So anyway, who am I? I usually say to people, when they say, "What do you do?" I say, "I do hardware," because it sort of conveniently encompasses everything I do. And I recently said that to a venture capitalist casually at some Valley event, to which he replied, "How quaint."
Dakle, tko sam ja? Obično kad me ljudi pitaju što radim kažem: „Izrađujem stvari“ jer to obično obuhvaća sve što radim. To sam nedavno neformalno rekao jednom rizičnom kapitalistu na nekom događaju u Dolini na što je on odgovorio: „Kako zanimljivo.“
(Laughter)
(smijeh)
And I sort of really was dumbstruck. And I really should have said something smart. And now I've had a little bit of time to think about it, I would have said, "Well, you know, if we look at the next 100 years and we've seen all these problems in the last few days, most of the big issues -- clean water, clean energy -- and they're interchangeable in some respects -- and cleaner, more functional materials -- they all look to me to be hardware problems. This doesn't mean we should ignore software, or information, or computation." And that's in fact probably what I'm going to try and tell you about.
Ostao sam bez teksta. I stvarno sam trebao reći nešto pametno. Sad kad sam imao malo vremena razmisliti, bio bih mu rekao: „Znate, ako pogledamo na sljedećih 100 godina i ako smo vidjeli sve ove probleme zadnjih dana, većina važnih pitanja: čista voda, čista energija, međusobno su zamjenjivi na određenoj razini, i čišći, funkcionalniji materijali, svi mi izgledaju kao konkretni problemi.“ To ne znači da moramo zapostaviti programsku podršku, informacije ili računanje. To je u stvari vjerojatno ono o čemu ću vam probati pričati.
So, this talk is going to be about how do we make things and what are the new ways that we're going to make things in the future. Now, TED sends you a lot of spam if you're a speaker about "do this, do that" and you fill out all these forms, and you don't actually know how they're going to describe you, and it flashed across my desk that they were going to introduce me as a futurist. And I've always been nervous about the term "futurist," because you seem doomed to failure because you can't really predict it. And I was laughing about this with the very smart colleagues I have, and said, "You know, well, if I have to talk about the future, what is it?" And George Homsey, a great guy, said, "Oh, the future is amazing. It is so much stranger than you think. We're going to reprogram the bacteria in your gut, and we're going to make your poo smell like peppermint."
Ovaj govor će biti o tome kako pravimo stvari i koji su novi načini na koje ćemo praviti stvari u budućnosti. TED vam šalje mnogo neželjene pošte ako ste govornik „napravi ovo, napravi ono“ i ispuniš sve te obrasce i ne znaš zapravo kako će te predstaviti. I sinulo mi je za radnim stolom da će me predstaviti kao futurista. Oduvijek sam bio uznemiren zbog pojma futurist jer se čini da si osuđen na propast jer ju ne možeš stvarno predvidjeti. Smijao sam se ovome sa svojim vrlo pametnim kolegama i rekao sam: „Znate, ako moram pričati o budućnosti, što je ona?“ I George Homsey, odličan čovjek, je rekao: „Budućnost je odlična. Mnogo je čudnija nego što misliš. Reprogramirat ćemo bakterije u tvojoj utrobi i napravit ćemo da ti izmet miriši po pepermintu.“
(Laughter)
(smijeh)
So, you may think that's sort of really crazy, but there are some pretty amazing things that are happening that make this possible. So, this isn't my work, but it's work of good friends of mine at MIT. This is called the registry of standard biological parts. This is headed by Drew Endy and Tom Knight and a few other very, very bright individuals. Basically, what they're doing is looking at biology as a programmable system. Literally, think of proteins as subroutines that you can string together to execute a program. Now, this is actually becoming such an interesting idea. This is a state diagram. That's an extremely simple computer.
Možete misliti kako je to stvarno ludo, ali postoje stvarno zanimljive stvari koje se događaju, a čine to mogućim. To nije moj rad, ali je rad mog dobrog prijatelja s MIT-a. Zove se katalog standardnih bioloških dijelova. To vode Drew Endy i Tom Knight i još nekoliko jako, jako bistrih osoba. U biti, oni promatraju biologiju kao sustav koji se može programirati. Doslovno, zamislite proteine kao potprograme koje spojimo zajedno da izvrše program. Ovo stvarno postaje zanimljiva ideja. Ovo je dijagram stanja. To je prilično jednostavno računalo.
