NationStates Jolt Archive

What will life be like in 50 years? Will there be a war? Will anarchy ensue? Will there be utopia? Or will it be the same?

I'll be 110 years old and self-proclaimed queen of Colorado.

Life will be good.

:cool:

HURD 1.0 will be released!

We'll have vastly extended, or indefinitely extendable lifespans, most or all major diseases, including aging, will be cured or treatable, communications will be significantly more advanced and more interactive, prototype versions of simulated reality will be emerging on to the market and we will have fully self-aware AI and robots whose role in our society will be one of major debate. Overall, our society will be far, far closer to "utopia" than it has been at any time in the past, the present included.

Nanotechnology will be an established and powerful aspect of our society, changing virtually all aspects of it we know now. Molecular manufacturing and picotechnology will be in their early growth stage (as nanotech is now), and there will be talk of femtotechnology and smaller on the horizon. These devices will be ubiquitous and available to a mass market much like computers or the internet are today.

Also, the world's energy problems will have been alleviated, perhaps after a period of economic trouble due to fossil fuel depletion, due to developments in alternative energy and changes in the infrastructure to accommodate more of these energy sources. Personal transportation, urban design, and culture will all be alt A side effect will be a significant reduction of environmental damage and greatly reduced greenhouse gas emissions.

We'll have vastly extended, or indefinitely extendable lifespans, most or all major diseases, including aging, will be cured or treatable, communications will be significantly more advanced and more interactive, prototype versions of simulated reality will be emerging on to the market and we will have fully self-aware AI and robots whose role in our society will be one of major debate. Overall, our society will be far, far closer to "utopia" than it has been at any time in the past, the present included.

One question: how will the earth sustain the ballooning population?

Personally, I think the West would have gone through some economic upheaval with the baby-boom retirement combined with changes in energy form; however, we would have emerged in reasonably good condition. I also think that it is likely that we would have gone to war at least twice, once against the PRC and once against Islam; and won both wars. Also, I believe that morally we would have slid even further and things such as beastiality and polygamy would be tolerated along with other things deemed immoral today; chances also are that crime would have skyrocketed, especially with the death of proper disclipline for children and the death of proper punishment for criminals.

Technologically, we would probably be much further than today, although I certainly do not want to think like people did fifty years ago when they expected flying cars and Mach 6 jets by 2000

Duke Nukem Forever will still not be out.

Thoroughly shitty.

Unless we get very lucky.

We will have been killed in 2037. During that year, NEO 2002 DO20 will make two close passes to earth, scientists think it will most likely hit.

One question: how will the earth sustain the ballooning population?

Population growth slows dramatically as places develop economically. For example, the population growth of India has fallen from 2.1% per year in the 1980's to 1.3% by 2016, and China's has fallen from 1.5% in the 80's to 0.6% today. In the developed world, population growth is either at replacement or declining; the only places left are those currently not developed, and that will continue to shrink as more and more of the world is developed and capable of investing in underdeveloped regions.

So, by the 2050's, even the 2030's, population will have long leveled off and will decline. Also, with advances in GM crops and farm technology the efficiency and productivity of our farms will have increased markedly. Already agriculture is one of the fastest growing industries in terms of productivity, and that trend shows no signs of slowing any time soon.

Any increases due to longevity will be offset by slowing birthrates and rising agricultural production.

don't know, but we definately will not have flying cars, teleportation, Swissmetro, invisibility suits, portable TV, or personal jetpacks.

Technologically, we would probably be much further than today, although I certainly do not want to think like people did fifty years ago when they expected flying cars and Mach 6 jets by 2000

At the same time, however, they also never conceived of the internet, modern telecommunications or miniaturization, all of which are far more beneficial and world changing than flying cars. For example, Arthur C. Clarke made the prediction that future space stations would have to have human crews so that they could change the vacuum tubes.

It's going to change a lot, but the particulars are still a mystery.

don't know, but we definately will not have flying cars, teleportation, Swissmetro, invisibility suits, portable TV, or personal jetpacks.

Those two I wouldn't be so sure about. We're already nailing down the underlying mechanisms of teleportation, and advances in optics are making cloaking a real possibility.

Anarchy terrifies me.

*commits suicide*

I will have turned everyone into wolves through nano-technology and chemistry.

I, as a wolf, will also be part electric eel.

Anarchy terrifies me.

