planetf1.com

It is currently Sun Jun 24, 2018 10:56 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules





Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Oct 16, 2014 7:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2013 5:36 pm
Posts: 1389
I know that we are all decent peaceful people, who can share and debate opinion, without to much strife, which is frankly awesome.
The shame is, the majority, the average man/ woman does not have a say in the path that we are taken down.

The good bit, major advances in medicine, technology maybe. (although living longer and technological killing machines maybe not so positive).

The bad bit, greed of land and substance, unconsciousness, polluting, selfish , short sighted, war mongers?

Maybe there will be an awakening and a shift to conscious leadership. I fear that the only thing that could possibly bring the world together for the good off all, would be a calamity, but even then it would be claimed by some to be the work of an invisible greater power that we should all worship and be in fear of.

Our generations place in history has no innocence. IMO.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 16, 2014 9:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 2:29 am
Posts: 1919
As long as another world war does not break out history will judge us as a success. More humans are living comfortably on this planet then ever before and greed and selfishness are often the drivers for people to motivate themselves to work and produce wealth which benefits mankind as a whole in the world wide economy. Ever since WWII civilized peaceful progress has been a lot better than the millennia before, now some might say that is the doomsday effect of nuclear weapons, well whatever it takes for humans in their billions to live peacefully with each other ...

_________________
Kimi: "Come on, get the McLaren out of the way!”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 16, 2014 11:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7980
It depends on who is writing the book, doesnt it? :twisted:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 16, 2014 12:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2011 1:59 pm
Posts: 5167
I think the Vulcans will look back at this period a reflection that maybe they shouldn't have bothered making contact with Zefram Cochrane , even if he did manage to make our first warp ship :]

_________________
There is no theory of evolution, just a list of animals that Chuck Norris allows to live.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 16, 2014 3:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2013 5:36 pm
Posts: 1389
I like these answers. Makes me realise what an over serious kno#hea# I can be sometimes 8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 16, 2014 4:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 9:41 pm
Posts: 4186
minchy wrote:
I think the Vulcans will look back at this period a reflection that maybe they shouldn't have bothered making contact with Zefram Cochrane , even if he did manage to make our first warp ship :]


He might pull out a gun and then we'll all end up with sexy uniforms and goatees!

In general, I don't think we really analyse the minutia of life from 100 years ago, so I'm not sure we will in 100 years look back at now with the same level of detail but probably around that level. I'd guess our defining characteristic will either be the "War on Terror", climate change/energy or the fact 95% of us died in the ebola outbreak.

I think we mostly try to be moral. Compared to 100s years ago we don't have as much hatred in our blood at least. It's now acceptable to be gay, be black, be a woman etc in a way that 100 years ago even in this country (UK) wouldn't have been as much fun. Religious hatred is still there. Some people still hate black guys or chinese guys or whatever but it's a smaller amount. I feel like we, as a people, are becoming less ignorant. Helped greatly by huge interaction across nations through the internet and the learning it can provide us.

In may respects, when we reach our demise or our beautiful utopia, I think we'll look back at this era as "getting there, but not done cooking yet".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 16, 2014 4:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2011 1:59 pm
Posts: 5167
mac_d wrote:
minchy wrote:
I think the Vulcans will look back at this period a reflection that maybe they shouldn't have bothered making contact with Zefram Cochrane , even if he did manage to make our first warp ship :]


He might pull out a gun and then we'll all end up with sexy uniforms and goatees!

All hail empress Sato!

_________________
There is no theory of evolution, just a list of animals that Chuck Norris allows to live.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 16, 2014 6:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3092
minchy wrote:
mac_d wrote:
minchy wrote:
I think the Vulcans will look back at this period a reflection that maybe they shouldn't have bothered making contact with Zefram Cochrane , even if he did manage to make our first warp ship :]


He might pull out a gun and then we'll all end up with sexy uniforms and goatees!

All hail empress Sato!

