Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

74 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Wow (4, Funny)

telchine (719345) | about a year ago | (#43301033)

Nanotechnology... the next big thing.

I'll get my coat

Re:Wow (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43301069)

Which one?

http://xkcd.com/90/

Re:Wow (1)

sanman2 (928866) | about a year ago | (#43309503)

Nanocoat is already a registered trademark of Nanotech Coatings Ltd

Re:Wow (5, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year ago | (#43301449)

Nanotechnology... the next big thing.

I'll get my coat

It sure does make for annoying headlines; but 'nanotechnology' is sort of a concept that is doomed by nature to be spread vacuously thin across all sorts of things, both incremental advances and more remarkable stuff.

There probably a material in existence whose bulk properties don't derive from its structure at a fine scale, so the entire history of fields like metallurgy is 'nanotechnology' in a weak sense. On the other hand, though, most of that history, even to the present for economically viable bulk production, is largely messing around with heating and cooling parameters, and throwing various trace impurities into the mix, and then hoping really hard that the right nanoscale structures self-assemble.

The real problem is deciding where to draw the line between 'yeah, it's "nanotech" in the vacuous sense that all materials engineering is' and 'actually "nanotech" in some sense that makes it worthy of the title'...

Re:Wow (1)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | about a year ago | (#43302445)

I just want to know when I can replace my riding outfit http://www.webbikeworld.com/r4/tourmaster-flex-le-jacket/ [webbikeworld.com] with something that's armored everywhere. The CE armor available only protects critical portions of the body. (kidneys, spleen, elbows, shoulders, basically) I want memory foam that protects everywhere!!

Re:Wow (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43303671)

I'm a high school student, and I get picked on a lot, so full body coverage will do wonders for me.

What is truly nanotech? (1)

girlinatrainingbra (2738457) | about a year ago | (#43303429)

re: but 'nanotechnology' is sort of a concept that is doomed by nature to be spread vacuously thin across all sorts of things
;>)
But being nanotechnology, by definition it will have to be able to spread wide and be just a nanometer high/thick, (right?), so that means "vacuously thin" == "less than one nanometer thickness".
.
Nanotechnology ought to be when the designing and engineering aspects are actually performed at the nano-scale level, not by standards procedures such as metallurgy and making carbon steel where the properties created are because of nano-scale changes anyway.
.
So maybe DNA design technology, or creating new ribosomes or new protein structures in a de novo synthesis could be something that's considered "real nanotech".
.
Wouldn't graphene sheets or graphene "nanotubes" or "buckminsterfullerenes filled with a bonus atom" be able to count as truly designed and engineered nanotechnology? I do agree with you that the term "nanotech" is being widely bandied about and abused.

Re:What is truly nanotech? (2)

angel'o'sphere (80593) | about a year ago | (#43303643)

"buckminsterfullerenes filled with a bonus atom" be able to count as truly designed and engineered nanotechnology?
They do. Just count the existing companies into nanotech. Most of them simply create nano particles, mainly for surface treatment of tools or windows and siilar things.

buildings... from explosions. ???? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43301117)

Is this in anticipation of a continuing successful american foreign policy or local political unrest. Either way I don't think nanofoams are going to save the day.

Re:buildings... from explosions. ???? (2, Insightful)

Hal_Porter (817932) | about a year ago | (#43301727)

I'm not American so far be it for me to tell you how to be American.

However there was a T shirt post 9/11 that said "I hope Allah has kevlar" that I feel summed up the sort of can do, batshit insane attitude we expect from Americans and from America.

You guys needs to be be Batman not Commissioner Gordon. We have loads of Commissioner Gordons that work within the rules with all the compromises that implies. Some problems need a rich psycho with an inflexible sense of morality and a load of gadgets.

And in any case the Jokers of this world are going to be blowing up shit no matter what America does. Look at the time line of AlQaeda attacks on the US.

Re:buildings... from explosions. ???? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43301807)

Wrong superhero.

That's the sort of ``anything goes'' attitude which results in the C.I.A. kidnapping people for ``enhanced interrogation''.