It's the last hope I have.

It's the last hope I have.

For only through pain does man learn, and thus only through anarchy can utopia come.

Sad but true.

One question: how will the earth sustain the ballooning population?


The fully self-aware AI will have open season.:p

We're already nailing down the underlying mechanisms of teleportation

What sort of teleportation?

What sort of teleportation?

We can teleport light from lasers to objects up to half a meter away. Of course, that doesn't mean much to us carbon-based organisms, nor does it mean much on the scale of our society, but the ability to teleport light has major benefits for communications and optics. And, of course, optics and communications are two of the major drivers of our economic and technological development. It's highly beneficial.

It would, for example, enable far more effective and secure real-time communication over long distances as well as advance the technology behind teleporting objects as well.

For only through pain does man learn, and thus only through anarchy can utopia come.

That's not exactly the way I was thinking about it.

don't know, but we definately will not have flying cars, teleportation, Swissmetro, invisibility suits, portable TV, or personal jetpacks.

We've had portable TVs for about 10 years.

We'll have vastly extended, or indefinitely extendable lifespans, most or all major diseases, including aging, will be cured or treatable, communications will be significantly more advanced and more interactive, prototype versions of simulated reality will be emerging on to the market and we will have fully self-aware AI and robots whose role in our society will be one of major debate. Overall, our society will be far, far closer to "utopia" than it has been at any time in the past, the present included.

Nanotechnology will be an established and powerful aspect of our society, changing virtually all aspects of it we know now. Molecular manufacturing and picotechnology will be in their early growth stage (as nanotech is now), and there will be talk of femtotechnology and smaller on the horizon. These devices will be ubiquitous and available to a mass market much like computers or the internet are today.

Also, the world's energy problems will have been alleviated, perhaps after a period of economic trouble due to fossil fuel depletion, due to developments in alternative energy and changes in the infrastructure to accommodate more of these energy sources. Personal transportation, urban design, and culture will all be alt A side effect will be a significant reduction of environmental damage and greatly reduced greenhouse gas emissions.

You are insanely optimistic, Vetalia. I doubt even a tenth of this will happen, possibly none of it at all thanks to Peak Oil.

self-proclaimed queen of Colorado.
Oh, I think not. No queens in my state! Democracy now, democracy forever.

I'll be 69. I don't care what the world is like, I'll be retired! :)

You are insanely optimistic, Vetalia. I doubt even a tenth of this will happen, possibly none of it at all thanks to Peak Oil.

I'll be alive to see it either way...we'll know for sure once it happens.

I'll be alive to see it either way...we'll know for sure once it happens.

Aye, that much is true.

'Course, Lavos could kill us all. That would be neat, in a sad, JRPG fan kind of way.

Mayan Gods, supported by a newly animated army of rubber ducks equipped with AK-74 Assault Rifles.

It will partially be my fault due to my misuse of noodles in the Great War of the Greeting Card Companies.

Not necessarily. something could happen while your asleep, wouldn't know what hit you. A freak piano accident, maybe.

Yeah, that would suck. Really, there's not much more to say than that.

That's not exactly the way I was thinking about it.

But you gotta admit, the only way we can reach utopia is after we practically die from large-scale gang wars.

And from using all our resources Road Warrior style.

I'll be alive to see it either way...we'll know for sure once it happens.

Not necessarily. something could happen while you're asleep, wouldn't know what hit you. A freak piano accident, maybe.

I personally feel that by that time period a lack of fresh, readily accessible water (meaning without the distilling process from oceanic water) and the steady, uncontrolled, and apparently exponential increase in population over time will bring the majority of the world to the brink of total destitution, and the privileged classes of the world will be destroyed in revolution and rebellion. Anarchy will descend and humanity will either experience a major loss in population and return to a Dark Age, or cross the point of no return and completely wipe itself out through the use of either nuclear/biological/chemical agents or through a total destruction of agriculture.

Indonesia and Australia go head at it in a blood war lasting long then ww2

We will have been killed in 2037. During that year, NEO 2002 DO20 will make two close passes to earth, scientists think it will most likely hit.

No, scientists have predicted that it's not going to hit, considering that it will be further away than the fucking moon.

50 years from now?

.....Nationstates 2 will be released and then 5 minutes later will be the apocalypse :rolleyes:

50 years from now?


