Re: Nanotechnology "X Prize"

From: Russell Wallace (wallacethinmintr_at_eircom.net)
Date: 10/28/04 

Date: 28 Oct 2004 16:40:48 GMT

On 28 Oct 2004 05:41:09 GMT, Jim Logajan <JamesL@lugoj.com> wrote:

>Even a trillion (either 10^18 or 10^12, depending on which side of the
>Atlantic you're on, it seems) binding operations a second wouldn't be all
>that profitable - it'd still take days or years to build anything of
>reasonable size. Enter, as always, the need for exponential growth provided
>by the infamous self-replicating assembler.

(These days - i.e. since a few decades ago - a trillion is 10^12 on
this side of the Atlantic too.)

Of course, at that rate it would take an unreasonable length of time
to make anything macroscopic...

But even a microscopic thing could be valuable if it were, say, a
molecular electronic computer, or a trillion molecules of some
sufficiently specific anticancer drug. And I think those things are
going to be a lot easier to build than a self-replicating diamondoid
assembler - and therefore worth aiming for first. 

-- 
"Always look on the bright side of life."
To reply by email, remove the small snack from address.