In Pictures: Upcoming Technologies We Want Right Now

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

flacoman3

Distinguished
Aug 31, 2010
44
0
18,530
[citation][nom]mrmike_49[/nom]re" Wireless Power : When/where was this proved???? Long time exposure??[/citation]
long-time exposure? We live on the Earth, which happens to generate a huge magnetic field, all the time.
 

hythos

Distinguished
Jul 1, 2009
211
1
18,690
[citation][nom]megamanx00[/nom]I'm sure if ol Nick Tesla saw the Wireless power slide he would say "told you so".[/citation]

Innovative ideas will be more difficult to come by any more, because the thinkers of history (like Leonardo, Galileo, Newton, Einstein, and Nikola) had so much less to distract their studies (like crappy reality TV!!)- regardless of computative assistance and theory-modeling (ie, computers), ect.. Tesla did believe he could 'vibrate the world' and to a point where devices could tap into the magnetosphere for energy (not to mention his death-ray, which was actually an electricity-beam), ect....
Not to detract from current legitimate breakthroughs which carry their own merrit, conventional education spurns only further conventional wisdom; Nikola's 'thinking out of the box' cames from self-promoted invisoning that doesn't come from books or institutional studies.
 

K-zon

Distinguished
Apr 17, 2010
358
0
18,790
How will the offset the power required and "raditions/energies" involved give time and expose that say a normal or typical gamer would spent time in, also say How much room would be needed for say a shpere like thing?

Best bet would be opposing mag-lev, but that would be some power drains, given you would need enough power to lift and hold say a 90-150 pd person easily and offset shift in the power/signals very regulary would require an ammensive computer system and power distrution center with some decent amount of precision.

Dont get me wrong, they maybe be working on a mag-lev system for trains. But they are going one direction and one direction only with one only alternative to stop. NOt to go stop, spin, jump, balance one part of the body over another, actually falling and getting backup. Still, its an idea.
 

K-zon

Distinguished
Apr 17, 2010
358
0
18,790
Now one the info is stored on the atom, how about using the " particle enegry field as another way to store of even read the info?
 

K-zon

Distinguished
Apr 17, 2010
358
0
18,790
Once again is nice idea and many practical applications, but lend to the think of being able to throw whatever away whenever very easily with the creation of masterful craftmanship jobless, cause parts not only would lose interchangeablility but reuseability. But still, a very good idea, and a smei old one at that.
 

K-zon

Distinguished
Apr 17, 2010
358
0
18,790
Nuclear Generators have always been an object of saying safe for home use. Think even a one time yrs ago it was very viable to have on installed underground and heavily sheilded and could sustain for many yrs. With Solar and Wind generators within the area as well, would offset usage forthmore allowing a safer median in using such an application. But in the event if something would go wrong, there would be very close area of effect though very quickly and maintain distater effects for many. So to say even by 2020 is still iffy, given there would be many needs to safer gaurds and offset usese from it to not draw anymore then needed.
 

K-zon

Distinguished
Apr 17, 2010
358
0
18,790
Wireless energy is once again, many times, a good idea. With it another confusing aspect of telecommunications and its empowerment. Literally. How is there going to be made a standard known and respected of the difference between power distrution of electronic equipment and the communication and data sharing/ storing or electronic equipment? The share number of different devices and equipment designs and development would probably make any engineer happy for more then a day and the designers and the whole sha-bangs that could came from many of these ideas, and especially this. Trying to possibly comabt the challenges of differences between empowering and communication with devices and electronics wireless.
 

churlysheen

Distinguished
Mar 8, 2010
6
0
18,510
I say yay on immortality. Because people have problems does not also mean they don't also make greater solutions. Immortality has both pluses, and negatives, just like living now does as well.
 

xi0s

Distinguished
Aug 30, 2010
10
0
18,510
You know all this technology is great but much of it, particularly cars, is going to hinge on completely rebuilding our infrastructure, something that hasn't particularly begun yet, but it needs to NOW. Entire cities are designed around the automobile but to truly revolutionize the way we move it needs to be about mass transit everywhere.
 

Nexus52085

Distinguished
Oct 16, 2009
168
16
18,685
[citation][nom]Draven35[/nom]I don't see that happening. Americans are all about individual transportation not mass transit.[/citation]
Depends on the city. New York City depends largely on mass transit to avoid unimaginable traffic problems.
 

