There is no such thing as a flying car. There never will be a flying car unless we invent antigravity.
You certainly can build a vehicle that can fly in the air and drive on a road. But what you have then is a roadable aircraft.
Now, what’s the problem with a roadable aircraft? If you’re flying a plane, do you really want to carry around all the equipment that lets the plane drive on a road? When you’re flying, that’s just dead weight. And when you’re driving, you have to carry around all your flying equipment.
So a roadable aircraft is always going to be a crappy aircraft and a crappy car. You’re much better off with a monofuction aircraft and two cars. Cheaper, safer, easier.
Remember, you’re not designing a car that flies, you’re designing an airplane that drives. The reason you might want an airplane that drives is to get you from your home to your neighborhood airport, then you fly to your destination tiny airport, then land, then drive the rest of the way to your destination. What’s wrong with driving your car to the neighborhood airport, parking, flying to your destination airport in a regular light plane, then renting or borrowing a scooter or bike or self-driving taxi to get to your ultimate destination?
Lightsabres are enormously practical weapons, for a Jedi. When you’ve got precognitive reflexes and Force-guided muscle control to the point that you can deflect a squad worth of blaster bolts back to the shooter, it’d be foolish to use anything else. When you’ve got merely human reflexes and motor control, though, yeah, you might as well stick with a good blaster by your side.
You’re totally right about the engineering issues, but I think that the “flying car” future concept is really about personal aircraft, not all-in-one vehicles. The idea is that you can fly somewhere as casually as we currently drive.
If I recall from the movie (which I only watched with one eye) there was never any indication that this was a superpower, but a skill involving an utter ignorance of physics on the part of the filmmakers.
Maybe I was biased from having read the comic it was based on, which was flat out “spandex and heat ray” material, but it never occurred to me that the movie intended us to see the bullet curving gimmick as anything other than a super power - albeit more of a “mystic ability through intense martial arts training,” than a “bitten by a radioactive spider” type of thing.
Back to the computer interface using gestures, I have had some industry experience with touch screen consoles used to control an automated packaging process. If the amount of time needed to enter the data is less than about 2 minutes, the operators will accept it. Anything more than leads to significant stress and a LOT of push-back. I solved the problem by adding a fully tiltable mount to the touch screen. When the operator wanted to input the specs for the job, she could click the display into ‘input’ mode which angled it about 60 degrees from upright. I added a cushion to the base of the monitor and that solved the issue. When the display was in ‘output’ mode, it went back to its normal upright position.
A year later, I encountered the newest model of ‘video crack machines’ found at many bars here in the USA. This model’s screen was set at a permanent 45 degree angle (or thereabout) and was much easier to play.
I imagine that Microsoft’s new (well it WAS new) interface dubbed ‘Surface’ may eventually make it into real worl use. It is probably more a function of bad marketing (what? bad marketing from Microsoft?? gasp) than function. Time will tell.
But wouldn’t there be an advantage in having precognitive reflexes and Force-guided muscle control and using state of the art weapons? I mean look at what happened. For all their Jedi skills, they ended up getting massacred by a bunch of guys with blasters.
Well, they were massacred because they were taken by surprise. A combo of the dark side “clouding” the force and the clones not planning to kill them basically negated their precognitive reflexes. So that basically proves that a lightsaber is a horribly weapon, unless you’re a Jedi.
Only if people are willing to undergo the kind of licensing and regulatory requirements they currently have for private pilots, which I don’t think is likely.
Self-flying? really? The first time someone hacks their skycar to be self-drive (and they will) and then drunkenly plunges into an orphanarium is the last time skycars will be allowed.
Movie-style computers, with the screen showing text in 72 point, onscreen messages appears one letter at a time, and make a little bleep for every letter.
There was recently a long thread on star trek transporters. It touches on a philosophical question which is more complex than may first appear (though my personal position remains unchanged from my first intuitive assessment of: the person at the destination is not you).
But I don’t see why it should be impossible to duplicate memories. Can you elaborate?
Sorry, no. Both Gorillaz and the recent Coachella concert used Musion Eyeliner technology which projects the image onto a transparent foil rigged at a 45 degree angle to the viewers. The projector is above the stage pointing down projecting its image onto a white surface on the floor in front of the stage. The reflected image is seen by the audience on the foil screen. The foil allows viewers to also see through it so anyone on the black-draped enclosed stage behind the foil is also visible giving the illusion that the projected image and the live person occupy the same space together. It’s a modern application of the very old Pepper’s Ghost concept.
Not a hologram, not projected into dust and not really 3D.
You can get a personal aircraft today. It’s called an airplane. Or, if you want the VTOL version, it’s called a helicopter.
If what you want is an aircraft that’s cheaper, safer, and easier to use than a car (or nearly as cheap, nearly as safe, and nearly as easy to use as a car), then you better start hoping for antigravity.
