Anonymous at Fri, 13 Sep 2024 14:45:45 UTC No. 16378600

>>16378519
Not abandoned at all.

Anonymous at Fri, 13 Sep 2024 14:50:46 UTC No. 16378605

>oh n-

Anonymous at Fri, 13 Sep 2024 15:03:52 UTC No. 16378622

>>16378600
so what are they doing with it?

Anonymous at Fri, 13 Sep 2024 15:10:54 UTC No. 16378635

>>16378519
they are also Asbestos 2.0, so the any application is severely limited and therefore funding dried up a bit
also, it's not magical

Anonymous at Sat, 14 Sep 2024 03:54:20 UTC No. 16379553

>>16378519
spent all the money fighting wars for jews and feeding browns, sorry goy.

Anonymous at Sat, 14 Sep 2024 04:41:03 UTC No. 16379594

>>16378622
mechanical shit mostly. theyre super easy to make in bulk but that doesn't do the autists in the lab trying to make individual transistors out of them, believe it or not

Anonymous at Sat, 14 Sep 2024 08:05:16 UTC No. 16379697

>>16378622
self sensing structures (cement, plastics, rubbers)
this cancer dust is conductive and if dispersed enough in the matrix it will tunnel electrons depending on the load (strain) applied to the material

t. i was doing a thesis on self sensing rubber but then dropped out due to crippling depression

Anonymous at Sat, 14 Sep 2024 13:59:51 UTC No. 16379973

>>16379697
>t. i was doing a thesis on self sensing rubber but then dropped out due to crippling depression
well it sucks that making the rubber self-sensing made it so depressed.

Anonymous at Sat, 14 Sep 2024 16:38:09 UTC No. 16380214

>>16379697
Anon what do you know about the red brick in ancient buildings that isn't breaking for thousand years? vs modern brick that breaks in 20.

raphael at Sun, 15 Sep 2024 06:47:39 UTC No. 16381408

>>16378519
graphene is the holy grail of material science

Anonymous at Sun, 15 Sep 2024 14:25:48 UTC No. 16381886

>>16380214
>vs modern brick that breaks in 20.
does it? try better foundation work

Anonymous at Tue, 17 Sep 2024 03:33:26 UTC No. 16384145

>>16378519
> I thought they figured out how to do them.
We didn't. It's still really hard to make nanotubes at all.
>are nanotubes abandoned technology
yeah, most of the people working on them moved to graphene because of the hype
>>16381408
no it isn't. Graphene's claim to fame was that you could make better transistors with conventional semiconductor manufacturing equipment. It's been more than a decade and that hasn't worked out and looks like it'll never work out.

Anonymous at Tue, 17 Sep 2024 03:49:03 UTC No. 16384161

I am afraid we are in the Tao, the phase where the forces of good and evil can only hold an unsteady balance, both gaining power while never allowing true growth for their corrupted, dualistic world.

Anonymous at Tue, 17 Sep 2024 03:50:05 UTC No. 16384162

>>16381408
>>16384145
I've made some graphene-infused body armor by magnetically stirring it into resins and laminating basalt fiber. It's pretty legit in terms of performance gains for the weight at low concentrations.