.....Nationstates 2 will be released and then 5 minutes later will be the apocalypse :rolleyes:



lol jk jkNo, you're totally right. :p

.....Nationstates 2 will be released and then 5 minutes later will be the apocalypse :rolleyes:

No, there will be three seals of the apocalypse:

1. The release of Duke Nukem Forever
2. The release of Starcraft: Ghost
3. The release of NS2

No, there will be three seals of the apocalypse:

1. The release of Duke Nukem Forever
2. The release of Chrono Break/Brake
3. The release of NS2
Fixed.

What will life be like in 50 years? Will there be a war? Will anarchy ensue? Will there be utopia? Or will it be the same?

Only 5 people will be left alive and will be forever tormented by a malevolent super-computer.

We will have been killed in 2037. During that year, NEO 2002 DO20 will make two close passes to earth, scientists think it will most likely hit.

Hmmmm... I can't seem to find anything on that one.

http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/iau/lists/CloseApp.html

Do you have the correct designation?

The closest I found was Asteroid 99942 Apophis 2004 MN4.
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/384/1

No, scientists have predicted that it's not going to hit, considering that it will be further away than the fucking moon.

Indeed. http://www.geocities.com/douglasrana/2004mn4.htm
And even if it did hit, it's not even close to an extinctor.


We'll have vastly extended, or indefinitely extendable lifespans, most or all major diseases, including aging, will be cured or treatable, communications will be significantly more advanced and more interactive, prototype versions of simulated reality will be emerging on to the market and we will have fully self-aware AI and robots whose role in our society will be one of major debate. Overall, our society will be far, far closer to "utopia" than it has been at any time in the past, the present included.

Nanotechnology will be an established and powerful aspect of our society, changing virtually all aspects of it we know now. Molecular manufacturing and picotechnology will be in their early growth stage (as nanotech is now), and there will be talk of femtotechnology and smaller on the horizon. These devices will be ubiquitous and available to a mass market much like computers or the internet are today.

Also, the world's energy problems will have been alleviated, perhaps after a period of economic trouble due to fossil fuel depletion, due to developments in alternative energy and changes in the infrastructure to accommodate more of these energy sources. Personal transportation, urban design, and culture will all be alt A side effect will be a significant reduction of environmental damage and greatly reduced greenhouse gas emissions.

I'm going to have to agree with Kyronea that your predictions are way off the mark, especially if one considers the benchmark to be wide spread common use, but for different reasoning. I think you are wildly over-estimating the rate of technological change. Pico tech and even fermotech in 50 years? No way, no how. The most basic nanotech might be in common use in 50 years. Maybe.

Only 5 people will be left alive and will be forever tormented by a malevolent super-computer.

They'll have to play chess for food at successively higher and higher levels of difficulty.

Only 5 people will be left alive and will be forever tormented by a malevolent super-computer.

That would make a pretty good sitcom...

But I think the sitcom will be extinct by then.

To quote Keynes, "in the long run we're all dead anyway." Out of context this will be misunderstood, but it suits my purposes just fine. :) I sincerely doubt anarchy (or even anarchism) will be present any time soon in the future. Just more of the present-day ennui combined with flashier technology. Perhaps we'll devise ourselves a nice little BNW-style society with a supercomputer to run it for us. That should be fun. Until the computer decides that humans are an affront to logic, of course. ^^

Pico tech and even fermotech in 50 years?

Picto- and femto-?

they're smaller than Nano

What will life be like in 50 years? Will there be a war? Will anarchy ensue? Will there be utopia? Or will it be the same?

Pretty much the same path as we're on now.

Peak Oil will happen, but won't be nearly as bad as the scare mongers have it. It'll be a bump in the road.
Water will be a bigger problem.
Climate change will also be a bump in the road, but nastier. We'll probably see at least another couple of cities taken out hard a la NOLA.
The biggest immediate problems will be economic and political. The teens and 20s will see an extended boomer-bust recession.
Technology will have advanced a fair bit, but don't expect Turing grade AIs or nanotech beyond the very basics. And flying cars will be available, but not in common use.

I'm going to have to agree with Kyronea that your predictions are way off the mark, especially if one considers the benchmark to be wide spread common use, but for different reasoning. I think you are wildly over-estimating the rate of technological change. Pico tech and even fermotech in 50 years? No way, no how. The most basic nanotech might be in common use in 50 years. Maybe.

