we need teleportation frankly

    • themelm@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      I’m good on things tied into the brain. Now things tied near the brain like sub vocalisation or little eye twitches or even somehow passive brain wave scans or something maybe. But actual hardware tied into my brain I’m gonna take a pass on.

  • Pons_Aelius@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    we need teleportation frankly

    Sorry but not in this universe.

    It is the same for pretty much all the narrative hand waves that are used to push the story forward. This is not knocking SF but to temper expectations.

    Deep sleep/human hibernation.

    FTL travel of any description, including FTL communication.

    Sentient, Self-aware AGI.

    Directed energy weapons and EM shields.

    • Slotos@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      FTL is a weird one.

      Speed of light is a singularity in a special relativity theory. Singularities usually indicate model limitations, not reality fundamentals.

      The theory happily describes behaviours below and above this “speed limit”, but insists on it being unapproachable from either side, which is weird already. At the same time our other models tell us that matter loses a finite amount of energy when it gains mass and stops moving at the speed of light.

      Problem is, we don’t seem to have a vocabulary to discuss ways around this singularity and universe is not so forthcoming with any clues.

      It’s a general crysis of physics lately. We know our models have limitations, we often know where they break exactly, and universe just giggles along.

      But yeah, it’s highly unlikely that any SF will correctly guess a viable FTL, even if it is possible. Especially considering how seemingly every author thinks quantum entanglement is it.

      • berg@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        That’s quite the question to ask, but as far I can tell it only works with quantum information. Sending a body would be like you trying to fit into a fiber cable to be bounced inside of beneath the Atlantic to avoid the otherwise long flight.

        • Deceptichum@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          From what I know of sci-fi, teleportation is often a machine that scans, destroys, and replicates the particles in your body at a secondary location.

          So if we could figure out scanning and printing at the atomic scale, with zero defects, and pair it with sending information at near instant speeds via quantum teleportation, we could have a teleporter.

          • berg@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            … if we could figure out scanning and printing at the atomic scale, with zero defects

            I think this is a bigger issue currently than sending large amounts of data across the globe. Though I wonder how much data a full copy would demand.

            • Deceptichum@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              You just made me curious and we’re not alone in wondering

              To have a scanner that can record the position of every atom in the body to an accuracy of the order of the size of a hydrogen atom would require position accuracy of about 10-10 meters. To get that accuracy over a distance of order 1 meter, this would require 30 decimal digits, which would be about 100 binary digits per atom. However, there would be a lot of redundancy in this data, so let’s be optimistic and assume you could compress this down to 1 bit per atom, so we still need approximately 1027 bits of data to just specify the positions of all the atoms in a human body. According to Wikipedia (Exabyte), the approximate data storage capacity of all the computers and storage devices in the world today is roughly 1 zettabyte = 1021 bytes = 1022 bits. Therefore, the data for the scan of one human would require at least 10,000 times the total storage of all the data stored on Earth right now.

              https://slate.com/human-interest/2013/05/is-teleportation-possible.html

              • Xariphon@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                6 months ago

                Now I’m wondering how long it would realistically take for that to become a not-insane demand. I know data storage multiplies pretty rapidly, but not that rapidly, so are we talking decades or centuries?

                • Deceptichum@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Apparently we can already do it, a gram of dna can store 215 petabytes and we can encode to dna at 18Mbps.

                  Gonna be a long upload.

  • intensely_human@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago
    • Big uptick in the amount of human activity in space — tech there already, economy starting to manifest it. Like 10,000 humans in space at any given time, then 100,000, then 1,000,000, and so on
    • If we can get a slightly lighter solar sail material, that’s the last missing tech piece needed to send probes to Alpha Centauri. We’d need massive laser arrays so tech alone would precede economic manifestation by a while. Human laser-accelerated probes can reach 0.3 c, and arrive at the star in about 15 years. The probe’s design is the size of a thumb drive
    • AI is obviously making big strides
    • honestly my thumbs are cramping up, but there’s lots more. drone-v-drone warfare, all semi-autonomous
    • Growing perfect genetic match organs to implant
    • mRNA delivered by microplasmids is incredible. There are easily a million life-enhancing distinct uses of it that involve temporarily building any protein we want in a patient’s cells, endogenously, with controlled expression. That is crazy powerful technology
    • Fusion power’s like almost there. I think we’re at the “now scale it” phase
    • Bombarding Earth by hurling containers full of rocks out of railgun launch tubes on the moon
    • Sex robots
    • Translating to and from animal languages
    • Cloning, which has existed for decades now, is somehow totally invisible to media attention. Like, in the time since Dolly the sheep was in the headlines, someone could have theoretically produced an actual army of human clones and have them hidden somewhere
    • Telepathy via neural implants

    That’s some of the sci fi stuff we either have now and just are too harried and exhausted to contemplate, or that we’re just on the verge of creating.

