How long will it take for humanity to surpass SW technology wise?

Originally posted by Red Nemesis
He isn't wrong, you're confuzed. [b]Read:

The highlighted portion is where your confusion is. In the depths of space there are particles and rocks. People don't seem to take into account that travel at the speed of light would pierce the hull of whatever vehicle may be used to space travel with those particles and rocks. The sentence is clear but the only way your reading (that Cado thinks there are rocks going c) makes any sense is if we assume that he is dumb. Understanding is increased if we do not, so I will not.

Cade, you are quite right. Running into something while going c would be devastating; hence the deflector dish in Star Trek. [/B]

We could invent sensors that alerts any dangerous obstacles and moves around it, sort of like some cars that are out, although it will obviously have to be far more advanced.

Originally posted by Red Nemesis

[list][*]P = principal amount (initial investment)
[*]r = annual nominal interest rate (as a decimal)
[*]n = number of times the interest is compounded per year
[*]t = number of years
[*]A = amount after time t
[/list]

If we use arbitrary units for advancement then you get an idea of how quickly this grows:
[/B]

And...

Originally posted by Red Nemesis

Poor argument. The advancement of all but the last ten thousand years or so has been negligible. You are completely right, but discussing the largely stagnant (although extremely successful) lifestyles of tribal peoples is a waste of time in terms of technological achievement. Restrain yourself to the past 10,000 years and your point holds however (for now).

Except not. There are limits to the physical capabilities of technology. It is likely that the limits (of transistors, no matter how small, for example) will be reached long before we reach Star Wars levels, let alone Star Trek. It requires a paradigm shift that simply cannot be predicted to arise before we can match them. Although I suspect that such a shift is coming we cannot predict it based on past performance.
[/B]

That's my entire point. If, according to you, only the last 10,000 years really mattered (which isn't entirely true, aka fire/tools), that means that we've accelerated so far in really only 10,000 years worth of growth. Now imagine a million, only now that we actively research technology, more or less ALL of those years would see inventions. So take how far we've advanced in 1 million (aka really 10,000) and change it to 1 million (aka really 1 million).

I don't get it. Who's to say that there's a limit to technology before Star Wars? Oh, and by "let alone Star Trek" that implies that ST tech is greater.

Originally posted by Red Nemesis

[b]
Elaborate. In which areas of laser application are we nearing equality?

K, change that, maybe not "nearing", but we are more than capable of surpassing it. Blaster technology is superior to our firearms, but not to the point of thousands or even several hundred years. They both have the same function, blaster tech just has greater firepower, ammo, and maybe range. Not some super weapon that we cannot invent.

Originally posted by Red Nemesis

You don't seem to understand the ridiculous levels of power in walker weaponry. Stardestroyer.net calls the energy output necessary to take out Alderann "522600 times the power output of Earth's sun!" TCW ICS puts the energy in 1 shot from a Republic gunship at 5x10^9 joules per shot. That is 112,500,000,000th of the yearly electricity production in the US as of 2005. Or 1/3000th of the total human energy consumption per second. That is fantastic.

Their weapons are incredibly powerful, many orders of magnitude greater than our own: that antipersonnel turret puts out 3521126 times more energy than an AK47 bullet.

We're screwed in that area.

112...TH? I'll assume that's a typo.

Oh, and I mean infantry/vehicle firepower and armor. The former could be surpassed within the century (not guaranteed, but it's possible, since some of the suits that the US is designing are already ahead of plastoid armor that stormtroopers use in many ways). The latter might take far longer, but we can do it, unlike your statement that we will never do it/not in a million+ years. Do you seriously think that it would take us over a million years to make a blaster? Seriously?

Originally posted by Red Nemesis

Really? Cybernetics, prosthetics and an equivalent to bacta (the Vita-Chamber of Star Wars) are going to be equalled in the next few hundred years? Really? Hell, the US couldn't even do stem cell research for the past 8 years. You really think we're going to integrate organs and mechanics? Think of the protests! Think of the OUTRAGE! Think of the children!

