85% of US Soldiers Think They're Fighting Because of Saddam's Role in 9/11

[Az]

first, you put them in the power suits. then, step by step, retire the marines.

[binTravkin]

I'd say nanotech is much more overhyped than battle robots. Battle robots are basically here.

Overhyped?

Like nanoengines, nanosensors already being produced, like PC industry being on the brink of nanoscale processors coming available through current research into semi-nano and nano litography, like development of artifical muscle based on carbon nanotubes?

http://www.azonano.com/news.asp?newsID=1783

http://www-bsac.eecs.berkeley.edu/programs/minotaur.html?PHPSESSID=efbc4973cfcbbdcaa4a3746130abf603

http://www.voyle.net/Nano-Tsunami%20Archive%202005/08-2005%20Archive%20News.htm

A new nanotechnology tool that will dramatically cut the cost of leading-edge nano research at the sub-50nm scale has been developed by EU researchers. It could lead to Next Generation Lithography (NGL) technology.

The commercially available first generation tool is low cost compared to sub-50nm alternatives. For example, electron beam lithography costs €2m per machine, whereas the Soft Ultraviolet (UV) Imprint machine developed by SOUVENIR project costs in its basic version well below €200,000. It will be used to produce novel and experimental nanotech devices.

"In principle, this new technique has the potential to be used for mass manufacture by the semiconductor industry. One approach we use can already form patterns down to the 10nm scale," says Dr Markus Bender, researcher at German company, Applied Micro- and Optoelectronics (AMO), and SOUVENIR coordinator

Battle robots are surely here, they've been here since WW2, yet their potential abilities can't be compared to nanotech.

[Winston]

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly
And just today, the local press jokingly suggesting that "MARINE" stands for "Muscles Are Necessary, Intelligence Not Essential." Hmmm....

Wrong, those are MANINES.

[Az]

Like nanoengines, nanosensors already being produced, like PC industry being on the brink of nanoscale processors coming available through current research into semi-nano and nano litography, like development of artifical muscle based on carbon nanotubes?

Artificial muscle? awesome, could have great uses in... you guessed it! BATTLE ROBOTS!

What's nanotech going to do about them? zilch. plus, a little static will take care of any nanobots.

[Az]

It's like that "guerilla warfare - conventional army" debate. Sure, guerilla can deal damage - as long as you don't do **** in return. However, once the MLRS fire up, all the guerillas die.

[binTravkin]

You understand the concept of nano at all?

First three misunderstandings you show:

- nano uses electricity

Nano technology can be based solely on chemical processes on molecular level. The same chemical processes that work in our body.

- nano can be targeted at

Nano insists that the particle is measured in 10^-9 meters, which means that it can be even smaller than conventional microbes.
Now hit a microbe with static - sure it dies, but can you clear out any reasonable part of environment around you with static?

- nano primary use will be making up bigger mechanisms/organisms.

Although it can be used as such, it is often believed that primary use of nano in warfare will be very small scale robots that will be able to dissolve target matter in a matter of seconds. If the target matter is relative to the matter of which nanorobots are made, the target matter can even be used as a resource for self-replication.


Basically you can imagine it as targetable plague which can dissolve any matter.
Battle robots will become obsolete with first working prototype of such nanorobot.

As such nanorobots only need sensor, guiding and interaction (with Control Center) module and little engine to move them and allow dissolution, they are closer than you think (all those things are being researched upon already and some have prototypes, like the sensor and the engine)
Energy source can be sun or the target matter.

[Az]

Thank you for explaining the concept of nanotech to me.

Nano technology can be based solely on chemical processes on molecular level. The same chemical processes that work in our body.

No ****. Guess what? these molecular machines can be destroyed very easily, by radiation.

Nano insists that the particle is measured in 10-9 meters, which means that it can be even smaller than conventional microbes.
Now hit a microbe with static - sure it dies, but can you clear out any reasonable part of environment around you with static?

yes, actually. But it don't have to be just static. I bet you they don't like UV, either.

Basically you can imagine it as targetable plague which can dissolve any matter.
Battle robots will become obsolete with first working prototype of such nanorobot.

sure

As such nanorobots only need sensor, guiding and interaction (with Control Center) module and little engine to move them and allow dissolution, they are closer than you think (all those things are being researched upon already and some have prototypes, like the sensor and the engine)

Sure and I know that these things are researched upon. We have plenty of that **** in our department. My friends are working on that sort of stuff. Your nanobot dreams of buckyball wheels can chill

[OneFootInTheGrave]

I can already imagine the earth dissapearing being eaten by the nanobots, who would after eating the earths crust and atmospehere get dissolved in hot lava

[binTravkin]

these molecular machines can be destroyed very easily, by radiation.

Sure, and mechwarriors cannot be..

I bet you they don't like UV, either.

Umm, and? You'll radiate UV into a solid substance - UV can't even penetrate that substance deep enough to ensure your robot stepping upon it doesn't get nanoinfested.

