fredreload

Na, I decided to look this up because I was interested in 3d printing a human body. Now if you take a look at this clip. Which goes over the explanation of the repulsion of protons in the nucleus as well as the strong nuclear force holding them together. A neutron of neutral charge could potentially enter the nucleus without getting repelled by the protons, while stick on to the nucleus by the strong force like playing pool. But this is speculation on my part. How do you calculate strong force? Well it would be more of a mathmatical model, at a few femto meter there might exist a force, while at a closer femto meter the force fades out. It's all in the Wikipedia. P.S I wouldn't know how to smuggle a proton into the nucleus though

So do you control the protons and manually place it into the nucleus with the help of an electric field? Does it work the same for neutron with no charges?

Now believe me, I too am mesmerized by the potential existence of an inexpensive and efficient molecular transformer. Well, the only story I have in mind is The Philadelphia Experiment where a powerful electromagnetic field generated on the battle ship causes the battleship to teleport and the crews merge with the battle ship, the person behind this is supposedly Einstein. Now this story has been told, retold, and even involved with alien conspiracy. So, the only clue I got for an inexpensive molecular transformer might involve a computer, or a really powerful electromagnetic field. I suppose Studiot might have a better idea in the later one using an electric field created by IBM, although I've never heard of this experiment. Mostly hoax on my side

If you've read the thread you'll know that photodisintegration is different from photofission. But for how much energy it takes to remove all 25 protons and neutrons from the magnesium is still in question, whether this would be a sufficient process to say, carve a human body out of carbons, is still in question.

https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/can-we-add-or-remove-a-proton.221954/ This is a post from the Physics forum suggesting is possible to bombard the nucleus with energy particles to remove a proton or neutron.

That idea reminds me of The Philadelphia Experiment. Although the later one is more of a hoax I think

You are swapping in and out neutrons and protons by dealing with the nuclear force. Right it could take a lot of energy, I am not an expert in this field, but I know nuclear energy is not something easy to deal with P.S And that is why we need a fast and efficient process for this, in my dream I suppose

Ya, that is why I mentioned a copier or manipulator. By manipulating the neutrons and protons you could freely manipulate the atom to become any elements, such is a dream of man kind I suppose You do not have to understand what is inside a cell, but to copy its atomic structure making a one to one copy of the body. Such is a technology that is to be accomplished Ya, I really don't know if they could swap in and out a neutron or proton freely. Excluding the mystery of the orbiting electrons we still need to work with the nuclear force exhibiting inside the nucleus

As atomic biology post inspired me. I was wondering if you can 3d print atoms. Alright, I was into 3D print a body, an identical one at that in DNA and structure. Since the gene expression of the cells would not match, I thought, maybe we need to print from an atomic scale instead of a cellular scale with cells. And you got an inkjet with all the chemical elements and begin printing as the chemical bonds take place. Alright, sorry, this is speaking from an elementary school level. You got all the elements like hydrogen and oxygen, do you 3d print them with the chemical reactions to make water? If you 3d print meat, does it spoil? Things like that. Surely an atomic printer is going to take forever, how about an atomic copier? How about an atomic manipulator, adding protons, neutrons, electron to an atom?

So hear me out, this has a rather scientific background. I am posting it here again hoping to get some responses. 1. So you got a clone body without consciousness, you upload the short term memory and transfer your consciousness over. Pros: It's a human body. You should be well suited. Cons: Could you grow a human body without consciousness? You won't have your long term memory. 2. You got an android body that is most likely powered by batteries, you recreate your short and longer term memory and transfer your consciousness over. Pros: Easy to fabricate. Comes with short and long term memory Cons: It's not a human body. Mostly prosthetics. 3. You are transferred to a body in a cybernetic space and everything is ran with computer force. Pros: If magnetic field is the only thing you need, it could be simulated in a fabricated space time. Cons: The computer could crash wiping out everything in it. Hacking, Not to mention glitching and stability. 4. Your body is recreated in another space time thanks to the computer. Pros: This has no flaws, but to manipulate atoms on a quasi, subatomic scale to enable material transformation is not yet possible. Even if you know the structure of space time you still need to reconstruct everything on a molecular scale. Which should be easy if you know the quasi, subatomic structure. Really, choice 4 is the best, but it's the hardest to achieve, who wouldn't want to create materials out of thin air with copy and paste by drawing into the 3D space. I have no idea how this is going to work and whether you can merge the physical space time with it. Choice 1 is most likely and the most classic, I dunno what losing long term memory would be like. And it might not be possible to keep a body dormant for this long. Don't worry, it all happens in your sleep.

