Please note that your COMMENTS are moderated.

On small MOBILE devices (e.g. smartphones), the MOBI version of the BLOG
will be automatically displayed to facilitate the reading.

"Let go - Let's go" is an engaging BLOG that discusses the past, the present, the future.

"Let go - Let's go" will share with you what we believe is important to be discussed, such as but not limited to, business, entrepreneurship, technology, finance, money, science, discoveries, health, sports, etc.

To explore the BLOG select a TOPIC in the right column.

NANOTECHNOLOGY might have been invented over 1600 years ago

from KHouse
Ecclesiastes 1:9 reminds us “Whatever has happened, will happen again; whatever has been done, will be done again. There is nothing new on earth” (ISV).
Most people would agree that we live in an age of technological innovation. However, some recent archeological discoveries may prove that some of this new technology may have been discovered centuries or even millennia before, only to be lost, until now.
Take for example a 1,600 year old cup discovered in the 18th century. The Lycurgus Cup named after the king depicted on the glass from the sixth book of Homer’s Iliad has fascinated scientists for decades. The unique properties from the glass allow the cup to change its color. In direct light the glass of the cup resembles jade, but when the light shines through the glass the cup turns to a translucent ruby color. This unusual optical effect is called dichroic.
The cup resides at the British Museum. They acquired it in 1958 from Lord Rothschild, who had it in the family for almost a century. Various studies were done on the cup since 1950, but a recent study has uncovered a technology that was thought to be a 20th century discovery.
After decades of study, scientists discovered tiny particles of silver and gold infused in the glass. Each gold and silver particle measured 50 nanometers in diameter. Scientists concluded in a 2007 research paper that even with modern power tools, this cup would take years to complete. Other cups similar to the Lycurgus Cup have been discovered by archeologists proving that Roman glass workers in 400 A.D. were the pioneers in nanotechnology.
The term nanotechnology describes building machines at a molecular level. K. Eric Drexler, an American engineer and a graduate from M.I.T, popularized the term, calling it molecular nanotechnology in the 1970s. The word nanotechnology is sometimes referred to as general technology because it can impact almost every industry.
The U.S. National Science Foundation describes nanotechnology like this:
“Imagine a medical device that travels through the human body to seek out and destroy small clusters of cancerous cells before they can spread. Or a box no larger than a sugar cube that contains the entire contents of the Library of Congress. Or materials much lighter than steel that possess ten times as much strength.”
The word “nano” comes from a Greek word that means “dwarf”. A nanometer is one billionth of a meter. In physical terms a nanometer is the breadth of three to four atoms placed side by side. The human hair is 50,000 nanometers in diameter.
Most experts have defined the parameters of nanotechnology that deal with anything measuring between 1 and 100 nanometers (nm). Anything above 100 nm is considered microscale and anything below 1 nm is considered the atomic scale.
Building nanomachines from the ground up starts with microscopic molecules called assemblers. It would require trillions of assemblers working simultaneously together to build one nanoscopic machine. The assemblers would also replicate themselves, building second and third generations of assemblers. Once enough assemblers have been replicated, they can begin to produce objects. The assemblers and replicators working together could eventually construct products that would replace human labor. This would decrease the cost of manufacturing consumer goods and make these goods plentiful, cheaper, and stronger. Famine would eventually be eradicated by food-fabricated machines to feed the hungry. Nano-surgery may be the next impact to the medical industry. Patients drink a fluid containing nanorobots programmed to attack and reconstruct the molecular structure of a cancer cell or virus. Nanorobots can also perform internal surgery without leaving external scars. The cosmetic surgery industry will take advantage of the technology to change a patient’s facial features, or eye color using nano-surgery robots. Nanorobots could replace dangerous jobs such as coal mining, oil drilling, tree-cutting, and removing contaminants from water sources and air.
Countries have invested billions of dollars into nanotechnology research for its potential use in military and industry applications. A 2012 report indicated that the U.S. has invested $3.7 billion through its National Nanotechnology Institute, followed by the European Union investing $1.2 billion and Japan with $750 million. Countries such as Bangladesh see a huge benefit from using nanotechnology for their agriculture. Scientists estimate that 70% of agriculture fertilizer is wasted from poor absorption, causing economic waste and environmental pollution. They believe that nanotechnology will increase fertilizer absorption and cause less environmental pollution.
The challenges, risks, and ethics involved with nanotechnology have caused medical doctors to worry if nanoparticles can cross the blood-brain barrier, protecting the brain from harmful chemicals in the bloodstream. Using nanoparticles in clothing and building materials may cause poison toxins to enter the human body. The immediate challenge with nanotechnology is to learn more about the materials and properties at the nanoscale. Some experts have warned scientists and politicians concerning the ethics behind using nanotechnology as a weapon. The concern lies in the fact that the question of ethics will occur after the weapon is built.
Using nanotechnology in the field of medicine also raises concerns about genetically changing the human body. This will open a Pandora ’s Box of creating transhumans. Experts argue that this technology will create a race of wealthy modified humans and a poorer population of unaltered people.
Eric Drexler has created another term called the “grey goo” scenario. He theorizes the dangers that may arise from malfunctioning self-replicating nanorobots destroying the planet. The grey goo scenario is an apocalyptic vision of trillions of nanorobots duplicating themselves by consuming carbon from the environment. In other words, synthesized material replacing organic material.
Related Links:

