What is Next? 1

[GOTWW]

I have been blessed to have been given the ability to participate in this forum, of an assorted assembly of exceptional engineering talent. Always amazed at the depth of knowledge that individually has been obtained in the many implementations, refinements, and re-refinements of the existing established technology, and associated governmental regulatory requirements.

But what this thread (and forum branch) is about is what are the next greatest achievements, that will revolutionize our lives. Cold fusion-confusion would have been one of them, hydrogen is probably not. Many new mind-boggling technologies exist, yet I have not seen really anything other than refinements of 50+ year old technology.

Of my assorted colleges there was a short conversation. The older said, this technology was science fiction when I was a kid, this is amazing! The younger, computer whiz replied back. When I was a kid we had star-trek transporters. This response was profound to me and I have never forgot.

Since I have been lambasted by some of my wild thoughts, I am curious about other wild ideas. We are now somewhat, it seems, held back by the paddle wheel mentality of only what worked in the past.

 

[davefitz]

Part of why we are still using only refinements of 50+ year old technology is that it has served us well, and there is not yet sufficient need to push the envelope and take the risks needed to develope newer technologies. Neccesity is the mother of invention, as they say. This could change soon as we reach "peak oil" and the cost for petroleum based products goes out the roof.

Another reason is that our social+ political system has strong mechanisms that preserve the status quo in all respects, and technology that is "revolutionary" in any aspect is viewed as threatening to this status quo and all subtle methods are used to squelch it ,nip it in the bud. This can be seen clearly in the "cold fusion" realm, and it is only now being quietly developed by the US Navy due to its national security implications. If not for such implications, our sytem tends to allow existing, governing technologies play themselvs out to their bitter end.

 

[ChrisConley]

One of the great accomplishments of science fiction is that it opened many young minds to the great things that science and technology could accomplish. How many of scientists and engineers started along their path because of great science fiction authors?

The amount of development and change early in the century seems greater than what we accomplish now because they were starting from scratch and every change was exciting and received real media attention. Now NASA scrambles on how to make a space launch exciting… how can you make a space launch boring!

There are many times more researchers and many times greater resources now than in the past, but we have become accustomed to new advances, I would say almost blasé. The computer, cell phone, medicine, automobiles, etc. undergo refinements that are astounding, however, people's reaction is pretty ho-hum.

Hit a few universities’ websites. Check out some of the research going on. If you remove a set of jaded glasses you'll see that some of the work going on, all over the world, has the potential to change the way we perceive the universe.

The main problem is that the media has decided that science is boring. I'll here 150 stories about who Ben Affleck is dating before I hear a story about an engineer working their entire life to make a difference. So instead of news about fusion research I have to hear about Jennifer Lopez's next husband.

Check out this link... often.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/topix/

My apologies for the rant, but the idea that science isn't progressing is one of my 'hot buttons'.


**If you are not part of the solution, then you are part of the precipitate.**

 

[GOTWW]

Actually, you all are correct, even the creators of star-trek did not fore see flip phones that can take pictures, and, be used to cruise the (then non-existent) internet. Not to mention the microwave oven, magnetic resonance imaging, micromechanical airbag sensors, 20 cent RFID chips, etc. etc. So I even regret, the statement about hydrogen. Maybe the hydrogen internal combustion engine will prevail. The engineering opportunities today, (for integrating the available technologies) is better than during the turn of the century, however, much of which is throw away electronics. What I lack it would seem, is a clear vision into the future prime movers of energy; petrol, coal, hydro, fission, and the available alternates. All have their negative consequences. One chap suggested, space based solar power, even this is a stretch for me to accept. Another popular science article suggested He4, mined from the moon. As for the navy, who knows what lurks in those murky depths.

 

[BillPSU]

I have been a sci-fi fanatic since a very young age. I dreamed of going to the stars and was around when Kennedy mandated the quest of getting a man to the moon. I watched the first man on the moon.

Necessity is the mother of invention. Today many inventions made for the space program are everyday items taken for granted, leading to indifference from the media and the population.

We are refining 50 year old technology however there is a tremendous amount of new technology being developed its just not what a mechanical or an industrial uses today.

