science fiction technology you see possible in the future and others not

In My Humble Opinion
1

What science fiction technology you see possible in the future and other science fiction technology not possible with today’s technology.

Some things we know not possible with today’s technology.

-star trek replicator or molecular assembler… Computing power is too crude, so crude it would requires quantum computer, the technology to move atoms or molecules does not really exist,scanning tunneling microscope is too crude to move atoms or molecules around and too slow and probability take centuries of centuries to try to build any thing like golf ball.

With quantum uncertainty principle is other problem.
-phaser guns, lasers guns,plasma guns or other energy handheld guns are not possible with today’s technology… The power source is major problem it would require cable hooked up to a large power source…No battery can hold that much power, The cooling problem and material science is other problem. Such a gun would explode in users hand. No handheld material we know of can deal with that much power and heat.

Such a device would require a magic battery or power source. And new cooling and material science.
-Jet-pack not practical with today’s technology it is too costly,not safe and in matter of minutes the fuel is used up.

-artificial gravity and force field is even more scfi no one has a clue how to make it. The are 4 fundamental forces that have been identified they are gravitational, electromagnetic, strong nuclear, and weak nuclear and no other force identified.

For artificial gravity and force field would require a force to counter a other force.

-teleportation of people not possible, it would require a MRI that can scan the person down to the subatomic level then dematerialization of all the atoms or molecules and covert the person to energy pattern than beam to the target and reconverted into matter and rematerialization.

You will be killing the person and making a clone.

A wormhole or Stargate/portal would be more possible because there is no dematerialization or rematerialization of the person. It would be safe for the person.

A person going through a wormhole or Stargate/portal would be like going through a door in your house.You would not be traveling through a tunnel you would step in and step out.

But a wormhole or Stargate/portal would require exotic matter to keep it open so it does not collapses in on it self and folding of space and time.

-star trek tricorder a MRI,CT scan,ultrasound or x-ray is really big device and no one knows how to shrink it down the device!!! That alone to a small handheld device.
-hologram like in star wars or star trek is big problem that laser or light does not stop in mid air and how would you shape or mold the laser and light and get it to stop in mid air at xx feet in the air you want?

All holograms we have today and there are different types of holograms are a allusion or in a closed device.

Not what you see in star wars or star trek a laser or light that shines and stops in mid air.

-star trek holodeck same thing why we don’t have holograms not only you need a holograms you need to be a mastery of hologram technology.

other problem when you walk into a 10 feet by 10 feet holodeck room how do you make room appear to go on for ever? Blindfold yourself walk into your room and think you in a big forest!! In in less than a minute you walk into your wall and hit your heat on the wall.

A moving floor or treadmill is not going to be any where close to walking on floor it would feel very strange.
-star wars landspeeder not possible, Jet or fans not want you want.

It has nothing to do with Jets being more powerful, F-35 and Harrier can take of vertically but it moves so much air around that it would be dangerous to be close to it.It also makes a lot of noise.

They need some thing other than Jet, fans or blades and it has nothing to do with it being 8 times more powerful.

And in movies landspeeders don’t have Jets, fans or blades it operates more like magnetism, ati-gravity or some thing else.
So it seems most of these science fiction technology like in star wars or star trek is so beyond today’s technology not even ideas and theories on drawing board that alone a lab.

The more I read science the more I get turn off star wars or star trek where future looks more like the movie interstellar than star wars or star trek minus the AI talking robot.

So what science fiction technology do you see possible in the future and other science fiction technology not possible with today’s technology.

What emerging science, technology and breakthroughs may be possible or not.

Well they cannot really predict what the future will be like 50 or 100 years out, but they can predict emerging science, technology and breakthroughs being done in lab now with science and the know being down now in lab.

Well star trek or star wars really off the mark.

2

Could future helicopter like these may be possible

http://previewcf.turbosquid.com/Preview/2014/05/23__22_48_42/copter01.jpgdcaf2537-b2b1-4525-896e-b4c97ec2dbdbLarger.jpg

https://cgcookie.com/blender/files/2012/12/helicopter_final_model_3-956x537.png

http://www.pcsimstore.com/images/detailed/0/sa-2-samson-avatar-fsx-1.jpg

http://www.mondolithic.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Heavy-Lift-VTOL-V-33H-SuperFrog.jpg

3

Both shows were using current trends and extrapolating them to space

Some things they did get right

Communicators - Cell Phones
Tablets/Ipads
Monitors in sickbay (Somewhat)
Automatic doors (although not as fast)
Large viewscreens

Yes, a lot of the other technology shown there is beyond current or even future capabilities

The landspeeder may be possible but not with jets but perhaps with a balloon for buoyancy but I am speculating on that

The other thing that may be possible in the future is the shuttlecraft but it would be in a different form than what was in Star Trek.

