the reality of technology (reflection)

[chrisj1968]

I've come to the conclusion that simply speaking, there are limits as to what we can create or innovate. I know you all love the technology in movies like the minority report with Tom Cruise. But upon considering many things, perhaps certain technological advances will have limits.

 

Man has probably for the longest time, desired to travel at light speeds. But forces, based upon probably Einsteins theories of relativity, some things can never be achieved as an example. 

 

Some technologies while beautiful in concept and design, may never come to fruition due to our inabilities to have the necessary materials.

 

we'll only be able to drive so fast due to forces that prevent us from achieving lightspeed travels. we will reach a limit at some point where our materials simply cannot advance tecnology.

 

this is my simple reflection on this topic as I was preparing bread crumb chicken dinner for my family and felt I had to put these thoughts on neowin

[wakjak]

There's literally no way you could ever 100% say what you just said and have it be true.

[+virtorio MVC]

Whatever limitations there are, we've got a long way to go before we reach any of them.

Except for television, that peaked with Firefly and it's been going downhill ever since.

[Praetor]

the problem is not the limits of creativity or the materials, but the necessary investments (money, human resourses, time), current tech and lobbies; while most of those can be passed, one still holds stuff back because of agendas.

[Nagisan]

Man has probably for the longest time, desired to travel at light speeds. But forces, based upon probably Einsteins theories of relativity, some things can never be achieved as an example. 

The beauty of science is it always discovers new things which can change what we know.

 

Quantum entangled particles for example transmit their state to one another at least 10000x faster than the speed of light. If we can come up with a way to stabilize them and measure them without them destroying themselves, we could theoretically transmit data at speeds considerably faster than the speed of light. Though transmitting data is far off that of moving an object at that speed, how can you say with certainty that we will not discover something new that will allow us to achieve such a feat?

 

I'm sure hundreds of years ago, everything we use on a daily basis now was considered impossible.

[T3X4S]

One thing is for sure:  In 10-20 years when we are able to have "usable" quantum computers... what is possible will balloon at an exponential rate.
So many things that are beyond our reach now, will become everyday commonplace with quantum computers.

Just think, it took the hard drive industry 30 years to get to a 1TB HDD, it took 18 months to get to 2TB.

So many things we talk about now, like a holodeck, maybe even teleportation will ONLY be possible with quantum computers.

As far as traveling @ light speed, that may be impossible - but getting close to it may not be -- and we may find it isnt even necessary.

Remember how our parents and grandparents even would talk about the computers that took up an entire floor of some building - my iPhone is more powerful than those computers.  And the rate of technological advancement will only increase.

We are already approaching the limits of silicon, but that roadblock only opened up much better options.

[FMH]

I think futurists get it wrong all the time! So many people are working on so many technologies, and we can't predict which will become mainstream at any given time.

So in a way, the technology might have limits, but the number of potential technologies is virtually limitless.

[chrisj1968]

I remember way back in the mid to late 90's before a lot of the neowin users had computers, I'd heard from my IT friend that the industry tinkered with the prospect of using actual DNA strands to replace the current metallic circuits. and supposedly, the data transfer rates would have been much faster had they achieved it. Not sure if it was 100% true but the prospect was interesting.

 

then there was an attempt at bubble memory. the hope was to be able to put many times more of data on a bubble memory unit. not sure if anything went anywhere with that.

 

question, are there any new technologies in an attempt to replace the metal strands that make up actual circuits being developed? if they could find a substance that conducts electricity better than the metal circuitry, we could surely push the envelope with processing speeds and power.

[The Evil Overlord]

I remember way back in the mid to late 90's before a lot of the neowin users had computers, I'd heard from my IT friend that the industry tinkered with the prospect of using actual DNA strands to replace the current metallic circuits. and supposedly, the data transfer rates would have been much faster had they achieved it. Not sure if it was 100% true but the prospect was interesting.

 

then there was an attempt at bubble memory. the hope was to be able to put many times more of data on a bubble memory unit. not sure if anything went anywhere with that.

 

question, are there any new technologies in an attempt to replace the metal strands that make up actual circuits being developed? if they could find a substance that conducts electricity better than the metal circuitry, we could surely push the envelope with processing speeds and power.

Oh hey, I watched the pilot of Knight Rider too

[cooky560 Veteran]

We've wasted a lot of materials in the past before we had efficient manufacturing but such things can be recycled into modern products before we run out of materials to invest in new technology there's a long way to go. There's also the marketing & profitability to consider of new technology before its released to the general public companies need to be persuaded to risk spending money on the new idea that may or may not make them anything.

[monkeylove]

In addition, there are limits involved in terms of material resources and energy available, and the availability is also hampered by various factors, such as environmental damage, flaws in economic systems, etc.

[cooky560 Veteran]

It's hard to get people (apart from enthusiasts) to buy a new graphics card or a new car, let alone something that's entirely new and out there. I think people's healthy doubts over what firms are offering plus high risk involved with new products is a huge hamper on new technology. Consider the electric car, it's hardly new technology anymore, but people are still having trouble with the idea.