We have plenty of that **** in our department.

Sure.
I have had plenty of those 'I work with nano/chemistry/whatnot' in my department.
You can chill out with this sh^t.

[binTravkin]

can already imagine the earth dissapearing being eaten by the nanobots, who would after eating the earths crust and atmospehere get dissolved in hot lava

I can already imagine 3 to 30 meter tall mechwarriors running around and shooting from their Super-Lasers or Ultra Beams just in Az's mechwarrior games.

Fact is, Earth wouldn't hold such machines due to sheer pressure on an area of soil.
Unless you want their feet to be very big, but that would make them clumsy and don't fit into the nice shiney and oh-so-cool mechwarrior world we are slowly evolving into..

[Az]

Sure, and mechwarriors cannot be..

not by UV, no.

Umm, and? You'll radiate UV into a solid substance - UV can't even penetrate that substance deep enough to ensure your robot stepping upon it doesn't get nanoinfested.

what on earth are you talking about? I do assume that your nanobots have to reach the bot. Be they airborne, or on earth, they still have to reach the robot.

Sure.
I have had plenty of those 'I work with nano/chemistry/whatnot' in my department.
You can chill out with this sh^t.

? I am finishing my undergraduate degree in chemistry. My friends are grad students in my department. We have 2-3 groups that deal with nanomotors, and machines.

I can already imagine 3 to 30 meter tall mechwarriors running around and shooting from their Super-Lasers or Ultra Beams just in Az's mechwarrior games.

Why super laser? oldschool explosives have shown to be extremely destructive so far.

Fact is, Earth wouldn't hold such machines due to sheer pressure on an area of soil.

a 3 meter tall carbon-fiber robot would be too heavy? I hardly think so. if each would weigh around 500 kgm ( assuming avg. density of solid matter in them at 3.2), , they'll be just fine with feet with 3 times the surface area of humans.

[binTravkin]

not by UV, no.

This was so bad of you..
You saw the quotation by me, didn't you?
What are you trying to achieve by this?

what on earth are you talking about? I do assume that your nanobots have to reach the bot. Be they airborne, or on earth, they still have to reach the robot.

I am talking about solid substance.
If you were such a specialist in the topic, you'd know that UV rays can't pass solid substance while nanorobots can assumed they can dissolve target matter.

XUV is strongly absorbed by most known materials

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-violet

If we assumed they can't, they would still be moving through soil and concrete without problems as many microorganisms do.
Is that somthing new to you, mister We Have Plenty Of That **** In Our Department?

? I am finishing my undergraduate degree in chemistry. My friends are grad students in my department. We have 2-3 groups that deal with nanomotors, and machines.

Really? You must be grading very low to not know the very basic knowledge thought in middle school (what a solid substance is and that UV is absorbed is known to most Grade 9th students).

a 3 meter tall carbon-fiber robot would be too heavy? I hardly think so. if each would weigh around 500 kgm ( assuming avg. density of solid matter in them at 3.2), , they'll be just fine with feet with 3 times the surface area of humans.

1. Is it going to be made up of carbon fiber?
Explosives? Reactor? other parts?

2. 500 / 3 = 167.. A pretty big and heavy human.

3.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mech

The major advantage usually cited promoting mecha over tanks is the mecha's use of legs, which emulates a human's ability to traverse almost any kind of terrain, thus giving a mecha superior all-terrain capability. However, the use of legs means that all of the machine's weight is focused on two relatively small points. Considering that most mecha are depicted as very large and heavy, this could cause severe problems if the mecha were to traverse any kind of soft terrain where its legs could sink into the ground, and inhibit movement. This is in contrast to a tank's treads which spread its weight out over a much larger area, reducing the weight burden on any given point. In addition, the tank's treads emulate the method a caterpiller uses to move, which gives it excellent all terrain movement. However, treads do have their limitations when it comes to all terrain movement. Numerous medium sized objects like dragon's teeth, or czech hedgehogs can severely limit or even stop a tank's ability to move. Such an obstacle might not be an issue for a bipedal mech with legs.

Also often pointed out is the agility of a mecha, which can in theory move in an unpredictable manner to present a more difficult target and/or dodge incoming fire. In the context of 21st century projectile weapons, dodging such attacks would be just as absurd as any human being able to do so. However, it would be possible for mechas to reduce their targetability through agility. In order to accomplish this, a mecha would need to have a range of motion very similar to a human being. This range of motion precludes the battlefield use of the vast majority of mecha depictions, which tend to be limited in range of movement (like BattleTech mechs) or which have mechanical control systems that limit the range of movement by limiting the range of controls.

Linear top speed is another restriction upon mechas, as they would be limited both in how quickly their legs could cycle while running, and by the amount of stress the legs could take from impacts on the ground while doing so (to say nothing of how the ground would react!). This restriction could be mitigated by the use of an alternate mode of travel, but the frequent depiction of flying as this secondary mode would likely turn a battlefield into a trap shoot for opposing units. Another solution would be the use of a secondary means of locomotion (in addition to walking), such as feet mounted wheels or treads, as seen in Front Mission and Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex, or the SMS, or Secondary Movement System of Heavy Gear.

