/sci/ - Science & Math

act

transuminsim and cybernetics and nanomachines baby

We can't even agree how the moon was formed and 30% of Americans believe the Earth is only 6000 years old. Why do we even bother?

At the top of my list:

1. Reverse aging of mice organs(like Benjamin Button movie)
2. Nano-microscope breakthrough - we not have the ability to observe virus live and more detail!
3. Birkeland-Sun model - Sun model based on accretion of heavy elements such as iron and nickel. Contradicts standard model that predicts mostly helium-hydrogen composition.
4. Cold fusion using helium and nickel (related to #3)

The study of the role in child anal rape in the production of muslim stem cells in a socialist healthcare system.

Global warming/climate change.
Anything involving evolution or abiogenesis.
Genetic manipulation of any kind, but especially involving humans.
Evolutionary psychology (listed separately than evolution, since it is scientifically and not just politically controversial).
Stem cell research.
Inflation cosmology.
Anything else Christfags object to, when it occurs to them.

>Ellen Page will never suck your dick. ;_;

>transhumanism

lol as if this could be considered science.

Gay Kurzweil can get out of here with his overactive imagination.

>>2648881
>bawww, why isn't everyone a death-worshiper like me?

>>2648700
I love you.

act

string theory

Some high profile study in the field of women's studies

>>2648895
>why can't everyone see that reality will surely conform to my absurd technocratic fantasies? I have charts that say so when grossly misinterpreted!

hadronic mechanics?

lol@act-meme on /sci/ :D

hadronic mechanics = dreams are real
pseudoscience

I'd say AI research will become more controversial over time as they get smarter and approach humans more.

The holographic principle theory seems pretty farfetched. Maybe I don't understand it well.

String theory isn't widely accepted, but makes a lot of sense. I'm hopeful, but it has yet to be proven.

>>2648875

>>2649300
This will soon be cross pollinated into /v/

What does act stand for?

>>2648875
>>2649300

Fine.

How long will it be until technology allows me to have Ellen Page suck my dick?

>>2649345
probably by the time she's an 80 yr old, but then she'd probably do it anyway

genetic engineering, especially of animals is a pretty hotly debated topic. Personally I put my vote with good old-fashioned breeding

By 2045, according to Moore's Law, we will reach Technological Singularity; i.e., the processing power of one computer will be more powerful than every human brain on Earth combined, and AI will literally be able to come up with solutions for problems before humans can even identify the problem to begin with.

It is when this happens, which is absolutely will, that mankind loses its title as the most advanced species on the planet.

Also, by 2025 we will have completely reverse-engineered the human brain, and will be able to literally construct working brains from silicon.

>>2649400
This is controversial because it brings to question sentience. If a robot can think, speak, react, act, and exist exactly like a human, or even better, who is to say what constitutes a sentient being? Is there a "ghost" in the machine? At what point is a "soul" that is able to feel created by this process?

If we cannot even identify the "ghost" in mankind, how will we be able to distinguish ourselves from robotic lifeforms, other than raw elements?

>>2649400
And by 2015 we will all have flying cars.

>>2649415
Ha. Ha.

Just look up Moore's law. This is 100% true.

>>2649425

No, it's 100% speculation based off past trends. Assuming that technology will advance exponentially forever is stupid.

Also: On 13 April 2005, Gordon Moore stated in an interview that the law cannot be sustained indefinitely: "It can't continue forever. The nature of exponentials is that you push them out and eventually disaster happens."

>>2649415

We could easily have flying cars today if we wanted to. Do you know why that never happened? It's stupid and not practical.

Constructing artificial brains however, is extremely beneficial.

tl;dr the futurehype argument doesn't hold much weight because a lot of the dumb predictions people made twenty years ago just don't make very much sense to implement.

>>2649460

>The nature of exponentials is that you push them out and eventually disaster happens

All that is saying is that we could very well reach a point where technology destroys itself/us.

>Assuming that technology will advance exponentially forever is stupid.
>Implying it hasn't through the history of man, and continues to.

Nigga, you just went full retard.

>>2648700

Awesome.

>>2649474

>Implying it did

>>2649474
tech went backwards a few times in the past

seems to be a two steps forward one back kind of thing

but it is possible it will permanently reverse. nobody knows what will happen in the future. chaos etc

>>2649530
>tech went backwards a few times in the past
That's only because of the dark ages. That was one superpower's doing.

>it is possible it will permanently reverse
Not unless it gets so advanced in one specific colony that they destroy all technology as well as all information regarding technology everywhere on the planet. I don't think that's possible.

