[ExI] nanogeezers again
spike66 at att.net
Wed Mar 22 02:51:51 UTC 2017
From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Mike Dougherty
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2017 7:30 PM
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Subject: Re: [ExI] nanogeezers again
On Mar 21, 2017 3:36 PM, "spike" <spike66 at att.net <mailto:spike66 at att.net> > wrote:
The second tallest one is the height of a standard AA battery. All have the same base length one inch.
Now I am rethinking my original idea for a containment device…
>…I'm no engineer, but for a 'containment device' have you considered "a box"?
Ja, the idea was to create a compartmented clear plastic container with one nanogeezer in each compartment, then create a mechanism which would shake vigorously, stop, take a photo from the underside of the container, write software to decide if it is seeing a square or a triangle, let it run for a few days, get perhaps a few tens of thousands of trials.
I thought of an alternative which does not require me to master image recognition software but it is so low tech it embarrasses me. I run the device with an ordinary digital video camera, post the video to any public site, ask volunteers to take a segment of video, record start time and end time, do the identification of each compartment as square or triangle the old-fashioned way with those two bio-cameras in the head of the carbon-unit volunteer. So low-tech is this. But it has its advantages, such as…
…such as we can be the very first lifeforms in the history of life on this planet to know the answer to the burning question: what is the aspect ratio necessary to make a nanogeezer land on its square base 20% of the time? Philosophers have puzzled over this for millennia. The fate of the free world hangs in the balance.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat