Starting another book Simon Winchester’s Perfectionists, on the history of precision. I think recommended it to me.
Conversation
About 50% done. Finished chapter on Rolls Royce vs Ford and into chapter on jet engines. The book itself is a bit too pop-tech style for me (I prefer less style, richer detail/insight, this is all “on a sunny day in March, a gangly man shuffled…”). Still, thought provoking.
2
6
General theme that occurs to me is that hardware progresses when you can make things mechanically/geometrically simpler and accommodate more extreme physics through increased precision.
Eg: jet engines are simpler than reciprocating, but work at far higher temps/pressures.
1
3
10
Though the big reason for EVs is emissions, the transformative impact is coming from the vast simplification. 1 complex engine+transmission is replaced with 4 simpler motors, intelligence moves into electronics and software, physics gets more extreme (lithium battery charging).
Replying to
Probably debatable, but internal combustion physics is in many ways less extreme than managing huge battery packs. More exotic materials, more fine-grained control to make it work. IC engines need a handful of valves programmable with a camshaft. Batteries… need a computer.
1
1
15
There’s some sort of value migration chain from visible and legible to invisible and illegible. IC engines can be understood with a visual gif. Motors need classical physics math and metaphors. Battery chemistry gets you into atomic physics.
1
1
8
EUV is insane. I had no idea it was this bizarre. So this shit is going to get us down to <1nm in a decade or so huh
1
3
23
Replying to
Unfortunately it means that the physical limits of batteries are much more cruel than that of fuel systems. Battery density will likely never be better than 1 kWh/Liter, only more efficient engines and frames will produce the scaling of efficiency we need to continue improvement.
1

