If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(InfoWorld)   She's gonna blow: 10 Star Trek technologies that are almost here   (infoworld.com) divider line 17
    More: Cool, Star Trek, Windows Azure, technology  
•       •       •

10503 clicks; posted to Geek » on 16 May 2013 at 1:39 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-05-16 03:57:30 PM
2 votes:

ArcadianRefugee: Having your atoms scrambled in one location and reassembled elsewhere

would be nice, but that's not how transporters work.


Yeah, that's how WonkaVision works.
2013-05-16 12:29:23 PM
2 votes:

TheHighlandHowler: me neither, but don't waste your time.

http://www.cio.com/slideshow/detail/101238/10-Star-Trek-Technologies -T hat-are-Almost-Here#slide12


Don't waste your time with that, either.  Deslidefied
2013-05-17 06:43:35 AM
1 votes:
And to think, the only reason the transporter exists at all is because they couldn't afford a shuttlecraft in the first season.
2013-05-16 05:54:23 PM
1 votes:

Dadoo: we'd assume one computer cycle to teleport each elementary particle in a human body


Not an expert on trekology, but aren't reproducing the particles/atoms/molecules the easiest part? Every molecule of H20 or whatever is the same as any other molecule of H20. You don't need to transport the physical stuff - just swap in the same chemical objects... Ans it'd seem you'd only need to get the position of every particle/atom/molecule correct to something like a tenth or a hundredth of an Angstrom (?)

What's always puzzled me about transporter tech is how to reproduce all the currents on the other side. I.e. the electrical impulses driving your heart, working in your brain to keep memories active, etc...
2013-05-16 04:40:02 PM
1 votes:

Tommy Moo: No way is teleporting more than a quantum particle "almost here."


Exactly. I friend of mine and I used to do a calculation, every so often. It's a reasonable assumption that, to teleport a human (in the way described by Star Trek), you'd need a computer to control the process. Being (very) generous, we'd assume one computer cycle to teleport each elementary particle in a human body. The last time I did the math (in about 2005), there hadn't been enough computer cycles in all of computing history to teleport a single person.

No, I'm thinking teleportation will be more like Stargate, if we can ever figure out how to create and control wormholes.
2013-05-16 03:57:39 PM
1 votes:

ShawnDoc: WhoGAS: I didn't take it that way myself. I assumed "almost here" on a more geological time scale where 150 years is pretty much no time at all.

What do you do for a living, that when someone says something is "almost here", you think of a amount of time greater than your lifespan?


I don't really see how that has anything to do with anything, where I work I mean.  Nor would the relative definition of "almost there" apply the same way it does with technological advances.

The article was about advances in science. As a person who reads a little bit, I know that throughout the history of science, we did not suddenly go "Look, a WHEEL!" and the next day the guy creates a Ferrari.  These things always take time.

I apply the phrase as it's appropriate based on the subject not relative to me.

Now if they had said, "Will be here in 32 years, 5 hours", then, when that time came to pass and they didn't deliver, yes, that would have been stupid of them to have done that.
2013-05-16 03:25:51 PM
1 votes:
Every time I walk up to an automatic door without slowing down and it opens for me, I think of those scenes of Kirk walking around the Enterprise.
2013-05-16 03:20:07 PM
1 votes:

ShawnDoc: WhoGAS: Is that sarcasm or are you really saying that? If you are serious, I'm curious as to what you are referring as dumb, specifically.

Nothing on that list is "almost here".  For the most part they're comparing Star Trek technologies to things that only superficially resemble them.  Yes, projecting a video on a human shaped piece of glass means that full range 3D holograms that can manipulate matter like in Star Trek are just around the corner!  Using Quantum Entanglement to transmit a tiny amount of data across 3' of open space means teleporting a human being miles away and through through obstructions is just around the corner.

Stupid.


Ahhh.  Okay.  I see you take offense at the assumption of "almost here" meaning "few years/within our lifetime".

I didn't take it that way myself.  I assumed "almost here" on a more geological time scale where 150 years is pretty much no time at all.

I can see your point.
2013-05-16 03:15:47 PM
1 votes:

Tommy Moo: No way is teleporting more than a quantum particle "almost here." And even if it was, I'd never do it. No one stops to think that the people in Star Trek die every time they use a teleporter, and are replaced with an exact copy of themselves at the other end.


There was a story in Isaac Asimov's Science Fiction Magazine in either '79 or early '80, about teleport technology.  Can't remember the name.

It opens with the inventer of the technology watching people getting in and out of the transports.  She meets a young boy who has teleported everywhere, and she has a couple of flashbacks.

One is creating the technology, and two, is how to solve the fact that it's not truly teleport tech as much as it is copy tech.  When you teleport, your dna/body stats are read, and then you are electrocuted with enough voltage to turn you to ash, and the data is transmitted to the destination, where you are rebuilt.

She is afraid that if she teleports, she'll lose her soul.

It ends up with the kid picking her up, and tossing her into the teleporter, and when she rematerilizes, she realizes that it isn't that bad.

It's been a long time since I read that, but it was a fun read.
2013-05-16 02:52:49 PM
1 votes:

fluffy2097: DamnYankees: Link isn't working for me.

That's Ok. Warp drives, Holodecks, transporters and sentient androids are not almost here anyway.

/where the hell are my green slave girls damnit?


I know! Forget flying cars, where are the green Yvonne Craig's?
2013-05-16 02:48:29 PM
1 votes:

mark12A: I can't believe they didn't mention IPads. Frikin' IPad is a direct ripoff of the PADD devices they use in StarFleet.

Yet another reason I HATE Abrams Trek. They don't even TRY to extrapolate any technology. Just a goddam, empty headed shoot 'em up movie....


Yup, Gene made sure to get cutting edge science advisors to work for him coming up with the gadgets.  Hell, most people don't realize that at the time Worf or Picard would tell the computer to play them some Klingon Opera or flute music, the idea of storing music on computers that you could call up at will was science fiction.  The first commercial electronic music player was from Audible.com in '97, TNG had characters calling up whatever they wanted back in 1987.

Hell, TOS had floppy disks back in the 60's when they wouldn't become actual computer storage devices until the 90's (talking about 3.5's here).
2013-05-16 02:37:11 PM
1 votes:

DamnYankees: Link isn't working for me.


That's Ok. Warp drives, Holodecks, transporters and sentient androids are not almost here anyway.

/where the hell are my green slave girls damnit?
2013-05-16 02:23:57 PM
1 votes:
11.) Control panels whose normal failure mode is spray sparks everywhere but otherwise continue functioning.
12.) Computers which explode when presented with a paradox.
2013-05-16 01:53:13 PM
1 votes:
When I saw that #1 was the Warp Drive, I stopped.  Seriously, almost there with the Warp Drive?  The article writer is a double dumb-@ss.
2013-05-16 01:49:56 PM
1 votes:
Well that was farking stupid. Maybe 3 of those things are anywhere close to being practical or even possible.
2013-05-16 12:31:23 PM
1 votes:
Also, don't forget transparent aluminum which is actually already here.
2013-05-16 11:53:34 AM
1 votes:
 
Displayed 17 of 17 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report