Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Arkhandus" data-source="post: 2928797" data-attributes="member: 13966">I voted the pessimistic choice.I don't really think we'll be able to improve the safety, efficiency, and stability of fusion devices all that quickly, let alone compact them to something that could be used in a motorcycle, car, or the like.  As it is now, production and refueling of hydrogen fuel cells is horribly inefficient, so trying to work out a process and infrastructure to make tremendously-widespread, small, and efficient fusion powerplants, without running out of proper materials to sustain the life of such technology for long into the foreseeable future (and thus economically viable), is likely to take quite some time.  We haven't seen a fusion-powered main battle tank yet, and likely won't for dozens of years or more IMO, let alone a fusion-powered Harley-Davidson for the common blue-collar man.Also, I'm skeptical of how much further computer technology can really advance unless we can work out more of the mysteries of a quantum computer.  Optical computer technology might be a more viable near-future development (so far as I know, from conversation with my 'computer architecture and design' class professor at college, no real success has been had yet in trying to develop such technology), and might possibly allow for a significant increase in computer processing power and data storage capacity, but I'm not sure, and only time will tell if it is so.  I don't know if our current level of technological sophistication will allow for us to compact advanced computer technology much further than it has already been shrunken.In 40 or 50 years we may be flying around in electric aircars or whatever, probably fueled with hydrogen cells after the oil companies are running out of petroleum to sell at ever-more-absurd prices, since by that point the technology and infrastructure needed to support hydrogen fuel cells in automobiles will probably be in place or at least economically viable enough to be in the process of implementation.  Fusion powerplants may have replaced coal-burning facilities and other old-fashioned powerplants, but will not likely, IMO, be compact and reliable enough for use in civilian vehicles.  We may have viable optical computer technology beginning to spread as the cutting-edge in tech.  Limited laser handgun technology may be in use by militaries, but still worthless in clouds and smoke and such.  So we might be starting to dip into Progress Level 6 bits of technology in D20 Future terms, but not truly being in the Fusion Age yet.  And of course this is assuming we don't all get blown to oblivion in a very short and decisively winner-less nuclear war.We may find in 10 or 20 years though that our microchips can't get any smaller, our nanomachines can't grow any more advanced, our metallurgy can't advance any further in creating lighter and stronger metals, our fusion generators can't shrink any further, our clean energy sources can't grow any more efficient, our chemistry can't break down nuclear waste any better, our devices can't repair the damage to the environment and prevent global warming from melting the polar icecaps, our medical science can't fight the superviruses and bacteria that have adapted and evolved to resist our cures and innoculations.I don't want to wax political, so I'll avoid the little rant I was about to go into, but suffice it to say that greed, politics, corporate muscle, and personal ambitions generally get in the way of many significant technological advancements that would improve society but hurt a few wealthy companies' or individuals' bank accounts.</blockquote>

Verification