5 ms·

Ants can create new paths on demand. Ants on a trail typically have the same destination. Ants aren't going to park on the already tiny trail unlike humans. Bum

Ants can create new paths on demand. Ants on a trail typically have the same destination. Ants aren't going to park on the already tiny trail unlike humans. Bumps, potholes slow down cars and limit ability to increase speed unlike ants. We'll be finally able to traffic jam free when flying cars become the norm.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
handWavey 7y ago
Flying cars won't become the norm, because too many people lack the cognitive traits and skills required to fly a vehicle. I'm being charitable with my words. From cradle to grave, the overwhelming majority of people you interact with every day are too unreliable to entrust with flying vehicles. From childhood, to adulthood, to old age, most people would not, should not, could not perform well as pilots of flying vehicles. They don't have it in them. So, this being HN, let's break out the tool box filled with buzzwords. Flying cars, after all, are just another nail, and we have plenty of software hammers to hit it with. Hey! I know, what about machine learning? AI! Self driving cars that can fly! One thing missing from that equation is faith in the software development life cycle, and a belief that we can engineer life saving systems, like drawing water from a faucet. Eh, not so much. Why, if I were king, it would've already happened! ...probably not so much.
donmatito 7y ago
That's not what the article is saying. They have tested ant flow on narrow bridges where additional lanes aren't possible. From the article: "they do this through self-imposed speed regulation. When it's moderately busy, for instance, the authors found the ants actually speed up, accelerating until a maximum flow or capacity is reached. Whereas, when a trail is overcrowded, the ants restrained themselves and avoided joining until things thinned out. Plus, at high density times like this, the ants were found to change their behaviour and slow down to avoid more time-wasting collisions." We'll be finally able to traffic jam free when autopilot will make us slow appropriately in high density conditions, avoiding accordion-like brake/accelerate/brake cycles
- pif 7y ago
  > We'll be finally able to traffic jam free when autopilot will make us slow appropriately in high density conditions... It looks wonderful! Just, please, add the option into your autopilot to let me pass before playing with the best jam-reabsorbing strategy! I need to go places, not like the rest of you who hit the road just for fun!
- CodesInChaos 7y ago
  Congestion dependent speed limits have been in use for a long time on German highways.
  - Spare_account 7y ago
    The principle is sound, but the ants actually obey the rules whereas (in the UK at least) a small contingent of human drivers will ignore the limits, speeding up and slowing down between enforcement cameras. This concertina effect from just a small number of drivers is enough to slow the entire flow of traffic.
    - lotsofpulp 7y ago
      It would have happened anyway after a certain density of vehicles is exceeded, since each car and truck had different accel/decel rates. Especially if there is an incline anywhere.
  - donmatito 7y ago
    yes, speed reduction on the Paris belt was also done in order to reduce traffic jams. The argument was "peak speed is slower, but apart from night/holidays situation with empty road, you'll actually get faster to where you're going because of less jams"
- lotsofpulp 7y ago
  > We'll be finally able to traffic jam free when autopilot will make us slow appropriately in high density conditions, avoiding accordion-like brake/accelerate/brake cycles No, because each vehicle has different acceleration and deceleration rates. Watch any road with an incline and you will see congestion develop relatively quickly before the incline. And a traffic jam is inevitable when the bandwidth of a road has been exceeded. Each vehicle needs a certain amount of space in front of it, and behind it. The faster it goes, the more space it is, as well as if it’s heavy. This means for a given number of lanes, at a given speed, there exists a max number of vehicles. Once this maximum is exceeded, speed must drop as it is no longer safe to travel so close to vehicles in front and behind, and so bandwidth also drops. Hence, traffic jam. The different accel/decel rates contribute to the congestion also, as vehicles need varying amounts of time to fill the space in front of them. Bottom line, there is no solution to traffic jams other than reducing space needed to travel Per person (trains instead of cars), or increasing speeds (not possible in cars on current roads without exceeding acceptable safety risks), increasing the number of lanes (space is usually not available), and the easiest option, reduce the number of vehicles traveling the road via variable tolling based on congestion (currently the best option in my opinion).
goranovich 7y ago
They can't create underground paths or bridges on demand, they can die on the trail. Sometimes we move so slow that bumps don't matter.
pif 7y ago
> Ants on a trail typically have the same destination. In particular, they are working as a team. No single ant has any incentive to move faster than their teammates: the nest will be filled at the same speed, whether she gets there first or others do.
jdnenej 7y ago
Flying cars will never become the norm unless we work out how to produce infinite clean energy or how to turn off gravity. Traffic jams will be gone when city planners work out cars were not a good idea for transporting mass amounts of people.
amhokies 7y ago
I think once we have self-driving cars that are able to coordinate with each other, it will improve traffic significantly.
moneytide1 7y ago
As far as flying car charging stations go - we could use large microwave emitters (narrow beam): "A microwave-powered aircraft has lifting surfaces for exerting lifting forces on the aircraft in response to the propulsion of the aircraft and a rectenna array for receiving and rectifying microwave energy transmitted to the aircraft from a location remote from the aircraft. An electric motor for driving a propeller is energized by microwave energy received by the rectenna array, which is provided in a body at the underside of the aircraft. The body has its major dimensions extending horizontally and is relatively shallow with a periphery which is vertically curved so as to reduce turbulence in the airstream over the body during flight. The body is separate from the lifting surfaces and shaped to at least substantially avoid the generation of lifting forces by the body." https://patents.google.com/patent/US4955562A/en https://patents.google.com/patent/US4955562A/en How much energy can a microwave emitter send across how far? If we're talking tens of kilowatts at a distance of 5-10 miles - emitter "turrets" would be situated on towers along a path between cities. Depending on the energy storage method aboard the passenger-ferrying aircraft - the tower would be sending a charge for the duration of a straight flight path travel time of several miles. If the craft has the energy storage for an average 50 miles of travel (70 miles after adding a safety buffer), then every 30 miles the craft would receive a charge behind a shield to protect passengers from intense microwave radiation focused on its rectenna. If the towers have a range of 5 miles, then that is 10 miles of charging since the craft flies towards, over, and away from the tower. Duration of a charge could increase if the craft has the altitude to glide and thus slow and stop running engines. Microwave induced amperage can increase as the craft gets closer to the source. Since this is for inter-city travel, the towers would be located on empty land where dozens of hectacres of solar panels could provide a local dedicated grid. Night flight may not be feasible unless there is a local dense energy source. We have to consider passenger air travel (likely automated) as traditional traffic, along a straight line, like Coruscant. Multiple towers and emitters at these charging points for high density intersections or for two way "highways". This could only work if these microwave emitters can send out high energy in a very narrow beam with the turret focusing precisely on the craft. It will kill any living thing in that path. Bird populations. Insect migrations. Unshielded passengers. Also see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrolaser https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrolaser This type of "fueling station" means less weight required for the flying car's energy storage method. Traffic path charging happens intermittently at flight speeds instead of idled. ... probably just best to use a dense energy source and "fill up while parked" the traditional way before each trip?