This one is a two-bit counter. So that's essentially the computational equivalent of two light switches. And this is being built by a group of students at Zurich for a design competition in biology. And from the results of the same competition last year, a University of Texas team of students programmed bacteria so that they can detect light and switch on and off. So this is interesting in the sense that you can now do "if-then-for" statements in materials, in structure. This is a pretty interesting trend, because we used to live in a world where everyone's said glibly, "Form follows function," but I think I've sort of grown up in a world -- you listened to Neil Gershenfeld yesterday; I was in a lab associated with his -- where it's really a world where information defines form and function.
Ovo je dvobitni brojač. To je doslovno računalni ekvivalent dvama prekidačima za svjetlo. I ovo gradi grupa studenata u Zurichu za natjecanje u dizajnu iz biologije. Iz rezultata istog natjecanja prošle godine, studentska ekipa sa Sveučilišta u Texasu programirala je bakterije tako da detektiraju svjetlo i da ga pale i gase. To je zanimljivo u smislu da sad možemo napraviti „ako, onda, za“ izjave u materijalima, u strukturi. To je prilično zanimljiv trend. Zato što smo živjeli u svijetu gdje su svi glatko rekli da oblik prati funkciju, ali mislim da sam ja odrastao u svijetu, slušali ste Neila Gershenfelda jučer, bio sam u labosu povezanim s njegovim, gdje je zapravo svijet u kojemu informacija određuje oblik i funkciju.
I spent six years thinking about that, but to show you the power of art over science -- this is actually one of the cartoons I write. These are called "HowToons." I work with a fabulous illustrator called Nick Dragotta. Took me six years at MIT, and about that many pages to describe what I was doing, and it took him one page. And so this is our muse Tucker. He's an interesting little kid -- and his sister, Celine -- and what he's doing here is observing the self-assembly of his Cheerios in his cereal bowl. And in fact you can program the self-assembly of things, so he starts chocolate-dipping edges, changing the hydrophobicity and the hydrophylicity. In theory, if you program those sufficiently, you should be able to do something pretty interesting and make a very complex structure. In this case, he's done self-replication of a complex 3D structure. And that's what I thought about for a long time, because this is how we currently make things. This is a silicon wafer, and essentially that's just a whole bunch of layers of two-dimensional stuff, sort of layered up. The feature side is -- you know, people will say, [unclear] down around about 65 nanometers now.
Šest sam godina proveo razmišljajući o tome, ali da vam pokažem moć umjetnosti nad znanošću, ovo je jedan od stripova koje pišem. Zovu se Howtoonsi. Radim s iznimnim ilustratorom koji se zove Nick Dragotta. Trebalo mi je šest godina na MIT-u i otprilike ovoliko stranica da opišem što radim, a njemu je trebala jedna stranica. Ovo je naša muza, Tucker. Zanimljivo je malo dijete, i njegova sestra Celine, i ovdje proučava samosastavljanje svojih pahuljica u zdjeli. Možete zapravo programirati samosastavljanje stvari tako da on počinje umakati rubove pahuljica u čokoladu i time mijenjati hidrofobnost i hidrofilnost. U teoriji, ako ih isprogramirate dovoljno, trebali biste moći napraviti nešto prilično zanimljivo i stvoriti vrlo složene strukture. U ovom slučaju, napravio je samoreplikaciju složenih 3D struktura. O tome sam razmišljao jako dugo, jer to je način na koji trenutno pravimo stvari. Ovo je silikonska ploča, to je zapravo samo niz slojeva dvodimenzionalne tvari koja je poredana u slojeve. Izvedbena strana je velika otprilike 65 nanometara sada.
On the right, that's a radiolara. That's a unicellular organism ubiquitous in the oceans. And that has feature sizes down to about 20 nanometers, and it's a complex 3D structure. We could do a lot more with computers and things generally if we knew how to build things this way. The secret to biology is, it builds computation into the way it makes things. So this little thing here, polymerase, is essentially a supercomputer designed for replicating DNA. And the ribosome here is another little computer that helps in the translation of the proteins. I thought about this in the sense that it's great to build in biological materials, but can we do similar things? Can we get self-replicating-type behavior? Can we get complex 3D structure automatically assembling in inorganic systems? Because there are some advantages to inorganic systems, like higher speed semiconductors, etc.