Prosthetics are already made, albeit primitive ones. Considering the rate in which tech/science advances, arms that are just like a normal human's could be accomplished in under "millions of years". I think you seriously underestimate science/tech advancement. Bacta is indeed conceivable.

Originally posted by Red Nemesis

Doubtful.
1. At present there is no incentive to do so.
2. The ships shown are dangerously fragile, it is unlikely we'll ever see a functional, utilized x-wing.
3. Energy production is a factor again.
4. Heat dispersal

K.

Nah. Sabers are totally broken. Plasma doesn't act like that, neither does light. Even if it did it wouldn't do the things asked of it. There is absolutely nothing real behind sabers.

Population growth is seemingly limitless, as disease and famine are nearly absent (in SW) and even Earth (in your setup) is freed from those restraints. From My Ishmael:

Bear in mind that each planet would carry 6 billion people.

It wouldn't take long at all, given that:
Humanity survives for a VERY long time
Humanity is not sent back to the stone age via some nuclear war or something like that
Humanity is not taken over by machines/aliens/etc.
Humanity continues to advance and doesn't stagnate

90% (at least) of humanity is involved in a culture that must expand its population in order to survive. Therefore these numbers actually apply instead of illustrate the ridiculousity (i know) of our patterns.

I'd say our best bet is in robotics (Data > C3PO) and medicine (we do have stem cells, after all). Space travel is beyond the pale and they simply use magic for power output.

There's often an incentive that comes along to build big stuff capable of blowing things up. It's our nature as humans. And if we actually put our effort into making one, we can. Of course, it's unlikely that future space ships would look like that of Star Destroyers, but we can make space ships. The US is already developing space lasers and space planes, many scheduled to release in as little as 30 years.

If coruscant alone has trillion+, and the republic had over a million worlds...

plus, trillions (I read) were said to have died in the YV war. Since casualties in a war are almost always far below the total population, trillions dying implyes at least a (whatever number comes after)llion.

What about blasters/handheld?
What about vehicles?
Star Destroyers can be surpassed if we try.
Heck, even Hyperdrive can be surpassed in a few milenia IF it is possible.

Originally posted by Red Nemesis
He isn't wrong, you're confuzed. [b]Read:

The highlighted portion is where your confusion is. In the depths of space there are particles and rocks. People don't seem to take into account that travel at the speed of light would pierce the hull of whatever vehicle may be used to space travel with those particles and rocks. The sentence is clear but the only way your reading (that Cado thinks there are rocks going c) makes any sense is if we assume that he is dumb. Understanding is increased if we do not, so I will not.

Cade, you are quite right. Running into something while going c would be devastating; hence the deflector dish in Star Trek.

[/b]

[list][*]P = principal amount (initial investment)
[*]r = annual nominal interest rate (as a decimal)
[*]n = number of times the interest is compounded per year
[*]t = number of years
[*]A = amount after time t
[/list]

If we use arbitrary units for advancement then you get an idea of how quickly this grows:

[/b]
Poor argument. The advancement of all but the last ten thousand years or so has been negligible. You are completely right, but discussing the largely stagnant (although extremely successful) lifestyles of tribal peoples is a waste of time in terms of technological achievement. Restrain yourself to the past 10,000 years and your point holds however (for now).

Except not. There are limits to the physical capabilities of technology. It is likely that the limits (of transistors, no matter how small, for example) will be reached long before we reach Star Wars levels, let alone Star Trek. It requires a paradigm shift that simply cannot be predicted to arise before we can match them. Although I suspect that such a shift is coming we cannot predict it based on past performance.

Elaborate. In which areas of laser application are we nearing equality?

You don't seem to understand the ridiculous levels of power in walker weaponry. Stardestroyer.net calls the energy output necessary to take out Alderann "522600 times the power output of Earth's sun!" TCW ICS puts the energy in 1 shot from a Republic gunship at 5x10^9 joules per shot. That is 112,500,000,000th of the yearly electricity production in the US as of 2005. Or 1/3000th of the total human energy consumption per second. That is fantastic.