Another advantage stressed is the higher clearance a mecha has compared to the relatively low profile tank. Its higher vantage point allows it to see farther into the horizon, shoot farther, and at better angles. However, this is also a disadvantage, as a mecha presents a much larger target profile as a result of its stance. Raising a mech's clearance increases its frontal projection area, making it a very obvious, and easy to hit target. The stance of a mecha also means that the use of armour for protection-by-deflection would not be of use, as armour plates are more likely to be "square on" to incoming fire from the ground. Oddly, the opposite could be said to be true of incoming fire from the air.

Utilitarians also point out that a mech's leg drive system would be far too complex and costly to be practical on the battlefield. Simply destroying a leg in combat, (a relatively easy thing to do, considering its size compared to a tank's tread), would also render the mecha immobile and out of action. This is in contrast to a tank's tread system, which is easy to repair and replace should the need arise. Another criticism involves a mecha's inherently poor stability. A tank is very low, and close to the ground which not only makes it harder to hit, but makes it very stable. A mecha is tall and can easily fall down, making it extremely vulnerable if not completely useless. Because of this, recoil becomes a serious factor when mounting high caliber weapons on a mech. The M1 Abrams tank mounts a M256 120 mm gun which produces considerable recoil. Such a weapon mounted on the chassis of a mech could possibly knock it down. This limits the potential arsenal a mech can carry, which is in stark contrast to mecha depicted in fiction where their arsenals are usually more varied and powerful than their tank counterparts. Some argue that the speedy and varied adaptability of a mech's posture can be the key to let a mecha to use even more powerful weapons than a tank. Depending on how weapons on a mecha are mounted, the mech could dynamically adapt leg and body posture and body weight distribution to absorb the recoil energy progressively and dynamically (ie. laying down prone or bracing the recoil with a wide stance). However this solution means the mecha typically can not move while bracing for recoil, unlike a tank which can shoot and move at the same time, an extremely important tactical advantage.

The biggest advantage the current main battle tanks, such as the M1 Abrams have is that they would require far fewer logistical requirements.

Grow up.

[Arrian]

@ thread.

-Arrian

[Az]

I am talking about solid substance.
If you were such a specialist in the topic, you'd know that UV rays can't pass solid substance while nanorobots can assumed they can dissolve target matter.

YES IT CANNOT TRAVEL THROUGH SOLID SURFACE. I DO IMAGINE THAT THE ROBOTS AREN'T OPERATING INSIDE SOLID MATTER, BUT INSIDE THE ATMOSHPERE. THEREFOR, NANOROBOTS WILL HAVE TO PASS THIS GASEOUS MEDIUM. THUS THEY'LL BE EXPOSED TO UV

1. Is it going to be made up of carbon fiber?
Explosives? Reactor? other parts?

Carbon Fiber will make the majoirty, and carbon fiber is lighter than 3.5-3.2. I've factored metal parts in.

2. 500 / 3 = 167.. A pretty big and heavy human.

And america is filled with potholes due to fat people sinking in, right? WRONG.

The major advantage usually cited promoting mecha over tanks

a 3 meter-tall , 500kg machine replacing battle tanks? never said that.

[binTravkin]

I DO IMAGINE THAT THE ROBOTS AREN'T OPERATING INSIDE SOLID MATTER

Yes, you imagine.
Shows your lack of kowledge and understanding on the topic.

And america is filled with potholes due to fat people sinking in, right? WRONG.

And american fat people run around difficult terrain, at high speeds jumping, shooting and doing other crazy things.
They're perfectly suited for that, right? WRONG.

Carbon Fiber will make the majoirty, and carbon fiber is lighter than 3.5-3.2. I've factored metal parts in.

A Handheld Bazooka weighs no less than 8kg, one it's missile weighs around 5kg.
A handheld Gatling gun (EDIT: although the concept is fantastic, let's assume mechas actually can do it ) weighs no less than 10kg, one it's bullet weighs 50-100g (let's assume it's 100g, as of bigger caliber and to be round value).
Now lets imagine a mech needs to fight for an hour (which would be a minimum requirement I think):

20 bazooka missiles
2000 bullets for gatling (assuming fire rate 200 rpm, which is not high for gatling)

20 * 5 = 100
2000 * 0.1 = 200

Ammunition = 300kg

Heavy parts as engine?
Energy source (be it a battery/reactor or simply fuel)

Meanwhile tank with the same pressure on soil can weigh up to 50tons and more having in it more than 10k rounds of machinegun bullets, around 100rounds for it's main gun and fuel for a week's operation.

a 3 meter-tall , 500kg machine replacing battle tanks?

..since they'll just operate giant mechas from a distance.

Any mecha would fail to a same size tank as the source suggests (yet you seem to be rating yourself smarter than any source).