/sci/ - Science & Math

not in your lifetime, at least. that do makes me sad

Thank g-d you're wrong

buzzkill

>>1857445
Thank General Dynamics?

>>1857421
>>1857430
http://www.hplusmagazine.com/articles/forever-young/manhattan-beach-project-end-aging-2029

>>1857421
Fusion power plants you will see in your lifteime... unless you're over 100 right now.

Atomic Level replicators, yeah those break physics.

Super powered genetically engineered mutants? Well it won't be the x-men, and it won;t be within our lifetime, but we could go so far as to recreate most alien species in fiction, yes including the acid-blooded xenomorphs.

Sentient robots? Those will happen. SAPIENT robots equal in mentality to a human, decision makers, you wish.

Interstellar travel. We have a fuckton of room in this solar system before we even need to worry about that.

GE mutants and fusion power plants could be seen within the next 20 years. Interstellar travel will probably take a while, but I bet atomic level generators and sentient robots will come about within this century.

Also this: >>1858198

>my face when Glorious Nanotech Revolution between 2030 and 2050
>my face when large-scale colonization of space and transhumanism begin in my meatbody lifetime
>my face when irelativistic ships come back from the stars

Also

>my face when Kurzweil's books go out of print and a cyborged Roger Penrose laughs at Singularitarians for believing

WHERE IS YOUR GOD NOW?

>>1858198

>Manhattan Beach Project

Looks like pic related, to be honest. The transhumanism bandwagon is growing and someone is bound to get to it and bring along eir less than honorable intentions.

Somebody please break this pathetic combo.

>>1858217
>irelativistic

I laughed...

>>1858235

Huh. I did not notice that.

>>1858217
>that pic

I bet people in the 1300s were made they were never going to have refrigerators and people in the 3500s will be mad they don't have transuniversalsimulchronometers.

itt: you realize you are communicating instantly with people thousands of miles away by looking at a large glow-ey square thing on your desk.

sigh people will never learn

>>1858244
> sci-trolling.jpg

>Boomer's face when he becomes an intergalactic faster-than-light crime-fighting cyborg, the first Scanner of space, the guardian of Mankind and the Instrumentality's most respected et cetera

http://www.futuretimeline.net/

you guys are retarded if you think this ending aging shit will become accessible to a large percentage of the population within our lifetimes, assuming this will actually work. you guys remember that people used to think everybody would be using flying cars by now?

flying what? haha, you funny!

>>1858279

The cost of it would go down with time.

Immortality would be nice, but seriously, I'm not holding my breath. I try not to be very future-hyped, but I can allow myself to hype the date of the Nanotech Revolution up a bit >;3~~

Also this.

>>1858293

Nanotechnology is so potentially revolutionary that all scientific effort and government funding should be focused on it.

>>1858316

Exactly.

That and cancer, but who cares about the children! Lets get some bionano in here!

>>1858325
Sauce on the comic?

>>1858336

SMBC

Hover the mouse over the red button underneath each comic to get that block, it's from a recent comic.

But I want a catperson-maid to mollest.

>>1857421
While I will admit some people are overly optimistic, some of that stuff is a very real possibility assuming we avoid societal collapse. We're already on the cusp of some very interesting and consequential discoveries.

I can understand some of your complaints, OP, but sentient robots and fusion power are pretty much uncontroversially possible, and will almost certainly happen within our lifetimes.

>>1858279
Okay, but realistically a lot of these speculations are based off of currently advancing technology. For a while all you had to do to make something seem futuristic was make it fly, we're thinking a little more scientifically here.

>>1858316
but African orphans, corporate CEOs and farming lobbyists need more money now!

>>1858360
>assuming we avoid societal collapse

>>1858450

>implying humanity will kill itself off

>>1858450

Societal collapse will be fine as long as we can make pyterabyte hard drives and backup human knowledge in a bunch of places.

Then it's just a matter of killing off everybody and restarting from scratch.

>>1858462
>implying you need to go extinct to devolve into the hunter-gatherer state that your species was for 99% of it's existence, and a large portion of it continues to be today

>>1858469

There will always be some people keeping science... Then it's just a matter of time for those to control the peasants with light and magic...

Oh Sagan, /sci/, we totally should!

>>1858262
>people in the 1300s were made they were never going to have refrigerators
No they didn't. They thought world created by god is perfect and will be stationary forever.

The whole idea of having advanced technological shit in the future have become aboard this exponential growth we've had in the few centuries.

>>1858262
>people in the 1300s were made they were never going to have refrigerators
No they didn't. They thought world created by god is perfect and will be stationary forever.

The whole idea of having advanced technological shit in the future have become aboard this exponential growth we've had in the last few centuries.

cultural relativism bitch

>>1858293
The pharmaceutical companies can't afford NOT to make it affordable by the time that it is possible, lest their headquarters should be broken into by thousands of angry old people.

We technically are capable of interstellar travel already, humans just can't survive it. We're working on that.

AI is a long way away, but not out of reach of humanity.

We already have super-powered genetically engineered mutants, we just eat them instead of having them fight.

