Programming in Freespace

   After a previous post called "New Science How To Guide" I added a comment about Freespace Programming without truly clarifying this process.  I wasn't truly very clear about what this entails... it was only a rough hewn concept at that point. There is more to it now, conceptually.
    The concept of programmable freespace is similar to programmable matter. In a field of programmable matter called claytronics an object called a catom, which is essentially a nanoscale robot, is programmed to interact with other catoms. The nanoscale catoms interact like a swarm to form 3d objects. Theoretically any object could be made, as the catoms act like 3d pixels of real matter. This is still conceptual due to the extreme difficulty of making machines and computers on the nanoscale, let alone a whole robot. Regardless the macro-scale modules at Carnegie Melon University are making very interesting progress.
   Programmable freespace is akin to programmable matter, except that it involves manipulating freespace, which is also referred to as energy fields. The space surrounding matter is not empty, but actually contains fields that distort space-time itself. This is useful, but in most materials the fields are too weak to interact effectively to produce anything of interest to mankind. The fields that are strong enough to interact are the electric fields, magnetic fields, and the photon emissions known as electromagnetic waves.
   There are already many devices which are designed to interact with magnetic fields, these are the motors, solenoids, and actuators. However, there is also sciences which can be applied to moving fluids and gases without motors. These are electrohydrodynamics, and magnetohydrodynamics. Neither one of these fields takes into account computing principles or advanced principles interference of waves to produce targeted phenomenon.
     These targeted areas of high or low energy may be thought of as nodes. The location of nodes can be programmed in various ways depending on the design of the system. I've not gotten to schematics yet, but there are a wide variety of methods that could be used. When it comes down to it, the final answer choices will be about the underlying physics, the concept of programmable nodes of interactivity in freespace is still useful regardless of the methods.

   Applications...

   Believe it or not, the most interesting applications of this new concept are force fields, and invisibility cloaks. Matter based invisibility cloaking is being done currently, but is limited by wave length. Wave length shouldn't an issue with nodal lensing techniques, so all frequencies of visible light may be curved around the cloaked object the same way. Ballistic deflection (active deflection force field) would be done in a similar manner, by moving ballistics and their generated forces around an object. Nodal energies would have to be high enough to move ballistics in motion in a vector path away from the shielded object (this may imply different methods used for this application than the cloak, though the theory is the same.)

    The energy expenditure of effective force fields, and invisibility cloaks would necessarily be high due to these being active systems. Any system based on continuous usage of energy to generate large fields that deflect light or ballistics would be high. Usage of such technology, if it is pursued, then must be well managed. It is certainly going to be useful, regardless of what anybody may say of its drawbacks.
   
   

Declaration of Geekdom

    With all the hype in technology, it seems hard to believe, but humans
need a little development too. We are the technology, or rather, our understanding of the technologies enable them to be used. The most savvy, the most developed in these uses of technology are referred to as the geeks.

   I am one of these elite. I strive daily to understand where we are going in terms of technology and what we can do with it. Whenever the movement in technology is open, as it is starting to become, the geeks become the guidebook in what can be done with it.

    More importantly, when we connect, when we share, when we develop new things together, as a geekdom, then these things take a life of their own. This is the root of the open software, and the open hardware movements. This is the start of the maker movement, and without community, we cannot keep its ideals of openness, and collaboration.

   We must not be too guarded. We belong to the geekdom, and this is a community of friends and kindred spirits.

What is Enzyme Splicing?

     Enzyme-splicing (as I have called it, since before it was officially invented) is a gene editing technique using enzymes to remove or replace targeted genes. Responsibly used, it will solve some of the problems that are inherent with GMO's. Stability issues are resolved, problematic bacterial genes with unpredictable side effects are completely removed from the process.
    There are real issues that can be solved with genetics other than those traditionally solved with chemical agriculture. Growth issues for plants in poor soils can be resolved by reducing the uptake of growth inhibiting minerals or adding nodules to the roots similar to legumes (thus boosting nitrogen fixing w.o. the need for fertilizers). Water conserving traits found in weeds could be added to crops. Yield per measure of water could be increased, thus making farming cheaper.
    Responsibly enzyme-spliced genes are similar to (at least) millennium-old practices of selecting desired traits from crop plants and cross-breeding them. Some evidence exists that for grains at least, the manipulations of mankind predate recorded civilization.  Enzyme splicing is not traceable using the same techniques as bacterial splicing techniques.
   I regard enzyme splicing as the only technique that should be used to manipulate genes, other than the old hybridization techniques. But, as always, it should done responsibly. Our manipulations of nature may outlast us as a species. To deeply and fully consider a manipulation before it is made is always the best practice. Then, as always, test test test... before humanity is introduced to the effects of the manipulations.    

    Responsibility is key in these operations. I had, for many years, predicted the rise of this technology as a more responsible and safe form of genetics. This was before anyone was actually even doing this kind of splicing or even talking about it. Why did I know about it? Nature actually splices genes in this way (using enzymes) occasionally, and commonly blocks expression of genes this way (using enzymes). Nature has operated beautifully for a lot longer than mankind, I assume that it knows best in this case.

New Science How to Guide

Every once in a while scientific fields become so saturated and mature that progress seems impossible. What is needed is a new science. But inventing a science from scratch would take more than a lifetime and acceptance is unlikely. Fortunately, there is a solution. Areas of science that overlap are often under developed. They are also complex. With the science of heuristics, and isomorphic studies (universalization of patterns and rules, which are applicable to more than one area),  and lots of mathematical and concept based research new sciences are possible.

