U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 03-27-2014, 03:39 AM
 
1,027 posts, read 1,576,421 times
Reputation: 280

Advertisements

Is Science and Technology stagnating? I know Computers , smart cell phones that are like computers , TV ,electronics ,tablet , HD TV and now 4K TV , 3D printing Better understanding of the human body and space , other stars and planets so on can give allusion leaps and bounds.

But .

Personal automobiles cars and trucks. Still travel at roughly the same speeds as 50 years ago, with some (minor) tweaks and improvements in gas mileage and such.

Farming - roughly the same crop yields-per-acre as 50 years ago.

Building houses or apartments. Still done very much as it was done 50, or even 150 years ago. In many ways they built cheap now and way better before.

Airplanes - still traveling at roughly the speeds that were available 50 years ago, with some improvements in carrying capacity at the upper ends of commercial aircraft sizes. (Heck, we don't even have the Concorde flying anymore... )

Weapons. Knives are still the same size, and generally as sharp as would have been expected 50 or 100 or 150 years ago.

Firearm technology has had minor tweaks and adjustments - but commonly guns are not particularly more accurate, powerful or less expensive than 50 years ago.

Getting in space is bit cheaper than 50 years ago but still too costly for space mining or people living on the moon or mars.

Rocketry not really that much better than 50 years ago.

The economic benefits of space travel are slim to none until science and industry can develop some efficient, quick method of collecting and transporting resources from other planets for space mining or space colonize other planets will be scfi.The thing is, we have to get the ships off the earth (or out of the earth's gravity well), and that takes energy. That part hasn't been solved yet way too costly for the economic benefits of space travel of space mining or space colonize other planets.


Medical progress slowing down and medical breakthroughs is slowing down with cancer treatment and cure?

I know 5 friends this year that died with cancer !! Also when the NDP leader Jack Layton in Canada died with cancer and rich man like Steve Jobs and man like Patrick Swayze that leaves you in shock how primitive the health care is.

Also disease like motor neuron disease , amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) ,MS, Parkinson's, strokes or spinal cord injury and disease


Very little if any more understanding of relativity and Quantum Physics.

String theory dead end now days.


So it seems Science and Technology stagnating in a lot of industries where most leaps and bounds are computers ,electronics and gadgets.

What your thought? Is Science and Technology stagnating or in some areas than other areas.

Sorry if I sound old pessimistic guy.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-27-2014, 06:02 AM
 
37,071 posts, read 38,273,370 times
Reputation: 14835
Quote:
Originally Posted by sweat209 View Post

Personal automobiles cars and trucks. Still travel at roughly the same speeds as 50 years ago, with some (minor) tweaks and improvements in gas mileage and such.
Cars are much faster than they used to be especially if you consider engine size, that's besides the point because how fast you can make them go is not the limitation. The real limitation is the safety factor.


Quote:
Farming - roughly the same crop yields-per-acre as 50 years ago.
Wrong again, look up some stats on corn and wheat yields.

Quote:
Building houses or apartments. Still done very much as it was done 50, or even 150 years ago. In many ways they built cheap now and way better before.
50 years ago a lot of the work was done by hand, now you have small excavators, electric powered ladders, gasoline powered wheel barrows, air powered tools, cordless tools, propane powered tools(nailers)....


Quote:
Airplanes - still traveling at roughly the speeds that were available 50 years ago, with some improvements in carrying capacity at the upper ends of commercial aircraft sizes. (Heck, we don't even have the Concorde flying anymore... )
Flying supersonic is expensive hence the reason the Concorde was never profitable.

Quote:
Weapons. Knives are still the same size, and generally as sharp as would have been expected 50 or 100 or 150 years ago.
I have knife that works better than a switch blade that I can open into locking postion with the flick of wrist.


.......

There has been improvements in all the things you list.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-27-2014, 01:40 PM
 
Location: Sarasota, FL
1,722 posts, read 1,830,740 times
Reputation: 1018
Quote:
Originally Posted by sweat209 View Post
Personal automobiles cars and trucks. Still travel at roughly the same speeds as 50 years ago, with some (minor) tweaks and improvements in gas mileage and such.
You can only get so much energy from gasoline. Safety has been dramatically improved, as has noise, parts, things like that. There's not much of a financial incentive to do better. Why invest a hundred million into a cars design that will still sell like a car? Need motive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweat209 View Post
Farming - roughly the same crop yields-per-acre as 50 years ago.
We have plenty of land. Farming is just a **** job that nobody wants to do. But, if we needed more crops, we just have to build UP. Think a 50 story skyscraper that uses Hydroponics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweat209 View Post
Building houses or apartments. Still done very much as it was done 50, or even 150 years ago. In many ways they built cheap now and way better before.
Build it better and it costs more. You want housing affordable or expensive?