We need Captain America (or Superman if one wishes to stick w/ DC Comics). America needs to unambiguously be seen as the good guys, w/ no uncertainty as to our moral compass. If a thing isn't something one would want one's grandparents reading about in the newspapers, then it ought not be done. The first thing which needs to happen on that front is the C.I.A. needs to go back to the old guidelines on professions which they are _barred_ from using as fronts / cover:

  - aid workers
  - religious
  - medical personnel

One of the most reprehensible things which the C.I.A. ever did was use the sham of vaccinations which were used to gather DNA so as to locate people related to Osama Bin Laden.

Fighting Polio is a lot more important than fighting terrorism. Spreading justice and democracy and self-representation and self-sufficiency is the key to winning the war on terror.

Re:buildings... from explosions. ???? (2)

TheCarp (96830) | about a year ago | (#43302865)

Spot the fuck on.

I was agast when Secretarty of state Clinton said that doctor should be freed. What that man did would have been highly illegal here in the US, where we have specific patient medical records laws that specifically defend our right to privacy. It is disgusting that she would encourage and defend the violation of that right anywhere, for any reason. If anything, she should commend pakistan for punishing grievous violations of patient medical privacy rights.

Its sad when people in developing countries look at aid workers with a jaundiced eye and spread rumors about sham vaccination programs. Its an absolute travesty when their fears are justified.

Re:buildings... from explosions. ???? (1)

sanman2 (928866) | about a year ago | (#43309521)

You can fuck right off. That doctor was a hero for helping to track down Bin Laden, and the govt which punished him were assholes for giving sanctuary to Bin Laden, as well as countless other terrorists.

As an Indian, I'm really fed up with the RACIST WHITE LEFT who have decided to defend all things related to Islamic Terrorism - whether it's Bin Laden, AlQaeda, Taliban, or any other murderous jihadist. All you bastards do is smirk when these predators from Pakistan kill people in countries nextdoor. The same Pakistan which complains that its sovereignty is being violated by drones is busy violating the sovereignty of neighboring countries by murdering their citizens with its own terrorist drones.

The next RACIST WHITE LEFTY who sticks up for these mass-murderers is going to get a well-deserved beating from me.

Re:buildings... from explosions. ???? (1)

TheCarp (96830) | about a year ago | (#43311569)

I wasn't aware that patient medical data privacy and the international reputation of doctors and aid workers was a racist issue. So its racism not to say that we Americans should treat others the way that we insist that we be treated? Its racism to suggest that people in Pakistan deserve every bit as much honest medical care which respects their privacy and dignity in the same way that we here are supposed to get it?

Bottom line, what he did would have been a serious crime here in the US. Suggesting that we should hold ourselves up to our own standards in what we encourage be done to others is hardly racism.

Re:buildings... from explosions. ???? (1)

sanman2 (928866) | about a year ago | (#43313021)

Nope, the willful harboring and cultivation of terrorists is the main issue, and cannot be eclipsed by a mere use of a vaccination program to get those terrorists. The fact is that the blame for all of that should go onto those who have cultivated the terrorists as a weapon of war in the first place, since no counter-actions would have to be done if the perps hadn't perpetrated to begin with.

WHITE LEFTIES should not be reasoned with, and only have their faces bashed in, since they're just smirking on the inside and trying support their terrorist friends.

Re:buildings... from explosions. ???? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43312287)

You fail to understand the point. Doesn't matter who they were after. Using vaccinations to find him was wrong, period. We aren't defending your so-called predators (so-called until you cite), we are defending everyone.

Re:buildings... from explosions. ???? (1)

sanman2 (928866) | about a year ago | (#43312981)

No, I'm not going to jump thru hoops for you with citing. The facts have been cited too many times already for you to be ignorant of them. And your citing demand is just to make others go jumping thru hoops while you smirk. The best thing to do is to bash smirking bastards like you in the face first, and then cite. They're very real predators, and your saying otherwise doesn't change that.

Re:buildings... from explosions. ???? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43333049)

Sorry, you're trying WAY too hard. I can only give this a 2/10.

Re:buildings... from explosions. ???? (1)

Hal_Porter (817932) | about a year ago | (#43306479)

One of the most reprehensible things which the C.I.A. ever did was use the sham of vaccinations which were used to gather DNA so as to locate people related to Osama Bin Laden.