Nanotech is going to take off in the next two decades; we're in a position now like the internet was in the 1970's; we have the basic technology, but we need to work out the infrastructure, make it cheaper, and make it user-friendly.

The kind of money that is building behind this stuff is pretty significant especially in the biotech sector where these devices are showing major effectiveness against multiple diseases. There are still some barriers remaining before commercialization can become a reality, but it's not that far off.


And femto/picotech is going to be easier to attain once we have developed nanotech. It's a feedback loop; nanotech makes it easier to manipulate things on the femto level, which enables us to manipulate things on the pico level, and so forth.

Picto- and femto-?

Picotech and, yes, femtotech.

they're smaller than Nano

I think he was just picking on my spelling... ;)

Nanotech is going to take off in the next two decades; we're in a position now like the internet was in the 1970's; we have the basic technology, but we need to work out the infrastructure, make it cheaper, and make it user-friendly.

That's a bit of a stretch to say that we're at the same point with nanotech now as we were ith computer nets in the 70s. Remember, ARPANET was already up by then. We have yet to achieve the same level of basics for nanotech. And then, it took 35 years or so for it to start to come into widespread use.

The kind of money that is building behind this stuff is pretty significant especially in the biotech sector where these devices are showing major effectiveness against multiple diseases. There are still some barriers remaining before commercialization can become a reality, but it's not that far off.

I'm not disagreeing with you that it'll happen, just with your time scale for it. I think people tend to overlook the human factor in tech adaptation.

And femto/picotech is going to be easier to attain once we have developed nanotech. It's a feedback loop; nanotech makes it easier to manipulate things on the femto level, which enables us to manipulate things on the pico level, and so forth.

Again, I simply think you're underestimating the time it will take, especially for those to come into wide spread usage.

And femto/picotech is going to be easier to attain once we have developed nanotech. It's a feedback loop; nanotech makes it easier to manipulate things on the femto level, which enables us to manipulate things on the pico level, and so forth.
An atom is 0.1 to 0.5 nm wide. Femtotech and picotech aren't going to happen.

I am pretty sure I will be back in diapers by then, so I don't really care......well, as long as someone is around to change my diaper. :eek: :cool:

they're smaller than Nano

I was correcting spelling

Although I got Pico wrong, silly me.

And femto/picotech is going to be easier to attain once we have developed nanotech. It's a feedback loop; nanotech makes it easier to manipulate things on the femto level, which enables us to manipulate things on the pico level, and so forth.

And what, pray tell, will femto-tech be made of?

And what, pray tell, will femto-tech be made of?

don't let facts get in the way of a discussion.

I was correcting spelling

Although I got Pico wrong, silly me.

'Tis one of Murphy's Laws of the Net - any correction must contain a mistake.

An atom is 0.1 to 0.5 nm wide. Femtotech and picotech aren't going to happen.

Maybe yes, maybe no, given sufficient time...

I don't know, I think the book Snow Crash has ruined by own imagination.

If I had to guess, technology will solve and cause more problems but life overall will be no different. I still see the majority of the population living in poverty and under the control of a brutal dictator. So basically the same.

But we have a colony on the moon though. I think that goes without saying. ;)

Maybe yes, maybe no, given sufficient time...

no, no matter of time. You can't make something smaller than its parts.

The Western economies will collapse through a combination of reckless spending, capital consumption and depreciation of currencies. As the world descends into chaos certain demagogues will seize control of the mega-state infrastructures- such as the EU and possibly the North American Union if it exists at this time- and will impose a controlled society that will strip away the last vestiges of liberalism.

Maybe yes, maybe no, given sufficient time...

It's a physical impossibility. You cannot create solid objects out of things smaller than atoms. Nanotech is as small as machines can get.

I am pretty sure I will be back in diapers by then, so I don't really care......well, as long as someone is around to change my diaper. :eek: :cool:

i hope my kids push me in front of bus if that happens

i hope my kids push me in front of bus if that happens

True, as soon as I need assistance to simply use the bathroom, death should come for me. With great haste.

Who cares? I'll be dead! :p

True, as soon as I need assistance to simply use the bathroom, death should come for me. With great haste.

he better have our numbers on speed dial

Who cares? I'll be dead! :p
You have no aspirations to undeath!? :confused:

You have no aspirations to undeath!? :confused:

Oooh... Lich Congo-Kinshasa...