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweat209 View Post
Airplanes - still traveling at roughly the speeds that were available 50 years ago, with some improvements in carrying capacity at the upper ends of commercial aircraft sizes. (Heck, we don't even have the Concorde flying anymore... )
Concorde should still be around. That was a neat program. But again it comes down to financial incentive. A Concorde ticket was $12k. Build it even faster, it'll cost even more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweat209 View Post
Weapons. Knives are still the same size, and generally as sharp as would have been expected 50 or 100 or 150 years ago.
Horrible example of technological limits. Knives can be replaced by laser beams going pew pew into people. Only Chinese terrorists use knives.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweat209 View Post
Firearm technology has had minor tweaks and adjustments - but commonly guns are not particularly more accurate, powerful or less expensive than 50 years ago.
They are as accurate as the person pulling the trigger. However, a couple years ago the formula that allowed you to correctly calculate the trajectory of a projectile was improved upon. But, what's the incentive for Glock to spend millions on making a more accurage Glock? Is a quarter inch grouping at 20 feet that bad? No incentive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweat209 View Post
Getting in space is bit cheaper than 50 years ago but still too costly for space mining or people living on the moon or mars.
Tell that to the number of companies privately developing space travel right now. Mr. Musk would disagree so would Mr. Branson.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweat209 View Post
Rocketry not really that much better than 50 years ago.
See post above.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweat209 View Post
The economic benefits of space travel are slim to none until science and industry can develop some efficient, quick method of collecting and transporting resources from other planets for space mining or space colonize other planets will be scfi.The thing is, we have to get the ships off the earth (or out of the earth's gravity well), and that takes energy. That part hasn't been solved yet way too costly for the economic benefits of space travel of space mining or space colonize other planets.
There's way too much science to go over here. There's no economic benefit to living on another planet, or mining asteroids yet. We have everything we need on Earth right now. When buyers demand these things, they will be developed.


Quote:
Originally Posted by sweat209 View Post
Medical progress slowing down and medical breakthroughs is slowing down with cancer treatment and cure?
Slowing down? Surely you can substantiate that with research?

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweat209 View Post
I know 5 friends this year that died with cancer !! Also when the NDP leader Jack Layton in Canada died with cancer and rich man like Steve Jobs and man like Patrick Swayze that leaves you in shock how primitive the health care is.
And once I tossed 500 pennies in the air and 10 of them in one little cluster were all heads up. Your arguing statistical probability not science failures.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweat209 View Post
Also disease like motor neuron disease , amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) ,MS, Parkinson's, strokes or spinal cord injury and disease
All of which who have seen improvements.


Quote:
Originally Posted by sweat209 View Post
Very little if any more understanding of relativity and Quantum Physics.
Hardly true. Worse example of them all. Higgs Boson? Black holes apparent horizon? Arxiv.org has papers every day advancing Quantum Theory.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweat209 View Post
String theory dead end now days.
Says who? It's alive and doing quite fine.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-27-2014, 08:03 PM
 
15,924 posts, read 16,850,438 times
Reputation: 7619
Blame the lawyers and the corporations who hire them for the stagnation.

The absolute protection of ones own product takes precedence over any technological advancements...
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2014, 10:56 AM
 
Location: Sarasota, FL
1,722 posts, read 1,830,740 times
Reputation: 1018
Quote:
Originally Posted by plwhit View Post
Blame the lawyers and the corporations who hire them for the stagnation.

The absolute protection of ones own product takes precedence over any technological advancements...
You mean - blame the laws that protect them, of which lawyers enforce. Are you one of those "the world hates me" people?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2014, 01:33 PM
 
1,027 posts, read 1,576,421 times
Reputation: 280
Quote:

Cars are much faster than they used to be especially if you consider engine
size, that's besides the point because how fast you can make them go is not the
limitation. The real limitation is the safety factor.
Quote:
You can only get so much energy from gasoline. Safety has been dramatically
improved, as has noise, parts, things like that. There's not much of a
financial incentive to do better. Why invest a hundred million into a cars
design that will still sell like a car? Need motive.
Well improvements in gas mileage is not much better and we still don't have electric car economy.It is true more and more electric cars and hybrid cars are coming out every year!!! But we have long road ahead before most cars or trucks on the road are electric cars.

And American cars are made cheaper now than before.Well many top Europe cars or Asian cars are made better and don't brake down has nuch.

My car of the 90's was built way better than the car I got from 2007.The interior of the car was way better before and now it is cheap.