What I am getting at is the space shuttle is very similar to the shuttlecraft

4

Star Trek shuttles fly. The Space Shuttle is a glorified brick. It needs rockets to take off and it doesn’t actually fly back in so much as re-enter. I don’t believe the Space Shuttle is capable of even so much as regaining altitude if they make a mistake. I think they can only adjust speed and yaw on reentry.

5

I think “beamed energy” is possible – heck, we know it’s possible in some applications – and if it can be made powerful enough, it would answer your objection to hand-held laser guns and to flight packs.

You see that city down there? That’s my fuel cell!

6

Why are ducted rotors or ugly helos with bizarre rotor configurations considered “futuristic”? Its still the same basic technology of a spinning rotor blade creating lift.

Tilt rotor VTOL craft like the Osprey are pretty futuristic IMHO. As are NOTAR helicopters that eliminate the tail rotor.

7

Wow, that’s a huge OP. Let’s see:

I’d put this in the category of ‘definitely possible’. I don’t believe that computing power is ‘too crude’, and anyway I don’t believe that’s the biggest thing holding the tech back at this point. Whether it will be Star Trek replicators is another matter, but I think this is something possible in the not too distant future (probably not in my lifetime though). Certainly I see 3D printing happening today, at any rate, and it’s probably just a matter of time before they are able to ‘print’ at the molecular level as well (don’t they do this already, on a non-industrial level of course, for things like carbon nano-tubes??).

Again, I think you are wrong. I can see laser guns (man portable) at least as a possibility. No battery can hold that much power TODAY, but then even ship, truck or plane mounted lasers weren’t possible 50 years ago, and we are possibly on the cusp of several new battery technologies that could lead to breakthroughs for such weapons. I wouldn’t rule this out.

Plasma weapons, however, I don’t see happening as, at least as far as I know, there is no even theoretical way to encapsulate it as a projectile (a plasma SWORD, though, at least could happen, though I wouldn’t want to wield one, let alone get hit by one :p). I’m not sure exactly what a ‘phaser gun’ really is, in real world terms, so no idea how feasible one might or might not be.

Yeah…probably not. But what you could have is some sort of ducted fan type personal flying device, or even a jet pack flying suit…in fact, both of these things exist, not just on a drawing board but actual prototypes or examples. I’m not talking about the hydrogen peroxide jet packs that give you a minute or two of thrust, but actual jets attached to a person using a flying suit (and a parachute of course) that could be used to fly longer distances than a few minutes.

Yeah…again, probably not on this one. Though you never know…a key breakthrough could mean some sort of anti-gravity. But, as far as I know there isn’t anything even theoretical here.

This is strictly Star Trek teleportation of course. This is another that probably won’t happen, but is at least theoretically possible I suppose.

And here I think you are again wrong. It’s not possible today, though I understand that several small very portable medical devices are in development that have some of the features of a tricorder. This is certainly within the realm of possibility, though. Just consider the size of a tablet or laptop and the computing power of that verse what was available even a decade ago and you can see the progression, and a lot of development is going into this field from a lot of sources.

You haven’t been keeping up. Microsoft is developing something called the Hololens today. True, it has to be worn like glasses, but you can interact with it. There are also technologies in development that even give you haptic feedback like you are touching one of these holograms or VR environments (I’ve seen demos of virtual buttons that you can ‘press’ and it seems like you are really pressing or touching something, even if it’s really just jets of air). This is certainly possible in the future, though it might not be exactly like Star Trek or Star Wars.

Depends. Does it have to be JUST like Star Wars or like reality? We’ve had ground effects vehicles for a hell of a long time that are sort of like a landspeeder…hell, I built on in a college engineering class using vacuum cleaner motors and other parts. I’m not sure what principals the SW landspeeders use (anti-gravity?) but something LIKE it is certainly possible, though it might not be practical.

