Is there anything useful about this? Maybe as an inexpensive(?) core for high strength skins?
If I can make the shipping boxes less fragile with same amount of paper as current cardboard box designs, it is a win.
Does that mean we could increase the orders of magnitude if we made it smaller? Lots of tiny stuff needs mechanical support. And lots of folded small things agglomerated is another way to say biology.
Even if we include things like hydroxyapatite in teeth, or even lignin, those are more like byproducts of biology than active biology itself.
I was thinking microscopic versus nanoscale. Folding something out of a flat material is probably cheaper than machining it, and if it's stronger than additively manufacturing it you have applications in medical devices and aerospace for starters.
Directly: no, the end of the article has a nice list of reasons why, somewhat hidden
(ex. "Actual shelters...need to respond to multidirectional loads" = these were tested with load in one direction)
Miles, if you're reading this, it's useful. You're already doing what .1% of people do. I call them journeys and emphasize they're a million steps without clear direction, and if you're lucky, maybe positive feedback along the way. You're just on step N < 1,000,000. This works out, in some way, you already know it's not literally "yes this is sooo useful that we should start autofolding it at 1000x scale". It will work out. maybe as exactly this, this with some tweaks, or the $25K helps you do $X, or the publicity helps you do $Y.
Tents don't need to be strong in compression - there's no weight on the roof. And obviously paper is not a material that scales up or would be practical for outdoor use.
Just a bit confused by the obvious mismatch here - maybe it's the journalist putting more weight on the disaster application than the kid did.
While this probably does have incredible Z-axis strength, I can't imagine it being very strong with any kind of lateral loads.
14yo won $25k for origami that holds 10k times its weight - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46106871 - Dec 2025 (9 comments)
The idea of origami steel sheets has stuck on my mind ever since I found out about laser welding. Cutting thin 2mm sheets of steel, stitching them back together in different shapes, and holding tons of weight? That sounds very compelling to me.
I know it's been used to build engines, which suggests they are strong, but there's also all this process around ancient swords around tempering, folding, etc that suggests that maybe just 3D-printing metals might result in weaker structures.
This, clearly very clever, young man is 14 years old. The article says: "Wu had always been fascinated with the ancient Japanese art of origami, but he really began indulging in it as a hobby about six years ago."
At eight. He was *indulging* in a hobby at eight years old. Indulging in a hobby should be a pre-retirement activity. What an incredible weight the attitude of the writer puts on kids.
I don't think indulge means what you think it means.
For anyone who hasn't understood my meaning:
Indulge is a word that implies that you're allowing yourself something that you might not ordinarily. The point being: it is (or should be) silly to suggest that a child can be said to indulge in a hobby. This is because the further implication is that an eight year old might show some restraint and focus on their book learning and networking.
I think it would be fun to build a playhouse out of it.
edit: What, they geoblocked a ~1min clip, wow.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lego_Masters_(American_TV_seri...
Adding 1 to _____ causes a doubling of resistance to pressure, adding 2 is a quadrupling, adding 3 is an octupling, what goes in the blank?
Agreed. But it doesn't go viral as much. Every cool robotics research goes with a comment that says "it could be useful for disaster response in a post-apocalyptic world where the conditions have changed in such a way that only my robot can save us".
But the parents are doing lots of unappreciated work here.
/parent here
Parents or a teacher most likely guided this kid to empirically measure how much weight a known origami fold can hold. I mean I remember that we were guided to do similar experiments at school when I was the same age... I don't remember making the news for "14-year olds empirically confirm Newton's law" :-).
[1] https://www.societyforscience.org/jic/2025-top-300-junior-in... [2] https://www.societyforscience.org/jic/2025-finalists/
https://www.societyforscience.org/jic/2025-project-showcase/
So how could he patent it?
I join the parent: it's a kid who empirically evaluated how much weight an existing fold can hold. It's not like he solved a hundred years old mathematical problem.
I’m glad I learned OS in depth during high school via Gentoo linux. And engineering/physics/math in college. It’s very easy to assimilate any new knowledge which can be understood through those areas of first principles.
But learning more advanced math is quite a task now.
this was rather famously the technique of Jonas Salk to learn and master things, switch fields every so often, giving you a wide base of disciplines to apply to new fields.
I have ;-) far too many times! Even going back and taking undergrad math coursework that my engineering curriculum didn't have like Discrete Math or Statistics got a lot harder than calculus / differential equations was when I was younger. I felt like I got less out of each hour, and also couldn't put in as many hours - not just because I have more responsibilities, but also because my brain just gets tired after fewer hours.
Never underestimate our motivation.
Although I've had to restrict it to the 2 desktop machines. Maybe I should give it a shot again on the laptops, now that binary packages are universally available...
https://theartian.com/ruth-asawa-patent-collaboration/
The boy experimented to find the optimal parameters (height, width, angles) for load bearing of that earlier invention.
So, the result of his work would warrant a new patent, of course with reference to all earlier patents of which his work is an improvement.
I was more ready to accept the headline if it had been invented by the kid.
Are you telling me you can't roll up 10 origami papers and stand them on a reasonably stable origami pattern?
that makes way more sense
not enough coffee bcak
No. It’s a sign of drive and discipline.
The latter, specifically the focus element, overlaps with autism. But more broadly it does not. (There are a lot of impressive teenagers applying themselves diligently to impressive ends. Most of them are not on the spectrum, though I suspect mild autism is slightly over-represented in that set.)
Would you say the same for a teenage sports prodigy?