There is a caveat, however. Young sciences, like startup businesses, must behave differently than mature sciences. What is unproven must be tested, whether it's been done, or is thought to be practical. In other words, rather than the unproven being considered false, it is considered possible, if there is any way of approaching it experimentally left at all. This is one of the only ways to produce scientific progress. Scientific method is good for textbooks, but not an effective way of producing progress. The old empirical method of trial and error is best for producing progress in a young scientific field. This is equally true of the areas of overlap between seemingly mature sciences.

Another point to consider is, for a science to be considered and developed further in society, it must be useful in producing something new. With overlap, a lot of old things can be made more efficiently, but new possibilities produce interest. The science must also be relatively open... with no secrets or expensive textbooks. Amateurs often produce more results (with varying levels of success) than experts because they don't "know" that certain things aren't supposed to work. Whatever works, will work... let's just leave the testing to the experts.

Some work in developing these sciences can be done by putting the applicable math and physics in computer code or scripts. Making computer models is sometimes more possible than multibillion dollar projects for amateurs. If you don't know programming, there are many free resources online that teach it. Even free programming tools. Blender (the 3d modeling tool) is relatively open to being coded.. it seems to use python scripting. http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Doc:2.6/Manual

So to sum it up. Invent a new science by doing the following.

1. Pick two or more sciences with interesting areas of overlap.
2. Define the rules or criteria that enable the sciences to work together well.
3. Test new ideas and experiments to try. Or model them.
4. Viable sciences will create new things, and be able to be learned by an amateur community.

Last of all... if the science doesn't seem to be currently viable. Don't waste the effort that you've already put into it. It may make interesting stories, games or short youtube videos. The inspiration from amateur science may just be what we need to pull our little world from its current stagnation.

Light Sabers are for REAL now!

   I've talked to friends before about light sabers being theoretically possible. I imagined limits on them as being different than those imposed in the movies... perhaps magnetic containment would open the possibility. This new discovery moves beyond that imposed limit, because the photons contain themselves. Star Wars fans may delight in this new discovery as it is very similar to light saber "matter" in how it interacts with itself and solid objects.
   This may also open other previously impossible weapons such as photon torpedos. Space Age discoveries seem to be happening when many space missions are on hold. I can't wait to see what is coming next!

The Newest Thing: Light Sabers

Amateurs on the Rise

   Despite the job climate being cold to entry level applicants at best, many people are bravely trying their hand at new skills. Currently speaking, this looks like play. These skills become serious hobbies sometimes, and occasionally turn a small profit.
   Many people are attempting skill sets like 3d printing, programmable electronics (Arduino controllers), upcycling, home hydroponics (legit stuff, like gardening, but for techies), home solar projects (solar cooker, solar collector for home or water heating, home greenhouses,etc.), underground geothermal, home machine shop or woodworking, and many other serious skills (like biodiesel production). These are actually all upper end skills that relate in many ways to industry. Many of these small scale operations are new, and don't have a lot of proper support yet.
   There is a rising culture of self-sufficiency directly linked to these skills, this is often referred to as "DIY" or "Maker" culture. There are suppliers that have staked a claim in helping these hobbyists find supplies to make things. There are videos all over YouTube that instruct people on how to make things themselves (take care to make sure that your instructions are safe). There are instructions on how to make or do things on ehow.com and instructables.com. There are project ideas on pinterest.com, and on the many, many blogs out here on the internet.
  Historically, many things have started small. Science itself was very amateur-like when it started. Taking notes and keeping records helped, as well as communicating to each other effectively, in taking science to the next level. Industry sprung up from some innovative iron works in England, gradually working its way into every aspect of our lives, as its innovative ideas made producing goods more effective. Now it is time to start again. We need to have a grasp on the process of making things, and putting ideas into motion, for ourselves and with our own skills and minds. This is the time when we can rise or fall. Together we rise.

Makers Unite!

    DIY (maker) culture is gaining momentum. This is the critical period for makers to band together to make a change in society. There is no greater pride than making your own things. There needs to be more businesses   that cater to makers. There needs to be more makers turning their ideas into profits.

   This requires unity. The primary problem is that the profits are small. Advertising is prohibitive at the per item profits that can be made within this culture of household industry. This makes being a maker a hard sell, literally.

   This could easily be taken on. Sites for makers that sell products are out there (Etsy.com, Ebay, Amazon)

Amazon DIY
Etsy.com
Ebay DIY

Partnership, funding, advertising all offer possibilities for return on investment. We need growth. Makers can provide it, they just need help. Just putting it out there.

To the Moon

Analysis has lately revealed that the current state of the satellites falls far short of what it should.

Satellite Crisis via PBS.org

The thing is, I knew that it would be this way. One indicator was economy. The other was the de-emphasis of the space program.
My thought on this was that a moon base partially solves the problem. A moon base can contain a larger number of instruments, is farther from the Earth and will not ever fall to Earth in our lifetime, can involve many collaborators and benefit all countries involved. I am convinced that weather monitoring will be as effective from the moon as from an orbital position, and that any working satellites could be more effective with data gathered from a moon base.

A moon base may have other offerings as well. A magnetic launch system from a low gravity object such as the moon would be very effective, and can accelerate modular objects used for space mining (which may even be assembled on the moon base itself by a human crew). This saves fuel to reach a planet for gravitational acceleration and can reach high speeds with low energy. So, inevitably, a moon base would save money on space mining operations.

A moon base may also be a good foundation for the theoretical space tourism industry. The moon may be a more popular destination if there is something there other than moon rocks.

 So, economically speaking, the moon is a better option than dozens of satellites. It is more permanent, more versatile, generates less space junk, and is a stepping stone to projects in deeper space. So, let's go to the moon!