[math-fun] (NFI) XGP/TeX dreams
I don't recall the exact date that the XGP showed up at MIT's Project Mac, but I think it was the very early 1970's. The XGP was the first bitmapped XeroGraphic Printer, and it changed the course of printing history, including leading inevitably to the Apple Macintosh/desktop publishing industry and the now ubiquitous "multifunction printer/scanner/fax" that probably all of you have in your homes. The coolest thing about the XGP is that it was available to (nearly) anyone at 545 Tech Square, and it immediately became a huge hit. Once the appropriate page layout languages and fonts became available, people twiddled with them incessantly, until their theses looked like ransom notes! One of the important steps along the way was the development of Knuth's TeX, which subsequently became the standard for mathematical publishing -- where it remains today. --- Fast forward to 2011. 3D printers exist, but don't appear to have generated the same excitement as the original XGP. I'm not sure quite why, because a 3D printer is sooo much cooler than the XGP ever was. Maybe these printers are too expensive; maybe they're too slow; maybe they're too hard to access. What is missing that would make the 3D printer today as exciting as the XGP was in the early 1970's ? Does Knuth (or a Knuth-wannabe) have to come up with 3D TeX ? What do mathematicians want from a 3D printer, anyway ? What would be the effect of putting a free 3D printer into 100 universities ? 1,000 universities ? 5,000 high schools ? 10,000 grade schools ? 50,000 libraries ? (I have no connection with any 3D printer company, but think that it is a major revolution.)
First, they're expensive, like the price of a used car. Second, it's easy to type words, but not obvious to most people how to make 3d stuff. If the printer came with a laser wand for high-res capture of objects, then it would probably be more accessible. On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Henry Baker <hbaker1@pipeline.com> wrote:
I don't recall the exact date that the XGP showed up at MIT's Project Mac, but I think it was the very early 1970's. The XGP was the first bitmapped XeroGraphic Printer, and it changed the course of printing history, including leading inevitably to the Apple Macintosh/desktop publishing industry and the now ubiquitous "multifunction printer/scanner/fax" that probably all of you have in your homes.
The coolest thing about the XGP is that it was available to (nearly) anyone at 545 Tech Square, and it immediately became a huge hit. Once the appropriate page layout languages and fonts became available, people twiddled with them incessantly, until their theses looked like ransom notes!
One of the important steps along the way was the development of Knuth's TeX, which subsequently became the standard for mathematical publishing -- where it remains today.
---
Fast forward to 2011. 3D printers exist, but don't appear to have generated the same excitement as the original XGP. I'm not sure quite why, because a 3D printer is sooo much cooler than the XGP ever was. Maybe these printers are too expensive; maybe they're too slow; maybe they're too hard to access.
What is missing that would make the 3D printer today as exciting as the XGP was in the early 1970's ?
Does Knuth (or a Knuth-wannabe) have to come up with 3D TeX ?
What do mathematicians want from a 3D printer, anyway ?
What would be the effect of putting a free 3D printer into 100 universities ? 1,000 universities ? 5,000 high schools ? 10,000 grade schools ? 50,000 libraries ?
(I have no connection with any 3D printer company, but think that it is a major revolution.)
_______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun
-- Mike Stay - metaweta@gmail.com http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~mike http://reperiendi.wordpress.com
Mike Stay has already mentioned two factors: 1. cost (dollars) of the "printer" itself, and 2. cost (learning curve) of writing the "input". Two other factors are: 3. resolution, 4. material. With respect to resolution, there were dot matrix printers before the XGP. What made the XGP so impressive was that its 200 d.p.i. (?) resolution finally reached the threshold of the individual dots being effectively invisible at standard viewing distance. Now compare George Hart's solids and surfaces that he posted a link to, a few days ago. They're very impressive constructions, but the rasterization and the "ooze" still makes an unfortunate first impression. That machine is a DECWriter, not an XGP. With respect to material, many 3D objects that people want to make are not suitable when rendered in low-temperature melting plastic. Again, this is a significant difference with the 2D world. Black toner on white paper satisfied a much larger fraction of the initial demand. Subtractive technologies (machining, more or less) have ruled the manufacture of 3D objects for the last 150 years. Before that, displacement technologies (forging, casting) were dominant. Additive technologies (earlier forms include welding and glueing) have always been an adjunct to the main event. When it comes to resolution, the precision of a modern ink-jet (or laser) printer is an extraordinary outlier among its relatives in additive technology. I too have high hopes for additive methods. But there's a long way to go yet. - John On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Henry Baker<hbaker1@pipeline.com> wrote:
I don't recall the exact date that the XGP showed up at MIT's Project Mac, but I think it was the very early 1970's. ...
One of the important steps along the way was the development of Knuth's TeX, which subsequently became the standard for mathematical publishing -- where it remains today.
---
Fast forward to 2011. 3D printers exist, but don't appear to have generated the same excitement as the original XGP. I'm not sure quite why, because a 3D printer is sooo much cooler than the XGP ever was. Maybe these printers are too expensive; maybe they're too slow; maybe they're too hard to access.
