Next YC batch: "We're Mollusca and we're democratizing access to nature's strongest material"
Just find the proteins involved then manufacture them with yeast. Easy Peasy Lemon Squeezy
they're made of rock
Snails' teeth beats spider silk as nature's strongest material (2015)
111–120 of 179 posts
Re: Snails' teeth beats spider silk as nature's strongest material (2015)
#112Re: Snails' teeth beats spider silk as nature's strongest material (2015)
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
I noticed that too. I feel like this might be a new way of laundering AI written text, just provide the quote verbatim as if the they believe it was actually written by the author.
The AI is so good that it traveled back to 2015 and published this paper.
Skynet is real
Re: Snails' teeth beats spider silk as nature's strongest material (2015)
#114Re: Snails' teeth beats spider silk as nature's strongest material (2015)
#115They say they’re taking about tensile strength at the footnote. But teeth would be more likely to be compressively strong. They don’t get pulled on much. The whole thing seems very confused. Anyway let’s build space elevator?
Yeah, they're conflating strength, hardness and toughness all over the place.
Re: Snails' teeth beats spider silk as nature's strongest material (2015)
#116Re: Snails' teeth beats spider silk as nature's strongest material (2015)
#117Limpet Radula is a badass name for a rock band
Especially in the hard rock grindcore genre.
Re: Snails' teeth beats spider silk as nature's strongest material (2015)
#118> Thats’s comparable to a single strand of spaghetti holding up about 3,300 one-pound bags of sugar What an odd example. A mid-sized car would have been much clearer.
But everyone knows, by experience, what 3300 individual roughly one pound bags of sugar weighs and what sort of force is needed to hold it up. Mid sized car is ambiguous, and nobody saw anybody hold that up (seeing hulk doesn't count)
But what is it in football fields?
That's the usual measurement of size in the States and it's absolutely unbelievably ridiculous.
Re: Snails' teeth beats spider silk as nature's strongest material (2015)
#119> Thats’s comparable to a single strand of spaghetti holding up about 3,300 one-pound bags of sugar What an odd example. A mid-sized car would have been much clearer.
I'm guessing this was initially '1.5 metric tons', and through a number of helpful and friendly conversions, ended up at 3,300 sugar bags.
Re: Snails' teeth beats spider silk as nature's strongest material (2015)
#120> Thats’s comparable to a single strand of spaghetti holding up about 3,300 one-pound bags of sugar What an odd example. A mid-sized car would have been much clearer.
I also thought that was weird. Then I learned it gets better. If you click through to the BBC article that was apparently their main source, the quote is this:
> Alternatively, as Prof Barber explained, it can be compared to a single string of spaghetti holding up 3,000 half-kilogram bags of sugar.
So the professor used an item that was familiar to his English audience (1500 kg=3307 lbs), then the Smithsonian writer tried to be helpful in converting the units, but switched to an item far less familiar to an American. I don't think I've ever bought a 1lb bag of sugar here, while a 500g bag is a little small but normal in the UK.
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-31500883
https://www.sainsburys.co.uk/gol-ui/product/sainsburys-white...