[chrisj1968]

the issue with electric cars is that they are limited on driving distances and right now people will stick with gas cars. Here in Nevada, tesla is beginning to build a 10,000 square foot manufacturing facility to build lithium batteries for electric cars. 4 or 5 states were in the hunt for the deal to attract Tesla.

 

I'm not sure how that will turn out ultimately. electric cars have to break into the big leagues first.

[#Michael]

I've come to the conclusion that simply speaking, there are limits as to what we can create or innovate. I know you all love the technology in movies like the minority report with Tom Cruise. But upon considering many things, perhaps certain technological advances will have limits.

 

Man has probably for the longest time, desired to travel at light speeds. But forces, based upon probably Einsteins theories of relativity, some things can never be achieved as an example. 

 

Some technologies while beautiful in concept and design, may never come to fruition due to our inabilities to have the necessary materials.

 

we'll only be able to drive so fast due to forces that prevent us from achieving lightspeed travels. we will reach a limit at some point where our materials simply cannot advance tecnology.

 

this is my simple reflection on this topic as I was preparing bread crumb chicken dinner for my family and felt I had to put these thoughts on neowin

 

I don't believe that for a second.  I can only imagine what we could build or what planets we would be exploring today if we only had the passion for space exploration that we had during the 1960's.  It is our lack of determination and will that is keeping us from achieving it.  Think about this...NASA's annual budget is 1/10th of 1% of the government's budget.  Think what we could achieve if we gave them an increase to even 1% of the budget.  What if we turned completely to private industry to help out (think of the movie 'Red Planet') and if we allowed them to put their company logo on everything in exchange for their money.  We could be on Mars within 5 years.

 

the issue with electric cars is that they are limited on driving distances and right now people will stick with gas cars. Here in Nevada, tesla is beginning to build a 10,000 square foot manufacturing facility to build lithium batteries for electric cars. 4 or 5 states were in the hunt for the deal to attract Tesla.

 

I'm not sure how that will turn out ultimately. electric cars have to break into the big leagues first.

 

I firmly believe that the reason behind the lack of electric cars making a bigger impact here in the US is because of big oil and our insane need to drive big SUVs.

[gohpep]

Technology will always increment.

[chrisj1968]

I don't believe that for a second.  I can only imagine what we could build or what planets we would be exploring today if we only had the passion for space exploration that we had during the 1960's.  It is our lack of determination and will that is keeping us from achieving it.  Think about this...NASA's annual budget is 1/10th of 1% of the government's budget.  Think what we could achieve if we gave them an increase to even 1% of the budget.  What if we turned completely to private industry to help out (think of the movie 'Red Planet') and if we allowed them to put their company logo on everything in exchange for their money.  We could be on Mars within 5 years.

 

 

I firmly believe that the reason behind the lack of electric cars making a bigger impact here in the US is because of big oil and our insane need to drive big SUVs.

 

I probably agree with you to a large degree. But something  I noticed is, electric cars charge doesn't last long. I live in Reno NV. to travel to Southern Cal to my wifes grandparents, we'd have to have an eletric charging station all along our travel down the 395. most of the 395 is desolate like the mojave desert. I usually tank my gas car up in Bishop and again at kramer junction/four corners. a HUGE gas point for people going to So CAL and eastward to Vegas.

 

electrical cars need to have generators built into their axels like a cars alternator, that way a car can charge its batteries as they travel. Not sure if that is feasible but an idea I've pondered.

[DocM]

>

electrical cars need to have generators built into their axels like a cars alternator, that way a car can charge its batteries as they travel. Not sure if that is feasible but an idea I've pondered.

>

You just described a series hybrid like the Chevy Volt, and the "generator" (AKA range extender) can be a flex-fueled IC generator, fuel cell, gas turbine generator, or even a smaller but high density super-battery like a metal-air (a config which Tesla has patented and is ramping up to.)

And a Tesla Model S can go 300+ miles on a charge, depending on how you drive and the size of the battery purchased. LV to LA is 270 miles. Reno being 518 miles would need a SuperCharger stop, for now.

Also, Tesla has a patented charging system known as SuperCharger that is solar and grid powered (co-generation) and brings the vehicle to a 50% charge in about 20 minutes. They do not charge for SuperCharger use, and have made it open source. They're installing a national network of SuperChargers with many using the roof of gas stations for the solar panels.

[Guest]

There are also other limits to consider. Like our own, for example.

 

Regarding games, there would be a little perceived reason to go above 120 fps. I know the eyes don't exactly work in frames, but regarding smoothness, going above 120 would only benefit the input devices if case the games' responsiveness to input is tied to their the graphical representation.

For movies and audio, DTS-HD MA is a pretty good achievement, and unless we want each sound that an object makes to be a completely separate track coming from a completely separate physical audio source, like they do in the relatively rare Dolby Atmos theatres, there's no logical reason to go above any of that quality.

Same with raw picture quality, we could only increase the resolution of things so much before we are unable to perceive each pixel (which we already might not be able to).

[Osiris]

There are also other limits to consider. Like our own, for example.

