Nuclear fusion power. Rapid spread of robots. Technology for longer, healthier lives. Better energy storage systems. Harnessing plant-based photosynthesis for solar energy. Cars that drive themselves. Computers embedded in your clothing.
No, this isn't a list of topics from science-fiction novels. It's a subset of a list that researchers at MIT think will help usher in a new era of prosperity.
The MIT News Office asked a collection of MIT faculty and researchers for their thoughts on the potentially life-altering technologies that are on the near horizon. C|Net has more, including photos.
Given that this information comes from MIT, I'm a little surprised there weren't more suggestions about nanotechnology or artificial intelligence.
Showing posts with label prediction. Show all posts
Showing posts with label prediction. Show all posts
Thursday, June 5, 2008
Saturday, November 3, 2007
Failed Predictions
"Difficult to see... always in motion is the future." - Yoda, Empire Strikes Back
The future is hard to predict accurately. Some of the smartest people who've ever lived have tried their hands at it and failed miserably. To illustrate that, a poster on The List Universe recently posted a list of the Top 30 Failed Technology Predictions.
It's pretty interesting to see some of the predictions that have been proven wrong over the years.
The future is hard to predict accurately. Some of the smartest people who've ever lived have tried their hands at it and failed miserably. To illustrate that, a poster on The List Universe recently posted a list of the Top 30 Failed Technology Predictions.
It's pretty interesting to see some of the predictions that have been proven wrong over the years.
Thursday, December 7, 2006
The Next Fifty Years
New Scientist Magazine, to celebrate their 50th anniversary in publication, has surveyed fifty of the most brilliant and influential scientists alive, asking them to forecast what their field of interest will be like in the year 2056.
The predictions include some that are revolutionary in scale and scope, and some that are merely evolutionary. Some I agree with, and some I don't, but you should read it and make your own determinations.
They interviewed scientists in a wide variety of areas, including mathematics, physics, astronomy, chemistry, biology, medicine, paleontology, psychology, and others, so the opinions are pretty diverse.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)