▲ | mitthrowaway2 3 days ago | |
That kind of reconstruction effort only happens with a huge budget, which means for most of these technologies, it never happens at all. Academic papers only give a basic starting point; especially for materials science, people dedicate the span of their entire years to developing manufacturing processes beyond what ever gets published in public. With enough motivation you can have the pleasure of following their footsteps, but it will consume more than one lifetime to do so. And nobody will fund that rediscovery effort, because there's no money in niche industries. A result of this is that, in some rare cases, there are certain machines and instruments where the best ones in existence were manufactured in the '80s and are jealousy hoarded in temperature-controlled vaults, because nobody today can make a better one and the industry that produced them is completely gone. FOGBANK is a great example of a lost technology that had to be rediscovered at great expense, and that only happened because the military could write a blank cheque. But that's exactly a lost technology; they had to do the R&D all over again. And even then, they didn't have to make up for a bigger market that vanished; they were always the only customer for FOGBANK, so the economics hadn't changed. Imagine if the economically producing that material required a customer base the size of Kodak's peak market share to amortize the capital cost of a production run. Most technologies don't have infinite money available to recreate from scratch; they depend on economies of scale and die out with their markets. |