test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Is Gene's vision realistic?

SystemSystem Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
edited May 2012 in Ten Forward
To many the idea of space ships flying around faster than the speed of light and fighting cyborg zombies sounds very unrealistic. But what seems much more unrealistic to me is the very premise of the entire story of Star Trek, which is that the human race decides to live in harmony upon discovering there are aliens.

Lets say humans really did discover there was intelligent alien life in the universe, and that the first aliens discovered were semi-friendly like the Vulcans. Do you think that discovery would actually motivate the majority of the human race to "come together", or do you think the same problems we have now would continue?
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1345

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012
    The vast majority of humans do live in harmony in Star Trek but not all of them. I think its from cornucopian technologies that alow humans to exsist in peace not the fact that we are not alone or have been visited by aliens for the first time. My 2 cents.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012
    We are heading for cyborg zombies on earth at the moment
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012
    I've always believed that it isn't mankind's introduction to aliens that cause the problems to go away, it is the advent of technology.

    How much of your income is spent on transportation, food, and fuel? In an age of transporters, replicators, and anti-matter reactors, most of what we consider an economy is non-existent. Poverty, disease, and war are almost all related to a lack of transportation, clean and healthy food, and fuel and the quests to get them. Remove the need for those and you have pretty much ended the causes of most wars. Even wars based on religious or political purposes have a resource management undertone. Even Bin Laden was a US ally until they quit funding is fight against the Soviets.

    So, to me, it is possible for mankind to reach that state of unity. But to quote Quark, "Let me tell you something about Hew-mons, nephew. They're a wonderful, friendly people – as long as their bellies are full and their holosuites are working. But take away their creature comforts... deprive them of food, sleep, sonic showers... put their lives in jeopardy over an extended period of time... and those same friendly, intelligent, wonderful people will become as nasty and violent as the most bloodthirsty Klingon."

    If we ever do reach a state of unity, it'll be because of the technology we develop, not the aliens we meet.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012
    I thought the question was gonna be about miniskirts in the future for some reason.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012
    Good point about technology; I suppose if everyone could have everything they wanted for free from a replicator people wouldnt have much to fight over. That said, when was replicator technology invented in Trek? Was it supposed to be before or after the human race "came together"?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012
    They do not unite just because there are aliens. They unite because the nuclear war devastated the planet and killed "enough people" to make sure it never happens again. Also, in Enterprise you see there are still different states on earth (e.g., the existence of the Royal Navy).

    It is also pretty obvious that not everything is so shiny and nice. Terra Nova and Terra Prime are examples from Ent era, the dictator of Cestus III is a TOS-era example, and the maquis are a TNG/DS9/VOY example. Captain Sisko said it best - earth is paradise, but outside it there are struggling colonies and many more shades of grey.

    As for FTL speeds, general relativity theory actually provides the theoretical foundation for warp speed. Many of the technological gizmos in ST do rely on solid mathematical/theoretical grounds. I recommend the book "The Physics of Star Trek" by Lawrence M. Krauss on this subject. I found it an interesting reading material for a Trekkie mathematician. :cool:
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012
    That said, when was replicator technology invented in Trek? Was it supposed to be before or after the human race "came together"?

    After, its a byproduct of tractor beams if I recall, same with teleporters.

    But keep in mind First Contact was made some time AFTER we nuked ourselves and we were still recovering from it, this might be why humankind adopted the policy it did because they were just recovering after a Nuclear War and were getting help to do that by a Alien race.

    Who knows how things would be in First Contact was done before that Nuclear War, perhaps the Federation would never be born.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012
    The idea of a better future, that goal where all humans work together without the desire for pesronal gain is the dream. It is the thing we should be working towards. The technology, the aliens, that was all extra fluff around the core message. A utopian Earth, I believe is possible, but not the way humanity is now, and without some major catastrophe. As Wolf said, it was WWIII that caused everyone to come together in ST. The species came to the brink of death, and finally, we realised 'wait a minute, we really need to stop this from happening again. There were no winners from that, we need to make sure no one ever does that again.' I think having discovered there were aliens in the galaxy, so shortly after such a catastrophic event, was the final thing that made everyone come together.


    I believe this is realistic, but it will need a world extinction event to occur first.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012
    I think the basic concept was sound, but his timeline was majorly optimistic as to how long this would take.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012
    I've always believed that it isn't mankind's introduction to aliens that cause the problems to go away, it is the advent of technology.
    I wish I could "Like" your post!
    But to quote Quark, "Let me tell you something about Hew-mons, nephew. They're a wonderful, friendly people – as long as their bellies are full and their holosuites are working. But take away their creature comforts... deprive them of food, sleep, sonic showers... put their lives in jeopardy over an extended period of time... and those same friendly, intelligent, wonderful people will become as nasty and violent as the most bloodthirsty Klingon."
    So true! This is US in a nutshell!

    But everyday I believe this as well...
    "Did you know that the first Matrix was designed to be a perfect human world? Where none suffered, where everyone would be happy? It was a disaster. NO one would accept the program. Entire crops /of the humans serving as batteries/ were lost. Some believed we lacked the programming language to describe your perfect world. But I believe that, as a species, human beings define their reality through suffering and misery. The perfect world was a dream that your primitive cerebrum kept trying to wake up from.Which is why the Matrix was re-designed to this: the peak of your civilization."
    I believe this is also true... It's hard being a realist and trying to have a little hope that humans could work for a common goal if our basic comforts where always met!
    The Architect: Humph. Hope, it is the quintessential human delusion, simultaneously the source of your greatest strength, and your greatest weakness.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012
    i think it could be, but we all must eliminate (to quote picard - tng 1x26):
    hunger, want, the need for possessions.

    so we would need for example the replicator and other technologys i think.

    than.. only than i could work.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012
    It can happen, whether it is because we discover advanced Technology on our own or through contact with aliens, but once everyone has access to limitless, clean energy, an endless supply of food and raw materials through replicators and the entirety of the universe to expand into, Knowledge, Art and wisdom will likely become the most precious things to strive for.