Quote:
Farming - roughly the same crop yields-per-acre
as 50 years ago.
Wrong again, look up some stats on corn and wheat yields.
Okay I did not know that. But it coud be industrialized countries have better crop yields-per-acre .

Quote:

50 years ago a lot of the work was done by hand, now you have small
excavators, electric powered ladders, gasoline powered wheel barrows, air
powered tools, cordless tools, propane powered
tools(nailers)....
Okay I did not know that.

Quote:

Build it better and it costs more. You want housing affordable or
expensive?
House built out of stone or clay would be better than all wood.I hear houses buillt South America built better.

I hear a lot of houses in Europe like in Germany are built out of concrete and buit way better than the houses in the US and Canada by far better.

How do they keep the cost down?

Quote:
Concorde should still be around. That was a neat program. But again it
comes down to financial incentive. A Concorde ticket was $12k. Build it even
faster, it'll cost even more.

Flying supersonic is expensive hence the
reason the Concorde was never profitable.


So the problem is not flying supersonic or Concorde ,Concorde 2 it is finding new technology to bring the cost down of flying supersonic.

Quote:

Tell that to the number of companies privately developing space travel right
now. Mr. Musk would disagree so would Mr. Branson.

Don't count on even the super rich going to the moon or mars any time soon. Well the rich going to ISS or around the earth in space is more possible.

Space colonization is no where close to possible with todays technology not even technology on the drawing board by sci fi science people like the space elevator or laser propulsion system will be any time soon if ever or bring space cost down.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2014, 04:19 PM
 
37,071 posts, read 38,273,370 times
Reputation: 14835
Quote:
Originally Posted by sweat209 View Post
Well improvements in gas mileage is not much better and we still don't have electric car economy.
You can make an gasoline car go six gazillion miles an hour or make an electric cat go six gazzilion miles hour... all that is irrelevant when you hit a tree and come to a dead stop. That type of accident going 65 or 70 is going to kill most people and it doesn't matter what type of safety features you have. Air bags help because they lengthen the deceleration a little but there are limits. The old saying "it's not the crash that kills you but the sudden stop" is 100% accurate.

When you have spectacular crash in say NASCAR people wonder how they walk away, it's because usually they didn't hit anything head on and if they do it's another car usually traveling at similar speed they are. On the other hand this accident which looks like nothing compared to others was fatal. If you are unfamiliar this is Daytona and they are traveling around 200MPH. FF to 3:31, it's the number 3.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXGKys62TXw
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2014, 05:37 PM
 
Location: Sarasota, FL
1,722 posts, read 1,830,740 times
Reputation: 1018
Quote:
Originally Posted by sweat209 View Post
Space colonization is no where close to possible with todays technology not even technology on the drawing board by sci fi science people like the space elevator or laser propulsion system will be any time soon if ever or bring space cost down.

Sure it is. We could terraform Mars starting right now if we wanted to. There's just no incentive to actually do it. Zero reason whatsoever.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2014, 05:59 PM
 
15,924 posts, read 16,850,438 times
Reputation: 7619
Quote:
Originally Posted by beninfl View Post
You mean - blame the laws that protect them, of which lawyers enforce. Are you one of those "the world hates me" people?
Who writes the laws? Who passes the laws? Who gets the politicians elected who write and pass the laws? Who funds the elected politicians who write and pass the laws?

How many concepts have never been brought to market because of the fear of lawsuits?

WTF does this mean
Quote:
Are you one of those "the world hates me" people?
I have been in the technology field since 1971, have traveled extensively and enjoy every day I'm still alive...

I suggest you look in the mirror to see who hates who...
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2014, 06:03 PM
 
15,924 posts, read 16,850,438 times
Reputation: 7619
Quote:
Originally Posted by beninfl View Post
Sure it is. We could terraform Mars starting right now if we wanted to. There's just no incentive to actually do it. Zero reason whatsoever.
Not true, it will take over 1,000 years to terraform Mars...

~ A century to settle Mars and create a substantial local industrial capability and population.

~ A half century producing fluorocarbon gases (like CF4) to warm the planet by ~10 C.

~ A half century for CO2 to outgas from the soil under the impetus of the fluorocarbon gases, thickening the atmosphere to 0.2 to 0.3 bar, and raising the planetary temperature a further 40 C.

~ Over a period of about a thousand years, human-disseminated and harvested plants would be able to put 150 mbar (millibars) of oxygen in the Martian atmosphere. Once this occurs, humans and other animals will be able to live on Mars in the open, and the world will become fully alive.

Terraforming Mars, The Noble Experiment?
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top