 

Regarding games, there would be a little perceived reason to go above 120 fps. I know the eyes don't exactly work in frames, but regarding smoothness, going above 120 would only benefit the input devices if case the games' responsiveness to input is tied to their the graphical representation.

For movies and audio, DTS-HD MA is a pretty good achievement, and unless we want each sound that an object makes to be a completely separate track coming from a completely separate physical audio source, like they do in the relatively rare Dolby Atmos theatres, there's no logical reason to go above any of that quality.

Same with raw picture quality, we could only increase the resolution of things so much before we are unable to perceive each pixel (which we already might not be able to).

 

You have not factored in the unknown, not everything is innovated or invented from scratch in many cases working on A may lead to or produce B.  By striving for the most purest sound, the best way to record, compress, deliver it or the most optimised graphics someone may stumble upon a better algorithm that has wide users, refinements to the existing technology right the way through to creating a small piece of new hardware which might lead from B to C, D to E.

 

I think humans are a long way off the universes physical limits and any artificial limits.

[DocM]

We don't even know what the universes physical limits are yet, especially with string theory in trouble and questions arising as to if our understanding of neutrinos, and possibly hydrogen, are way off.

This end of knowledge idea has been brought up many times through history, and it's always been dead wrong.

[monkeylove]

The catch is physical limitations of the planet plus increasing demand from the global population. Given current issues which will worsen during the next few years, we will be lucky if we can even maintain basic needs in the long term.

[The Evil Overlord]

the issue with electric cars is that they are limited on driving distances and right now people will stick with gas cars. Here in Nevada, tesla is beginning to build a 10,000 square foot manufacturing facility to build lithium batteries for electric cars. 4 or 5 states were in the hunt for the deal to attract Tesla.

 

I'm not sure how that will turn out ultimately. electric cars have to break into the big leagues first.

As I am not in the know so to speak, what happened to hydrogen fuelled cars? I know about the Honda FCX Clarity, and from what I had seen, it looked like a promising alternative? Was the project scrapped?

(Genuinely asking as I don't know)

[seta-san]

chrisj1968, on 28 Dec 2014 - 19:51, said:

I've come to the conclusion that simply speaking, there are limits as to what we can create or innovate. I know you all love the technology in movies like the minority report with Tom Cruise. But upon considering many things, perhaps certain technological advances will have limits.

 

Man has probably for the longest time, desired to travel at light speeds. But forces, based upon probably Einsteins theories of relativity, some things can never be achieved as an example. 

 

Some technologies while beautiful in concept and design, may never come to fruition due to our inabilities to have the necessary materials.

 

we'll only be able to drive so fast due to forces that prevent us from achieving lightspeed travels. we will reach a limit at some point where our materials simply cannot advance tecnology.

 

this is my simple reflection on this topic as I was preparing bread crumb chicken dinner for my family and felt I had to put these thoughts on neowin

 

duh. everyone knows this. computer technology is even starting to peak. I've seen manufacturing process get down to 20nm .. I doubt it can physically get much smaller and after that all we have is multicores to fill in the blanks.

DocM, on 29 Dec 2014 - 17:17, said:

We don't even know what the universes physical limits are yet, especially with string theory in trouble and questions arising as to if our understanding of neutrinos, and possibly hydrogen, are way off.

This end of knowledge idea has been brought up many times through history, and it's always been dead wrong.

I think we're approaching the end of useful knowledge.

[T3X4S]

duh. everyone knows this. computer technology is even starting to peak. I've seen manufacturing process get down to 20nm .. I doubt it can physically get much smaller and after that all we have is multicores to fill in the blanks.

I think we're approaching the end of useful knowledge.

Huh ?

As far as your 1st comment about nanometers @ 20nm - that is completely different than cores - the 20nm refers to the die size.  "multicores" do not fill in those blanks - 2 totally different things.

Your 2nd sentence - "the end of useful knowledge" - rethink that - there is no end of useful knowledge.  Sure "useful" is a relative term - but we can never say "well we invented everything there is to invent !"

If you were kidding, then I apologize for taking you literally - I didnt see the "/s" @ the end.

As far as technology is concerned, everything will change drastically once we can get quantum computers to work - everything will change then.

[seta-san]

T3X4S, on 30 Dec 2014 - 03:01, said:T3X4S, on 30 Dec 2014 - 03:01, said:

Huh ?

As far as your 1st comment about nanometers @ 20nm - that is completely different than cores - the 20nm refers to the die size.  "multicores" do not fill in those blanks - 2 totally different things.

Your 2nd sentence - "the end of useful knowledge" - rethink that - there is no end of useful knowledge.  Sure "useful" is a relative term - but we can never say "well we invented everything there is to invent !"

If you were kidding, then I apologize for taking you literally - I didnt see the "/s" @ the end.

As far as technology is concerned, everything will change drastically once we can get quantum computers to work - everything will change then.

 

useful *fundamental* knowledge. physics, chemistry, biology... hard sciences.

 

and yes. I know that 20nm is the die size.... but that's reaching it's limit. it's why we are starting to resort to multicores.