If you made a list of the most evil things the CIA have done or will do it wouldn't even make the top 100. Still a world with the CIA is a world remarkably free of existential threats to the US. Al Qaeda is no USSR and the USSR was not a threat in the way the Axis was.

The US basically has a policy of picking a bête noir and then stomping it at all costs. And it's pretty obvious that doing so leads to a gradual weakening of bête noir n+1 compared to bête noir n.

You're saying this is morally dubious but you understate things - it is actually fundamentally amoral. But that doesn't matter because America's opponents in this game are amoral too. Now I don't mean the Europeans - they're not even playing. Americas opponents are the bête noirs - totalitarian powers that challenge US hegemony. The Europeans are mere spectators.

Re:buildings... from explosions. ???? (2)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | about a year ago | (#43302527)

American superheros are out of style, and will soon be history. The emasculated administration of our schools are trying to have kids arrested for even thinking about anything heroic.

http://www.glennbeck.com/2013/03/04/indoctrination-kid-suspended-for-making-a-gun-out-of-a-pastry/ [glennbeck.com]

http://www.myfoxdc.com/story/20970646/ten-year-old-boy-arrested-after-toy-gun-found-in-his-backpack [myfoxdc.com]

Sorry, those are not my main, or favorite sources for news - but the liberal media doesn't seem to like those kind of stories.

I don't know where tomorrow's heroes will come from, but I'm afraid they won't be coming from the United States. Maybe Canada will step up to the plate. I can't imagine the UK taking our place, they already live in Orwelle's 1984. The British guy I work with says he tried to enlist. They hammered him with a psyche test, and one of the questions was, "Why do you want to be a soldier?" His honest answer, "I want to have a gun!" disqualified him. Not only did it disqualify him for military service, but apparently, the shrink came unglued on him.

Sad days ahead, I think, for the US and UK.

Re:buildings... from explosions. ???? (1)

khallow (566160) | about a year ago | (#43302781)

They hammered him with a psyche test, and one of the questions was, "Why do you want to be a soldier?" His honest answer, "I want to have a gun!" disqualified him. Not only did it disqualify him for military service, but apparently, the shrink came unglued on him.

I've heard similar stories of railroad employment. People who love trains are considered anathema. I guess the theory is that they're going in with all sorts of ridiculous expectations and are going to think "Damn, this isn't like my model train set" or something. Or maybe it's because people who love their job make things hard for the people just trying to get by via milking the system.

Re:buildings... from explosions. ???? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43303013)

Umm, it is easy enough to find those stories in other sources.

The first one [huffingtonpost.com] , and the second one [washingtonpost.com] .

And those stories seem to be a non sequitar from your starting point. I do think the administration should not have reacted as it did in both stories, and I have nothing against guns... but kids getting in trouble for waving around a toy gun is not getting "arrested for thinking of anything heroic." Either you are knowingly exaggerating or stretching your point, or you have a twisted sense of what it means to be heroic and I would hope to never be around you with a gun (regardless if I had mine or not...).

Re:buildings... from explosions. ???? (1)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | about a year ago | (#43303345)

Huh, wut?

You mighta sorta had a point - until that last sentence. WTF?

Re:buildings... from explosions. ???? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43304877)

Either much of your post was completely disconnected from your starting point that, " administration of our schools are trying to have kids arrested for even thinking about anything heroic," in which case you disingenuously used the starting point to bolster and segue into some off-topic rant. Or you think there is an actual connection between what those kids did and "anything heroic." So is some kid waving around a toy gun supposed to be an example of thinking of doing something heroic? Because if so, I wouldn't want to be anywhere near someone who thinks just flashing and waving around a gun is an example of heroic thinking.

Re:buildings... from explosions. ???? (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year ago | (#43303153)

Look at the time line of AlQaeda attacks on the US.

They will do it with weapons and money we are giving to them now, and the only unknown (to us) will be who gives the order.

Re:buildings... from explosions. ???? (1)

lgw (121541) | about a year ago | (#43305661)

Heh, Commissioner Gordon compromised about as much as Batman did - read (or watch) Batman Year One sometime. Same inflexible sense of morality (that wasn't exactly a normal person's), just fewer gadgets.

