X-Message-Number: 32968
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 11:06:22 -0400
From: "Perry E. Metzger" <>
Subject: Can Mark Plus tell us what the "Physically Dubious Assumption...
References: <>

> Subject: Charles Babbage analogy
> From: MARK PLUS <>
> 
> In Cryonet #32949, Gerald Monroe writes:
> 
> http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/dsp.cgi?msg=32951
> 
> >How many years typically passed between when writers and
> >scientists of the past accurately described a technology and when
> >it was first prototyped?  For instance, Babbage's analytical
> >engine was described in 1837 (refined until his death in 1871) and
> >the first mechanical computer that was comparable was the German
> >Z1, completed 1938. 101 years.
> 
> One, Babbage's machine would probably work because its design
> doesn't make physically dubious assumptions.

Can you specifically state the EXACT physically dubious assumptions
made by those who believe molecular manufacturing is possible?
Asserting they exist is not sufficient. Those making a scientific
claim are obligated to state that claim sufficiently clearly that
others can verify or refute the claim.

Drexler, Merkle, Freitas, Allis and others who have published in this
field have stated their claims clearly enough that others can verify
or refute them. If you believe there is a problem in any of their
papers, lets hear it stated clearly.

So what are these exact "physically dubious assumptions"? Tell us
EXACTLY. After a dozen or so exchanges in this thread, you haven't yet
told us.

Perry
-- 
Perry E. Metzger		

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32968