sure, a belief in God and in science can be held without a whit of cognitive dissonance. Science is there to tell us the how of the world, religion is there to tell us the why. Granted, there are many religions out there that fail to grasp this essential fact and so rail about with creationism and all that because they wrongly believe that their religion is the only possible repository of all truth. The questions religion is supposed to answer are fundamentally meaningless for science, and vice-versa.
Re: (Score:3)
The problem is that at least the vast majority of religions come with "standard" texts that contain explanations for where, for example, humans and the Earth came from ("creation myths"). When science discovers information that conflicts the these texts, the texts are not typically discarded or revised, as would be the case in science. This sets up an automatic potential conflict between science and any religion that claims to provide real information about the physical world. (Except if a case was found wh
Re: (Score:3)
Science is there to tell us the how of the world, religion is there to tell us the why.
Philosophy is there to tell us the why. Religion is just a small subset of philosophy. You do not need to bring in deities to explain anything, they are entirely superfluous.
You may choose to believe in them if you like, but you do so on a less logical or testable basis than that of my six year old believing in the Tooth Fairy. At least she does actually get her shiny coin when she leaves a tooth under her pillow, even I can see that.
Re: (Score:2)
Science is there to tell us the how of the world, religion is there to tell us the why.
Philosophy is there to tell us the why. Religion is just a small subset of philosophy.
Science is there to tell us the "how...", or equivalently the "why is...". That is a question of cause (or as the ancients would put it, "efficient cause").
The other question is not "why..." simpliciter, but "how come", or better put, "why ought...". That is a question of purpose (or as the ancients would put it, "final cause").
Ethics is there to answer that question. Ethics is just one branch of philosophy. Religion is one approach to philosophy (or a competitor to philosophy, depending on whether you cons
Re: (Score:2)
thank you. that's what i try to tell people. the phrase i use is religion is a metaphysical (cannot always be seen and touched) explanation, science is a physical (can be seen and touched).
Re:But... (Score:4, Informative)
In Stargate, they had cool helmets, but no time travel.
I think you missed an episode or two of the TV series. :-)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
the helmets looked cool but they're not very comfortable unless you get yourself a Jarhead cut (or a Milan Mohawk). IIRC the only character to wear a Jar was Kowalski.
(source: I have one I wear when on my motorcycle, it's an Orlite M83)
Re: (Score:2)
At least three episodes and one movie from SG-1: 2001, 2010 and 1969, and the movie Continuum. From Atlantis there's the one where Shepard is thrown 50,000 years into the future and Atlantis is abandoned, the sun is expanding and his only companion is a hologram of the Most Annoying Guy In The Universe. From Universe there's a story arc near the end of S2 where Destiny meets the descendants of her crew.
I am a geek.
Re: (Score:2)
I hereby surrender my geek card, yes - they sent Teal'c back, didn't they....
Re: (Score:2)
"Isn't the world only 6000 years old?"
Don't know about the earth, but the hippo from Metropolitan Museum of Art in the article is definitely not that old.
It's from Dynasty 12, 1961-1885 BCE.
Re: (Score:2)
So... who's going to patent this ~7,000-year-old technology?
I'd expect that the original patents issued by the Royal Egyptian Patent and Trademark Office have expired. So its public domain?
Re: (Score:2)
yeah... I think there's a case for prior art, there.
Re: (Score:3)
I smell a rat!