Oooh... Lich Congo-Kinshasa...
Heh, I'll be reserving the status of Lich for myself, thank you very much (check my nation). :p He can be a wraith or something...

Mayan gods are pwning us in 2012.

This made me think of "In the year 2525..." by Zager and Evans...

semi-utopian "anarchy". much as i described in the 2037 thread. except that now, 20 years after that, the bennifits of population reduction have become real and an entire generation has grown up knowing them. old concepts like wars and fanatical idiological conflicts have become little more then accademic curiousities, of interest only to those specializing in antiquarian studies.

life has settled down. no one is starving anymore. population levels continue to deminish but that is leveling off and stabalizing. there are however many more unnoccupied ruins of the the 20th century's industrial age to poke arround in and explore. there are of course dangerous contaminations in many of them that make this somewhat riskey, but there is no one to stop or 'protect' anyone from doing so.

most people though, grow their own gardens, live in their very modest little dens, or in larger groups of interest based polyamourous families and either walk or ride the narrow gauge interurbans to the nearest craftufacturing centers. and gather every 19 days to voice their input directly and in person to the assemblies of their village's local 'elders'.

life is no longer a battle and no one looks upon nature as an advisary but rather as its diversity as the true foundation of reality that it is.

the internet has become largely self repairing thanks to its own ability now to give 'birth' to its own maintainence bots and is rapidly becoming something called the city of the mind and moving off earth and launching itself into space, where its hardware at least, will be relatively safe from human interfeerence and tampering.

most paved roads have fallen into complete disrepair, even here and there, as a flat place, having been build upon. a few remain but are almost totaly unused. none or course are, any longer maintained at all.

parking lots have long since been turned into parks and streets into gardens.

the tecnologies of very narrow gauge transit systems and wind solar and hydro energy are very mature of course, but people have become totaly comforatable with this and few can immagine any other way, let alone that which had been common for the brief flash of a century, and very nearly now, a century past.

=^^=
.../\...

no, no matter of time. You can't make something smaller than its parts.
It's a physical impossibility. You cannot create solid objects out of things smaller than atoms. Nanotech is as small as machines can get.

All I'm saying is leave open the possibility for future refinements of the model. It may be possible. Ya'll say never. Vetalia says within 50 years. I'll stick with we'll see, but very, very unlikely within a reasonable timescale.

This made me think of "In the year 2525..." by Zager and Evans...

:::sings (badly::: "In the year 2057..."

semi-utopian "anarchy". much as i described in the 2037 thread. except that now, 20 years after that, the bennifits of population reduction have become real and an entire generation has grown up knowing them. old concepts like wars and fanatical idiological conflicts have become little more then accademic curiousities, of interest only to those specializing in antiquarian studies.

life has settled down. no one is starving anymore. population levels continue to deminish but that is leveling off and stabalizing. there are however many more unnoccupied ruins of the the 20th century's industrial age to poke arround in and explore. there are of course dangerous contaminations in many of them that make this somewhat riskey, but there is no one to stop or 'protect' anyone from doing so.

most people though, grow their own gardens, live in their very modest little dens, or in larger groups of interest based polyamourous families and either walk or ride the narrow gauge interurbans to the nearest craftufacturing centers. and gather every 19 days to voice their input directly and in person to the assemblies of their village's local 'elders'.

life is no longer a battle and no one looks upon nature as an advisary but rather as its diversity as the true foundation of reality that it is.

the internet has become largely self repairing thanks to its own ability now to give 'birth' to its own maintainence bots and is rapidly becoming something called the city of the mind and moving off earth and launching itself into space, where its hardware at least, will be relatively safe from human interfeerence and tampering.

most paved roads have fallen into complete disrepair, even here and there, as a flat place, having been build upon. a few remain but are almost totaly unused. none or course are, any longer maintained at all.

parking lots have long since been turned into parks and streets into gardens.

the tecnologies of very narrow gauge transit systems and wind solar and hydro energy are very mature of course, but people have become totaly comforatable with this and few can immagine any other way, let alone that which had been common for the brief flash of a century, and very nearly now, a century past.

Hmmm... even more fanicful than Vetalia's post, IMHO, on two points.

First, I think that's simply a revisioning of an already failed idea of human nature.

Two, I think that's a vast over-estimate of time required for human societies to change and adapt so drastically.