The "dicks, pussies, assholes" rants in Team America World Police explain the point I think you're making better than anywhere else I've seen.
 

I know where they got inspired (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43301121)

http://nick.mtvnimages.com/nick-assets/video/images/spongebob-squarepants/knight-shining-pants-1.jpg?format=jpeg&matteColor=white

Troy Hurtubise (3, Informative)

50000BTU_barbecue (588132) | about a year ago | (#43301151)

Didn't he come up with something like this? Or am I misremembering one of his inventions? I recall someone putting a mound of shaving cream-looking stuff on a bomb and it went phut instead of boom. Then I remember Hurtubise demonstrating armor by being shot at.

Re:Troy Hurtubise (2)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | about a year ago | (#43301539)

Troy's had several inventions regarding armours and protection. His 1313 laminated plating resisted consecutive sniper rifle rounds to the same location (not possible with current armours), though I don't know of any public demonstration footage of this, as well as explosive charges larger than typical RPGs. His Firepaste, though, has protected his own face from a torch supposedly hotter than re-entry temperatures, footage of which is on YouTube.

He also constructed a supposedly 97% coverage body armour ("Trojan") with lots of little gizmos included, and allowed almost totally unrestricted movement. No idea if it actually worked or was demonstrated.

Just search Google for his name; The articles are numerous.

Re:Troy Hurtubise (1)

dbIII (701233) | about a year ago | (#43302725)

Suggesting it is one thing, I could have suggested it when playing with projectiles hitting powdered metal in 1990 (and so could many others going back decades more - it's pretty obvious if you look at shock waves in some materials and it's really just like a kevlar vest on a micro scale), implementing it is harder.

Buildings smuildings (4, Insightful)

shione (666388) | about a year ago | (#43301153)

I can see a lot better use for this than putting it on buildings. How often do buildings in the first world get bombed anyway and what affect will it have on demolishing them when needed? Put them in carparks, as crash barriers and traffic devices, even fencing walls, anything to hold cars back so they cannot cause greater damage to others.

Re:Buildings smuildings (2)

gstoddart (321705) | about a year ago | (#43302229)

I can see a lot better use for this than putting it on buildings. How often do buildings in the first world get bombed anyway and what affect will it have on demolishing them when needed?

Are you seriously suggesting we stop panicking about unlikely things now? Because Western governments have spent the last decade fostering the panic, and I can't see them stopping any time soon. It's how they get away with everything these days, by invoking terrorism, child porn, or copyright infringement.

How often has the TSA found someone trying to blow up a plane?

There's simply too much money at stake to start winding down panic over activities which are low probability.

Re:Buildings smuildings (1)

khallow (566160) | about a year ago | (#43302687)

I can see a lot better use for this than putting it on buildings.

Sounds like they're angling for some TSA money. Probably not a good sign for the long term viability of the technology (or the US economy for that matter).

Re:Buildings smuildings (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43303101)

It would depend on the details of the material. It might not be that useful for something like a car impact, at least as far as helping the people in the car. The material itself is more resistant to damage and can help spread impact forces over a larger area. But whatever is being hit still has to handle those forces, and dissipate a significant portion of them. This is great for a structure where it can handle a lot of large forces against a wall, but the material of the wall may fail if lot of force is focused on a smaller area. Maybe it would help structures survive impact by cars, although concrete already does that and might be cheaper in the end, even if it has to be repaired after every accident. And the people in the car might not benefit if the crumple zones already come close to maximizing he distribution and dissipation of energy involved.

Re:Buildings smuildings (1)

theIsovist (1348209) | about a year ago | (#43304425)

Buildings don't get bombed that often, but that doesn't mean it's not worth it to do so. All major government buildings are required to have blast resistant exteriors, and other facilities, such as factories often have blast resistant materials because, well, things sometimes explode unexpectedly. The point of the blast resistance is entirely there to protect the person. You want to minimize the amount of shrapnel that occurs when the material is hit by a strong force. In this case, with the foam, it could help disperse the force of blast, resulting in less damage, less shrapnel, and hopefully less structural damage.