What is missing that would make the 3D printer today as exciting as the XGP was in the early 1970's ?
Does Knuth (or a Knuth-wannabe) have to come up with 3D TeX ?
The phrase "3-D printer" is catchy, but misleading: printing in the sense of reproduction of text is essentially two-dimensional. Even in 2-D, pictorial reproduction and creation is technically more complex, involving skills lying completely outside the domain of DTP; its 3-D equivalent --- sculpture --- captures better what these devices do. One obvious area of application (for which they are apparently already regularly used) is simply rapid prototyping of CAD/CAM designs, for which appropriate solid-modelling languages are already highly developed, having been utilised for many years to build virtual models for viewing on-screen, or (imposing crucial limitations) solid milling. Looking beyond old-hat industrial plotting, there seems to be no obvious reason why --- for example --- PostScript cannot be immediately generalised to 3-D, and used to drive a laser sintering prototyper. The technology is anyway still in its infancy: just around the corner are surely devices which will mix materials (cf. colour printing vs. black-and-white) and apply surface finishes, as well as improving resolution. It will have arrived when some bright postgrad programs one of these engines to reproduce itself. Now there's a prospect providing food for thought ... [Though if Mike's 3-D photocopier hits the streets first, maybe even the postgrad will be redundant.] Fred Lunnon On 8/18/11, Henry Baker <hbaker1@pipeline.com> wrote:
I don't recall the exact date that the XGP showed up at MIT's Project Mac, but I think it was the very early 1970's. The XGP was the first bitmapped XeroGraphic Printer, and it changed the course of printing history, including leading inevitably to the Apple Macintosh/desktop publishing industry and the now ubiquitous "multifunction printer/scanner/fax" that probably all of you have in your homes.
The coolest thing about the XGP is that it was available to (nearly) anyone at 545 Tech Square, and it immediately became a huge hit. Once the appropriate page layout languages and fonts became available, people twiddled with them incessantly, until their theses looked like ransom notes!
One of the important steps along the way was the development of Knuth's TeX, which subsequently became the standard for mathematical publishing -- where it remains today.
---
Fast forward to 2011. 3D printers exist, but don't appear to have generated the same excitement as the original XGP. I'm not sure quite why, because a 3D printer is sooo much cooler than the XGP ever was. Maybe these printers are too expensive; maybe they're too slow; maybe they're too hard to access.
What is missing that would make the 3D printer today as exciting as the XGP was in the early 1970's ?
Does Knuth (or a Knuth-wannabe) have to come up with 3D TeX ?
What do mathematicians want from a 3D printer, anyway ?
What would be the effect of putting a free 3D printer into 100 universities ? 1,000 universities ? 5,000 high schools ? 10,000 grade schools ? 50,000 libraries ?
(I have no connection with any 3D printer company, but think that it is a major revolution.)
_______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun
3d printers are used by some math/art folks to create (or prototype) some interesting sculptures with a geometric flavor. See for example: Bathsheba Grossman samples http://www.bathsheba.com/downloads/ A Geometric Sculpture of Carlo Séquin http://www.flickr.com/photos/jbuddenh/2333245413/in/pool-644106@N25/lightbox... Vladimir Bulatov, a geometric sculpture. http://www.flickr.com/photos/9083682@N05/2106760178/ Jim Buddenhagen On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Henry Baker <hbaker1@pipeline.com> wrote:
I don't recall the exact date that the XGP showed up at MIT's Project Mac, but I think it was the very early 1970's. The XGP was the first bitmapped XeroGraphic Printer, and it changed the course of printing history, including leading inevitably to the Apple Macintosh/desktop publishing industry and the now ubiquitous "multifunction printer/scanner/fax" that probably all of you have in your homes.
The coolest thing about the XGP is that it was available to (nearly) anyone at 545 Tech Square, and it immediately became a huge hit. Once the appropriate page layout languages and fonts became available, people twiddled with them incessantly, until their theses looked like ransom notes!
One of the important steps along the way was the development of Knuth's TeX, which subsequently became the standard for mathematical publishing -- where it remains today.
---
Fast forward to 2011. 3D printers exist, but don't appear to have generated the same excitement as the original XGP. I'm not sure quite why, because a 3D printer is sooo much cooler than the XGP ever was. Maybe these printers are too expensive; maybe they're too slow; maybe they're too hard to access.
What is missing that would make the 3D printer today as exciting as the XGP was in the early 1970's ?
Does Knuth (or a Knuth-wannabe) have to come up with 3D TeX ?
What do mathematicians want from a 3D printer, anyway ?
What would be the effect of putting a free 3D printer into 100 universities ? 1,000 universities ? 5,000 high schools ? 10,000 grade schools ? 50,000 libraries ?
(I have no connection with any 3D printer company, but think that it is a major revolution.)
_______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun
participants (5)
-
Fred lunnon -
Henry Baker -
James Buddenhagen -
John Aspinall -
Mike Stay