Talk:Claytronics

I don't think nanobots and programmable matter are the same thing at all. 97.116.30.116 (talk) 02:00, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

how big are computers?
I am having some trouble visualizing the catoms and what the overall programmable matter looks like. Some pictures or diagrams could make a huge difference. Also, the description is very "tech" heavy, maybe some more general descriptions for a lay audience. —Preceding unsigned comment added by EricSchwert (talk • contribs) 04:04, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

i like the format of this article. it is clear and makes sense, good job!

i am a little confused about how these computers can be the size of an atom however. to the best of my knowledge nothing can be fundamentally smaller than an atom, except for particles. how do you manufacture a computer chip or something similar which is on the order of size of an atom? perhaps claytronics uses small, but not quite atom sized computers?

tim —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tfeyereisen (talk • contribs) 15:25, 9 April 2010 (UTC)


 * The Claytronic atoms (or "Catoms") are not actually of the size of an atom, or anywhere near it. They are just called "Claytronic atoms" as they are very small: about sub-millimeter to sub-micrometer range. They will be much, much larger than atoms, however. --EngineeringGuy (talk) 10:05, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Redirect
I spent a little while locating this article because I heard the term catom, but was not familiar with the field of programmable matter. Would someone please create redirects for the terms catom and catoms? 70.250.179.129 (talk) 16:22, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Claytronics vs. Nanorobotics
I don't understand, what is so new about the idea of Claytronics? To me it is just another name of the already longer existing idea Nanorobotics. Could somebody explain the diference? Mr. D. E. Mophon (talk) 22:13, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Images and/or videos needed.
Currently, this article has only text. Some images and/or videos should be added. They would greatly help in improving the article's quality and enable readers to understand the concepts easily. --EngineeringGuy (talk) 10:24, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Claytronics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928145249/http://techiteasy.org/2007/02/16/303/ to http://techiteasy.org/2007/02/16/303/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:01, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Merger proposal
Formal request has been received to merge the article Programmable matter into Claytronics; dated: July 2018.

Proposer's Rationale (proposed by IP): Claytronics is an abstract future concept that combines nanoscale robotics and computer science to create individual nanometer-scale computers called claytronic atoms, or catoms, which can interact with each other to form tangible 3D objects that a user can interact with. Programmable matter is matter which has the ability to change its physical properties (shape, density, moduli, conductivity, optical properties, etc.) in a programmable fashion, based upon user input or autonomous sensing. According to this definition Claytronics is a type of programmable matter, but more theoretical/fictional. However it cites real examples, so it should go under programmable matter as a end point to destination.

Discuss here. Richard3120 (talk) 20:54, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Don't merge - Claytronics is a particular form of programable matter [...], Programmable matter being a generalization of a very specific implementation of implementation of programable matter does not invalidate its programmable matter's criteria for inclusion. Your rationale seems to contradict your requested merge direction, if you intended to merge Claytronics into programmable matter I'm still against it as Claytronics is a B-Class article and programmable matter is Start-class. Because of the difference in amount of content, that would unbalance the programmable matter article. Instead it would be better to link implementations within the body of programmable matter.Ethanpet113 (talk) 04:08, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
 * just for information, I am not the proposer of this merger, I am simply listing it on behalf of an IP who suggested it at WP:PM. I have no personal opinion on the matter, as I am not an expert. Richard3120 (talk) 04:12, 6 March 2019 (UTC)