China will be a world power, the entire US will speak Spanish, children will be force-fed religion and morality and all that crap, and everyone who disagrees will vanish in the middle of teh night.

At any rate, we probably wouldn't be here fluffling our brains out. :( :fluffle::fluffle::fluffle::fluffle::fluffle::fluffle:

The question is irrelevant, since we will have destroyed ourselves in one way or another long before then.

No, there will be three seals of the apocalypse:

1. The release of Duke Nukem Forever
2. The release of Starcraft: Ghost
3. The release of NS2

Don't forget the 4th seal, which is that No more Final Fantasy games are made. Seriously, theres 12 of them and they are still making another one.

China will be a world power, the entire US will speak Spanish, children will be force-fed religion and morality and all that crap, and everyone who disagrees will vanish in the middle of teh night.

At any rate, we probably wouldn't be here fluffling our brains out. :( :fluffle::fluffle::fluffle::fluffle::fluffle::fluffle:

So negative! Shouldn't someone your age have more confidence in our future? :p

That's a bit of a stretch to say that we're at the same point with nanotech now as we were ith computer nets in the 70s. Remember, ARPANET was already up by then. We have yet to achieve the same level of basics for nanotech. And then, it took 35 years or so for it to start to come into widespread use.

Then let's move it back to the early 1960's, when ARPANET was still in its design stage. Even if we're in 1960 for nanotech, that still means it will be as ubiquitous as the internet is now by 2054 (assuming it takes 47 years to get from its current stage to full market penetration).

I'm not disagreeing with you that it'll happen, just with your time scale for it. I think people tend to overlook the human factor in tech adaptation.

We also have to take in to account, however, that people are getting better at adapting technology for commercial purposes. Each generation is more familiar with more advanced technology, and that plays a huge role in how quickly a new technology is adapted to commercial purposes.

Again, I simply think you're underestimating the time it will take, especially for those to come into wide spread usage.

It hinges on a lot of things. At the same time, however, each new disruptive technology has established itself in the market faster than its predecessors, especially in communications and optics. Those prior technologies create a boostrap effect.

Now, I think we won't be anywhere near individual nanofactories or things like that but we will have molecular manufacturing on an industrial scale by the 2050's.

But we have a colony on the moon though. I think that goes without saying. ;)
Why do so many people think that we'll colonize the moon? There's a reason that the US hasn't been back there since the early 70's: the place is a dump, the property values are lousy, and there's nothing anybody wants to rape or steal up there.
Anyway, Mars is much sexier.

wow, i can't believe it's 2007 and we still don't have flying cars :mad:

Flying cars will never happen because they'll have restrictions like airplanes where they can and can't fly, which will make it difficult. You can't just take off from your driveway and fly over a bunch of houses and populated areas, what if you crash?

No, there will be three seals of the apocalypse:

1. The release of Duke Nukem Forever
2. The release of Starcraft: Ghost
3. The release of NS2
4. The release of HURD 1.0

wow, i can't believe it's 2007 and we still don't have flying cars :mad:
We do (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_car), they're just really expensive and impractical, as one would expect from a VTOL aircraft built to the specifications of a car.
I'm more dissapointed in the absense of orbital death lasers which are specifically designed to be easily taken over by international terrorist groups.

Why do so many people think that we'll colonize the moon? There's a reason that the US hasn't been back there since the early 70's: the place is a dump, the property values are lousy, and there's nothing anybody wants to rape or steal up there.
Anyway, Mars is much sexier.

Getting to Mars and the rest of the solar system is easier from a moonbase thanks to lower gravity.

wow, i can't believe it's 2007 and we still don't have flying cars :mad:

who needs flying cars? The reason why we don't have it is because we are not trying to.

4. The release of HURD 1.0

What is HURD 1.0?. And no, the fourth seal is the final fantasy series ending.

We will have been killed in 2037. During that year, NEO 2002 DO20 will make two close passes to earth, scientists think it will most likely hit.

Scientists think it will most likely miss, according to BBC News. I know, because I read the article multiple times and almost entered the competition to come up with a way of 'tagging' it.
Unfortunately, my method was overly complicated and not fully developed.

Ilaer

I picked 'utopia', since I like to think of things on the bright side.

Still, I envision a very different world, and not in all ways for the better. The ecosystem is on the verge of collapse, and it is already too late to stop that. Ridiculously, we continue to do exactly the wrong things on that front, which only compounds the problems. By 2057, I hope we will have become environmentally responsible, even if it done out of necessity rather than choice.