Genetic engineering has burst onto the scene in the last 20 years and is far from being developed. Artificially produced human insulin was a tremendous deveopment. Nano-technology today they think in terms of machining infintesimal part but what about using genetics to grow the part.

Oil is finally reaching its point of maximum supply potential yet demand is growing with a fixed amount of reserves. The push should be in fusion research. It solves two problems lack of fossil fuel and global warming.

I believe we humans think in to short of time frames. In the next 100 years oil resources will shrink tremendously what will we do? The correct question is in a 1000 years the oil will be gone what should we do? But of course we being the short lived species we are, 1000 years is meaningless to us.

Right now greed and power is driving research and development. If they can't make a buck on a development why do it. Adding to human knowledge is not an acceptable answer. Fusion and genetics are some of the prime areas where research should be done.

 

[GregLocock]

Oil is a fun topic. For most practical purposes it can be replaced by coal or nuclear, but for transportation there seems no likely substitute.

It would seem that aircraft are the hardest challenge. I'm inclined to ignore them, since, at a cost, oil will always be available, either by extraction from more expensive sources, or direct reformulation from coal.

Let's suppose the price of oil ramps up at 20% per annum. That means that in about 6 years the price of oil in the USA will represent the same proportion of the GNP as it did in the 1974-81 'oil crisis'. That was sufficiently expensive to inspire a variety of rather silly solutions by the big 3, and the more sensible solution by the American consumer of switching to smaller cars with smaller engines.

So, we have a timespan of about 6 years (from some arbitrary start point, not visible yet) to implement a new personal transport system, and, since it will almost certainly need electricity, improved stationary power generation infrastructure.

The second part is known technology. You either get nuclear, or coal, or both. I don't see any particular point in discussing which of those two should be used, that is likely to be made on a political rather than engineering basis.

People have been messing about with hydrogen in ic engines for forever, and have yet to come up with a satisfactory method for (a) generating hydrogen or (b) storing it on the vehicle. Then you still have a device that is at best 50 and more likely 25% efficient.

Likewise for fuel cells, which, once you have the hydrogen, are fairly efficient, but they have other issues.

So, my guess is boring old electric cars, pushbikes, and conventional cars or buses with reasonably high occupancy.

Incidentally agriculture, and big trucks, are a big issue.


Cheers

Greg Locock

 

[GOTWW]

My preference is either nano-mechanical, or quantum mechanical. For the nano-mechanical system. Naturally stimulated growth of CO2 hungry proto-plazma, planted in the vast equatorial regions of the wonderful oceans are digested, and collected into fuel by, environmentally benign nano-mechanical robots. The choice of fuel, is independent, however, hydrocarbon based liquids would be the most convenient. As for the quantum system....

 

[makeup]

Well I dont think we've even started yet. We havent yet exploited half of the composites available including those of steel and yet we are obsessed with something new. The next thing in my view will be further improvements of the existing, ceramics, medical, power and I cant wait. We are a long way of a revolution.

 

[rhodie]

I think that rapid manufacturing has a future. Reverse engineering CMMT and Stereolithography-like technology paired with sintered metal technology will bring about a "replicator" type technology.

 

[GOTWW]

Yes!!, the replicator, I totally forgot about it. I do not recall if it was deemed universal. But, nowadays it would not be a too-much stretch of the imagination. Spurring the imagination. It would put OEM custom car fabrication to a new meaning. Just sit down with a CADster for an hour or so and viola! You’re (hopefully) dream car pops out. Hopefully we can retain the machinist for building or repairing this new wonder. Not that my intent of this thread was star-trek based technological spin-offs. But there was that food cooker thing. It is not unbelievable nowadays; that given 3 or 4 dog-food type bags of kelp-soybean mixture into the respective hopsters, once a month or so simulated food could not be produced. I would wait a bit for them to perfect the technology, as have been in a few galleys that everything tastes the same.

 

[flamby]

Considering that the humans are evolving since more than 50000 years and yet all the great looking achievements are of circa 1900-50, it gives the impression that party is nearly over. With oil flame dimming out, future looks grim, not promising any great revolutions. Thankfully, we'll have pushbikes.

 

[GOTWW]

Hint, this is a secret, but...., I have put all my money into donkey futures, because, when the oil runs out, these are going to be 4-legged walking gold bags.