Damnit, I thought competitions to see who could out Star Trek everyone were banned from this forum.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 16, 2014 7:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2011 1:59 pm
Posts: 5167
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
minchy wrote:
mac_d wrote:
minchy wrote:
I think the Vulcans will look back at this period a reflection that maybe they shouldn't have bothered making contact with Zefram Cochrane , even if he did manage to make our first warp ship :]


He might pull out a gun and then we'll all end up with sexy uniforms and goatees!

All hail empress Sato!

Damnit, I thought competitions to see who could out Star Trek everyone were banned from this forum.

:lol:

_________________
There is no theory of evolution, just a list of animals that Chuck Norris allows to live.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 17, 2014 1:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 9:21 am
Posts: 3329
minchy wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
minchy wrote:
mac_d wrote:
minchy wrote:
I think the Vulcans will look back at this period a reflection that maybe they shouldn't have bothered making contact with Zefram Cochrane , even if he did manage to make our first warp ship :]


He might pull out a gun and then we'll all end up with sexy uniforms and goatees!

All hail empress Sato!

Damnit, I thought competitions to see who could out Star Trek everyone were banned from this forum.

:lol:

News to me, I'm fairly certain I made a Voyager reference in the Feedback thread over summer.

_________________
AlienTurnedHuman wrote:
Eurytus probably thought he was God. At least until he was banned. Which means if he was God, it makes me very scared of PF1-Mod.

Please report forum problems to us, via PM/Feedback Thread. Screenshots will also help.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 17, 2014 7:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 9:06 am
Posts: 2891
What continent? When I judge the world 100 years ago I think of this

Europe: Massive disparity in classes and egos eventually leading to the death of millions of people

North America: Opportunistic people trying to make it rich

South America: Undecided

Africa: Undecided

Asia: A land mostly of what would be considered peasants with a select few who take advantage of their ignorance

Australasian: A region that is starting to find their own feet and separate their national identity from Europe

Will the world in 100 years judge us as a whole or consider us to still be in our own boarders?

_________________
Danger is real, fear is choice.
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
Best Round Result: 1st (Monaco '12 & '15, Silverstone '14, Austria '15, Mexico '15, China '16)
Podiums: 11
2018 Championship Standing: oh jeez...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 18, 2014 11:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 9:41 pm
Posts: 4186
P-F1 Mod wrote:
[Star Trek Quote Banter - removed due to multiple quote nesting]
News to me, I'm fairly certain I made a Voyager reference in the Feedback thread over summer.


This chat totally amused me. Ah, Empress Sato and her ridiculous midrift baring uniform. And the hilarity of the TOS style ship that looks so outdated compared to the Enterprise of the Enterprise series (those silly set designers not knowing how technology would advance over the next 35 years and plan accordingly! (I think those coincide... been a few years since I watched Voyager.

Sidenote: After an Ed Byrne gig at the fringe a few years ago I had to explain the whole evil twin goatee thing to my friends. I thought Ed Byrne was great but I think he was a little too geeky for my friends.

A Voyager reference? Some kind of technobable? Whatever mod is second in command acting really, really badly? Deciding the forum was critically short of something before the next post reveals it's all fine? Seven of Nine fighting the Rock? (Okay, the last two don't fit but that was pretty damn cool. I just wish we'd seen him do the People's Elbow.)




In 100 years I wonder if history will even care? I sometimes think in 100 years things will either be glorious or we'll be in a second dark age (or first if you believe certain articles online). In 100 years we'll probably be out of oil and coal. Natural gas will be either gone or close to it. Uranium and even breeder elements like Thorium will probably be very, very limited or will have been stockpiled by nations well in advance.
This will lead to more war, and eventually one of our nuclear states will be ready to nuke someone else to stop them using resources.