Quantum Theory: is the Universe not gravitationally but electrical?

from K-House

Ever since the birth of Quantum Theory there has been speculation—some privately held, some very public—of what the implications of the existence of quanta really means. As measuring devices improved dramatically, they provided more clarity to the issue. Today it is an accepted “truth” that everything is quantized. Energy (as well as length, time, and mass) exists in discrete quantities, divisions if you will.
There are also other side-effects to this discovery. Everything is “connected.” All particles on the quantum level know what the other particles are doing, regardless of distance, instantaneously. Let that sink in. Also, there is a size at which, when dividing the particle in half, it becomes “non-local.” It is nowhere and everywhere. Every measurement of the universe in which we reside has a “quantum limitation.”
Since what we know of reality is based solely on our perception (what we see, hear, feel, taste and smell), it appears there is a foundational structure upon which all of the details “hang.”
If we entertain the idea that the Universe is not gravitationally based but is electrical, it certainly would fit even our most common understanding of a computer-generated simulation. Because of the many difficulties with the gravitational model of the universe, many physicists are being convinced of an electrical model. Many of the issues concerning missing mass, celestial interactions, black holes and the abnormality of temperatures on our own Sun dissolve with the electrical theory.
There is a movie from a few years back (The Thirteenth Floor) in which the simulated characters of a simulated world are confronted with the fundamental limitations of their “reality.” Because of the limitations of structure, they were forced to conclude they were living within a “program” created by an outside source.
Ironically, this is where the physicists of our time find themselves. Disregarding what the Bible has said all along, of course, they are seeking to quantify and confirm the obvious, yet unwanted, conclusion to where the evidence is leading them. Like all good “scientists” they are trying to creatively foster any explanation other than a Creator that loves them and has been trying to inform them in every way possible.
The more they learn about the foundations of our reality, the more the idea of an underlying structure to space/time is confirmed. Millions of dollars are being spent in preparation for the design and construction of experiments to “test” the simulation theory.
Right now at the University of Bonn, nuclear physicist Silas Beane and some of his colleagues have come up with a test that exploits this feature of simulations; their need to be discretized, or quantized.
Beane and company believe we can test to see if the universe behaves the way we expect from theory, or the way we’d expect in a discretized model like a computer simulation. If the latter is true, it would provide evidence that we are all stuck in a simulation:
“In our universe, the laws of physics are the same in every direction. But in a grid, this changes since you no longer have a space-time continuum, and the laws of physics would depend on direction. Simulators would be able to hide this effect but they wouldn’t be able to get rid of it completely.”
Beane and company are testing by creating their own simulations. They are presently simulating quantum chromodynamics (QCD), which is the fundamental force in nature that produces the strong nuclear force among protons and neutrons, and to nuclei and their interactions. In place of the space-time continuum, they have designed tiny, tightly spaced cubic “lattices.” They call this “lattice gauge theory.” After observing their models, they then compare them to real world observations.
Interestingly, the researchers consider their simulation to be just a beginning. As computational development takes place, they envision more powerful versions in which molecules, cells, and even humans themselves might someday be simulated. But for now, they’re interested in creating accurate models of cosmological processes — and finding out which ones might show evidence of an underlying lattice.
On the possibility that we do live in a simulation he says, “There is a famous argument that we probably do live in a simulation. The idea is that in the future, humans will be able to simulate entire universes quite easily (approximately 500 years). And given the vastness of time ahead, the number of these simulations is likely to be huge. So if you ask the question: ‘Do we live in the one true reality or in one of the many simulations?’ the answer, statistically speaking, is that we’re more likely to be living in a simulation.”
The interesting analysis that drives them is that we have “noticed” that our reality has limitations. It is not a foregone conclusion that if some alien culture is behind this simulation, it would be constructed in a way we could understand it. Since we can, at least so far, understand its limitations, this means one of two things; either the designer is like us or it is constructed for our discovery. Either scenario causes secular scientists headaches. How could “they” be like us when they are capable of such technologies? And why would they care that we can discover limitations that should be invisible to the participant?
Many are seeing this edge of reality as an obstacle to be overcome. They talk of entering into the “real world” by their own intellect and effort. This is vaguely reminiscent of the Tower of Babel. As man stumbles forward, the higher probability is of misstep. If God acted at Babel to halt their development capabilities, what more could He have in store for us now?
Related Links:

To lighten your day.....

These are from a book called Disorder in the American Courts and are things people actually said in court, word for word, taken down and published by court reporters that had the torment of staying calm while the exchanges were taking place.

ATTORNEY: What was the first thing your husband said to you that morning?
WITNESS: He said, 'Where am I, Cathy?'
ATTORNEY: And why did that upset you?
WITNESS: My name is Susan!
ATTORNEY: What gear were you in at the moment of the impact?
WITNESS: Gucci sweats and Reeboks.
ATTORNEY: What is your date of birth?
WITNESS: July 18th.
ATTORNEY: What year?
WITNESS: Every year.
ATTORNEY: How old is your son, the one living with you?
WITNESS: Thirty-eight or thirty-five, I can't remember which.
ATTORNEY: How long has he lived with you?
WITNESS: Forty-five years.
ATTORNEY: This myasthenia gravis, does it affect your memory at all?
ATTORNEY: And in what ways does it affect your memory?
WITNESS: I forget..
ATTORNEY: You forget? Can you give us an example of something you forgot?
ATTORNEY: Now doctor, isn't it true that when a person dies in his sleep, he doesn't know about it until the next morning?
WITNESS: Did you actually pass the bar exam?
ATTORNEY: The youngest son, the 20-year-old, how old is he?
WITNESS: He's 20, much like your IQ.
ATTORNEY: She had three children , right?
ATTORNEY: How many were boys?
ATTORNEY: Were there any girls?
WITNESS: Your Honor, I think I need a different attorney. Can I get a new attorney?
ATTORNEY: How was your first marriage terminated?
WITNESS: By death..
ATTORNEY: And by whose death was it terminated?
WITNESS: Take a guess.
ATTORNEY: Can you describe the individual?
WITNESS: He was about medium height and had a beard
ATTORNEY: Was this a male or a female?
WITNESS: Unless the Circus was in town I'm going with male.
ATTORNEY: Is your appearance here this morning pursuant to a deposition notice which I sent to your attorney?
WITNESS: No, this is how I dress when I go to work.
ATTORNEY: Doctor , how many of your autopsies have you performed on dead people?
WITNESS: All of them. The live ones put up too much of a fight.
ATTORNEY: ALL your responses MUST be oral, OK? What school did you go to?
WITNESS: Oral...
ATTORNEY: Do you recall the time that you examined the body?
WITNESS: The autopsy started around 8:30 PM
ATTORNEY: And Mr. Denton was dead at the time?
WITNESS: If not, he was by the time I finished.
ATTORNEY: Are you qualified to give a urine sample?
WITNESS: Are you qualified to ask that question?
ATTORNEY: Doctor, before you performed the autopsy, did you check for a pulse?
ATTORNEY: Did you check for blood pressure?
ATTORNEY: Did you check for breathing?
ATTORNEY: So, then it is possible that the patient was alive when you began the autopsy?
ATTORNEY: How can you be so sure, Doctor?
WITNESS: Because his brain was sitting on my desk in a jar.
ATTORNEY: I see, but could the patient have still been alive, nevertheless?
WITNESS: Yes, it is possible that he could have been alive and practicing law.