Technology and teh future

[Kyonye]

I played the demo for R.U.S.E.

It took a little to get into it but not enough for me to buy the game.

[Rbstr]

A lot of people have expectations for nanotech that are well beyond rational.

There's lots of stuff in materials science and chemistry (specifically catalysis...which in some ways is materials science) that you can do with futzing around at the nano-scale. But there's only so much you can really do with orders of a handful of molecules.

For instance "nanobots" in the way we think of a general purpose robot is really not something you can do. Think about a virus...those are roughly nanoscale, they can't really do much on their own, they've got to inject their data into a cell (which would be a collection of microscale and nanoscale objects) to get stuff done.
Does that make sense? You need lots of tiny junk to get much useful done.

[Crator]

Nanorobotics is an emerging technology. Will be a while before we see anything related to that.

But for instance the most current nanotech related to repairing our bodies: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...#Drug_delivery

List of other nanotechlogy applications that are current as of today:
1 Medicine
1.1 Diagnostics
1.2 Drug delivery
1.3 Tissue engineering
2 Environment
2.1 Filtration
3 Energy
3.1 Reduction of energy consumption
3.2 Increasing the efficiency of energy production
3.3 Recycling of batteries
4 Information and communication
4.1 Memory Storage
4.2 Novel semiconductor devices
4.3 Novel optoelectronic devices
4.4 Displays
4.5 Quantum computers
5 Heavy Industry
5.1 Aerospace
5.2 Catalysis
5.3 Construction
5.3.1 Nanotechnology and constructions
5.3.2 Nanoparticles and steel
5.3.3 Nanoparticles in glass
5.3.4 Nanoparticles in coatings
5.3.5 Nanoparticles in fire protection and detection
5.3.6 Risks of using nanoparticles in construction
5.4 Vehicle manufacturers
6 Consumer goods
6.1 Foods
6.1.1 Nano-foods
6.2 Household
6.3 Optics
6.4 Textiles
6.5 Cosmetics
6.6 Agriculture

[Firefly]

lolwikipedialol

[Bags]

Originally Posted by Firefly

lolwikipedialol

lolthisisn't2001anymorelol

[Rbstr]

You've failed to see my point at all about nanorobotics. You link doesn't go against that point either.
It, in fact, has nothing to do with nano-sized robots, but nano-manipulation with an STM (Though...something on this scale of single atoms on a surface immediately falls apart at high temps because of thermal diffusion). They make the exact same conclusion I did, "Complex tasks are likely to require a group of nanorobots working cooperatively." with a wide definition of a nanorobot as a small device that performs a task.

As a guy involved in this stuff, "nanotechnology" just isn't some kind of awesomely powerful tool that comes from unexpected phenomenon that spontaneously happens when things get this small.
Sure, some things are novel, like quantum dots, but most nanotechnology is simply making use of nano-sized components of the same stuff we already use. Making them tiny allows us to more finely control structures and certain properties. (http://www.nano.umn.edu/northernnano...Nov06_Debe.pdf is an example of that in fuel cell technology)

Hell, lots of "nanotechnology" has been around for ages as has only really been renamed as such recently to catch on buzz (see catalysis...we've had nano particles forever, we've always known smaller particles = better, in general).

Most of the "Cool" nano stuff is figuring out how to use it at larger-than-lab scales rather than discovering new properties.

[Crator]

I think we are having a tomato/tomatoe discussion :P I'm not arguing any of your points. Reading that Nanorobtics link I put before says exactly that. And the #1 goal in all of it is to eventually get to a point that you are talking about. That's just SciFi right now. But all good SciFi usually gets implemented in some way eventually.

Would be awesome if we could have nanobots in our bodies to repair us. If you want to read a cool SciFi book about nanobots in this way check out Anarchy Online: Prophet without Honor. Neat stuff!

[Firefly]

Originally Posted by Bags

lolthisisn't2001anymorelol

That hasn't changed a goddamn thing.

[Bags]

Originally Posted by Firefly

That hasn't changed a goddamn thing.

I could edit something completely ridiculous into a wikipedia article and find it unchanged a few days later back in the day. If I do that same edit today it's generally reverted within minutes or seconds. Suffice to say I've never found something in wikipedia to be completely false, as I always check references. I'm sure some stuff has been butchered, but never for me.

Moot point in the end though because I just look up a topic on wikipedia and use the more scholarly references referenced in the reference section. This works surprisingly well.

[Rbstr]

Almost anything on wikipedia in (real) math and science is well cited and factually correct.

Even with politically charged areas, it's pretty easy to tell what's junk because they rarely cite anything peer reviewed.

[2coolforu]

The few things I can see guiding the future

Space travel (or lack of)
Nuclear Fusion (We've nearly got it pinned down, there's plenty of Deuterium out there)
Carbon nanotubes
Magnetohydrodynamics (Ferromagnetic body armor, magnetic-liquid rigidity, magnetic rail acceleration)

Of course the vast majority of science and high-technologists are thrown into military any way, if I was to put a bet on it I'd say the human race is on its way to failure rather than success, especially in Western cultures we think we are hot shit and amazing, that every individual is special and this other bullshit. In reality bacteria kick our ass at surviving and the vast majority of the human race achieves absolutely nothing and rides of the advancements made by a select few genii.

But hey, I'm just a cynic.

[Hezzy]

Didn't we have a thread like this 6 or 7 years ago? It would be interesting to read it!

I think I'll either be a bit higher in the company I'm in now, or probably in the police!

[krnasaur]

I'm guessing we won't need batteries because we'll be using wireless energy.

Didnt tesla try that? Thats why he built the tesla coil I thought, to attempt some sort of "wireless energy"

and computers will have 1 TB of ram

[LordReaver]

Originally Posted by krnasaur

Didnt tesla try that? Thats why he built the tesla coil I thought, to attempt some sort of "wireless energy"

and computers will have 1 TB of ram

You remind me of these.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_Versatile_Disc
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LS-R
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein-coated_disc

This is shit we have now, but are not doing anything with it, because they want to commercialize the fuck out of blu-ray first.


Here are my future predictions.

Within 25 years, rich people will have cars that fully drive themselves.
Within 10 years Smell-O Vision will be annoying you in commercials, because they are making that shit right now.
Within 15 years, Dell will be a hollow shell of their former selves ala AOL.
Within 3 years, people will realize tablets are just shitty laptops with touchscreen.
In 10 years you will wonder how you ever used your piece of shit iPhone 5
Within 15 years, we will have an electricity problem, because too many people are charging their cars.
Within 8 years there will be a full scale cyberwar between two nations.
Within 12 years, the Japanese will come up with something worse than testicle porn.
Within 13 years, the Chinese will copy the Japanese.

[Baneblade]

Isn't the world supposed to end next year? That would be different.