Maker Technology

[Reban]

What it's not

Talking about more limits to Makers and what they can do its worth looking at the Molecular Disassembler on p.641 of the equipment chapter in T5.09

The basic Molecular Disassembler is a self contained 1 ton (Size 6) unit capable of dissembling, assembling or a combination of both up to a Size 6+ object depending on various factors.

It's 0.7ton grey goo containment area can do things like convert a broken air/raft into a shelter.

Its worth nothing that its TL23.

In other words these capabilities are far beyond what a Maker could do at TL11.

Does anyone know where the Molecular Disassembler first appeared?

 

[mike wightman]

Hanwavium conjecture time.

There are two guaranteed methods to separate/brake chemical bonds - heat stuff up until it is so hot you have a cloud of plasma, or zap it with enough electricity to do the same.

I'm guessing that the TL23 molecular disassembler makes use of one of the variants of damper technology disintegration in particular - page 375 - that allows for direct manipulation of the chemical bond -i.e. it messes at the quantum level with the bonding and antibonding orbitals that hold stuff together.

 

[kilemall]

My gut tells me allowing a Maker to make things really fast is going to introduce game imbalance. As a Ref I'd say the Maker takes approximately the same amount of time that standard manufacturing does.

There are multiple operations and components in a gun so it takes time. I don't want to see a situation where a merc company arrives on planet and half an hour later they're all equipped with smallarms.

In the example I had, consider the economics. They would have to have shipped with the raw materials and tied up tonnage, when it would have been more efficient to just ship finished weapons, and have them immediately ready.

What it does do is provide unexpected replacements- until the consumables run out.

Also, to equip a whole company at max speed they would have to have specialized makers for everything, and be toting those instead of more ready equipment or troopers or ammunition.

It would likely be they haul one general purpose maker for parts gen, one specialized for the thing they tend to use up/break/lose/can't anticipate exact need ahead of time, and any other use of makers would be back at the home base.

Tying creation time and maker ability to credits cost leverages the market value mechanism already in the game so you don't need a separate complexity valuation.

Because of that brutal multiplier built in for time AND object size, the break even point for larger and more expensive made equipment puts sunk capital costs more and more firmly into a large org/factory based model.

 

[Lycanorukke]

There are two guaranteed methods to separate/brake chemical bonds - heat stuff up until it is so hot you have a cloud of plasma, or zap it with enough electricity to do the same.

Disassembly is simple, the main problem is power. And when you run around with 'Fusion-ina-can" power is not a problem.

Cut the item up into little bits (laser cutting), turn those bits to plasma, seperate the plasma with something similiar to a mass spectrometer with magnetic fields. Allow to cool, and out comes pure elements into nice individual packets. We could even do it now - except for the little power problem.

Molecular reassembly is of course pure trek-ese and way beyond the scope of a Trav maker. What I was thinking along the lines of is - say your jump coils burn out. You throw the old one in the maker to be scavanged for lanthanum and other rare earths, and then the maker resues a lot of the old materials and shortfalls are pulled from the maker stores.

Definetly not throw in a broken gun and get a cup of 'Earl Grey hot' out.

 

[whulorigan]

Definetly not throw in a broken gun and get a cup of 'Earl Grey hot' out.

Well I guess that would be one way to make Gunpowder Tea . . .

 

[Lycanorukke]

Well I guess that would be one way to make Gunpowder Tea . . .

"Gunpowder Coffee! When you need that extra *bang* in the morning"

But back to more serious things - 'specialised' makers (as opposed to the generic print anything) even with their limitations could have a lot of interesting effects outside the military/industrial settings. If it was allowed to have a '90% done' print job to be stored for later you could have 'on demand' making.

Eg: A fashion shop keeps '90% done' jobs of the latest fashion in storage, so when a customer comes in the final design parameters are inputted (colour, exterior texture, final sizing, etc) and half an hour of so later the final item pops out as opposed to waiting for hours for a job from scratch.

The 90% complete technique would allow suppliers to crank out bulk blanks to sell to retailers, and the retailers mini-maker would tweak the final product (within reason) to make the final product. It would save the retailer cost on exotic materials for the maker, allow the supplier/template creator to maintain control over what is sold, and be a lot faster. Of course as with today, maker fashion would be seen inferior to 'Sophont made' socially, but at least it would be in a average person budget.

Designers who could create new maker designs on the fly (or even just adjust the blanks outside the standard variable parameters) would be in high demand by any major retailer regardless of the product, and any serious boutique shop would have one such person at the ready for 'preferred (aka cashed up) customers.

"You want the standard revolver? Yes we have a selection over here. Oh, you want it gold plated and with the fluffy dice attachment. Hmm, let us see what we can do for you..."

 

[pendragonman]

"Gunpowder Coffee! When you need that extra *bang* in the morning"

But back to more serious things - 'specialised' makers (as opposed to the generic print anything) even with their limitations could have a lot of interesting effects outside the military/industrial settings. If it was allowed to have a '90% done' print job to be stored for later you could have 'on demand' making.

Eg: A fashion shop keeps '90% done' jobs of the latest fashion in storage, so when a customer comes in the final design parameters are inputted (colour, exterior texture, final sizing, etc) and half an hour of so later the final item pops out as opposed to waiting for hours for a job from scratch.

The 90% complete technique would allow suppliers to crank out bulk blanks to sell to retailers, and the retailers mini-maker would tweak the final product (within reason) to make the final product. It would save the retailer cost on exotic materials for the maker, allow the supplier/template creator to maintain control over what is sold, and be a lot faster. Of course as with today, maker fashion would be seen inferior to 'Sophont made' socially, but at least it would be in a average person budget.

Designers who could create new maker designs on the fly (or even just adjust the blanks outside the standard variable parameters) would be in high demand by any major retailer regardless of the product, and any serious boutique shop would have one such person at the ready for 'preferred (aka cashed up) customers.

"You want the standard revolver? Yes we have a selection over here. Oh, you want it gold plated and with the fluffy dice attachment. Hmm, let us see what we can do for you..."

There are small car manufacturers that do this now. Leave final paint and interior installation until the order.

 

[aramis]

"Gunpowder Coffee! When you need that extra *bang* in the morning"

Makes me wonder what coffee-leaf tea tastes like.

 

[Reban]

Since we're talking coffee....

One limit I think I'd impose on Makers is that they cannot reproduce organic material.

The Traveller science of Biologics (concerned with devices based on living matter. Example biologic devices include grown hull panels, interior shock absorbers, water purifiers, carbon dioxide scrubbers, and motion sensors.) is listed as base tech level TL13.

The background material in the BBB talks about such things as clones and synthetics being grown in a vat.

This is different to the additive and subtractive methods we talked about above i.e. the 3D printing and CNC machining.

Thinking about the realworld science behind this, yes medics can print things like skin and ears right now, although I'm not sure how widespread their use is so far, but you need skin sells in the first place to print. You can grow beef in a test tube and assemble it into a burger. You can probably print Solent Green into various shapes too.

Organic material is derived from living material, so you must grow it in a vat before using it.

Maybe there are specialist makers for creating organic items? However having a cup of steaming coffee roll off the conveyor belt or even a packet of coffee granules seems slightly too advanced for Makers, or at least a specialist subset.

EDIT: T5 talks about Forced Growth, maybe this is the Biologics equvielent of Maker Tech?

One objection to limiting Maker tech from producing organic material is that it couldn't produce wood, paper or leather. Of course if it had wood in its stores it could shape it using its internal tools, it it had wood pulp it could 3D print paper or print wood veneer with a grain. Things like leather could be substituted with synthetics or plastics, and it makes "real" leather a premium product.

So the limit is: "Makers don't produce organic material". Thoughts?

 

[mike wightman]

Carbon chemistry is still just chemistry.

We can synthesize DNA now from raw materials, bio-chemists have even succeed at making completely artificial gene sequences.

The bio- prefix makes people think it is to do with living things, whereas in reality you can start with a pile of carbon powder, some nitrogen and oxygen from the air etc and synthesise any 'organic' chemical you like.

Even the term organic chemistry is a bit of a misnomer these days - we make 'organic' polymers that nature can not break down because bacteria and fungi etc have never encountered them before - its a similar situation to when plants mutated to produce lignin way back when, it was an awfully long time before bacteria and fungi evolved that could digest it.

So basically if makers can assemble stuff at the atomic/molecular level then they would have no problem synthesizing polymers, organics or 'biological' material - they are all just chemicals.

 

[kilemall]

At the most I might impose a limit of makers have to be specialized for biologicals.

And most player biomakers would likely be printing 'parts'- replacement organs or limbs for instance.

 

[Reban]

So basically if makers can assemble stuff at the atomic/molecular level then they would have no problem synthesizing polymers, organics or 'biological' material - they are all just chemicals.

Yeah but thats the thing.... If as Aramis puts it, and I agree, Maker technology is "Some combination of additive, subtractive, and manipulatory manufacturing.", thats not atomic or molecular level manipulation, thats more sticking, cutting, grinding, bending.

Compare the amount of technology and processes required to turn a store elements into a cup of coffee to making a widget from bar stock and printable polymers.

At the most I might impose a limit of makers have to be specialized for biologicals.

And most player biomakers would likely be printing 'parts'- replacement organs or limbs for instance.

I agree, but I think the fork between Maker and Biologic tech is wider. The best way I can explain it is that my reading of it is that one is a dry manufacturing process and the other is a wet growing process.

I think the biological equivalent of a Maker in the BBB is a "vat".

 

[vegas]

So basically if makers can assemble stuff at the atomic/molecular level then they would have no problem synthesizing polymers, organics or 'biological' material - they are all just chemicals.