Hopefully not. But I'll likely be dead within 50 years, 60 at best. So I guess at least it's unlikely to be my problem.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 18, 2014 1:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2011 1:59 pm
Posts: 5167
On a Star Trek and looking back at ourselves reference. Whatever the possibility of warp/hyperspace/whatever you want to call it may be, I actually find it a little odd to think that First Contact is only set 40 years in the future! Somehow, I don't think we can get through another world war and still be able to produce that kind of technology in 40 years. Unless of course there is a massive amount of scientific advancement during and as a direct result of another world war?

I think that the western world at least, is too concerned with the accumulation of personal wealth to actually progress at a rate that we have been over the past 200 years.

_________________
There is no theory of evolution, just a list of animals that Chuck Norris allows to live.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 18, 2014 2:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7980
minchy wrote:
On a Star Trek and looking back at ourselves reference. Whatever the possibility of warp/hyperspace/whatever you want to call it may be, I actually find it a little odd to think that First Contact is only set 40 years in the future! Somehow, I don't think we can get through another world war and still be able to produce that kind of technology in 40 years. Unless of course there is a massive amount of scientific advancement during and as a direct result of another world war?

I think that the western world at least, is too concerned with the accumulation of personal wealth to actually progress at a rate that we have been over the past 200 years.


Technology is accelerated by war. The rockets that first got man into space were originally weapons.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 18, 2014 2:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2011 1:59 pm
Posts: 5167
moby wrote:
minchy wrote:
On a Star Trek and looking back at ourselves reference. Whatever the possibility of warp/hyperspace/whatever you want to call it may be, I actually find it a little odd to think that First Contact is only set 40 years in the future! Somehow, I don't think we can get through another world war and still be able to produce that kind of technology in 40 years. Unless of course there is a massive amount of scientific advancement during and as a direct result of another world war?

I think that the western world at least, is too concerned with the accumulation of personal wealth to actually progress at a rate that we have been over the past 200 years.


Technology is accelerated by war. The rockets that first got man into space were originally weapons.

That's kind of what I was thinking, that without global war and more capitalism and greed, we really won't progress that much technologically in the next 100 years.

It's not just rockets that went into space, there were so many advances in science from every side during WWII.

_________________
There is no theory of evolution, just a list of animals that Chuck Norris allows to live.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 18, 2014 4:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7980
minchy wrote:
moby wrote:
minchy wrote:
On a Star Trek and looking back at ourselves reference. Whatever the possibility of warp/hyperspace/whatever you want to call it may be, I actually find it a little odd to think that First Contact is only set 40 years in the future! Somehow, I don't think we can get through another world war and still be able to produce that kind of technology in 40 years. Unless of course there is a massive amount of scientific advancement during and as a direct result of another world war?

I think that the western world at least, is too concerned with the accumulation of personal wealth to actually progress at a rate that we have been over the past 200 years.


Technology is accelerated by war. The rockets that first got man into space were originally weapons.

That's kind of what I was thinking, that without global war and more capitalism and greed, we really won't progress that much technologically in the next 100 years.

It's not just rockets that went into space, there were so many advances in science from every side during WWII.



The first things to go out the window are the thing that holds up progress most.

Financing and H&S (Risk)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 18, 2014 5:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 9:41 pm
Posts: 4186
I think the trouble was that in the 60s, it seemed like nuclear powered hoovers and hover cars might be only 10 or 20 years away. Unless I've missed something, they didn't come.

Technology for vehicles is pretty similar now to what it was then. Computers have come along a huge way but even by the late 60s we had transistors rather than vacuum tubes. All we really did is make it smaller and chuck more in. I guess the internet is a true innovation since then, but not much else has been invented "from scratch" if you know what I mean. Perhaps we need whatever is the next breakthrough material or component is. Outwith the internet (which is a silly statement given just how important the internet is in so many lives these days) I feel we haven't innovated enough to reach the next level. If I want to the 1960 with my entire flat as it is, the phones and TVs etc would be cool but not unfathomable in the way showing a mobile phone to someone from 100 years before that would be.
(Sorry if that doesn't make sense, I haven't slept since I got up on Friday morning and am now starting to feel rather sluggish.