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

handWavey 7y ago

Flying cars won't become the norm, because too many people lack the cognitive traits and skills required to fly a vehicle. I'm being charitable with my words. From cradle to grave, the overwhelming majority of people you interact with every day are too unreliable to entrust with flying vehicles. From childhood, to adulthood, to old age, most people would not, should not, could not perform well as pilots of flying vehicles. They don't have it in them. So, this being HN, let's break out the tool box filled with buzzwords. Flying cars, after all, are just another nail, and we have plenty of software hammers to hit it with. Hey! I know, what about machine learning? AI! Self driving cars that can fly! One thing missing from that equation is faith in the software development life cycle, and a belief that we can engineer life saving systems, like drawing water from a faucet. Eh, not so much. Why, if I were king, it would've already happened! ...probably not so much.

donmatito 7y ago

That's not what the article is saying. They have tested ant flow on narrow bridges where additional lanes aren't possible. From the article: "they do this through self-imposed speed regulation. When it's moderately busy, for instance, the authors found the ants actually speed up, accelerating until a maximum flow or capacity is reached. Whereas, when a trail is overcrowded, the ants restrained themselves and avoided joining until things thinned out. Plus, at high density times like this, the ants were found to change their behaviour and slow down to avoid more time-wasting collisions." We'll be finally able to traffic jam free when autopilot will make us slow appropriately in high density conditions, avoiding accordion-like brake/accelerate/brake cycles