 

[GOTWW]

rhodie, thumbs up!. Some positive feedback. Your simple comment spurred yet another next!, That is TOYS ARE U!, easy. give kids the chance to design their own toys, however so crude using an adaptation of the existing rapid prototyping technology. Maybe crude ninja figures, yet with the advanced development, perhaps toyes that do more. Kinda might put a dent is the massive "" brand sweat shop mass produced stuff coming from overseas.

Just gotta wonder, with a 5% unemployment rate for engineers. why is there so much wining? Jease, 5% of the population can not even handle mc-burger work, I do not hear the ex-mc-burger people wining so much?

 

[sms]

My daughter was assigned the topic of oil independance as a topic for a debate class. We started talking about alternatives including hydrogen and fusion, and it reminded me of a few old science fiction short storys I have read over the years. Why not run a cargo space vehicle over to Jupiter, suck hydrogen off the atmosphere of the planet, and bring it back? Or how about mining asteroids? We often look at our Earth as being resource limited, but our solar system is not. I think the next big leap has to be to space, that will be the best way to provide people with some elbow room.

All it takes is money......

 

[DrillerNic]

Resources such as metals don't really run out- we can start to mine rubbish tips- in Nevada they are currently mining gold from the old spoil tips: modern extraction techniques can get the 0.05% (or whatever) of gold left in the 1950's spoil: easier than digging new gold out of the ground! Unless we start needing more of certain mineral that exisits in the crust (which I think is umlikley), we won't be mining asteroids for some time.

Resources such as coal, oil and gas which are burnt are ultimitly finite. However, generating hydrogen from electrolysis of water using renewable electricity is probably almost always going to more energy efficient and cheaper than getting hydrogen from extra-terrestrial sources.

Finally, SMS, for energy independence, tell your daughter to first look at efficiency measures (what's teh average mpg in teh US vs, say Europe for each class of vehicle?) and then look at the prospects of oil exploration over the large chunks of the US that are currently off limits: The east coast (there's oil offshore Newfoundland such as Hibernia and White Rose, why not in the southern continuations of these basins offshore New England?). The West coast (lots of oil in California, and there used to be production offshore California until it was banned). The rest of the Gulf of Mexico, (especially the Florida coast: lots of oil & gas in the Texas & Louisiana coasts, why not around the Florida coast?) Alaska- banning drilling in the ANWR due to possible environmental damage was very, very controversial: there hasn't been very, very limited environmental damage in & around Prudhoe Bay after decades of drilling there.... Encourage Canadian exploration in the Mackenzie delta- finace a pipeline from the Canadian arctic (unless you think that Canada is a possible future enemy, and so energy supplies from Canada aren't guaranteed long term!)

 

[GOTWW]

I have always had a problem with the extra-terrestrial approaches as getting the product for up-there to down here. As you know, concentrate the energetics too much as to practically transport, have another name, called bombs. It is the classical case of the big golden anchor, and the lost fisherman in the rowboat.

As for metals, have not put much thought into it. Always thought that the landfills of today will be the gold mines of tomorrow.

Engineers should enjoyce at the end of the old. Necessity is the mother of invention. May be many starts and fits, but the future lenardos, teslas, edisons,.... will have another window of opportunity to shine.

My personal opinon is that the rapid pace of theoretical understandings will result in a profound elegant solution. It could shake our fundamental view of our universe. Some will choose suicide rather than accept the new reality. Especially the donkey futures investor.

 

[sms]

BTW I did indeed discuss with my daughter the more pratical approaches around increased fuel economy and drilling in places around the US that we have not drilled in before. But she also wanted to consider out of the box approaches, so we started coming up with imaginative solutions, including converting ocean water to Hydrogen, or bringing a comet into earth orbit and mining the chemicals and minerals off of it.

Like I said the problem is solvable, all it takes is money

 

[GOTWW]

sms, Maybe your daughter was way ahead of us all along. I just read in the latest EE times about the desperate need for EEs to help design Magnetized-beam plasma propulsion system. Apparently the units, stratigically placed around earth, moon, mars, jupiter.. would allow very low cost interplanetary transport and make "space travel routine", no joke, check out the latest EE times for yourself.

 

[GOTWW]

& BTW for those that do not get EE-Times

http://www.eetimes.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=51200114