Their weapons are incredibly powerful, many orders of magnitude greater than our own: that antipersonnel turret puts out 3521126 times more energy than an AK47 bullet.

We're screwed in that area.

Really? Cybernetics, prosthetics and an equivalent to bacta (the Vita-Chamber of Star Wars) are going to be equalled in the next few hundred years? Really? Hell, the US couldn't even do stem cell research for the past 8 years. You really think we're going to integrate organs and mechanics? Think of the protests! Think of the OUTRAGE! Think of the children!

I read something about finding low-energy pathways (regions of space where gravity is less due to conflicting pulls) with calculus, which would save on gas usage. Another idea was "bending space" in front of the ship while leaving it normal behind it, maintaining c internally but traveling faster relative to the outer universe. That would require wtfsad levels of power though, and as known now the speed limit is unbreakable in every circumstance.

Doubtful.
1. At present there is no incentive to do so.
2. The ships shown are dangerously fragile, it is unlikely we'll ever see a functional, utilized x-wing.
3. Energy production is a factor again.
4. Heat dispersal

K.

Nah. Sabers are totally broken. Plasma doesn't act like that, neither does light. Even if it did it wouldn't do the things asked of it. There is absolutely nothing real behind sabers.

Population growth is seemingly limitless, as disease and famine are nearly absent (in SW) and even Earth (in your setup) is freed from those restraints. From My Ishmael:

Bear in mind that each planet would carry 6 billion people.

It wouldn't take long at all, given that:
Humanity survives for a VERY long time
Humanity is not sent back to the stone age via some nuclear war or something like that
Humanity is not taken over by machines/aliens/etc.
Humanity continues to advance and doesn't stagnate

90% (at least) of humanity is involved in a culture that must expand its population in order to survive. Therefore these numbers actually apply instead of illustrate the ridiculousity (i know) of our patterns.

I'd say our best bet is in robotics (Data > C3PO) and medicine (we do have stem cells, after all). Space travel is beyond the pale and they simply use magic for power output.

very nice read. I miss physics. When I asked my college to let me take quantum physics, they laughed. Douchebags.

I read something about finding low-energy pathways (regions of space where gravity is less due to conflicting pulls) with calculus, which would save on gas usage. Another idea was "bending space" in front of the ship while leaving it normal behind it, maintaining c internally but traveling faster relative to the outer universe. That would require wtfsad levels of power though, and as known now the speed limit is unbreakable in every circumstance.

Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
We could invent sensors that alerts any dangerous obstacles and moves around it, sort of like some cars that are out, although it will obviously have to be far more advanced.

That's my entire point. If, according to you, only the last 10,000 years really mattered (which isn't entirely true, aka fire/tools), that means that we've accelerated so far in really only 10,000 years worth of growth. Now imagine a million, only now that we actively research technology, more or less ALL of those years would see inventions. So take how far we've advanced in 1 million (aka really 10,000) and change it to 1 million (aka really 1 million).

K, change that, maybe not "nearing", but we are more than capable of surpassing it. Blaster technology is superior to our firearms, but not to the point of thousands or even several hundred years. They both have the same function, blaster tech just has greater firepower, ammo, and maybe range. Not some super weapon that we cannot invent.

Oh, and I mean infantry/vehicle firepower and armor. The former could be surpassed within the century (not guaranteed, but it's possible, since some of the suits that the US is designing are already ahead of plastoid armor that stormtroopers use in many ways). The latter might take far longer, but we can do it, unlike your statement that we will never do it/not in a million+ years. Do you seriously think that it would take us over a million years to make a blaster? Seriously?

Prosthetics are already made, albeit primitive ones. Considering the rate in which tech/science advances, arms that are just like a normal human's could be accomplished in under "millions of years". I think you seriously underestimate science/tech advancement. Bacta is indeed conceivable.