AFM based nanofabrication was the focus of my research two summers ago, so it's more than feasible within my lifetime alone.

Also we already use fusion power plants. Hell, we've even discovered that cold-fusion is possible if we had enough resources and time and money to mass produce muons. (which we don't)

ITT: OP realized what every nerd and sci-fi geek will grow up to realize. The future already happened, the technological singularity came and went, you missed it. But you didn't miss much, because nothing really changed.

Schoolchildren have access to the best technology mankind has ever dreamed of, a wealth of information and functionality we wouldn't have imagined not more than a decade ago. Yet we still pay rent, go to church, pay taxes, and bitch about politics.

Oh yeah, and all those non-American or non-white people? They're still killing eachother. The future is now.

>>1858279
On the contrary, sir, the only reason advanced technology is produced these days is precisely BECAUSE it's available to the mass market. I content that were such a solution available, not only would it be made accessible to the mass market, some bottles of wine would still be more expensive.

The age of IBM and Special Government Privilege is over, this is the era if Google and Microsoft. Tech for all!*

*(All here meaning middle and upper class members of the first world only)

>>1858566

>AFM based nanofabrication was the focus of my research two summers ago, so it's more than feasible within my lifetime alone.

But how long until we get the first multi-purpose, reprogrammable, Drexlerian molecular assembler?

>>1858316

Hey guys, representative from Academia reporting in from the research division of Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science. Just wanna let you know that nanotech ain't all it's cracked up to be. At least it won't be for a while. Nanofabrication alone is a bitch and a half to do right and the limit imposed by current chip technology already limits the size of electronics we can feasibly produce.

(to clarify, the reason you're seeing multi-core processors instead of dramatically faster processors is because we've reached a size limitation where chips are made so small they're at a quantum tunneling barrier: There is literally so little room between the 'wires' of a modern integrated circuit that electrons are literally teleporting to nearby 'wires' via quantum tunneling and shorting circuits. We CANNOT produce smaller chips because we're approaching a quantum barrier. There is always the possibility of developing a new style of chip (one that doesn't use electricity, for example) but sci-fi nanotech won't happen until that little hurdle is taken care of)

Of course that's not my department, that's a Physicist's problem. My department is materials and manufacture, and my AFM nanofabricator project lost funding. Fuck you too, NSF. Pic related

>>1858637
Quantum tunneling? Still sounds pretty cool, even if it is a problem.

>>1858603

I'm not familiar with that reference, so I'm not sure exactly what you're looking for, but I'll contextualize and extrapolate to assume you mean something that can build items at an atomic level.

If you'll allow me to make some gross oversimplifications, that's effectively what an AFM nanofabricator is. But it only works in one plane. (which sucks) Theoretically you could 3D print something in layers though, so if you had hundreds of thousands of dollars and years to spend on a single article, you could theoretically build any 3-D object at the atomic level with the technology we currently have available. But don't get too excited, atomic level construction is like cold-fusion. It's possible, but so horrendously expensive it's prohibitive.

>>1858566
Negative sir, consider this: the oil singularity happened, it created the most expansive boom in industry and scientific progress known to mankind giving us the most concentrated form of energy ever wielded by man. Realistically new forms of technology will rapidly emerge if we find another cheap abundant source of energy. Solar is the future, even if it is relatively inefficient right now. Not me mention we're running a bit low on that other stuff.

>>1858667
The novelty of quantum tunneling wears off once it starts wrecking your shit. The problem is we don't have the means to control the effect. I personally don't understand the concept as well as a Physicist would so I'm giving you all a watered down version of an explanation that was already dumbed down for me by someone who knew what they were talking about.

Anyway, my point is that modern technology is hella fucking balls to the wall awesome... but people are still people, bills still have to be payed, and life marches on the way it always has. Life changing technology will come and go (like smart phones and the internet) and in spite of the modernity tomorrow will look alot like today. That doesn't mean we won't develop kickass technology tomorrow, it just means it won't seem as groundbreaking as we're making it out to be when it happens.

call >>1858446 a baka ...

>>1858637
the problem is sisd

/sci/ sure is slow this afternoon.

bump

>>1858699
If we find something that can outdo 45 MegaJoules per Kilogram, maybe. But even hydrogen cells barely match that and those are such a bitch to make it's not even worth it unless endurance and spatial efficiency are high priority optimizations in your application.

Look, I love solar just as much as the next dude, I think solar's a pretty cool guy. But .02 Watts/In^2 (I believe the current state of the art factoring in average output is typically %20 of peak output) has to go a long way before it matches up to 45 Joules/cm^3 (to put this in perspective, 1 J = 1 W*s, so while the most expensive solar cells available produce .02 Joules per second, good old gas produces 45 Joules for every cubic centimeter burned (albiet typically at 50% efficiency))

So it'll take a square inch of bitchin' solar paneling 37 and a half hours to produce energy equivalent to a single teardrop of gas. The answer here is to get a damn good control systems and an optimizations Mechanical Engineer (such as yours truly) and a bit more than a square inch of solar paneling. But if you're looking for something to replace gas in vehicles, military applications, and mass corporate equipment, we're going to need stuff revolutionary.