As for demolition - buildings are gutted before demolition. There's a lot of scrap material that can be recycled or reused. There's also a lot of material that you don't want being blown out of the building when the charges go off. So a good portion of the demo work is stripping the building down to its structure. Blast proof material would be removed for many reasons, but in particular, you wouldn't want to mess with the precise calculations that go into dropping a building straight down.

No real details about these... (5, Interesting)

Lumpy (12016) | about a year ago | (#43301175)

I would LOVE for them to figure out a better foam for armor for us motorcyclists. Right now we have standard polymer foams in our armor, but I would love some effective stuff that is thinner fill in the non impact points for extra protection. Right now I have thick CE rated foam armor in impact locations that also has kevlar on the outside, but I would love to have a reactive foam for a backboard that is flexible normally but solidifies into a backboard when the texting bimbo in the minivan runs me off the road and I come off the bike.

Current motorcycle armor is effective, but it could be better.

Re:No real details about these... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43301231)

Think of the kidney donor list! Some of them might be children!

Re:No real details about these... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43301245)

3DO or Sastec it's already available.

(Expensive though)

Re:No real details about these... (3, Interesting)

1369IC (935113) | about a year ago | (#43301271)

These things tend to make their way into industry, but it'll take a while. ARO funding university work is usually a first step in the process, but at the end, if it works out, it gets transitioned to industry in one form or fashion. For example, flexible display research started out with Army funding and there was a consortium with universities and industry. Here's a story. [wired.com] You can see they started working on it in '04, the article is from '08 and they're not at Best Buy just yet. Full disclosure: The Army Research Office is part of the Army Research Lab, which is part of the command I work in, the Research, Development and Engineering Command. We taxpayers fund a lot of research.

Re:No real details about these... (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year ago | (#43301395)

I would LOVE for them to figure out a better foam for armor for us motorcyclists.

Try sintered armorgel! "Feels like gritty jello, protects like a stack of telephone books."

Re:No real details about these... (1)

Xest (935314) | about a year ago | (#43302297)

"I would love to have a reactive foam for a backboard that is flexible normally but solidifies into a backboard when the texting bimbo in the minivan runs me off the road and I come off the bike."

Does she do this often? Have you considered contacting the police?

Re:No real details about these... (1)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | about a year ago | (#43302585)

Yes, she does this often. And, she's EVERYFRIGGINGWHERE!! People who normally drive sensibly and without distractions often fail to see a motorcycle. Such people are rarer and rarer all the time.

Re:No real details about these... (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | about a year ago | (#43303403)

Yes, she does this often. And, she's EVERYFRIGGINGWHERE!! People who normally drive sensibly and without distractions often fail to see a motorcycle. Such people are rarer and rarer all the time.

Current research actually indicates that this is true - drivers in 4 wheeled vehicles are typically looking for drivers in other 4-wheeled vehicles and they will miss those in smaller 2-wheeled vehicles because they're not expecting to see them (their typically smaller profile doesn't help, either). And it also is perfectly normal human behavior, either. It's why car drivers fail to spot motorcyclists and cyclists, why cyclists get doored, etc.

It's the same reason why someone can be looking for something despite said item being right in front of them, or if you're coding, failing to see an obvious bug in the code.

There's very little that can be done about it, either. Sometimes with training it can be alleviated somewhat, but not eliminated (it's part of the brain's way to cope with the deluge of optical information that comes in - it's filtered before processing).

Short of making your motorcycle look like a car, there's very little you can do other than be proactive and assume you're invisible. Even loud pipes doesn't solve the problem (the brain filters out rhythmic audio as well - as anyone who's realized that their playlist ended hours earlier can attest).

Try to be where people expect vehicles (people expect vehicles to be in lanes, not between them), assume no one can see you or hear you which means if you see someone turning left, be cautious and be prepared to stop, horn, or make an unexpected detour. And where merging happens as well - it's easy to spot someone who looks like they've got a plan and assume you'll be cut off.

Being wronged is far better than dead right. Or even injured - you may have right of way, but still better to be intact and uninjured than assert your rights and have to end up in the hospital and deal with insurance and other time-consuming issues.

Re:No real details about these... (1)

Lumpy (12016) | about a year ago | (#43311125)

Which is why I have 145DB of air horns on my bike. I have actually scared a woman swerving into my lane so badly that her cellphone went out the window. I smiled for the rest of the day.