Draven35

Distinguished
Nov 7, 2008
806
0
19,010
Los Angeles would need an insane amount of public transportation infrastructure... when i was going to school across town (35 min drive without traffic) taking mass transit was 2 1/2 to 3 hours each way.
 

xi0s

Distinguished
Aug 30, 2010
10
0
18,510
[citation][nom]Draven35[/nom]I don't see that happening. Americans are all about individual transportation not mass transit.[/citation]

We're only a victim of our own bad habit's. Whether you like it or not, the change for the better is inevitable, even if it is several decades away. There are already project's planned for 7 different bullet trains interconnecting around the country, just as an example of the fact we are not ignorant and do desire it.
 

JonnyDough

Distinguished
Feb 24, 2007
2,235
3
19,865
To automated cars: I see it as a pointless tech, along with wireless power in roads to power our vehicles (who said that in a comment?). If you want to drive a car, there are simulations in video games that will be more realistic in the future, and there can remain race tracks and go cart tracks. What we need is a futuristic monorail system. The highway transportation system is dangerous to animals and pedestrians, very costly to maintain, and inefficient and slow. A well planned out and engineered computerized monorail system is superior in nearly ever way to the HTS, making automated cars an obselete idea already. It is my belief that we should simply skip this notion and move on to something much much better.
 

JonnyDough

Distinguished
Feb 24, 2007
2,235
3
19,865
[citation][nom]Zingam[/nom]I think they've missed the ultimate sex doll, that looks, feels and talks like a real woman but instead of wanting you to buy her stuff, she is always ready for some more action.[/citation]

Doing things for others can be very rewarding. Try it sometime.
 

Draven35

Distinguished
Nov 7, 2008
806
0
19,010
[citation][nom]JonnyDough[/nom] A well planned out and engineered computerized monorail system is superior in nearly ever way to the HTS, making automated cars an obselete idea already. It is my belief that we should simply skip this notion and move on to something much much better.[/citation]

Better in what way? always going where they want to go, on their schedule? will it stop every block? Not everyone can walk all over town you know. Is it going to run 24 hours a day, seven days a week? is it going to run to all the suburbs and rural areas? When a new housing development is build, or a new apartment building, will it have a new stop immediately, or the five to ten years that it usually takes for government-engineered projects?

Believe it or not, not everywhere is as densely populated as the downtown part of major urban areas. Mass transit becomes less effective the more it has to spread out. The main urbanized/suburbanized part of Los Angeles country, for example, is about 35 miles north-south by 48 miles east-west.

Such a system, in order to 'work' would need to be about 10% the density of the street system... including interchanges... which would cost more money than there *is*.
Every stop would need to be accessible. (We're already talking about having stops ten blocks apart in urban and suburban areas, and ten blocks is a LONG push in a chair and a long 'limp' with a cane.) It would still be dangerous, and would be maintenance hell- you think highways are expensive to maintain, look at trains. (And then there's that whole thing in L.A. of quakes)

And unless there are 'express routes' to get you across town you end up with the same problem I mentioned two posts ago- two and a half to three hours to get 34 miles. Spending five to six hours a day in transit, and eight at work, you'd have just enough time to fix dinner and eat before going to bed... even assuming that the average is half that (see next para)... sigh- lets put it this way- assume you're making $17/hr. (which btw, is the approximate average salary for working Americans.) So every day you're losing $51 worth of time. Each week, you're losing $255 in time. Each year, that's $12,600 in time (assuming two weeks vacation, plus holidays...) So much for mass transit 'saving money'. Then there's the non-work part, where that time spent on, waiting for, and building your schedule around mass transit is lost time that could be spent with friends and/or family- you know, trying to have a life outside work.

(by the by- another point about L.A.- going 70 miles round trip is a bit bad, but a significant part of the population of L.A. drives *at least* twenty miles each way to work. I think last time they did the survey, the average was like 14 miles each way...)

Of course, the funny part is, depending on the price of gas, it was often cheaper gas-wise to make that drive...
 

xi0s

Distinguished
Aug 30, 2010
10
0
18,510
It wouldn't be expensive to maintain in the future, as technology and engineering becomes more reliable. The idea that these monorails would need to stop at every street corner is rubbish. You can have miniature transit systems installed between nodes as well. You can redesign and rethink the way we grow and develop housing. The traditional 'house' will eventually be antiquated as we go up not out. You have to rethink the entire way we live in order to realize what is the most efficient and non-problematic transportation infrastructure.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.