I think that is right, so isn't the solution to say makers cannot assemble things at the atomic level? That would limit them not just from organics but from atomic-level electronics too. Solves a few problems at once.

Or does AotI tell us they manufacture to individual atom accuracy?

EDIT: this post is sort of redundant on what Reban just wrote. Sorry, hadn't refreshed my browser.

 

[aramis]

I think that is right, so isn't the solution to say makers cannot assemble things at the atomic level? That would limit them not just from organics but from atomic-level electronics too. Solves a few problems at once.

Or does AotI tell us they manufacture to individual atom accuracy?

EDIT: this post is sort of redundant on what Reban just wrote. Sorry, hadn't refreshed my browser.

The atomic level is canonically over TL20. Elemental level transport (which essentially axiomatically includes assembly at that level) is TL21.

 

[vegas]

Out of curiosity, what canon is that? I'm having trouble tracking down much canon on this stuff.

In any event, if that is the case, then we can reasonably posit lots of constraints on makers. They are great for mechanical devices, but at the fine dimensions required for advanced electronics, they are not adequate. A broken part - sure, fix it in a Maker. A broken computer or jump drive or whatever may not be so easily resolved depending on what broke.

 

[aramis]

Out of curiosity, what canon is that? I'm having trouble tracking down much canon on this stuff.

In any event, if that is the case, then we can reasonably posit lots of constraints on makers. They are great for mechanical devices, but at the fine dimensions required for advanced electronics, they are not adequate. A broken part - sure, fix it in a Maker. A broken computer or jump drive or whatever may not be so easily resolved depending on what broke.

T5.09 allows atomic level transmission at TL20.

Note that at TL16, you can transport matter as an integral object... which implies some variation of wormhole... (Think the transport pods in Galaxy Quest)... while the TL21 scans and transmits you (possibly destructively) at a molecular level, 22 at an atomic level...

 

[infojunky]

A broken computer or jump drive or whatever may not be so easily resolved depending on what broke.

Considering how low-tech the manufacturing process for space rated IC chips is I really don't have a probleme with a Maker doing up Electronic bits. The real problem is the coding to get your new electronic widget to work... As such bits to fix your broken widget that you have all the drivers for is one thing, while whipping up a new gizmo from scratch is another.

 

[vegas]

IC manufacturing is low tech? We are down to feature sizes of ten atoms. Sure, rad hard stuff today is made at larger geometries, but it still isn't something a "printer" could ever do.

But this is the far future. We can assume printers will get better but we can also assume electronics become more demanding. What kind of devices are needed to support a jump field? Or to do the computations for jumpspace? We can make that be as complex as we want, right? I think there is value in putting some things out of reach of Makers.

If we don't put restrictions on them, Makers become Star Trek replicators by other means. Star Trek gets the economic implications of replicators right - there is no more scarcity, so there is no more money or commerce as we know it. But Traveller has money and commerce, so it must have scarcity, and therefore Makers can't be replicators.

 

[infojunky]

IC manufacturing is low tech?

Pretty much, not saying there isn't a lot of sophisticated materials science there, but the core technology is pretty basic, as a offshoot of offset printing.

If we don't put restrictions on them, Makers become Star Trek replicators by other means. Star Trek gets the economic implications of replicators right - there is no more scarcity, so there is no more money or commerce as we know it. But Traveller has money and commerce, so it must have scarcity, and therefore Makers can't be replicators.

While I do allow for advanced workshop fabrication of a wide variety items. I also require a wide variety of materials, Couple this with said workshop can produce the individual pieces but final assembly still requires a human element. Then there is the time element, a one-off in the workshop is gonna take at least 10 times as long and cost more than twice what one could buy it for. Plus the need for storing all specific materials on hand. And then there is the required skill set and design as well.

 

[kilemall]

I agree, but I think the fork between Maker and Biologic tech is wider. The best way I can explain it is that my reading of it is that one is a dry manufacturing process and the other is a wet growing process.

I think the biological equivalent of a Maker in the BBB is a "vat".

Depends on opinion. The play RUR, the very one that literally defined the word robot, envisioned effectively vat-grown biobots. So if you asked a 1930s sci-fi fan what a robot would look like, their answer would likely have leaned towards human biological.

Of course we don't have biobots building cars, but who knows by TL15?

The distinction I think is like the one made for 2300 Pentapod tech- equipment made is alive of a sort, needs to be fed and in it's biological support zone, squishier then mechanical equivalents, but is self-repairing to a point.

I don't know what T5 says about biotech, but my gut says it takes 1-2 TL after to do the same things that are mechanical/electronic.

In my example above I guess one of the major limiting factors would be a lot of biotech would be expensive. That's how I'm factoring in complexity.

Speaking of robots, that's another way to think of makers. Automated activity saving sophonts hours or day, check, expert ability to manufacture, check, built-in tools, check.

So just use T5 rules for building static robots, then for the chemical/mechanical/electronic/bio making tools part don't get too detailed. I'd suggest using some variant of cost of item to price the tooling.