Na desno vidimo radiolaru. To je jednostaničan organizam prisutan u svim oceanima. Veličina mu je 20 nanometara i složene je 3D strukture. Mogli bismo raditi mnogo više s računalima i općenito sa stvarima kad bismo znali graditi predmete na ovaj način. Tajna biologije je da ugrađuje računanje u način na koji pravi stvari. Ova mala stvar ovdje, polimeraza je zapravo superračunalo namijenjeno replikaciji DNA. I ovaj ribosom ovdje je još jedno malo računalo koje pomaže translaciju proteina. Razmišljao sam o ovome na način da je odlično graditi s biološkim materijalima, ali možemo li mi napraviti nešto slično? Možemo li postići samoreplicirajuće ponašanje? Možemo li dobiti 3D strukture koje se automatski sklope u anorganskim sustavima? Zato što anorganski sustavi imaju svoje prednosti poput poluvodiča veće brzine i slično.
So, this is some of my work on how do you do an autonomously self-replicating system. And this is sort of Babbage's revenge. These are little mechanical computers. These are five-state state machines. So, that's about three light switches lined up. In a neutral state, they won't bind at all. Now, if I make a string of these, a bit string, they will be able to replicate. So we start with white, blue, blue, white. That encodes; that will now copy. From one comes two, and then from two comes three. And so you've got this sort of replicating system. It was work actually by Lionel Penrose, father of Roger Penrose, the tiles guy. He did a lot of this work in the '60s, and so a lot of this logic theory lay fallow as we went down the digital computer revolution, but it's now coming back.
Ovo je dio mog rada o tome kako napraviti autonomno samoreplicirajući sustav. I ovo je na neki način Babbageova osveta. Ovo su mala mehanička računala. Ovo su strojevi s pet stanja. To je kao da imamo tri svjetlosna prekidača. U neutralnom stanju neće se uopće povezivati. Ali ako napravimo niz od njih, moći će se replicirati. Počnemo s bijelo, plavo, plavo, bijelo. To kodira, to će se sada kopirati. Od jednoga nastanu dva, od dva nastanu tri. I tako dobijete replicirajući sustav. To je zapravo rad Lionela Penrosea, oca Rogera Penrosea, tipa s pločicama. Radio je mnogo na ovome u 60-ima, tako da je mnogo ove logičke teorije bilo zanemareno dok smo prolazili kroz digitalnu računalnu revoluciju, ali sada se vraća.
So now I'm going to show you the hands-free, autonomous self-replication. So we've tracked in the video the input string, which was green, green, yellow, yellow, green. We set them off on this air hockey table. You know, high science uses air hockey tables --
Sad ću vam pokazati daljinsku autonomnu samoreplikaciju. Pratili smo u videu ulazni niz koji je bio zeleno, zeleno, žuto, žuto, zeleno. Postavili smo ih na ovaj stol za zračni hokej. Znate, visoka znanost koristi stolove za zračni hokej.
(Laughter)
(smijeh)
-- and if you watch this thing long enough you get dizzy, but what you're actually seeing is copies of that original string emerging from the parts bin that you have here. So we've got autonomous replication of bit strings. So, why would you want to replicate bit strings? Well, it turns out biology has this other very interesting meme, that you can take a linear string, which is a convenient thing to copy, and you can fold that into an arbitrarily complex 3D structure. So I was trying to, you know, take the engineer's version: Can we build a mechanical system in inorganic materials that will do the same thing?
Ako gledate ovo dovoljno dugo zavrti vam se u glavi, ali ono što zapravo vidite su kopije originala koje proizlaze iz dijelova koje imamo ovdje. Imamo autonomnu replikaciju niza bitova. Zašto bismo željeli replicirati nizove bitova? Čini se da biologija ima još jednu zanimljivu karakteristiku, a to je da možete uzeti linearan niz, što je prikladna stvar za kopiranje, i možete ju smotati u strukturu proizvoljne 3D složenosti. Pokušavao sam napraviti inženjersku verziju: Možemo li napraviti mehanički sustav od anorganskih materijala koji će raditi to isto?
So what I'm showing you here is that we can make a 2D shape -- the B -- assemble from a string of components that follow extremely simple rules. And the whole point of going with the extremely simple rules here, and the incredibly simple state machines in the previous design, was that you don't need digital logic to do computation. And that way you can scale things much smaller than microchips. So you can literally use these as the tiny components in the assembly process.