>>2649474

>All that is saying is that we could very well reach a point where technology destroys itself/us.

That's not at all what he was saying.

Also, historic trends don't necessitate future trends to be the same, it's an overly simplistic view. Especially considering how small the sample size of the history of computing hardware is.

>>2649530
You can't use chaos as an excuse to claim whatever you want. If technology was ever wiped out, we would just rebuild. Technology is pretty natural for humans, the only way tech dies is if every human died, and even then life would form again. The universe tends towards complexity.

Quantum psychics has to be within the scientific community.

>>2649548
>That's not at all what he was saying.

Then, by all means: Elaborate.

The alien bacteria we found today.

>>2649545
reversed a few times, in china too, and mesoamerica

and you present just one scenario, there are thousands. without a crystal ball, you won't know

>>2649552
you can scientifically use chaos to claim things are not predictable. this is my only claim.

>>2649557

Basically that sustained exponential growth is an unreasonable assumption. I think you're taking "disaster," too literally in this context.

http://news.techworld.com/operating-systems/3477/moores-law-is-dead-says-gordon-moore/

>>2649575
April 2005, nice date.


'In 2008 it was noted that for the last 30 years it has been predicted that Moore's law would last at least another decade.[49]'

>>2649400


What age are you? By 2025 we will have completely reverse-engineered the human brain??? Where is this tid-bit of information coming from. So 14 years to work out how a human brain works. It took like 10 years to complete the human genome project. The blueprint to build a basic brain + rest of body. Basic brain as in little or no neuron connections. But if true we probably wont be building chips using silicon we will be using
graphine.

By the way genetic engineering cant even solve problems caused by 1 gene mutation. Let alone Baldness yet you think we could understand a Brains inner workings

Also a computer can be infinity times as powerful as a human brain in hardware terms as it likes, but if we haven't got the algorithms and related hardware it doesn't mean shit. For instance current computing power is equivalent to a human brain. Which would u prefer a human brain or a CPU.

"It can't continue forever. The nature of exponentials is that you push them out and eventually disaster happens." Moore really is a genius in hindsight we can all fix our stupid predictions which is what he really did he predicated stupid shit that couldn't possibly physically hold. ( This is in response to a later thread but your thread references Moores Law)

TL DR... Moores Law shouldn't be a law because it is obvious it would never hold. We ain't that smart well a few of us but Gordon Moore is not one of them

What is hadronic mechanics? cant find a thing .

>>2649868

Just a /sci/ passerby here. Saw your comment and was reminded of something I watched recently. I thought you will enjoy this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iDR8Z-e_GU

the greeks had steam power. instead of using it to advance their cultures infrastructure they used it for cheap parlor tricks. what makes you think that wont happen again? isn't happening right now?

aeolipile

>>2649586

What does the date have to do with anything? He hasn't come out and said, "Oh wait I was wrong, it will exponentially increase forever!"

And yes another decade may be reasonable, as I had said it is infantile to assume exponential growth will last forever.

>>2649936

...thought you might* enjoy this.

Derp

Am I behind in the times or is anthropogenic global warming still debated?

>>2649975

It's still debated. We know it's getting warmer and we know we are responsible for some of the warming. The question is how much.

>>2649936

Over 1 hour man...
I've only watched about 5 mins but fine, in terms of scientific development a lot has happened in the last 100 to 200 years. But science was held back by religion, less college graduates, money and materials.

In that lecture Henry Markam points this out that we wont dig in deep to a rats brain for 100 years maybe 20 to 30 he says, but we need other tech to do this computing power, biology etc,. Now i'd say a the brains of a human and a rat are very similiar (some people even look like rats lol)

But heres my point
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0gbYHDvzUM&feature=related
Scientists/People give very optimistic dates.


>>2649949
There is actually a few moores law, but considering this is the most widely accepted one

Moore's law describes a long-term trend in the history of computing hardware. The quantity of transistors that can be placed inexpensively on an integrated circuit has doubled approximately every two years


Implying Moores law has nothing to do with dates
>> years
>> time
>> dates
it would seem dates has a big part of it

Well in his law he said it would increase exponentially he didnt say it would stop. It wasn't until it was obvious to the world that it wouldn't continue forever he decided to say it would stop. Basically just backing up my point Moore is not a genius and his law isnt a law. Actually wondering now that we know its not true is it actually even a LAW

>>2649400
Moore's law will eventually become false because matter is made of atoms.

My opinion :
The density limit will be reached by 3D-architectured molecular-transistor based processors.