There's often an incentive that comes along to build big stuff capable of blowing things up. It's our nature as humans. And if we actually put our effort into making one, we can. Of course, it's unlikely that future space ships would look like that of Star Destroyers, but we can make space ships. The US is already developing space lasers and space planes, many scheduled to release in as little as 30 years.

Star Destroyers can be surpassed if we try.
Heck, even Hyperdrive can be surpassed in a few milenia IF it is possible. [/B]

I'm sure if we try, we could destroy planets with a single fart.

Originally posted by Red Nemesis
He isn't wrong, you're confuzed.

The highlighted portion is where your confusion is. In the depths of space there are particles and rocks. People don't seem to take into account that travel at the speed of light would pierce the hull of whatever vehicle may be used to space travel with those particles and rocks. The sentence is clear but the only way your reading (that Cado thinks there are rocks going c) makes any sense is if we assume that he is dumb. Understanding is increased if we do not, so I will not.

Cade, you are quite right. Running into something while going c would be devastating; hence the deflector dish in Star Trek.

Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
We could invent sensors that alerts any dangerous obstacles and moves around it, sort of like some cars that are out, although it will obviously have to be far more advanced.

@DS

So in other words, it would take us tens of thousands of years to invent blasters (or some gun that equals/surpasses it)???

...

haha...wtf?

Let me ask you: what is your invisionment of our technology...let's say, 2,000 years in the future? What do you think we would've invented?

can i point out that the title of this post is poor grammar? It should say "as far as technology is concerned." Anything that ends in "wise" is incorrect english:

i.e.

Strength-wise, force-wise, knowledge-wise.

Originally posted by truejedi
can i point out that the title of this post is poor grammar? It should say "as far as technology is concerned." Anything that ends in "wise" is incorrect english:

i.e.

Strength-wise, force-wise, knowledge-wise.

Yes, you can. As long as you don't forgot to use correct grammar yourself. 🙂

Or else you would be called a hypocrite. And that's my thing.

i think it is okay to point it out as long as I don't hate on the person who did it, even if i slip up from time to time.

Suffice it to say, that I TRY to follow grammatical rules, but i don't worry about it that much.

It was just too much when it was in a thread NAME.

Originally posted by truejedi
can i point out that the title of this post is poor grammar? It should say "as far as technology is concerned." Anything that ends in "wise" is incorrect english:

i.e.

Strength-wise, force-wise, knowledge-wise.

Maybe we are finally moving into Newspeak, what with the first Ingsoc president and all. 😐

But srsly, Orwell has grammar rules on Newspeak and -wise is the proper form in newspeak. Isn't that trippy?

(Have you ever read Player Piano by Vonnegut? It uses the -wise a lot, mostly as satire though.)

Originally posted by Slash_KMC
...Or else you would be called a hypocrite. And that's my thing.

lulz

Originally posted by truejedi
can i point out that the title of this post is poor grammar? It should say "as far as technology is concerned." Anything that ends in "wise" is incorrect english:

i.e.

Strength-wise, force-wise, knowledge-wise.

Force-wise, never ever not in a millium years - unless you're one to believe these secret government programmes that had during the cold war (that they're too embarrased to mention happened) with telekinesis and mind powers - lol

Strength-wise, i'm not sure how you mean strength. Physical individuals, so how strong we'll become physically, mentally, or humanity as a whole, whereby we invent more powerful and more energy exsorstive weapons. Or even technology...?

Originally posted by CadoAngelus
Knowledge wise, probably not that far from...we're finding out new things about science and technology all the time - whether the concept is fesible or not is a different sotry.

Force-wise, never ever not in a millium years - unless you're one to believe these secret government programmes that had during the cold war (that they're too embarrased to mention happened) with telekinesis and mind powers - lol

Strength-wise, i'm not sure how you mean strength. Physical individuals, so how strong we'll become physically, mentally, or humanity as a whole, whereby we invent more powerful and more energy exsorstive weapons. Or even technology...?