Ovdje vam pokazujem da možemo napraviti 2D oblik, slovo B, koji se spaja od niza komponenata koje prate iznimno jednostavna pravila. I sav smisao korištenja iznimno jednostavnih pravila i iznimno jednostavnih strojeva stanja u prošlom dizajnu je ta da ne treba digitalna logika za računanje. Na taj način možemo napraviti mnogo manje predmete od mikročipova. Možete doslovno koristiti ove kao male komponente u procesu izrade.
So, Neil Gershenfeld showed you this video on Wednesday, I believe, but I'll show you again. This is literally the colored sequence of those tiles. Each different color has a different magnetic polarity, and the sequence is uniquely specifying the structure that is coming out. Now, hopefully, those of you who know anything about graph theory can look at that, and that will satisfy you that that can also do arbitrary 3D structure, and in fact, you know, I can now take a dog, carve it up and then reassemble it so it's a linear string that will fold from a sequence. And now I can actually define that three-dimensional object as a sequence of bits. So, you know, it's a pretty interesting world when you start looking at the world a little bit differently. And the universe is now a compiler. And so I'm thinking about, you know, what are the programs for programming the physical universe? And how do we think about materials and structure, sort of as an information and computation problem? Not just where you attach a micro-controller to the end point, but that the structure and the mechanisms are the logic, are the computers.
Neil Gershenfeld vam je pokazao ovaj video u srijedu, čini mi se, ali pokazat ću vam opet. To je doslovno obojan slijed onih pločica. Svaka boja ima drugačiju magnetsku polarnost i slijed jedinstveno definira strukturu koja izlazi. Nadam se da oni koji znaju išta o teoriji grafova mogu pogledati ovo i to će ih uvjeriti da tako možemo napraviti proizvoljne 3D strukture. Zapravo, znate, mogu uzeti psa, izrezati ga i ponovno ga složiti da bude linearan niz koji će se složiti iz slijeda. I sad zapravo mogu definirati taj 3D objekt kao slijed bitova. Prilično je zanimljiv svijet kad ga počnete gledati malo drugačije. Svijet je sad program prevoditelj. I tako razmišljam o tome koji su to programi za programiranje fizičkog svijeta? I kako razmišljamo o materijalima i strukturi, kao o informacijama i računskim problemima? Ne samo gdje prikačite mikroupravljač na završnu točku, nego da su struktura i mehanizmi logika, da su računala.
Having totally absorbed this philosophy, I started looking at a lot of problems a little differently. With the universe as a computer, you can look at this droplet of water as having performed the computations. You set a couple of boundary conditions, like gravity, the surface tension, density, etc., and then you press "execute," and magically, the universe produces you a perfect ball lens. So, this actually applied to the problem of -- so there's a half a billion to a billion people in the world don't have access to cheap eyeglasses. So can you make a machine that could make any prescription lens very quickly on site? This is a machine where you literally define a boundary condition. If it's circular, you make a spherical lens. If it's elliptical, you can make an astigmatic lens. You then put a membrane on that and you apply pressure -- so that's part of the extra program. And literally with only those two inputs -- so, the shape of your boundary condition and the pressure -- you can define an infinite number of lenses that cover the range of human refractive error, from minus 12 to plus eight diopters, up to four diopters of cylinder. And then literally, you now pour on a monomer. You know, I'll do a Julia Childs here. This is three minutes of UV light. And you reverse the pressure on your membrane once you've cooked it. Pop it out. I've seen this video, but I still don't know if it's going to end right.
Kad sam potpuno upio ovu logiku počeo sam gledati na mnoge probleme malo drugačije. Sa svijetom kao računalom, možete promatrati ovu kapljicu vode kao da je obavila račun. Postavite nekoliko graničnih stanja, poput gravitacije, površinske napetosti, gustoće i slično i tada pritisnete Izvrši i kao čarolijom svijet vam stvori savršenu loptastu leću. Ovo primijenjeno na problem- postoji pola milijarde do milijarde ljudi na svijetu koji nemaju pristup jeftinim naočalama. Možemo li napraviti stroj koji bi mogao napraviti bilo koje leće brzo na licu mjesta? Ovo je stroj u kojemu doslovno definirate granična stanja. Ako je kružno, napravite sferičnu leću. Ako je eliptično, napravite astigmatičnu leću. Stavite membranu na to i primijenite pritisak, to je dio dodatnog programa. Doslovno samo s dva ulazna podatka – oblika graničnog uvjeta i pritiska možete definirati bezbroj leća koje pokrivaju opseg ljudske refraktivne pogreške, od -12 do +8 dioptara, i do 4 dioptra cilindra. I sad doslovno izlijemo monomer. Ovdje ću se ponijeti kao Julia Childs. Ovo su tri minute UV svjetla. Obrnete pritisak na membranu kada ste ju skuhali. Izbacite ju van. Gledao sam ovaj video, ali još ne znam hoće li dobro završiti.
