synexo Posted January 19, 2006 Share Posted January 19, 2006 Do you think that Star Trek-like levels of technology will be achieved within the time period depicted in the tv shows? i.e. faster than light interstellar travel within 200 to 300 years, transporters, etc.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeAreTheOne Posted January 19, 2006 Share Posted January 19, 2006 I think most propably yes. Someone has already teleported single photon :) (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2049048.stm) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bones2097 Posted January 19, 2006 Share Posted January 19, 2006 dude we should be star trekkin' now... if it wasn't for stupid ppl who started wars on thier faith... or try to keep control by abusing thier power... like the catholic chruch said the decimal system was the work of the devil & every on should use roman numerals (that in excludes zero!!!) und the dark ages science was banned for +100 yrs :o... i think so but we need another war yet not looking foward to that gene war what ever its called..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFMF Posted January 19, 2006 Share Posted January 19, 2006 Most probably yes In my opinion - Star Trek had a very idea of what the future might be like and it's the same for there idea of what the technology might be like... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duggie Posted January 19, 2006 Share Posted January 19, 2006 I think so, just look at what we already have from TOS and TNG. We can teleport photons, have cell phones that do more than those communicators do. Also think about all the cool teck that we have that they didn't know we could have back in the 60's and even in the 80's. It may be a while before we go treking though space at faster than light, but I believe that that kind of teck will be around in one to two centuries. Things seem to come faster than what we predict sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hilander72 Posted January 20, 2006 Share Posted January 20, 2006 Most probably. Star Trek (TOS) technologies does exist today, but far from all of it. Some techs might be impossible or something else will be used instead. Possible future: AI (low IQ :cyclops:), holosuite, "tricoder", Universal Translator (real time audio). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mav Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 No offense but shouldn't this be in a Trek related or general-technology related subforum instead of the Stargate forum? Just mentioning it ;p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenebrae Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 2-3 centuries is a long time given that about 90% of all technological innovation has been developed in the last century and most of that in the last 30-40 years. I think that it's worth pointing out that there will probably be a lot of stuff that you don't see in Trek. I always thought it was pretty laughable that they're almost 300 years in the future and don't use something a little more sophicated than touchscreens. Although I guess if they're packing all the high explosives in there, there isn't much space for high tech wizardry. Holosuites... well, I think virtual reality is a lot more likely... although there would be obvious benefits to being able to construct tangible holograms but I think we're a ways off that. Transporters... well, I think that there is a big difference between transporting subatomic particles a few meters and FTL... I'd like to hope there is some way of cheating the speed of light or else the universe is a pretty dull place. Although clearly the calculations of Alcuiberre and more recently the notions of Heim would suggest that it's within our reach - possibly. When it is within our grasp though... who can say? Faster than Light? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TetsuoShima Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 I say, probably not. Why, energy output: the energies required to perform those marvellous feats they do in that show would be enormous and quite frankly, I don't see any new and practical form of energy creation/use on the horizon. Fusion is the best I can see happening and that simply won't cut it in energy output. Simply look at the E=mc² equation that roughly states that energy and mass are equivalent in those quantities. You can easily calculate how much energy it would require to 'replicate' a sandwich or how much energy would have to be transmitted and stored to use a transporter. Of course, it may well be that new theories and technologies will be develloped, but as things are now (research advancements/economic situation/...), I don't see anything like that happening in the next millenium. I'd like to imagine that it would though, but when I'm realistic, I'd call it wishfull thinking. A very powerfull thing that is btw, wishfull thinking, if used properly... ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenebrae Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 Replicators are capable of transforming matter back into energy. So you just turn rubbish into food/clothes etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjnave Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 Just an interesting something...I heard (somewhere) that Light Speed has been ruled as impossible (or at least practically impossible) by scientists and that Star Trek is basically the only Sci-Fi that can get away with using it in their writing. In other words if you were a sci-fi writer that you wouldnt be taken serious if you used light speed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenebrae Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 So if you write something scientifically implausible in science fiction, you're a bad sci-fi writer? That'll be a real kick in the teeth to about 80% of sci-fi authors. I'm not even sure what your point is - reaching light speed is impossible or at the very least so totally impractical as to be pointless? Well, I think that's a pretty widely acknowledge fact but if we make the possibly spurious assumption that warp drive is similar in principle to the Alcubierre drive - then they aren't really going faster than light, in fact, they aren't moving at all. It's a cheat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