>>1858828
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power
http://media.caltech.edu/press_releases/13325
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/article4799369.ece

>>1858828
Even then, it's an essentially unlimited resource and if the type of money that was spent on finding oil was spent on research and development of solar technology and fields I bet the world would have more than enough energy to replace oil as our primary supplier.

IT COULD BE HERE TOMORROW

Awesome things could be done in the future using discoveries and technologies we can't even imagine yet

>>1858847
Enlightening, an excellent find anonymous and worthy of a bookmark.

Let's analyze this.
Let's assume perfect extraterrestrial iridescence (144% of surface), let's also assume this extraterrestrial solar array remains in such a position that it is always perpendicular to the sun such that it always achieves peak power output (eliminates 20% averages restriction, increasing efficiency by roughly 80%!) Let's also assume that we've found a way to eliminate space-junk so these panels never get dirty or break and let's do some digging into Mankin's et.al. where he claims that if he had infinite money he could build an array capable of microwave energy transmission reaching efficiency of 60%.

So we have .1 Watts/in^2 (since no 80% reduction)
Multiplied by 1.44 (for improved extraterrestrial iridescence)
Multiplied by .6 (because microwave transmission sucks)
And we have .0864 Watts/in^2, but we're in space, so we've got alot of room to dick around. Let's be ambitious and say we're trying to solve the energy crisis, using this system to replace all current energy sources. "15 [TeraWatts (W * 10^12)] – geo: average total power consumption of the human world in 2004[13]" (source is Wiki).

So we've got .0864 Watts / In^2 trying to provide 15000000000000 Watts. That's about 1.736 * 10^14 square inches of high-grade solar paneling. Also read as 43246.09534 square miles of perfectly functioning solar paneling. That's about the size of Pennsylvania.

>Becoming immortal will be too expensive
>Have all of time to pay off your debts.

Wat?

>>1859004
So we need about 1.7 x 10^14 square inches of high quality solar paneling, and INTERNET says a 65.59x42.24 sheet runs about 1500 US monies.

So a quick number crunch says we're looking at a piece of hardware that costs 9.39955 x 10^13 US dollars. To put that in perspective, that's 14.24 times more money than the current worth of all the world's gold combined. Since gold is an internationally recognized standard of currency backing, you could say that just the solar panels alone for this kind of device would costs 14.24 times more money than the world has.

While we can handwave funding, what we can't handwave are the resources necessary to produce solar paneling of this magnitude, nor the maintainance costs and the practical issues of getting the damn thing in the sky in the first place.

Are you guys fucking retarded?

Even if we don't see those technologies "within our lifetime" you do realize that cryogenic freezing technology will have advanced enough by the time you consider it an option so that you may wake up in the future when these techs are existent?

I'm def. freezing myself if I don't see this shit in my life.

>>1859102
you son of a fuck

>>1859062

could you imagine the wholesale discount when buying 1.7 x 10^14 square inches of high quality solar paneling?

i shudder to think

>>1859120
Are you calling my dad or my mum a fuck?

Your next words may be your last.

>>1859062
okay, maybe not an all at once type of fix, but if we were to gradually start using solar more and more, the technology would be able to catch up and the development would likely decrease in cost. Honestly, I feel like it's a worthy endeavor, the sun has been providing abundant energy for the earth since before life existed, it seems like the obvious choice that the power source for our solar system should be the power source for our civilization.

>>1859102
There's a number of biological impediments to human cryogenic freezing. First off there's a phenomenal cellular degeneration and dehydration risk that there's very little you can do about. No matter how fast you freeze yourself, consider your skin completely gone, at best you'll look like that one chick who got in the drunk driving accident they show all the kids these days to scare them into driving sober. At worst you're completely conscious of every cell in your body dying for the duration of your freeze, in a living hell for however long you've frozen yourself.

There's not really much 'advancement' in cryogenic freezing. You freeze shit and biological processes stop. It's pretty straightforeward and accomplished what big research wants to accomplish with it. Of course it doesn't stop neural activity as salt generated electricity doesn't give two shits about what chemical processes consider 'cold' (you approach absolute zero before that starts to matter) so assuming you weren't killed outright you'd be conscious for the entirety of your freezing. You just wouldn't be able to move, breath, see, or feel. Of course it doesn't matter, you wouldn't need eyes where you're going.

>>1859140
Bring it on I haven't had a good fight in years.

>>1859128
Wholesale discount would have to reduce the price to a 15th of bluebook costs to make it within the price range of the entire planet.

>>1859140
I would assume at least one of your biological parents was a fuck, and at least one other biological parent was a fucker. Unless of course you were adopted by virgins, in which case neither of your parents would be fuckers or fucks.

>>1859236
the last paragraph of this post was probably the greatest thing I've read all night

bump

>>1858217
>myface when glorious loss of oxygen producing rainforests by 2050
no face posted cause i'll be dead from lack of oxygen

>>1861110
Sup Lars. You're going to die and never fuck Lela.