Honestly, I think they have gotten a hell of a lot more right than wrong (sci-fi in general I mean). Look at some of the greats in sci-fi (Clarke, Wells(!!), Asimov, Dick, Verne, etc)…there is a lot there that is reality today that was, well, sci-fi in their day.

I think a lot of the space exploration stuff is pretty far off the mark, sure, but some of the other stuff is pretty good.

8

They are shown in futuristic movies and games and plus they just look new and different.

It is no different than the new guns the big plastic or bullpup rifles that is giving to the illusions it is more powerful even fact the gun is the same size and it is not more powerful.

It looks weird and futuristic.

A better combo would be take off or land like a helicopter than fly like a plane. But they don’t have jet engines attached to it like this.

http://www2.pictures.zimbio.com/mp/0SVJpzhe5Yhl.jpg

http://cnet4.cbsistatic.com/hub/i/r/2013/09/13/ee9083e4-5739-11e3-89ab-14feb5ca9861/resize/620x/f393c1f0104bf05a3bdea582ed9281d0/AVX_Aircraft_JMR.jpg
It probably some reason why this would not work. Has to be all jets or all blades not combo.

And probably some reason why jets engines attached to helicopter will not work.

9

So, your weapon is a mirror? :dubious:

10

Balthisar: Uh… Huh? I don’t grok. If joke, me am smart Bizarro No. 1! If legitimate rebuttal…me also am smart.

(Although, to be sure, a mirror for a weapon worked pretty well for Perseus.)

11

Well, yeah, really the same idea as Perseus, except using “beamed energy” (a point source) instead of the sun (effectively an area source). If you’re counting on beaming the energy that you need remotely to your energy weapon, and since there aren’t any capable batteries, in effect you only really need a mirror (or something that acts like a mirror for the EM wavelength being used).

12

The biggest problem with a hand-held laser weapon is heat removal. Lasers are inherently inefficient devices. In order to achieve the needed population inversion, you have to effectively throw away some heat. It adds up.* Powerful continuous wave lasers have fans for air cooling or, better stillm, flowing water. This can cramp your style.

If you want a powerful CW laser you will want a power cord (or that broadcast power – although THAT will just add to your heat load), but there’s no reason you can’t use a pulsed laser – instead of a steady beam, you get a very brief burst of light with extremely high power levels. You could carry around a portable laser that didn’t require hookup to a power line or to cooling water if you wanted to do that.
There are lots of pictures of pioneer laser scientist Arthur Schawlow with his ruby laser built into a plastic toy ray gun housing, shooting through a transparent balloon to burst a colored balloon inside:

https://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A0LEVxqgBoRV1bwAYjZXNyoA;_ylc=X1MDMjc2NjY3OQRfcgMyBGZyA3lmcC10LWV4Y2x1c2l2ZUJrdARncHJpZAM4WFJNZEdaSVN6eXZvdHFJamRlVUZBBG5fcnNsdAMwBG5fc3VnZwMwBG9yaWdpbgNzZWFyY2gueWFob28uY29tBHBvcwMwBHBxc3RyAwRwcXN0cmwDBHFzdHJsAzI4BHF1ZXJ5A0NoYXJsZXMgVG93bmVzIFJheSBHdW4gTGFzZXIEdF9zdG1wAzE0MzQ3MTU4MjI-?p=Charles+Townes+Ray+Gun+Laser&fr2=sb-top-search&fr=yfp-t-exclusiveBkt&fp=1

https://images.search.yahoo.com/search/images;_ylt=AwrBT9PGB4RVvFEArBhXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTEyYmZ1ZmJzBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDQjAzOTZfMQRzZWMDc2M-?p=Schawlow+Ray+Gun+Laser&fr=yfp-t-exclusiveBkt#id=0&iurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.osa-opn.org%2Fopn%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2Farticles%2F0511%2FFeatures%2FFeatureImages%2Ffeature1-fig1.jpg&action=click

What you can’t see in that shot – because they always frame it to avoid showing it – are the two lines bringing in the high voltage electricity to run the xenon flashlamp inside, and possibly a cooling water line (although ruby lasers work perfectly well air-cooled, so maybe not).

The kicker is that I’m sure that you could build a pulsed laser today that would do the same thing, without a power cable. Unfortunately, although it could burst balloons, it would do anything against a human being (except maybe blinding him).