(Laughter)
(smijeh)
So you reverse this. This is a very old movie, so with the new prototypes, actually both surfaces are flexible, but this will show you the point. Now you've finished the lens, you literally pop it out. That's next year's Yves Klein, you know, eyeglasses shape. And you can see that that has a mild prescription of about minus two diopters. And as I rotate it against this side shot, you'll see that that has cylinder, and that was programmed in -- literally into the physics of the system. So, this sort of thinking about structure as computation and structure as information leads to other things, like this.
Obrnete ovo. Ovo je vrlo star film. S novim prototipovima obje površine su fleksibilne, ali ovo će vam pokazati princip. Kad ste završili leću doslovno ju izbacite van. Ovo je Yves Kleinov oblik naočala za sljedeću godinu. Možete vidjeti da ima blagu dioptriju od otprilike -2. Kako ju rotiram vidjet ćete da ima cilindar koji je bio isprogramiran u fiziku sustava. Ovakvo razmišljanje o strukturi kao računanju i strukturi kao informaciji vodi do drugih stvari poput ovoga.
This is something that my people at SQUID Labs are working on at the moment, called "electronic rope." So literally, you think about a rope. It has very complex structure in the weave. And under no load, it's one structure. Under a different load, it's a different structure. And you can actually exploit that by putting in a very small number of conducting fibers to actually make it a sensor. So this is now a rope that knows the load on the rope at any particular point in the rope. Just by thinking about the physics of the world, materials as the computer, you can start to do things like this.
Ovo je nešto na čemu moje kolege u SQUID laboratorijima trenutno rade, zove se elektroničko uže. Doslovno, mislite o užetu. Ima vrlo složenu strukturu tkanja. Bez opterećenja ima jednu strukturu. Pod drugim opterećenjem ima drugačiju strukturu. To možete iskoristiti umetanjem malog broja vodljivih vlakana što ga zapravo pretvara u senzor. Ovo je sad uže koje zna teret na svakoj pojedinoj točki užeta. Samo razmišljanjem o fizici svijeta, o materijalima kao računalima, možete početi raditi stvari poput ove.
I'm going to segue a little here. I guess I'm just going to casually tell you the types of things that I think about with this. One thing I'm really interested about this right now is, how, if you're really taking this view of the universe as a computer, how do we make things in a very general sense, and how might we share the way we make things in a general sense the same way you share open source hardware? And a lot of talks here have espoused the benefits of having lots of people look at problems, share the information and work on those things together. So, a convenient thing about being a human is you move in linear time, and unless Lisa Randall changes that, we'll continue to move in linear time. So that means anything you do, or anything you make, you produce a sequence of steps -- and I think Lego in the '70s nailed this, and they did it most elegantly. But they can show you how to build things in sequence. So, I'm thinking about, how can we generalize the way we make all sorts of things, so you end up with this sort of guy, right? And I think this applies across a very broad -- sort of, a lot of concepts.
Nastavit ću ovdje. Čini mi se da ću vam reći vrste stvari o kojima mislim pod ovim. Jedna stvar vezana uz ovo koja me sad stvarno zanima je kako, ako stvarno gledate svijet kao računalo, kako napravimo stvari u vrlo uopćenom smislu i kako bismo mogli dijeliti način na koji ih proizvodimo istim principom kao što dijelimo i strojnu opremu otvorenog pristupa. Mnogo govora ovdje je govorilo o prednostima toga da mnogo ljudi promatra neki problem, dijele informacije i rade na tim stvarima zajedno. Zgodna stvar kad si čovjek je ta da se krećeš u linearnom vremenu, i ako Lisa Randall ne promijeni to, nastavit ćemo se tako kretati. To znači da sve što radimo, ili napravimo, radimo u nizu koraka, mislim da je Lego u 70-im svladao to, i napravili su to vrlo elegantno. Mogu vam pokazati kako gradimo stvari u nizu. Razmišljam o tome kako možemo generalizirati način na koji radimo cijeli niz stvari i završimo na ovom tipu. I mislim da se ovo može primijeniti na mnogo koncepata.