pif 7y ago
> We'll be finally able to traffic jam free when autopilot will make us slow appropriately in high density conditions... It looks wonderful! Just, please, add the option into your autopilot to let me pass before playing with the best jam-reabsorbing strategy! I need to go places, not like the rest of you who hit the road just for fun!
CodesInChaos 7y ago
Congestion dependent speed limits have been in use for a long time on German highways.
- Spare_account 7y ago
  The principle is sound, but the ants actually obey the rules whereas (in the UK at least) a small contingent of human drivers will ignore the limits, speeding up and slowing down between enforcement cameras. This concertina effect from just a small number of drivers is enough to slow the entire flow of traffic.
  - lotsofpulp 7y ago
    It would have happened anyway after a certain density of vehicles is exceeded, since each car and truck had different accel/decel rates. Especially if there is an incline anywhere.
- donmatito 7y ago
  yes, speed reduction on the Paris belt was also done in order to reduce traffic jams. The argument was "peak speed is slower, but apart from night/holidays situation with empty road, you'll actually get faster to where you're going because of less jams"
lotsofpulp 7y ago
> We'll be finally able to traffic jam free when autopilot will make us slow appropriately in high density conditions, avoiding accordion-like brake/accelerate/brake cycles No, because each vehicle has different acceleration and deceleration rates. Watch any road with an incline and you will see congestion develop relatively quickly before the incline. And a traffic jam is inevitable when the bandwidth of a road has been exceeded. Each vehicle needs a certain amount of space in front of it, and behind it. The faster it goes, the more space it is, as well as if it’s heavy. This means for a given number of lanes, at a given speed, there exists a max number of vehicles. Once this maximum is exceeded, speed must drop as it is no longer safe to travel so close to vehicles in front and behind, and so bandwidth also drops. Hence, traffic jam. The different accel/decel rates contribute to the congestion also, as vehicles need varying amounts of time to fill the space in front of them. Bottom line, there is no solution to traffic jams other than reducing space needed to travel Per person (trains instead of cars), or increasing speeds (not possible in cars on current roads without exceeding acceptable safety risks), increasing the number of lanes (space is usually not available), and the easiest option, reduce the number of vehicles traveling the road via variable tolling based on congestion (currently the best option in my opinion).

goranovich 7y ago

They can't create underground paths or bridges on demand, they can die on the trail. Sometimes we move so slow that bumps don't matter.

pif 7y ago

> Ants on a trail typically have the same destination. In particular, they are working as a team. No single ant has any incentive to move faster than their teammates: the nest will be filled at the same speed, whether she gets there first or others do.

jdnenej 7y ago

Flying cars will never become the norm unless we work out how to produce infinite clean energy or how to turn off gravity. Traffic jams will be gone when city planners work out cars were not a good idea for transporting mass amounts of people.

amhokies 7y ago

I think once we have self-driving cars that are able to coordinate with each other, it will improve traffic significantly.

moneytide1 7y ago

As far as flying car charging stations go - we could use large microwave emitters (narrow beam): "A microwave-powered aircraft has lifting surfaces for exerting lifting forces on the aircraft in response to the propulsion of the aircraft and a rectenna array for receiving and rectifying microwave energy transmitted to the aircraft from a location remote from the aircraft. An electric motor for driving a propeller is energized by microwave energy received by the rectenna array, which is provided in a body at the underside of the aircraft. The body has its major dimensions extending horizontally and is relatively shallow with a periphery which is vertically curved so as to reduce turbulence in the airstream over the body during flight. The body is separate from the lifting surfaces and shaped to at least substantially avoid the generation of lifting forces by the body." https://patents.google.com/patent/US4955562A/en https://patents.google.com/patent/US4955562A/en How much energy can a microwave emitter send across how far? If we're talking tens of kilowatts at a distance of 5-10 miles - emitter "turrets" would be situated on towers along a path between cities. Depending on the energy storage method aboard the passenger-ferrying aircraft - the tower would be sending a charge for the duration of a straight flight path travel time of several miles. If the craft has the energy storage for an average 50 miles of travel (70 miles after adding a safety buffer), then every 30 miles the craft would receive a charge behind a shield to protect passengers from intense microwave radiation focused on its rectenna. If the towers have a range of 5 miles, then that is 10 miles of charging since the craft flies towards, over, and away from the tower. Duration of a charge could increase if the craft has the altitude to glide and thus slow and stop running engines. Microwave induced amperage can increase as the craft gets closer to the source. Since this is for inter-city travel, the towers would be located on empty land where dozens of hectacres of solar panels could provide a local dedicated grid. Night flight may not be feasible unless there is a local dense energy source. We have to consider passenger air travel (likely automated) as traditional traffic, along a straight line, like Coruscant. Multiple towers and emitters at these charging points for high density intersections or for two way "highways". This could only work if these microwave emitters can send out high energy in a very narrow beam with the turret focusing precisely on the craft. It will kill any living thing in that path. Bird populations. Insect migrations. Unshielded passengers. Also see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrolaser https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrolaser This type of "fueling station" means less weight required for the flying car's energy storage method. Traffic path charging happens intermittently at flight speeds instead of idled. ... probably just best to use a dense energy source and "fill up while parked" the traditional way before each trip?