Green technologies plus fusion should make power generation easy enough, though, and presumably our technology will be a bit farther along. Hopefully we will have some sort of long-term extraterrestrial settlement going. Weekends on the moon may be a bit beyond our grasp still, though.

I do not care too much about flying cars, but underground arrow-straight maglev trains connecting major cities would be grand. Zipping from Ottawa to Frankfurt a.M. between lunch and supper strikes me as about right.

Oh, and Nationstates will have eclipsed World of Warcraft (Or whatever currently rules) as the most popular online game.

P.S.: Read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Failed_predictions and keep in mind that the things I have just outlined will probably one day belong there.

WWIII will be fought during that time. Six years after 2057, Zephram Cocherane will build a warp ship in an old Montana missile silo. The vessel will achieve a speed of 1c and attract the attention of an alien race we will call the Vulcans.

I guess i agree with the flying cars point of view...it makes sense


ur all wrong about the fourth seal though...

The Ultimate Question to the Greatest Mystery of the NS Universe will be answered...

Who is [violet] and is he/she Max Barry?

then apocalypse, of course ;)

wow, i can't believe it's 2007 and we still don't have flying cars :mad:

Ahem (http://www.firebox.com/index.html?dir=firebox&action=product&pid=415&src_t=cat&src_id=boystoys)

I'm still laughing over the picotech thing. That was funny.

An atom is 0.1 to 0.5 nm wide. Femtotech and picotech aren't going to happen.

Why not? Manipulation of subatomic particles is entirely possible, and if anything quantum computing today reflects the first generation of subatomic technology. There's not really a barrier to how small we can go; at present there is, but that's not a hard limit.

Why not? Manipulation of subatomic particles is entirely possible
Yes. It is. But putting a bunch of subatomic particles together so that they form a machine is not. They'll just form an atom at best. The degree to which subatomic particles can be manipulated is very small. You can fire them at things, and that's about it.

There's not really a barrier to how small we can go; at present there is, but that's not a hard limit.

There are a number of barriers. The smallest one is the Planck length, and there are quite a few larger.

Yes. It is. But putting a bunch of subatomic particles together so that they form a machine is not. They'll just form an atom at best. The degree to which subatomic particles can be manipulated is very small. You can fire them at things, and that's about it.

You can manipulate the properties of atoms on that scale; that's a pretty significant ability, especially if you can increase it to affect larger and larger quantities of atoms. It would enable massive improvements in precision manufacturing and materials, and might even allow us to begin to alter atoms themselves for better functionality on the object scale.

There are a number of barriers. The smallest one is the Planck length, and there are quite a few larger.

Barriers that haven't even been tested yet. We don't know exactly what is possible on those levels, although there are serious barriers to anything smaller than the nanolevel at present.

You can manipulate the properties of atoms on that scale; that's a pretty significant ability, especially if you can increase it to affect larger and larger quantities of atoms. It would enable massive improvements in precision manufacturing and materials, and might even allow us to begin to alter atoms themselves for better functionality on the object scale.

My God, it's like a bad '60s SciFi movie. Seriously, that's got to be the biggest load of bullshit I have ever read. Damn, altering atoms to make them better than the ones that exist already. Wow. Seriously, wow.

My God, it's like a bad '60s SciFi movie. Seriously, that's got to be the biggest load of bullshit I have ever read. Damn, altering atoms to make them better than the ones that exist already. Wow. Seriously, wow.
Eh, what will you do if this actually takes place?

My God, it's like a bad '60s SciFi movie. Seriously, that's got to be the biggest load of bullshit I have ever read. Damn, altering atoms to make them better than the ones that exist already. Wow. Seriously, wow.

It's already happening...I don't see any bullshit in an already existing natural phenomena. The processes of fusion and fission alter atoms at the subatomic level, and in the case of fusion it produces some elements that we would definitely see as "better" than their predecessors, like iron and carbon from helium and hydrogen.

Other examples are the way properties of elements change at the molecular level when exposed extreme pressures and temperatures, and the way the formation of certain compounds is dramatically altered when they are manufactured in a zero-g environment. These make already existing molecules different, and in the case of zero-g compounds they are better than the ones produced on Earth. It would only be a matter of discovering how to engineer this at the atomic level ...we already know it happens.

everyone will have hoverboards and vacation on Uranus

It's already happening...I don't see any bullshit in an already existing natural phenomena. The processes of fusion and fission alter atoms at the subatomic level, and in the case of fusion it produces some elements that we would definitely see as "better" than their predecessors, like iron and carbon from helium and hydrogen.