Problem is "loud pipes" are a wimply little girl solution as they are only 102db and behind the bike and are designed more for "look at me! look at me!" attention whores and are useless for safety. but airhorns mounted up by the headlight that will scare someone inside a BMW with the windows rolled up is a fantastic solution.

Mount two of these on your motorcycle and take back your lane. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLCB2nuVqj4 [youtube.com]

Re:No real details about these... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43312351)

This is my problem with the idiots that ride bicycles on the road. Sure, it is legal, but you've got to be dumber than a bag of hammers to do it. I just hope they get run over before they have children, so their dumbass doesn't propagate.

Re:No real details about these... (1)

Lumpy (12016) | about a year ago | (#43311097)

Yes I have, problem is the police refuse to pull over all minivans and SUV's.

Re:No real details about these... (1)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | about a year ago | (#43302557)

I'll ditto that. In fact, I posted above. CE armor is alright, but it only covers a few vital points. I hope that when I go skidding down the road on various parts of my body, all of those parts are covered. That's pretty unlikely though!

Re:No real details about these... (1)

rocket rancher (447670) | about a year ago | (#43302597)

Well, foam is pretty much just air, so why not use just air, then? And that is exactly what companies like Alpinestars and Dainese have been producing for a while now for professional motorcycle racers -- air bag suits. When Carlos Checa clipped Marco Melandri last month in the opening race of the 2013 World Superbike season, they were both wearing air bag suits. Checa wears one from Alpinestars, and Melandri wears one from Dainese. Both companies have transferred their track-developed air bag technology to their street lines, so its available to the general public. Like you, I'd love thinner and lighter armor in my leathers, and air bags seem to address the flexibility and mass issues that pro riders (and amateur canyon carvers like me) care about. The key is realizing that you need armor only if you come off your bike. The real win with air bag technology is that it is deployable on demand, which means it is *way* easier for the suit safety engineers to work around the flexibility issues, because flexibility stops being an issue when you are not in control of the bike anymore. And as far as lightness goes -- a small cylinder of compressed nitrogen, the flexible bladders stitched into the suit at all impact points, and the multi-axis accelerometer to trigger it all masses about as much as a single CE-rated kevlar-laced knee slider.

Re:No real details about these... (1)

Lumpy (12016) | about a year ago | (#43311137)

I already have a neck restraint that inflates if I come off the bike rapidly. I have seen the other jackets like that but none in real tests They need to do crash tests on motorcycle racers before I drop $1100 for a jacket.

Re:No real details about these... (1)

DarthBling (1733038) | about a year ago | (#43303103)

Probably not quite what you're looking for, but have seen the armor made by Forcefield [forcefieldbodyarmour.com] ? Their back protector is soft and flexible, but it hardens up in a impact. It may not offer you quite the same level of protection from piercing damage as hard shelled armor, but it's every bit as good if not better for blunt force. ATGATT!!

Overpressure or impact (1)

kqc7011 (525426) | about a year ago | (#43301199)

This looks more like a better packing material than body armor. I do not see how this would work for stopping a smaller high speed trajectile. I do see this used for the replacement of some types of open and closed cell foams.

Re:Overpressure or impact (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43301341)

I do not see how this would work for stopping a smaller high speed trajectile.

It probably wouldn't, rather, you'd still need ceramic plates to stop powerful projectiles.

This would replace the kevlar, which is presently placed behind ceramic plates to protect the wearer from spalling.

Re:Overpressure or impact (2)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year ago | (#43301429)

Given that TFA specifically name-checked 'Traumatic brain injury', it would appear that both "body armor" and "better packing material" are valid interpretations. They aren't looking to defeat penetrators(at least not notably better than existing systems); but are aiming to do something about the fact that dangerously powerful shockwaves propagate just fine through armor designed against fragments and less-zealous bullets.

How many licks does it take to get to the center.. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43301247)

Wouldn't this foam work better if the empty spaces were filled with a compressible liquid?

Re:How many licks does it take to get to the cente (4, Funny)

lxs (131946) | about a year ago | (#43301343)

I think you'd first have to invent a compressible liquid. Most liquids are characterized by being barely compressible. even in high pressure hydraulics the liquid is only compressed by one or two percent.