*They have developed some extremely low-heat-generating lasers in recent years. But the hitch is that they have to be driven other, not efficient, lasers in order to work at all, so it’s no savings in the end.

13

As for handheld energy weapons, why is the power source impossible? There is enough energy in a single round of a bullet to kill contained in a small enough package to be in a handheld weapon. So containing that amount of energy in such a small package is already possible.

Perhaps a mini particle accelerator instead of pure energy weapon would work and have almost unlimited firing ability given enough power , sort of like the ion rocket engine what happens if someone stands in front of that stream of ions).

14

The space shuttle re-entered as a glider so no, it could not regain significant altitude (in theory it could by trading speed for a brief rise) but it did, as far as I know, have full three-axis controls. So they could adjust pitch, yaw, and roll, which also allowed directional and speed control.

15

Many SF stories concern themselves with this topic. However, given the vast distances between stars (and their planetary systems), communication via radio seems unlikely. Suppose we pick up an artificial signal? It could be millions of years old. If we reply to it, we wait…and waits…meanwhile, the aliens that sent it may have died out.
When and if manking builds interstellar spaceships, those who leave on them will never return. The travel time is just too long.

16

I think with anti gravity we don’t even know exactly what gravity IS yet, which is a pretty big barrier to applications that would have to manipulate it. We can and do use gravity without knowing how it works, but changing gravity’s properties requires knowledge of what those properties are.

17

To go to Mars or beyond you would want some thing bigger than the space shuttle or Star Trek shuttle craft. If you are going to be in a craft for months it would have to be bigger than typical RV size or trailer park home.

The problem with star trek and stargate TV shows and the likes of other scfi shows is use of SSTO (single-stage-to-orbit) a vehicle that reaches orbit from the surface of a body without jettisoning hardware.

In reality it takes about 90% to 95% of fuel to get that small 5% of mass into space. So 90% to 95% of rocket gone.

The fuel is used up in minutes not hours,days or weeks.

The problem with scfi shows is use of SSTO vehicles where 95% of the vehicle is mass and 5% of it is the engine. And fuel that is not used up in minutes but last weeks to months before you need to get more fuel.

In reality a star trek shuttle craft could not land on a planet and have enough fuel to get it to take off into space!!!

To go to the moon or mars you need big rocket like a Space Launch System or Saturn V rocket it is massive very massive fuel tank!!!

No star trek or stargate SSTO with propulsion known to man today could do that.

A star trek enterprise-D or stargate Asgard ship, prometheus, daedalus, Goa’uld starships, Ha’tak ship, Ori spaceship so on would launch from the ground and have enough fuel to make it into space.

To get into space and go anywhere requires massive fuel tank in two or three stages of throw away dead fuel weight.

Like I say the problem with scfi is use of SSTO and fuel that last weeks to months not minutes!!!

It basically for SSTO to have any chance to be reality they have to use other propulsion system other than chemical propulsion that may work but is beyond level where at today like.

-anti-matter propulsion
-magnetic monopole
-exotic fuel source
-anti-gravity

May or may not work
-rocket riding on a shock wave of nuclear blast
-fusion propulsion

If non of these things discovered or made (magnetic monopole,exotic fuel source,anti-gravity or work like anti-matter propulsion,fusion propulsion or riding on a shock wave of nuclear blast. Than the future will be more like the movie interstellar!!

18

I think other thing may be confusing me besides scfi movies and scfi games is small drones seem to have lot of ducted rotors or blades.

http://kpcbweb2.s3.amazonaws.com/content/717/original_drone-reuters-lg.jpg

May be there is some aerodynamic reason scale size. Why some thing small is like that!!! but on a big scale why it is not like that or the pictures I posted before!! the form factor of plane or helicopter not really changed.

There may be some aerodynamic reason why helicopters form factor not really changes or more likely will not changed like pictures I posted.

19

Two Star Trek answers: 1) antimatter fuel, and 2) gravitation control.

If you have working anti-gravity, then getting to orbit is the same as climbing a “beanstalk” space elevator. You only have to “pay” for the cost in gravitational potential energy.

In real life, antimatter fuel is possible now (okay, in very small amounts.) Gravitics, alas, isn’t even theoretically possible.

20

There is one potential candidate of propulsion technology known to man today that can do this, the Em-Drive EmDrive - Wikipedia.

Much more proof is needed but it is known, and does appear so far to produce thrust and in theory should scale up power with size.