Changing from one atom to another, wouldn't that be nano scale? If all you meant by that comment was changing the number of protons in an atom, yeah, we could do that.

Changing from one atom to another, wouldn't that be nano scale? If all you meant by that comment was changing the number of protons in an atom, yeah, we could do that.

I think it would be femto scale because protons are 10^-15 meters in diameter. If we were to work with electrons, it would be on the atto scale.

Changing the number of protons is the only way we can really alter things on the atomic level at present, so yeah. We might also be able to work later with neutrons as well for purposes of reducing atomic mass or for advanced work with radioactive processes. Electrons could be manipulated for communications and other fields.

Of course, there's also the speculative possibility of working on even smaller level subatomic particles, but that's way too far away to imagine happening by 2057.

Changing from one atom to another, wouldn't that be nano scale? If all you meant by that comment was changing the number of protons in an atom, yeah, we could do that.

Protons are femto-, but simply changing the number of protons in an atom in no way constitutes "femtotech". That'd require making machines out of protons and the like.

Protons are femto-, but simply changing the number of protons in an atom in no way constitutes "femtotech". That'd require making machines out of protons and the like.

Not really. It would require the ability to precisely manipulate femto-scale objects for commercial purposes, and not necessarily constructing functional machines. Now, femto-scale manufacturing would require something of that sort, but that's only part of the "-tech", not the whole thing.

It's already happening...I don't see any bullshit in an already existing natural phenomena. The processes of fusion and fission alter atoms at the subatomic level, and in the case of fusion it produces some elements that we would definitely see as "better" than their predecessors, like iron and carbon from helium and hydrogen.

Nuclear fission and fusion aren't "picotech", though. Picotech would require machines on the picometer scale. By the way, you didn't state that you were changing one element to another element. You stated that it would involve making one element better, which is patently ludicrous. Elements are useless for anything besides energy unless stable, and the most stable isotopes will be the most common ones.


Other examples are the way properties of elements change at the molecular level when exposed extreme pressures and temperatures, and the way the formation of certain compounds is dramatically altered when they are manufactured in a zero-g environment. These make already existing molecules different, and in the case of zero-g compounds they are better than the ones produced on Earth. It would only be a matter of discovering how to engineer this at the atomic level ...we already know it happens
Molecular is micro- and nano- level, not pico- and femto-.

Not really. It would require the ability to precisely manipulate femto-scale objects for commercial purposes, not necessarily functioning machines. Now, femto-scale manufacturing would require something of that sort, but that's only part of the "-tech", not the whole thing.

Rather stretching the meaning of femtotech, but I'll give you that definition. Still doesn't help, since if you add a proton to an atom it doesn't become a "higher level" element without massive quantities of energy. It splits into "lower level" elements.

Nuclear fission and fusion aren't "picotech", though. Picotech would require machines on the picometer scale. By the way, you didn't state that you were changing one element to another element. You stated that it would involve making one element better, which is patently ludicrous. Elements are useless for anything besides energy unless stable, and the most stable isotopes will be the most common ones.

It would require manipulating pico-scale objects to be "picotech"; nuclear fusion and fission do work like that, although they're not functioning machines.

But you could manipulate these objects on that scale, making them "better" in the sense that the entire process could be more accurately controlled from the bottom up.

Molecular is micro- and nano- level, not pico- and femto-.

I know, I'm just saying that molecular-level changes in structure likely have underlying changes at smaller orders of magnitude, and these could be manipulated to improve molecular structure.

Rather stretching the meaning of femtotech, but I'll give you that definition. Still doesn't help, since if you add a proton to an atom it doesn't become a "higher level" element without massive quantities of energy. It splits into "lower level" elements.

I'm using it in the same way that carbon nanotubes and other structures are grouped under "nanotech"; they're not machines, but they are structures designed and built by engineers for specific purposes.

And massive quantities of energy are another issue; if we could produce huge amounts of energy extremely cheaply, it would be possible to make higher elements economically. Otherwise, you're correct but this depends more on energy technology in 2057 than other fields.