Regarding whether it's "pretty limited", yes and no, imo:
Yes, compared to, say, the size of a continent, the amount of new land is tiny.
However, new land is usually made in highly sought-after (high-density, high-value etc) areas [citation needed]. So it would make better sense to compare the surface of the new land to the surface of the adjacent area.
For example, the polders in the Netherlands significantly augment the country's surface. The artificial islands in Tokyo Bay significantly add to the real estate of the harbour. The artificial islands in Dubai and Bahrain significantly add to the coastline.
I think that this is enough for OP's analogy between domain parking and land speculation to reasonably stand.
A bit on the pedantic side, but you can make more land; there are dozens of artificial islands around the world, some of which have resulted from the need for more land.
The costs, of course, as well as other considerations (legal...) are of a different scale.
I've got one from Bosch (a name brand), and use it to check for steel reinforcements in concrete and power wires in walls (and, rarely, studs). I can't double check the readings non destructively, so I evaluate the device according to whether in the end I hit something or not when drilling.
The readings are imprecise at best, with lots of false positives and possibly some false negatives (no way to know).
The tool is useful, if repeated readings are coupled with domain expertise, common sense and intuition.
If you ask me if the tool, by itself, works, I'll reply "maybe". All I know is that, aided by the tool, I haven't done any damage yet.
I don't think it's the tool's fault though. Rather, it's the combination of non-destructive testing and the limited feedback.
Absolutely, it would be a most suitable replacement. I've being using it for similar purposes, as a professional architect, exclusively since 2013 or so.
Blender delivers great results, is a joy to use and has a vibrant community.
Sketching (2D/3D) with pencil and paper for rough ideas.
As soon as any accuracy is needed, AutoCAD for 2D and/or Blender for 3D. Blender is usually enough, but I'm faster in AutoCAD.
If possible, I try to physically experience the new space or object, using my imagination and any props at hand. For example, I might put masking tape on the floor, following the layout of the drawing, and walk around them pretending they are obstacles.
The phrase 'a new kind of science' is a huge red flag, but apart from this I don't think I can evaluate what I'm reading.
Does the article make any sense? Does it at least hint at a useful direction?
Or is this a case of someone holding a hammer (the language) and seeing everything as a nail (how the universe works)?
For real estate, a quick and dirty solution that comes to mind is asking price per square foot, assuming that the market itself has taken into account all the common relevant factors.
Unless price is something you intend to test against, of course.