• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Technology in our Lifetimes

coalesce

Illuminator
coalesce
Joined
Mar 10, 2003
Messages
4,739
After reading this article on genes from the Washington Post, I thought to myself: will we see the same technological advances in our lifetimes that our parents and grandparents saw in theirs? I mean, my grandmother went from mule-drawn carriages in Sicily in 1905 to Neil Armstrong on the moon in 1969. Do you think we will see that same type of advacement in our lifetimes, and if so, in what field? I think it'll be in nanotechnology and medicine.

Thanks!

Michael

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A55817-2003May29.html?nav=hptoc_n
 
half the physics papers ever published, were published since about 1990

IMO given the exponential increase in our understanding of the world around us, it'd be somewhat surprinsing if we dont see just as big technological changes...
 
Actually...

Though we have MORE advances, I don't know if they are of the same scope..... I mean, going from horse drawn carriages to the moon would be pretty much for humans to leave to solar system. And that's probably not going to happen in our lifetimes.
 
Though we have MORE advances, I don't know if they are of the same scope..... I mean, going from horse drawn carriages to the moon would be pretty much for humans to leave to solar system. And that's probably not going to happen in our lifetimes.
Click to expand...

I am sure they said the same about getting to the moon.
 
Great article about the rate of technological change and what will be seen in the future. the site it's part of is a goldmine for anyone interested in technology, AI, and singularity.
 
Re: Actually...

sorgoth said:
Though we have MORE advances, I don't know if they are of the same scope..... I mean, going from horse drawn carriages to the moon would be pretty much for humans to leave to solar system. And that's probably not going to happen in our lifetimes.
Click to expand...

read the article i linked to :)
 
The next great technological advance will be in the field of computers and communication.

In fact, nine out of the next ten great technological advances will be in the field of computers and communication.
 
PixyMisa said:
The next great technological advance will be in the field of computers and communication.

In fact, nine out of the next ten great technological advances will be in the field of computers and communication.
Click to expand...

++
 
look at the last century, all the great leaps came about due to nessessity in wartime. WWI gave us aircraft (a mere curiosity before) and many other things.

WWII. more increases in aircraft technology, guided rocketry, jet engines, zip fasteners, obscure (and evil) medical research and electronic computers.

YOu could argue that space research came about due to the cold war.

Does it need a war to bring about such great leaps, I for one hope not and would be happy to live without whatever we don't have yet if it stops a war.
 
My chief worry about scientific advance is the knee-jerk reactionism demonstrated by our political parties.

If the recent hullabaloo regarding stem-cell research and the general mis-comprehension of the subject demonstrated by our legislatures is any clue, I fear for the future of free exchange of information and reserach in the scientific community.

I also don't like the idea of privatization of so much research. I understand that profits can be a huge incentive to pusue useful research, but I fear that the scramble for patent grabs for everything from inventions that haven't been made yet to patenting viruses and sections of the human genome could stifle world-wide research cooperation.

If anything I imagine wars and other security concerns might harm the progress of scientific investigation since so many papers have been classified lately.
 
Yes, computational singularity.

But what about the flip side of the coin - nanotechnology?
It has the potential to make solid objects appear in thin air or to cause liquid to transform into solid objects and vice versa (as in "Terminator").

And the combination of computational singularity and nanotechnology could see our human civilization superceded by superintelligent autonomous robots.

Of course, we would not see that.
We would all be dead.

regards,
BillyJoe
 
Nanotechnology isn't magic; it has to obey the laws of chemistry and physics. The nano-thingies have to be solid themselves (they are machines, after all).

If something is made up of interconnected nanites, it can in theory change shape at will, but doing so requires energy and produces heat. Too much heat and the nanites stop working. Kill the power source and the whole thing dies.

Nanotechnology can't make a solid object appear in thin air, though airborne nanites might be effectively invisible until they group together. But airborne nanites have an even worse problem with power.

And the combination of the computational singularity and nanotechnology could see our human civilisation superceded by a civilisation of superintelligent, immortal, nano-assisted humans too.
 
PixyMisa said:

And the combination of the computational singularity and nanotechnology could see our human civilisation superceded by a civilisation of superintelligent, immortal, nano-assisted humans too.
Click to expand...

Or if singularity has been achieved with another civilisation on another planet, then there's one heading for us at close to the speed of light, that will see us superceded by superintelligent nano-aliens.

Something to look forward to.
 
PixyMisa said:
Nanotechnology isn't magic; it has to obey the laws of chemistry and physics.
Click to expand...
It does obey the laws of physics.
It just appears to be magic.

PixyMisa said:
The nano-thingies have to be solid themselves (they are machines, after all).
Click to expand...
Yeah but....they are so small that....

PixyMisa said:
If something is made up of interconnected nanites, it can in theory change shape at will, but doing so requires energy and produces heat. Too much heat and the nanites stop working. Kill the power source and the whole thing dies.
Click to expand...
Well, in theory, it is possible. Whether the details can be worked out remains to be seen.

PixyMisa said:
Nanotechnology can't make a solid object appear in thin air, though airborne nanites might be effectively invisible until they group together.
Click to expand...
So, in other words, they can.

PixyMisa said:
But airborne nanites have an even worse problem with power.
Click to expand...
I do believe you are correct on this one.....but a mere technicality. ;)

PixyMisa said:
And the combination of the computational singularity and nanotechnology could see our human civilisation superceded by a civilisation of superintelligent, immortal, nano-assisted humans too.
Click to expand...
This is unlikely.
Robots with near infinite computing power augmented by self-replicating nanomachines are unlikely to be able to be contolled by mere humans.
Hell, we can't even control the internet.

regards,
Billyjoe.
 
BillyJoe said:
Yeah but....they are so small that....
Click to expand...
...They can flow like crankcase oil. Yeah. Actually, they'd probably catch on each other and wouldn't flow very well at all. You can make fine powders flow through a pipeline by blowing air through them, though.
Well, in theory, it is possible. Whether the details can be worked out remains to be seen.
Click to expand...
Well, we can certainly work out the energy requirements right now - it's just chemistry. And that alone tells us that a lot of the wilder speculation is bunk.
So, in other words, they can.
Click to expand...
Nope. If they're fine enough to float in the air, whatever it is they construct will be thinner than ricepaper. You'll be able to poke a hole in it with your finger.
I do believe you are correct on this one.....but a mere technicality. ;)
Click to expand...
A big mere technicality, though.
This is unlikely.
Robots with near infinite computing power augmented by self-replicating nanomachines are unlikely to be able to be contolled by mere humans.
Click to expand...
But the mere humans will also have near infinite computing power augmented by self-replicating nano-machines. That's kind of the point.
Hell, we can't even control the internet.
Click to expand...
Don't know about that. Seems to work fine for me.
 
Okay PixyMisa,

It seems you are too good for me. :(
(Doesn't necessarily mean that you aren't badly wrong though. ;) )

Your take is that nanotechnology is science fantasy rather than science fiction because of the energy requirements. I hope you are right because nanotechnology (and computational singularity) have been used by various authors in "End Times" scenarios.

However, I am not sure about your point about "humans also having near infinite computing power augmented by self-replicating nano-machines". My point was that they will lose control as soon as they try to produce computers/robots that exceed them in intelligence. The only way to do that is to enable them to rewire their own hardware. Then, any instruction hardwired into the robot not to harm humans will not be worth the paper it was not written on.

regards,
BillyJoe
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom