That is rather interesting, not least because it seems to initiate a whole new field of research:
Micro-geometries that inhibit quorum sensing.
I would not be surprised if vast areas (literally) of plant and animal surfaces had evolved to do
precisely that. Lungs, anyone?
Best wishes
Adrian
Dr Adrian Bowyer
http://adrianbowyer.net
On 16/05/13 20:14, MECHOLSKY,JOHN JOSEPH,JR wrote:
> Do you know about Sharklet? It was inspired by sharkskin: http://www.sharklet.com/technology/
>
> Jack
>
> John J. Mecholsky, Jr., Ph.D
> Materials Science & Engineering Department
> 237A Rhines Hall
> PO Box 116400
> University of Florida
> Gainesville, FL 32611-6400
>
> Telephone: 352 846 3306
> FAX: 352 846 3355
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Engineers and biologists mechanical design list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Julian Vincent
> Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2013 9:45 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Ghosties
>
> I certainly try to stick to that positive viewpoint. However - - mention of shark skin brings up another problem. How many biomimetic design solutions are actually due to physicists and engineers having worked out how a particular phenomenon works, then it's been recognised in biology and hailed as a new phenomenon? Shark skin certainly falls into that category.
> Velcro is good, though, so are cats' eyes as road markings and Lotus effect. I think gecko tape is OK. I agree that a prep. list would be a useful thing.
> One of the problems about doing science is knowing the history behind various ideas. I am reading Gerry Pollack's latest book on the strange physics of water. He describes what he calls the exclusion zone - a layer of water molecules about 100 µm thick built up rapidly against a surface - that he discovered and has studied. It's been known in biology for quite a few years under the name of the unstirred layer, but Gerry found that out only later. I suspect biomimetics is in the same category - if you don't know your history you are condemned to relive it. If you *do* know your history you can apply some of the earlier ideas - which is what happened with shark skin, once the full connection had been made.
>
> Julian
>
> On 16 May 2013, at 14:17, Daniel Weihs wrote:
>
>> Hello Julian
>>
>> The best way is to describe real biomimetic systems that are of public
>> interest, and well known ( but not the biomimetic aspect) Thus
>> sharkskin drag reducing surfaces, Velcro , etc. are good examples,
>> that all of us, when talking with the public , should point out. A
>> prep. List may be useful
>>
>> Danny
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Engineers and biologists mechanical design list
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Julian Vincent
>> Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2013 3:16 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Ghosties
>>
>> There are quite a few stories which do the rounds regularly of systems
>> which purport to be derived biomimetically and are nothing of the
>> sort. I have researched some of these, since it seems to me that it's
>> important to sort out how ideas can profitably be moved from biology
>> to technology, and counter-examples might be useful as examples of
>> bad science, wishful thinking, post hoc propter hoc, etc.
>>
>> The ones I know of are:
>>
>> **Roof of the Crystal Palace: The corrugated roof was invented in
>> 1810 or earlier by John Claudius Loudon, an inventive
>> horticulturalist, some 40 years before the Crystal Palace was designed
>> and (as far as I can tell) before people in the UK had come across the
>> floating leaves of the lily, Amazonica.. The corrugated roof bears no
>> relation to the leaves of lily, but the half-round arch which tops the
>> Crystal Palace (not present in the original drawings) is very
>> reminiscent of the leaf in its design. There may be a connection there. A result of lax reportage by the Press?
>> **Eiffel Tower: This was the first structure to be designed according
>> to wind loadings. Its hierarchical strutted structure is probably a
>> result of limited access to the site. The Tower is nothing to do with
>> the structure of bones, tulip stems, or anything else biological.
>> **Sydney Opera House: Nothing whatsoever to do with shells. It's a
>> shell structure, but that's a technical description. Nothing in the
>> original accounts of its design or structure says anything about a biomimetic origin.
>> **Polar Bear light guides: The bear's hair does not function as a
>> light guide (shown experimentally) although light guides arranged in
>> the same way can have useful properties.
>> **Eastgate Centre, Harare: Doesn't work like a termite mound
>> (technically as a stack - chimney - which can draw air through the
>> system) because termite mounds don't work like that! The building was
>> designed before people understood how the nest's gas exchange system
>> really works (it seems to be more like our lungs, semi-tidal and not
>> mixing very much). And people ignore that insects can cope with a
>> wide range of CO2 in the air surrounding them.
>>
>> Any more to add to this hit list (there must be!)?
>> How do we rectify these fairy tales?
>>
>> Julian Vincent