    • DrFuggles@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      translating animal languages

      “How to Use AI to Talk to Whales—and Save Life on Earth With ecosystems in crisis, engineers and scientists are teaming up to decipher what animals are saying. Their hope: By truly listening to nature, humans will decide to protect it.”

      Wired Magazine August 2023

  • BananaTrifleViolin@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Self Driving Cars - were getting used to the idea because of the half baked stuff that’s already here but it’s realistic this will make it mainstream in the coming years

    “Cure” for cancer - the rapid progress in immunotherapy drugs is making more and more cancers realistically treatable. Cancers.are still terrible conditions but it does feel realistic that we are moving towards a “cure”. After that it’ll be a focus on preventing and reducing the horrible side effects of treating cancers.

    Regrowing organs - this also seems increasingly realistic. We’re already routinely regrowing people’s immune systems for some conditions (autologus ransplants - where the donor is also the recipient). We’re also increasingly growing different types of tissues and organs in lab experoments. It’s looking plausible although hard to say when it’ll become mainstream.

    AI - I’m not convinced this one is on its way. What I mean is true General AI. What is labelled AI now is nowhere near General AI; it’s sophisticated and impressive but also limited and deeply flawed. We’re in an era of hype to drive up share prices but the actual technology is error strewn and is essentially a remix engine for human generated creativity. I’m not convinced true General AI is on its way because at the moment they don’t understand how the current AI systems work. It’s unlikely you can proceed from what we have to full general AI stumbling around in the dark or by shear luck. Not impossible, but unlikely. I think the current methods will more likely hit a brick wall in prpgress - they are useful tools but may be an illusion when it comes to full AI.

  • uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Actually safe autonomous transport and delivery would be a great next step. But the enterprises are putting their pre-alpha releases into the public and killing people which is souring the public to the notion.

    • vonbaronhans@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      To be fair, Tesla is the primary culprit of this. Waymo and other AV companies have just been slowly but steadily ramping up their testing and operating in relatively safe ways, and they are by and large doing pretty well from the coverage I’ve read. It’s not happening as quickly as anybody hoped, but we’re seeing steady improvements over time.

      Tesla is just reckless, though, branding things in ways that make the whole AV endeavor look much worse than it deserves.

  • FaceDeer@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    AI is already well underway, so that’s probably the most plausible soonest.

    A fully reusable rocket in the form of Starship is also well underway and should be successfully orbiting for the first time soon. Just a matter of a year or two before it’s doing workhorse cargo launches probably.

    The new round of superconductor possibility might pan out, which would be another one. But that’s more of a yes/no outcome that hasn’t quite been settled yet, rather than something with a “completion bar.”

    • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Just a matter of a year or two before it’s doing workhorse cargo launches probably.

      I doubt that. I’m a big fan of the concept, But SpaceX is behind their promises schedule in a way that would make NASA blush.

      Starship launches are becoming less transparent in what they share and information is becoming less frequent. Starship is supposed to land humans on the moon for Artemis III for 4 billion dollars but right now it can’t even make orbit without violently exploding for mostly unknown reasons.

      The main lesson from launch 1 was that a deluge system is an absolute must, like literally everyone told them, but Musk personally vetoed. Now they have something almost the same, but more complicated because Musk refused to do things on time. And the lessons from launch 2? Who knows, they stopped talking, and analysis of the videos is very hard because SpaceX realized random YouTubers could analyse their failures.

      Remember, Elon said we’d have 2 Starships on Mars in 2023.

      • FaceDeer@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        They’ve launched a total of two Starship test flights so far, so I’m not sure how you’re drawing a meaningful trend line on them becoming “less transparent.” We know a lot about IFT-3 already, they’ve been doing static test fires and the Starship slated for it has a cargo bay capable of launching Starlink V2s.

        SpaceX has never been shy about their failures. They’ve released humorous supercuts of their Falcon 9 landing failures before, and have allowed those Youtubers to place cameras around Starship launches to get views from close enough to be fried by the rocket exhaust. So I’m not sure where you’re getting this sense of secrecy from. What other launch companies are so open about their development process?