I think you totally misinterpreted his post.

Originally posted by Red Nemesis
He isn't wrong, you're confuzed. [b]Read:

The highlighted portion is where your confusion is. In the depths of space there are particles and rocks. People don't seem to take into account that travel at the speed of light would pierce the hull of whatever vehicle may be used to space travel with those particles and rocks. The sentence is clear but the only way your reading (that Cado thinks there are rocks going c) makes any sense is if we assume that he is dumb. Understanding is increased if we do not, so I will not.

[/B]

Thanks for pointing that out Red. Though,his lack of proper punctuation caused the confusion. However, with that being said, I interpreted his sentence exactly as he'd written it. No, I didn't think he was stupid, but possibly ignorant of certain aspects of science/space. Ignorance is a far cry from stupidity. We are ALL ignorant of many things. So, implying that one might be ignorant is by no means an insult. I still laugh at "several thousand years" though. Cado, once again, no insult intended.

Originally posted by Slash_KMC
I think you totally misinterpreted his post.

possibly, and probably - i was half asleep when i replied to that post.

Originally posted by Jinsoku Takai
Thanks for pointing that out Red. Though,his lack of proper punctuation caused the confusion. However, with that being said, I interpreted his sentence exactly as he'd written it. No, I didn't think he was stupid, but possibly ignorant of certain aspects of science/space. Ignorance is a far cry from stupidity. We are ALL ignorant of many things. So, implying that one might be ignorant is by no means an insult. I still laugh at "several thousand years" though. Cado, once again, no insult intended.

no offense taken...

i do admittedly have some flaws in my English grammar, but as long as people are able to understand or at least relay their understanding onto others my job is done...lol

also, "several thousand years" makes you laugh because...? i'm intreged 😛

Originally posted by truejedi
can i point out that the title of this post is poor grammar? It should say "as far as technology is concerned." Anything that ends in "wise" is incorrect english:

i.e.

Strength-wise, force-wise, knowledge-wise.

Sorry, I'm not that good at grammar 😉

Space travel is the key. I've read a lot of theories on how it can be done, generating enough gravity to bend space between two points light years apart seems to be the popular theory. I also read that NASA and/or the Air force are working on gravity generating devices.

Originally posted by CadoAngelus
lulz

Knowledge wise, probably not that far from...we're finding out new things about science and technology all the time - whether the concept is fesible or not is a different sotry.

Force-wise, never ever not in a millium years - unless you're one to believe these secret government programmes that had during the cold war (that they're too embarrased to mention happened) with telekinesis and mind powers - lol

Strength-wise, i'm not sure how you mean strength. Physical individuals, so how strong we'll become physically, mentally, or humanity as a whole, whereby we invent more powerful and more energy exsorstive weapons. Or even technology...?

what the hell does any of this mean? I corrected his grammar, and pointed out that those 3 things are poor grammar. What were you doing?

Originally posted by Allankles
Space travel is the key. I've read a lot of theories on how it can be done, generating enough gravity to bend space between two points light years apart seems to be the popular theory. I also read that NASA and/or the Air force are working on gravity generating devices.

Which would take an unrealistic amount of energy. Not to mention, it's not even clear as to what effect this would have on a human body.

Originally posted by truejedi
what the hell does any of this mean? I corrected his grammar, and pointed out that those 3 things are poor grammar. What were you doing?

Originally posted by CadoAngelus
i was half asleep when i replied to that post.

i didn't take into account that you were correcting him lol...i went off on a rant about it...but i still stick to my opinions on how advanced we are in those three areas...even if i look like a div because it didn't understand what you were doing lol...

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
Which would take an unrealistic amount of energy. Not to mention, it's not even clear as to what effect this would have on a human body.

We could sometime in the future have the ability to simulate certain Force powers, such as TK and Mind Tricks, much easier than we can go FTL. Although pre-cog is probably impossible or close to impossible.