Re:How many licks does it take to get to the cente (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43301465)

I think you'd first have to invent a compressible liquid.

How about gas?

Re:How many licks does it take to get to the cente (3, Interesting)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about a year ago | (#43301597)

Wouldn't this foam work better if the empty spaces were filled with a compressible liquid?

How about gas?

What do you think the "empty" space in a foam is filled with?

Re:How many licks does it take to get to the cente (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43301741)

What do you think the "empty" space in a foam is filled with?

Hookers.

Re:How many licks does it take to get to the cente (5, Funny)

al.caughey (1426989) | about a year ago | (#43302101)

What do you think the "empty" space in a foam is filled with?

My socks that go missing from the laundry?

Re:How many licks does it take to get to the cente (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year ago | (#43303191)

If the "empty" space in a foam is filled with anything, is it really "empty"? It could be filled with holes, but how many would it take?

Re:How many licks does it take to get to the cente (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43305171)

If the "empty" space in a foam is filled with anything, is it really "empty"? It could be filled with holes, but how many would it take?

Classic semiconductor physics...

Re:How many licks does it take to get to the cente (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43301685)

Gasses are fluids, not liquids.

Re:How many licks does it take to get to the cente (1)

RaceProUK (1137575) | about a year ago | (#43301815)

I think you'd first have to invent a compressible liquid.

How about gas?

Gas is a fluid, but is isn't a liquid.

Re:How many licks does it take to get to the cente (1)

Khashishi (775369) | about a year ago | (#43301899)

But the main difference between gas and liquid is compressibility.

Re:How many licks does it take to get to the cente (1)

Bengie (1121981) | about a year ago | (#43302479)

Ever try to set liquid fuel on fire? I think there are other properties than just "compressibility" that define gases and liquids.

Re:How many licks does it take to get to the cente (1)

RaceProUK (1137575) | about a year ago | (#43302641)

But the main difference between gas and liquid is compressibility.

Not denying that :)

Gas (1)

phorm (591458) | about a year ago | (#43303419)

Hmmm... well it does seem an awful lot comes out from a tiny cavity, but if it's liquid then you'd better change your underw...

Oh, wait. You probably meant gasoline/petrol? Not something I'd want to have embedded in the nanogaps of my clothing etc though.

this is gOatSex (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43301393)

knows that ever have somebody just you can. No, Kdeep unnecXessary

Heard years back about US football padding (1)

dpilot (134227) | about a year ago | (#43302673)

That padding was something like an arms race. Basically the players hit each other to some sort of tolerable pain level. Add better padding, to hopefully reduce injuries, and as a side-effect that reduces the pain from a given hit force. Since the pain was reduced, it's obviously a call to increase the hit force.

In essence, the improved padding simply increased the violence level, by making the increased violence physically tolerable. Nanofoam padding for football simply ups the ante. The flip side of this is when coverage is uneven, and the new higher levels of hit force are accidentally applied to less-covered body parts.

Re:Heard years back about US football padding (1)

jewens (993139) | about a year ago | (#43304923)

Yes, the concept you are describing is the conservation of risk. Safer cars make drivers less careful, helmets make bicyclists less careful and drivers (the ones that see them) treat them as less fragile objects, criminals are bolder where the freedom to bear arms is curtailed, and people who know they can get health insurance on their way to the ER are less likely to have it already.

Oh and the one thing improved armor technology is never used for is lightening the load on the soldier, cop etc. The just increase the required protection level and maintain a fixed weight.

Buildings? (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year ago | (#43303201)

How does it protect them from explosions on the inside?

Buildings explode now? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43304469)

Which are the buildings that explode?

100 years? (1)

saveferrousoxide (2566033) | about a year ago | (#43304781)

People have been looking at preventing damage from impacts for more than a hundred years

While this is technically true, I think he could have added a couple more zeros to that estimate and still made a very safe assertion.

It's already here, and it's called Kryron. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43306341)

http://bourqueindustries.com/

They aren't calling it "foam", but I believe the concept is the same given their use of carbon nanotubes.

Their body armor has already received NIJ certification.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>