3 ms·

> MIT's artificial leaf is ten times more efficient than the real thing This doesn't surprise me, to be honest. Organisms have evolved to be fit enough to surv

> MIT's artificial leaf is ten times more efficient than the real thing This doesn't surprise me, to be honest. Organisms have evolved to be fit enough to survive, and efficiency above a certain level might not affect an organisms fitness (or might even affect it negatively).

johnny22 16y ago
yes, if the plant sucks up too much power it might get too hot and lose too much of the often more scarce water. or something like that anyways..
- erikpukinskis 16y ago
  Photosynthesis stops above a certain temperature due to quantum effects anyway, so there's a natural governor. And I assume plants' vascular system also does some cooling.
VladRussian 16y ago
they didn't specify efficiency criteria. Was it input solar energy to O2 output? to H2 output? Was it input solar energy to electricity output - trees doesn't directly produce it, so what thermal efficiency coefficient they applied to calculate conversion, if it is the case? ...
thehotdon 16y ago
Engineering beats evolution, every time.
- photophotoplasm 16y ago
  Horses for courses, and all that.
  - thehotdon 16y ago
    Well, it's not just a difference in optimization goals; it's a difference in methodology. Evolution optimizes by using heuristics and stochastic search--piling crap on top of crap, and obfuscating into oblivion. Engineering optimizes by finding elegant mathematical solutions. Sorry, getting off-topic. I guess I'm just bitter about not being a robot.
    - wladimir 16y ago
      Evolution "optimizes" for a lot more constraints. It needs to be self-healing, and work for a long time without any outside maintenance and monitoring. It collects its own energy, and competes with (unpredictable) other organisms for nutrients and sunlight. Good luck engineering a system like that. Elegant mathematical solutions are great, but only exist for limited, well-defined problems.
- dools 16y ago
  Except for baby formula vs. breast feeding!

johnny22 16y ago

yes, if the plant sucks up too much power it might get too hot and lose too much of the often more scarce water. or something like that anyways..

erikpukinskis 16y ago
Photosynthesis stops above a certain temperature due to quantum effects anyway, so there's a natural governor. And I assume plants' vascular system also does some cooling.

VladRussian 16y ago

they didn't specify efficiency criteria. Was it input solar energy to O2 output? to H2 output? Was it input solar energy to electricity output - trees doesn't directly produce it, so what thermal efficiency coefficient they applied to calculate conversion, if it is the case? ...

thehotdon 16y ago

Engineering beats evolution, every time.

photophotoplasm 16y ago
Horses for courses, and all that.
- thehotdon 16y ago
  Well, it's not just a difference in optimization goals; it's a difference in methodology. Evolution optimizes by using heuristics and stochastic search--piling crap on top of crap, and obfuscating into oblivion. Engineering optimizes by finding elegant mathematical solutions. Sorry, getting off-topic. I guess I'm just bitter about not being a robot.
  - wladimir 16y ago
    Evolution "optimizes" for a lot more constraints. It needs to be self-healing, and work for a long time without any outside maintenance and monitoring. It collects its own energy, and competes with (unpredictable) other organisms for nutrients and sunlight. Good luck engineering a system like that. Elegant mathematical solutions are great, but only exist for limited, well-defined problems.
dools 16y ago
Except for baby formula vs. breast feeding!