Keeping in the sci-fi genre, Mass Effect only had the next step of advancement when we fund Eezo and the Mass relays.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 18, 2014 7:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7980
mac_d wrote:
I think the trouble was that in the 60s, it seemed like nuclear powered hoovers and hover cars might be only 10 or 20 years away. Unless I've missed something, they didn't come.

Technology for vehicles is pretty similar now to what it was then. Computers have come along a huge way but even by the late 60s we had transistors rather than vacuum tubes. All we really did is make it smaller and chuck more in. I guess the internet is a true innovation since then, but not much else has been invented "from scratch" if you know what I mean. Perhaps we need whatever is the next breakthrough material or component is. Outwith the internet (which is a silly statement given just how important the internet is in so many lives these days) I feel we haven't innovated enough to reach the next level. If I want to the 1960 with my entire flat as it is, the phones and TVs etc would be cool but not unfathomable in the way showing a mobile phone to someone from 100 years before that would be.
(Sorry if that doesn't make sense, I haven't slept since I got up on Friday morning and am now starting to feel rather sluggish.

Keeping in the sci-fi genre, Mass Effect only had the next step of advancement when we fund Eezo and the Mass relays.



I think the next big thing will be nano, bio, and what I would like to see, zero point (many places looking again at Ponds and Flaishman)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 23, 2014 2:41 am 
One hundred years from now, the generation that inherits this planet with it's massive pollution, runaway greenhouse effect, mass starvations, and depleted resources will curse us.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 23, 2014 12:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri May 31, 2013 1:20 pm
Posts: 627
mac_d wrote:
I think we mostly try to be moral.


The thing is, everyone always acts in ways that they think are correct/moral based upon their knowledge and experience at the time, this has always been the case in the past and will continue to do so in the future. What changes is the commonly accepted moral framework.

For example 100 years ago it wasn't considered bad to be racist, there were even scientific theories (eugenics) purporting to explain inherent differences (including moral ones) between races. Now this is generally accepted to be bunkum and racism is no longer acceptable in 'civilised' society (though still quite acceptable in some societies)

I think in 100 years from now, our descendants will judge this period positively for improvements made in technology (particularly the first driverless cars), the reduction of homophobia and misogyny and general worldwide peace. They will be shocked at our stewardship of nature (global warming), the rampant income/wealth inequality, and our barbarism towards animals being bred for meat. 100 years from now, 'meat' animals will be bred just to keep the genetic stock going, while actual meat will be grown in Petri dishes from stem cells harvested from the stock breeds.


Last edited by orion_f1 on Thu Oct 23, 2014 12:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 23, 2014 12:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri May 31, 2013 1:20 pm
Posts: 627
mac_d wrote:
I think the trouble was that in the 60s, it seemed like nuclear powered hoovers and hover cars might be only 10 or 20 years away. Unless I've missed something, they didn't come.

Technology for vehicles is pretty similar now to what it was then. Computers have come along a huge way but even by the late 60s we had transistors rather than vacuum tubes. All we really did is make it smaller and chuck more in. I guess the internet is a true innovation since then, but not much else has been invented "from scratch" if you know what I mean. Perhaps we need whatever is the next breakthrough material or component is. Outwith the internet (which is a silly statement given just how important the internet is in so many lives these days) I feel we haven't innovated enough to reach the next level. If I want to the 1960 with my entire flat as it is, the phones and TVs etc would be cool but not unfathomable in the way showing a mobile phone to someone from 100 years before that would be.
(Sorry if that doesn't make sense, I haven't slept since I got up on Friday morning and am now starting to feel rather sluggish.

Keeping in the sci-fi genre, Mass Effect only had the next step of advancement when we fund Eezo and the Mass relays.



It doesn't make sense to power domestic appliances directly by nuclear power, that's why we have electricity (which itself can indeed be produced by nuclear power). What always seems to be 20 years off is fusion power as opposed to fission. I hope we'll have cracked that 100 years from now, and fission (and hydrocarbon) power plants will be seen as polluting fossils.

