Posted by Per Corell on October 25, 2002 at 13:46:10:
In Reply to: 3D honeycomb posted by Manuel Oliveros on October 25, 2002 at 09:56:25:
Thank's for the positive critics ; as I understand your point, technology are progressing as now clean surfaces and processes in gravity space, put a glue to anything. it proberly will but just making what allready is, can't be that good an idear ; the academics are right even they even never got to even use the options pressent, but acturly I question the idear, to take 10 steps not knowing where lead. To form you need tools, if a house are somthing cultural it do matter that possible technikes are present mainly they don't ,without digital tools, you Romans don't question arab culture goods like reading and writing , and still you turn one direction only. This is what I think about architecture applications , my 3D-Honeycomb are acturly straiter than a russian architect rule, --- the one needing tree to hold and one to draw, to watch aso. with the rule leaving room for the fingers even to draw a strait line ;))
I will be glad the humans go to astroides, this I don't hide, my trust in technology are fully with any real new technology, right 3D-Honeycomb are straiter by math. describtion, to know it you just need a few easy functions copying to and from layers. Press the button and the results are yield on specific layers carrying the objects the order _I_ result. In nanno btw ; as I said, science and research don't do as it shuld yield and tha't becaurse of low fonding, keep dreaming.
Anyone in the group know it is like this, I hope I do remember to exchouse this pony of mine, but maby the description alone, of a method that make anything a third the cost, with the hardware and software avaible maby are a nearer option, than doing bicycles with G-Free welding as if anyone live in bad old buildings, then the bit's get wet. Right ------- you romans want the F-117 and you just heard about the horseless truck. Want a cheap nice cabin anywhere, order one and the framework will be there build halve the time, maby you don't know if you realy want it that shape, then the framework are the cheapest thing, as it is soooo cheap ;))
Isn't it ; one mashine instead of 100 and only sheet material producing framework for anything, ----- I try compensating with nice graphics ,this seem to carm most of you Romans ,but how to tell, this can not be different .
Anyway I don't know if the fancy nannoworks realy will perform handles for a single function somwhere, you better have tools to control it. ------ But what if what if in 500 years will grow a WTC copy in nanno steel, as they allready talked about 15 years ago, will make us suffer bad old nice houses, when better copies could be made a third the cost, leaving a few jobs and technologies by making sense to the material , is this so bad as Dot com firms Pyramides bound to work square . My point is, that getting there to be able to use the tools tha maby never be, as what you se could be somthing different than it show. Do you realy think we will get the tools of God, without earning it ;))
Just like that, when progress and develobment are the way to get there, I do not think so that's my trouble ,even I progress technology but I still care for reson, then I try look for the results and 500 or was it 1000 years of nanno research , before a building will raise by inner means controlled by what ?
I like when technology make structures possible across networks, now if we today shuld have the cosyest, strongest, safest house placed on a hill, then would you then think a house made with the avaible nanno technologies, would produce a better house ,than that out of 3D-H ;))
Sorry to the groupe I will try rest myself .
Once again ,thank's for the positive critic.
Free 3D Models