The idea of programmable matter is cool as fuck Basically a swarm of nanorobots that can be controlled to form three-dimensional shapes
I've done a bit of research and found some work done and now I believe it is possible to develop both the hardware and software to be able to make programmable matter.
The possibilities for this technology would be limitless - what do you guys think about this/should i keep looking into it?
Also I found that DARPA sponsored research into it so maybe that's why I can't find any recent work surrounding it
>Also I found that DARPA sponsored research into it so maybe that's why I can't find any recent work surrounding it o the contrary, DARPA funded stuff tends to be openly published.
Jace Morales
yeah I found some stuff at MIT and carnegie mellon
claytronics and modular robotics
Aaron Sanders
Replicators
Ian Foster
You can use Lisp to program molecules for bioengineering using Clasp:
I will personaly give you $500 if you can make 2 nanobots that can assemble like this. Its fucking impossible and not even your idea. This was the plot of several movies
Sebastian Carter
I would like to think in the future it would be worth more than $500 dollars
Of course it's not my idea I just started looking into current research on it
People have made larger scale versions of the technology (around a millimeter in size) but are working on scaling it down and getting the software to work in unison
2 working together isn't the hard part it's getting like 2 million to work together
That's not anything like what you're describing dude.
Adrian Lewis
in what way? thats what im talking about
Luke Jenkins
Checked Arxiv?
Isaiah Brooks
haven't yet no - is there stuff there?
Julian Campbell
Seems like a terrible idea. Considering the first computer viruses were basically just written by nerds asking "what if I wrote a program that writes copies of itself"? It wouldn't be long before someone came along and fucked up the whole planet.
We need either: >1 - Better power sources that can be scaled down to that extent >2 - Wireless energy transfer Without #1 or #2, you're just making glorified toys.
Charles Richardson
>>hardware so how are you going to make nanobots user? For that matter, how do you get robots to reliably stick and unstick to each other? You need this to be VERY RELIABLE. Millions of robots means millions of things can go wrong. >>software it has recently been demonstrated that simple graident formation alogrithms do not scale to swarms of thousands of robots. Individually rare hardware errors can cause cascading failures. ssr.seas.harvard.edu/files/ssr/files/aamas2017-gauci.pdf In other words, making the software might be incredibly hard.
Alexander Fisher
no we don't. Your robots can connect to each other and share power. For power sources, you can have big, battery bogdabots, whose sole purpose is to serve as batteries.
a more practical idea is that of lattice robots. You have a passive lego like lattice that robots can crawl around in to move lego blocks around. It may not transform as fast, but it can still transform. Lattice structures can be fairly stiff and strong too
if you make your lego blocks small enough they can be things like motors, transistors, insulator, metal, and from that you can make damn near anything. Meaning you could make this: Mit's doing that right now. cba.mit.edu/docs/papers/17.04.11.SelfAssemSpacecraft.pdf