You know, Cameron Sinclair yesterday said, "How do I get everyone to collaborate on design globally to do housing for humanity?" And if you've seen Amy Smith, she talks about how you get students at MIT to work with communities in Haiti. And I think we have to sort of redefine and rethink how we define structure and materials and assembly things, so that we can really share the information on how you do those things in a more profound way and build on each other's source code for structure. I don't know exactly how to do this yet, but, you know, it's something being actively thought about.
Cameron Sinclair je jučer rekao: „Kako natjerati sve da surađuju na globalnom dizajnu da naprave kuće za čovječanstvo?“ I ako ste gledali Amy Smith, govori o tome kako postići da studenti MIT-a rade sa zajednicama na Haitiju. Mislim da moramo redefinirati i ponovno razmisliti o tome kako definiramo strukturu i materijale i slaganje stvari tako da zaista možemo dijeliti informacije o tome kako to raditi na dublji način; i međusobno nadograđivati tuđe izvorne kodove za strukturu. Ne znam točno kako to napraviti, ali o tome se aktivno razmišlja.
So, you know, that leads to questions like, is this a compiler? Is this a sub-routine? Interesting things like that. Maybe I'm getting a little too abstract, but you know, this is the sort of -- returning to our comic characters -- this is sort of the universe, or a different universe view, that I think is going to be very prevalent in the future -- from biotech to materials assembly. It was great to hear Bill Joy. They're starting to invest in materials science, but these are the new things in materials science. How do we put real information and real structure into new ideas, and see the world in a different way? And it's not going to be binary code that defines the computers of the universe -- it's sort of an analog computer. But it's definitely an interesting new worldview.
To vodi do pitanja poput: je li ovo program prevoditelj? Je li to potprogram? Zanimljive stvari poput toga. Možda postajem previše apstraktan, ali znate, ovo je na neki način, ako se vratimo na likove iz stripa, ovo je svijet, ili drugačiji pogled na svijet za koji vjerujem da će biti dominantan u budućnosti – od biotehnologije do slaganja materijala. Bilo je odlično slušati Billa Joya. Počinju ulagati u znanost o materijalima, ali ovo su nove stvari u znanosti o materijalima. Kako staviti stvarne informacije i stvarne strukture u nove ideje i vidjeti svijet na drugačiji način? Neće binarni kod definirati računala budućnosti, nego će to biti analogno računalo. Ali je to svakako zanimljiv pogled na svijet.
I've gone too far. So that sounds like it's it. I've probably got a couple of minutes of questions, or I can show -- I think they also said that I do extreme stuff in the introduction, so I may have to explain that. So maybe I'll do that with this short video.
Otišao sam predaleko. To zvuči kao da je to sve. Imam vjerojatno još nekoliko minuta za pitanja, ili mogu pokazati, mislim da su rekli u uvodu da radim ekstremne stvari tako da ću možda to morati objasniti. Možda to napravim ovim kratkim videom.
So this is actually a 3,000-square-foot kite, which also happens to be a minimal energy surface. So returning to the droplet, again, thinking about the universe in a new way. This is a kite designed by a guy called Dave Kulp. And why do you want a 3,000-square-foot kite? So that's a kite the size of your house. And so you want that to tow boats very fast. So I've been working on this a little, also, with a couple of other guys. But, you know, this is another way to look at the -- if you abstract again, this is a structure that is defined by the physics of the universe. You could just hang it as a bed sheet, but again, the computation of all the physics gives you the aerodynamic shape. And so you can actually sort of almost double your boat speed with systems like that. So that's sort of another interesting aspect of the future.
Ovo je zmaj od 3000 četvornih stopa, to je površina s najmanje energije. Vraćajući se ponovno na kapljicu, misleći o svijetu na drugačiji način. Ovoga je zmaja dizajnirao Dave Kulp. I zašto biste željeli zmaja velik 3000 četvornih stopa? To je zmaj veličine kuće. Želite da to vuče brodove velikom brzinom. I ja sam malo radio na tome s nekoliko kolega. Ovo je drugi način gledanja, ako ponovno apstrahirate, ovo je struktura definirana fizikom svemira. Mogli biste to objesiti kao plahtu, ali opet, račun cijele fizike daje vam aerodinamičan oblik. Možete zapravo gotovo udvostručiti brzinu broda takvim sustavima. To je još jedan zanimljiv aspekt budućnosti.
(Applause)
(Pljesak)