Neurological EMP Devices
Kurt Feltenberger
(14 Apr 2018 03:46 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Neurological EMP Devices
Rupert Boleyn
(14 Apr 2018 03:57 UTC)
|
Re: Neurological EMP Devices
Rob O'Connor
(17 Apr 2018 10:25 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: Neurological EMP Devices
Kelly St. Clair
(18 Apr 2018 00:40 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: Neurological EMP Devices
Graham Donald
(18 Apr 2018 07:58 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Neurological EMP Devices
Bruce Johnson
(18 Apr 2018 18:47 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Neurological EMP Devices
Rob O'Connor
(19 Apr 2018 07:55 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Neurological EMP Devices
Rupert Boleyn
(19 Apr 2018 10:30 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Neurological EMP Devices
Phil Pugliese
(19 Apr 2018 21:58 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: Neurological EMP Devices
Richard Aiken
(20 Apr 2018 01:37 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: Neurological EMP Devices
Jeffrey Schwartz
(20 Apr 2018 17:59 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: Neurological EMP Devices
Rob O'Connor
(21 Apr 2018 08:23 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: Neurological EMP Devices
Tim
(21 Apr 2018 09:31 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: Neurological EMP Devices
Richard Aiken
(23 Apr 2018 01:15 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: Neurological EMP Devices
shadow97218@xxxxxx
(23 Apr 2018 19:50 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: Neurological EMP Devices
Phil Pugliese
(23 Apr 2018 20:34 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Neurological EMP Devices
Bruce Johnson
(24 Apr 2018 16:14 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Neurological EMP Devices
Phil Pugliese
(24 Apr 2018 18:53 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: Neurological EMP Devices
Rob O'Connor
(25 Apr 2018 02:04 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: Neurological EMP Devices
Richard Aiken
(25 Apr 2018 23:12 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: Neurological EMP Devices
Phil Pugliese
(26 Apr 2018 00:20 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: Neurological EMP Devices
Rupert Boleyn
(26 Apr 2018 00:24 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: Neurological EMP Devices
Richard Aiken
(26 Apr 2018 22:08 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: Neurological EMP Devices
Graham Donald
(26 Apr 2018 01:58 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: Neurological EMP Devices
Richard Aiken
(26 Apr 2018 22:02 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: Neurological EMP Devices Rob O'Connor (27 Apr 2018 07:48 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: Neurological EMP Devices
Richard Aiken
(28 Apr 2018 00:09 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: Neurological EMP Devices
Robert O'Connor
(29 Apr 2018 05:06 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: Neurological EMP Devices
Rupert Boleyn
(29 Apr 2018 19:14 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: Neurological EMP Devices
Rob O'Connor
(30 Apr 2018 08:37 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: Neurological EMP Devices
Richard Aiken
(30 Apr 2018 18:36 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: Neurological EMP Devices
Robert O'Connor
(02 May 2018 08:33 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: Neurological EMP Devices
Richard Aiken
(03 May 2018 00:21 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: Neurological EMP Devices
Rupert Boleyn
(03 May 2018 02:56 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: Neurological EMP Devices
Richard Aiken
(04 May 2018 01:47 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: Neurological EMP Devices
Rob O'Connor
(05 May 2018 02:27 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: Neurological EMP Devices
Kenneth Barns
(05 May 2018 03:39 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: Neurological EMP Devices
Kenneth Barns
(23 Apr 2018 23:56 UTC)
|
Richard Aiken wrote: >> The purpose made neuromuscular blocking drugs >> (curare derivatives, aminosteroids, succinylcholine) >> can only be given by injection. > > How about injectors built into a cloud of nanobots? You would need to be hit with a large number of nanobots, which would have to be able to make the drugs with locally available materials unless the bots carry enough to get you to the dose required. Effective dose for neuromuscular blocking drugs is in the mg/kg body mass range, so 10^(-3)g order of magnitude. Bacteria - true nanomachines if the zinc micromotors in the linked article (and ACS Nano paper) are nanomachines - weigh about a picogram or 10^(-12)g each. That's one of the problems with nanotechnology as described in SF; conservation of mass, thermodynamics and (chemical) kinetics are ignored. Where does the waste (heat, chemical byproducts) from replication and other reactions go? Where does the material to make more copies or other substances come from? How do nanomachines avoid attacks from the immune system or environmental detritivores (bacteria and fungi)? The real-world analog to nanomachine attack would be (viral) infection - an incubation phase as machine numbers built up to the stage where they could produce macroscopic effects, then an active phase of varying intensity and duration. Acute poisoning requires enough mass of toxin reaching target sites quickly enough to swamp clearance mechanisms. So the hard limit to onset speed is tens of seconds (circulation time). Practically, an intravenous bolus injection is the only way to reliably get close to this. Meso- and microscale drones (mm length scale) are happening about now: 'Slaughterbots' for a 'day after tomorrow' extrapolation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlO2gcs1YvM Current military tech: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NGgHyfPGU0 Graham Donald wrote: > It need not be anything too fancy, reading the last few > posts I was reminded of the Dick Francis novel 'Trial Run', > in that novel the killers are using a powerful animal > tranquilizer (that has muscle relaxing properties.) mixed > with a skin penetrating agent. It needs to be something quite fancy because the combination of effects desired (i.e. voluntary muscle paralysis without affecting other striated/skeletal muscle fibres and interfering with ventilation) is infeasible, as Richard, Ken and I have pointed out. The neurophysiology of terrestrial animals doesn't permit it - our muscles and nervous systems are interlinked in such a way as to forbid it. A veterinary/toxicological aside: Etorphine or carfentanil (two high-potency opioids used as animal tranquillisers) don't need to be mixed with a skin penetrating agent (dimethyl sulfoxide [DMSO] is beloved of alties and mystery writers); they are very, very fat-soluble. Darts as delivery systems are useful because they bypass the skin and reduce the onset time (and perhaps the dose needed) compared to the transcutaneous route. Robert O'Connor