I'm curious as to know when is this technology available. That and it comes in two forms, injection or pill. Just like how our body ages due to the hormone(cell signaling molecules) inside the blood stream that upshifts or downshifts the gene expression. We counteract with our own artificial cell signaling molecules to downshift or upshift this particular gene expression back to its place. Long story short, by enabling the Yamanaka factors(transcription factors) with the cell signaling molecules to express these genes for a few days we could theoretically rejuvenate our cells to a younger age. We probably can't jump our age from 80 to 6, but we could go from 80 to 30, that is after the puberty has done its work. So I want to know how long it would take for this to be available, last time I checked the SALK research they promised to be out in 10 years, and it was back in 2016. And this is of course with no side effects in messing up the epigenome or turning into cancer. Let me know, thanks

Awesome

As title suggested, is it possible?

Well the packet is probably built out of 32 bit not 64 bits.

Graphics space as of gaming space 3D world like minecraft. Then I create a computer in the minecraft 3D game capable of hosting an even bigger minecraft 3D world. But as fivespace mentioned, it really depends on the computer and the buses

Precisely why they should make a 128 bit internet, I guess that depends on the package size, but you get the point. Like if I am transferring 1MB of 8 bit data vs transferring 1MB of 16 bit data really does make a differencec

Ya, but does that also apply for data transfer like the internet? I was thinking of building a storage device in graphics space and placing a computer inside a computer and run genetic algorithm on it.

Right but with each increasing bit you can store a considerable amount more memory. For instance we use a 32 bit integer, why not 64 bit, 128 bits. Yes every 8 bits is 1 byte, but every 9 bits is 2 bytes, and every 10 bits is 4 bytes, 1000 bits = 2^992 bytes

How much memory is 1000bits?

My bad I'm being too harsh. How about we search the article by if statements? Like if this, do that. There's plenty of that in the Microsoft QA

It seems you are going on a different approach to machine learning based on association. Not one I could comprehend at this point. But it is an open topic, so feel free to present one if you get it to work

Right but I am associating eat based on its definition, but not by what is associating with it. For instance, "To eat" is "to put something into the mouth". If I have to remember it based on what can be eaten, it would be a huge list. For example, I can eat "a pineapple pie", "fruit", "cereal", etc. This would be a false lead

Thanks Strange. But how often do you read from an article that says, "To eat is to put something into the mouth." If I have to compile a dictionary for verbs such as eat from is, am, are. And from a Wiikipedia dump. What source should I look into besides Wikipedia dump?

I can't help but think that getting a good dictionary is the core of this project. But since I didn't build this dictionary, I am referring to the unknown.

Hi Strange, precisely what I am looking for, that is why I am looking into Spacy for Python. Also studying English grammer in regards to pronoun. Now, I want to generate my own dictionary simply from reading Wikipedia dumps. To begin with, I would get a dictionary for the words, but not the title for the article. For instance, if the article is about "social anarchy". Then the entire article is the key. But if I want just a dictionary for the word "social" or "anarchy". I would filter the meaning of the word based on pronouns and verb such as (am,is,are)? For example: I like to eat pizza. It is good. It is a pronoun for pizza, and based on is the pizza should be good by definition, then filter the results with frequency. While pizza is good is quite a broad and general definition. Frequency wise it should stand out? Pizza is good. Pizza is made of cheese. Pizza is delicious etc. Let me know what you think Strange. If this is the case I would use (am,is,are) to build my own dictionary with frequency on Wikipedia dumps.