Major possible breakthrough to molecular manufacturing? INCA Technology

    • Major possible breakthrough to molecular manufacturing? INCA Technology

      A friend of mine who is a patented inventor named Steve Bridgers has a patent for a modular construction system called INCA.
      This stands for Inter Nodal Connector Architecture.

      First of all, look at his patent here:

      patents.google.com/patent/US68…itecture&q=Steve+Bridgers

      INCA is based on the tensegrity geodesic structures of Buckminster Fuller, and the fullerene molecule.

      It is not material dependent; Steve showed myself and others that macroscopic materials and mesoscopic materials, such as bamboo, polymers, steel, anything that can be somewhat rigid, can be used.

      However, his real dream, and our real goal, is to achieve what this forum is all about: Self Replicating, Exponential Manufacturing Nano technology with atomic precision control over the molecules.

      We want the molecular assembler as you all do.

      Here is some more info and links:



      facebook.com/INCAnautChallenge/

      You can see some of the basic designs and diamondoid-inspired structures made with this.

      The idea is to take carbon wires such as fullerene nanotubes and make these systems:

      Series of interlocking nodes, tubes, springs, that can be used to build super strong and flexible as well as lightweight structures.
      Electrical, Optical, and other systems can be coupled to the mechanical systems to make smart, shape-changing active materials.

      All feedback on this is welcomed.

      One of the big plusses with the INCA system as the bootstrap for MNT is this: It is based on the curvature we see in the biological and natural world. Look at the spirals and curved structures in nature, such as in DNA helixes and protein chains and more.
    • Diamondoid wrote:

      INCA is based on the tensegrity geodesic structures of Buckminster Fuller, and the fullerene molecule.
      Geodesic domes without internal structure fall (to my understanding) not under the category of tensegrity.
      It just so happened that Buckminster Fuller who is known for geodesic domes also invented the term tensegrity.

      I suspect heavy usage of pure breed tensegrity in advances APM products such as lighter than air structures.
      Aerial Meshes
      I don't think tensegrity will be all that important in the early bootstrapping phase.
      With semi stiff foldamers and bulky nodes (bulky => non mathematically ideal) it's hard to draw a line what is tensegrity and what not.

      There are two things to discern here:
      A. Space Trusses (nodes take neither tourques nor bending moments only tension and compression)
      B. Space Frames (nodes take torques and bending moments too)

      Tensegrity is a subset of A with pure tension elements (ropes chains) allowed.
      The main advantage of tensegrity is that it auto-equilibrates internal and external loads
      thus you get maximal stability for minimal design complexity and maximum part reusability
      (for the cost of lower reliability - single point failure => full collapse).

      For nanofactory bootstrapping first and foremost stiffness needs to be maximized.
      By adding more and more redundant structures you move more and more to B (space frames) which is as far away from tensegrity as it gets.

      Just recently a record was set on the biggest stiff empty de-novo protein cage constructed by bottom up self assembly:
      See: foresight.org/nanodot/?p=7154
      This is a dodecahedron.
      A dodecahedarl protein frame wouldn't be stiff if it would fall into the class A of space trusses.
      (Deltoids like the octahedron have that interesting property)
      It's stiffness depends on the fact that the bulkiness of the nodes can take torsion and bending moments.
      So this de-novo protein dodecahedron is a spaceframe and most certainly not a tensegrity structure.


      Diamondoid wrote:

      One of the big plusses with the INCA system as the bootstrap for MNT is this: It is based on the curvature we see in the biological and natural world. Look at the spirals and curved structures in nature, such as in DNA helixes and protein chains and more.

      I think this is just about aesthetics.
      Smart design usually leads to aesthetic products.
      But the other way around finding smart products starting from aesthetics can be much more difficult.
      It helps when your design space is small.
      This is not the case when you start from a point as general as spirals and curves - too vague.
      An (only periphereal APM related) example I know of is Conal Elliotts research about automatic differentiation (with heavy usage of statically typed programming as unconditionally required basis) where he ends up with infinite multidimensionall derivation towers (taylor series) basically for free just by pursuing aesthetics in code.

      This is relevant for APM since it is immensely useful for 3D modelling (surfaces normals curvatures).


      Lastly about that "invention":

      I'm surprised that his invention passed the threshold of originality.
      As I see it it' this is just a ball with three springs on it.

      I do not have the time to read through the details of that patent.
      Patents aren't necessarily made for quick comprehensibility.

      Sadly consulting the the referred to website for more information
      (incanautchallenge.com/) is no longer possible since it's gone - victim of internet amnesy.
      It seems that domain name got annected by some japanese wordpress blogger.

      Beside the patent I found no openly accessible information other than that facebook page behind the usual sign in wall: de-de.facebook.com/INCAnautChallenge/

      Steve Bridgers presentation does not come over very convincing - at least for me.
      He doesn't show a closeup of his invention.
      Ok a bit better:

      Also he conveys the feeling of "I am so cool and so much better than you".
      Then the other videos of the same YT channel are a little ... obscure.
      I liked this entertaining excerpt:
      "... Because it moves mechanically and dynamically we can MOVE IT ..."
      ROFLmao

      Aside from that this "challenge" is likely long gone (if it ever happened).
      The video was published five years ago in Sept 2011.

      Diamondoid wrote:

      You can see some of the basic designs and diamondoid-inspired structures made with this.
      Self similar stuff is interesting.
      My avatar image is a tripod made of sp3-carbon atoms (which themselves have tripod-symmetry) - pretty fundamental. I'm not yet sure where this specific design could be of use.