netshark Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 Most likely not. It's right that most of the technical progress has been made in the past century, and I expect this progress to increase exponentially. But I guess that isn't enough, beside, there are most certainly physical impossibilities to star trek visions that will never be achieved in reality - no matter how far developed we are. Another thing is, that I dont expect huge wars in the future like the nuclear strikes that we've been told in the first contact - that might even support our development, but as I said, guess it just won't be enough. (we also will never apply the ideals of the federation society, where no money is necessary anymore etc. - the human egoism will prevent that, always) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maverick Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 how about this, its not an isolinear chip but if you put it into a computer it will do the job it is told to do (unless its on my computer, in which case it will spend most of the day thinkin about it, then say NO!) which is what the chips do right? i carry one with me most days to uni and never think about what an astonishingly handy piece of kit it really is. must be worthy of at least a line in a klingon song...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
str82u Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 There are so many leaps and bounds now in technology that it may not be that long for some things, but the most useful probably aren't that popular because they are more helpful than profitable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
queenhank Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 A real-life tricorder has already existed, if not quite so advanced as a Star Trek one. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tricorder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
makka32 Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 Star Treck Warp drive = Antimatter - Matter reaction ----> Explanation: Antimatter is created using particle accelerators otherwise known as synchrotrons, the energy required to create the antimatter is far greater than what the antimatter gives in return...However, antimatter does exist, and is the most efficient form of energy known to exist (proven) and is therefor a very plausible fuel for space travel if collected and stored in mass quantities. Just a single gram of antimatter is capable of litterally splitting the world in half and also powering a ship from earth to pluto and back again twice. Like I said, it required more energy to create it than you get out, but! Techniques have been devised to counter that...to some degree. Using the suns energy (radiant heat), it would be possible for a 'station' of some sorts to be positioned in a close orbit around the sun (I don't know how close...closer than earth thats for sure). That solar energy would be used to power particle accelerators, which are used to create antimatter, which is then stored in penning traps (magnetic traps - read more if interested) and then transferred to ships and the like for a power source. Stargate ZPM = Zero Point Module - Utilising zero point fluctuations in a complete vaccum seal. -----> Explanation: Zero Point Fluctuations do exist, although they cannot as yet be harnessed for energy. If they could, this source of energy would be theoretticaly inexhaustible and would not follow the 'conventional' laws of physics. Read more about Quantum Mechanics to understand what I mean by that. ZPM's may be fiction, but the idea behind the technology does exist and is being researched at the moment. Also, Zero Point Fluctuations explain a great deal about the universes structure, such as galaxies, and why they are clustered as they are. ZPF's are random fluctuations - waves - in space that over a period of billions of years clumped all the matter together into galaxies. (Some antimatter galaxies have been 'observed' but scientists are still unsure of their existance). The underlieing theme i'm trying to get to you here is that alot of the technology you see in star treck and star gate is real, however in it's infant stages. That's what makes the shows so popular, and beleivable in some twisted sense :) Someone said earlier that energy would be the biggest problem...Thats true...he also said that it would be impossible to power it using 'fusion' which is the closest we have at the moment...Thats also true, but as i've explained above there are alternate sources that still comply with E=mc^2. Antimatter at least should be proof enough that those sorts of energy levels are achievable. Sorry for the long post :) I hope you found it interesting. I certainly do, and spend a great deal of my time researching these and other theoretical energy and propulsion sources. Cheers, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenebrae Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 ACTUALLY - ZPMs in Stargate weren't tapping zero point energy. They were doing something else (meaningless babble) the upshot of which is that they had a finite amount of energy - hence the fact they can be depleted. In Atlantis they reveal that the Ancients never managed to tap Zero Point because obviously being all powerful means you're pretty lame. Zero Point energy would be pretty super though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magestorm Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 In the Star Trek tech manual, it explains that antimatter is not efficient to produce. Usually, they have stations that produce the antimatter. However, ships do have emergency facilities onboard to produce their own antimatter, buit converts at 10 units deuterium to 1 unit antideuterium. This, of course, makes it impractical for them to make it onboard. But it is there, as an amergency measure, since deuterium alone cannot power their warp engines, but they can use bussard collectors to collect it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjnave Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 I'm not even sure what your point is - There was no point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now