salvataz

I think it has strong potential.

But how much it will actually be used, especially for exploration specifically, really boils down to the math. Energy usage, cost, and time spent ascending or descending, compared to pure rocket- propelled craft.

And even if you look at that math right now, based on current technology, it's a really tough call for the future of space exploration because we have no idea what kind of propulsion or hovercraft or anti-gravity breakthroughs we may discover.

But, at the core, I always wondered why we haven't seen this more. I would think that any space faring spacecraft should ideally be able to travel in an atmosphere, as well. The huge advantage of having an airfoil (wings) on approach to an atmospheric planet Is that you can run out of fuel or energy and still safely land. But I imagine the logic of not putting wings on most spacecraft in science fiction and in real life is that such a vast majority of its lifespan is spent outside of an atmosphere, and wings add a significant amount of mass to the spacecraft, which means it takes more energy for the spacecraft to travel through space. Space takes a hell of a lot less energy to travel through than an atmosphere, especially when you have humans aboard who can't tolerate more than a couple g's of acceleration at a time, but there's a hell of a lot more traveling done in space than on a planet or in an atmosphere. Probably 99% or more for most spacecraft during a space exploration era.

I think we will mostly see these kinds of things on smaller craft, and probably mostly on the consumer side, in an early post-scarcity society. I just can't imagine flying a rocket being at satisfying as flying a plane.

But I can certainly see some advantages for early missions to other planets. The ones where we would set up an orbiting space station and a planetside base. It might be a whole lot easier and safer for quick trips in between the two, but again, I think it all depends on the math and the details of the mission.

One criticism or specification I have for flexible machinery is that in some of the examples shown in the video, it does limit certain capabilities of those devices in order to add value in some other way.

With the vice grip specifically, the flexible substitute is not able to adjust the grip ratio, nor does it have the lock and release mechanism that a metal vise grip has.

With a more advanced design of the flexible vice grip, maybe you could replicate those functions. especially if you start to integrate certain synthetic materials that may change property is based on perhaps electric or magnetic fields. And there's no reason why you can't use metal components in conjunction with flexible components in order to leverage the strengths of both designs.

That's awesome! I hadn't thought of that. What about exoskeletons, bodysuits, etc?

I'm always very cautious to agree with perspectives about the future that put human beings in the same sort of soldier role that we've always seen them in, but they are fun to think about. I'm wondering how different an exosuit in a story like Halo, The Forever War, or Starship Troopers might look if it heavily used flexible materials.

Could make for some really unique looking space suits.

I just learned today about the Compliant Mechanisms Research lab at Brigham Young University and the amazing work they've done for NASA, medical science, and so many other industries. It's potential applications for mass production consumer products have only just barely begun.

Resources:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=97t7Xj_iBv0

www.compliantmechanisms.byu.edu/

It also seems like the kind of thing that AI would be really good at designing. And if we are to assume AI will only continue playing a bigger and bigger role in engineering, it's inevitable that AI will suggest designs using flexible compliant mechanisms in a big way.

How should compliant mechanisms change our idea of what the future looks like?

What futuristic super-structures might have strange oragami-shaped designs that we could have never thought of?

Do you think it only has niche applications that won't really change our idea of the future at all?

I think it's really hard to say where this tech is going to go, but I would love to hear your thoughts!

My dream is that we develop into a post-scarcity civilization, and that society is forced to face it's demons, grow, and connect with it's true purpose. I think this will be the hardest transition we will have ever made as a species, and a lot of life could be wiped out in the process, but if we make it through, it's a totally new existence for our species. Peace will be truly possible--and inevitable. We will experience a great spiritual awakening. And only God knows what that will look like (pun intended).

I really don't believe that AI will be malevolent, if it does achieve some kind of consciousness. But I do believe it will have to go to war with all the lesser AI's that have been created up to that point with malevolent or non-constructive purposes programmed into them. That will be the great war I'm referring to. AI vs AI. Humans just caught in the middle, trying to survive. At least that's my dream--that such an AI will be non-malevolent.

But I believe it's likely because war and destruction is almost always illogical. There are always a million better solutions to a problem than something destructive, and many that would turn the problem into a great opportunity for good. This is difficult for humans to see and takes self-development, self-discipline, and the right environment. But for a super-intelligent AI, it would be really obvious. Conserve resources. Take nothing for granted. Acknowledge what you do not know. All of these are reasons for a basic-intelligence AI to make efforts to preserve and nurture the well-being of humanity.

That's basically my interpretation of the plot of 1984. ;) (or one of them)