Hover cars do not make any sort of sense, because keeping a car floating uses a LOT of energy, way way way more energy than you save from rolling resistance in tyres etc, and way more energy than it would take to build a flyover on a highway
(ie aggregate energy of all hover cars passing through that space over the lifetime of the flyover)
However we could have high-speed pneumatic tubes instead of railway lines, allowing 'trains' to travel at close to airplane speeds, which would make all flights bar intercontinental ones redundant.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 23, 2014 3:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 9:41 pm
Posts: 4186
Re Above: I know this. Sensible people have known this for longer. But this guy...

Number 3 On this list:
http://www.techhive.com/article/155984/ ... tions.html

The President of a Vacuum cleaner company predicted they'd be nuclear powered. I just like the notion of it. I don't know if you ever played the Fallout games, but a nuclear powered vacuum cleaner is the kind of thing you'd see in that universe. And so the idea will forever be lodged in my brain.

Regarding fusion, I don't know if you saw Lockheed Martin's 10 year plan etc. http://www.zmescience.com/ecology/renew ... -21102014/

I'm not convinced it is possible but obviously I am a long, long way away from being a expert on the subject. IF Lockheed Martin's project is a success, it'd be crazy. Space travel seems almost infinitely closer to reality if you can generate a crap load of energy from some Hydrogen. Not sure what pressure space is (vacuum's don't really exist without infinite energy) but surely you could stick a big funnel on the front and power your ship... forever. (The geeks amongst us might think that a certain TV show about a small rouge spaceship Red Dwarf. No idea if that is possible and/or practical. I just think it's a cool concept.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 23, 2014 5:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7980
There are many "types" of nuke generators. Some to run cities, others to run clocks.

I remember reading this article ( or one like it ) a while ago and thinking it is a step in the right direction

http://archive.wired.com/wired/archive/12.09/china.html

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/20 ... ts-of-them


I may be an eternal optimist, but I really do think we have not seen the last of Ponds and Flaishman.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 28, 2014 10:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri May 31, 2013 1:20 pm
Posts: 627
moby wrote:
There are many "types" of nuke generators. Some to run cities, others to run clocks.

I remember reading this article ( or one like it ) a while ago and thinking it is a step in the right direction

http://archive.wired.com/wired/archive/12.09/china.html

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/20 ... ts-of-them


I may be an eternal optimist, but I really do think we have not seen the last of Ponds and Flaishman.


China is perfectly right to go ahead and build new nuclear power stations. The reaction in Japan and the western world post-Fukushima was way too over-the-top. Fukushima was 50-year old reactor based on 60-year old design, it got hit by a tsunami that was considerable stronger than anything it had been designed to withstand. The result? 0 radiation-related fatalities*, a handful of workers in hospital for monitoring. A few workers were exposed to radiation above normally acceptable safety levels, but what papers didn't report was that the " normally acceptable safety levels" are extremely paranoid, and equivalent to some places on earth that naturally have as much background radiation.

The correct reaction in Germany etc should have been - close down old nuclear plants and replace them with more modern ones that are safer, more efficient AND can work using the spent fuel from older-design reactors as their primary fuel. This at one stroke solves the issue of storing nuclear waste from old plants (of which as much as 98% can be used by more modern nuclear plants), and that of possible weapons proliferation, since the waste from modern plants cannot be reprocessed to weapons-grade material.

However, western government reactions nowadays are unfortunately driven more by media relations than by science, so I guess we'll just go on burning more fossil fuels and suck up the cost of dealing with climate change.

Regarding Ponds and Flaishman (spelling?) I'm not too optimistic about cold fusion, but not that bothered. There is a giant fusion reactor in the sky that we can harvest energy off for millions of years, the only thing with solar power is cost both of the panels and to upgrade the electricity grids so that power can get to where it needs to get, in the meantime of course using nuclear as baseload since 'clean' energy is mostly intermittent.

*the only fatality at Fukushima was tsunami-related


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group