    We humans are kinda hardwired to try and rise above our pears. Maybe being better at sport, better looking, more wealthy, famous, smarter, supporting the better sports team/Franchise/computer company or simply by having better gear in an MMORPG.

    If the wealth of the Individual becomes meaningless and we do not need to fear for a neighboring nation to take it from us since they will have enough themselves and can always make more, exploring the vastness of space, making great discoveries, creating works of art and advancing humanity as a whole might be the major way for us to satisfy these urges.

    I'm optimistic enough to believe that it could happen, but realist enough to know it won't be in my lifetime and I sorta have my doubts it will be before we manage to bomb us back into the stone age over resources, faith and general worldview.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012
    At the rate the basic social skills and diplomacy of humans are devolving, I'm confident in saying that, yes, his vision was unrealistic. There is no way in hell we'll have a United Earth in the 2100s or even the 2200s. Humans are just too stubborn and destructive for that.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012


    to sit an think of what it would be like the thought of the billions... after a nuclear war...

    i removed a wall of text... a lot of that is fairly personal, maybe i skip this one...

    best let philosophers, thinkers, and like minded discuss this, an old soldier who been in bad places should not dwell on such things. Memory is rough enough on this old dog, do not need to add to it.:o

    I'll come back and read it later team.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012
    There are way too many factors that would have to be addressed and a lot of "growing up" that humanity would have to do first.

    1) The gap between when a new technology or invention is perfected and when it is released right now is far too great. I'm not referring to an iphone or anything like that I'm talking the major, life altering stuff.

    2) Humans overall would have to do such an extreme amount of growing up that really it's hard to envision Humanity as a whole behaving in the way they do in Star Trek. Even getting a majority of humanity to do away with petty things like greed, jealousy, etc would be an almost impossible task. Utopia societies have been tried and failed so many times throughout history. Small to medium sized colonies of Fanatical devotees maybe.

    3) Humanity is much more likely to destroy itself before we even get past our own solar system, and even if we do get that far and find other intelligent life, we're much more likely to automatically assume their hostile and fubar first contact so much that they just wipe our asses out.

    4) Bridging back to number 1 and the gap between invention, development and practical useage, over-population, famine, disease, dwindling resources, and war over it all will probably stunt true space exploration to the point where if anything a couple of ships might be sent out to the closest possible M-class planetary systems looking for salvation. However, if I were those people I would abandon Earth and try to completely start over the right way on a new planet. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one, and the survival of the human race outweighs the needs of all.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012
    To many the idea of space ships flying around faster than the speed of light and fighting cyborg zombies sounds very unrealistic. But what seems much more unrealistic to me is the very premise of the entire story of Star Trek, which is that the human race decides to live in harmony upon discovering there are aliens.

    Lets say humans really did discover there was intelligent alien life in the universe, and that the first aliens discovered were semi-friendly like the Vulcans. Do you think that discovery would actually motivate the majority of the human race to "come together", or do you think the same problems we have now would continue?

    Reguardless first contact with any alien race friendly or hostile will result in the world throwing their differences aside. I think hostile alien`s would result in coming together and throwing differences aside more than a friendly alien race. It will be the situation where we all have a common enemy among us and its the hostile alien life forms.



    The reality is we dont want alien interaction. The first contact with an alien life form could result in a world wide plague as we are exposed to organisims not native to our planet.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012
    'Realistic' is not a term that is know to Hollywood. Remember my friend he was creating a made-for-TV series.

    However (Vulcan Voice)

    Gene did give us something, a gift if you will. He gave us something to shoot for as a species. We will never have warp capability but there are physicist's working on way to propel us to the infinite reaches of the 'cold black' of space. There are teams of people working on better sources of energy. So, we have a pretty good foundation on which to build the future.

    So, realistic you say, maybe not a Trekverse as we see on TV, but is is real enough for my imagination. And sometimes the very thought of what he imagined for mankind chokes me up. I think he has set an example and many of us follow it. You don't have to be a 'real' Starfleet Officer to conduct yourself as one. Just live your life for you and betterment of your fellow man. Be as professional as you want to be. Live by good values and think of others too.

    Going to space has been a dream of mine since I was 9 years old and you know what it's not out of reach. Maybe being a Mission Commander or Pilot is but a Mission Specialist, now that is still within reach. Just look up the requirements on NASA's home page. All we have to do is set our mind to purpose.

    As far as building an actual Enterprise, i think we can make one however it wouldn't have WARP or an Anti-Matter power source. But the actual structure of it we can build.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012
    spektre12 wrote:
    'Realistic' is not a term that is know to Hollywood. Remember my friend he was creating a made-for-TV series.

    However (Vulcan Voice)

    Gene did give us something, a gift if you will. He gave us something to shoot for as a species. We will never have warp capability but there are physicist's working on way to propel us to the infinite reaches of the 'cold black' of space. There are teams of people working on better sources of energy. So, we have a pretty good foundation on which to build the future.

    So, realistic you say, maybe not a Trekverse as we see on TV, but is is real enough for my imagination. And sometimes the very thought of what he imagined for mankind chokes me up. I think he has set an example and many of us follow it. You don't have to be a 'real' Starfleet Officer to conduct yourself as one. Just live your life for you and betterment of your fellow man. Be as professional as you want to be. Live by good values and think of others too.

    Going to space has been a dream of mine since I was 9 years old and you know what it's not out of reach. Maybe being a Mission Commander or Pilot is but a Mission Specialist, now that is still within reach. Just look up the requirements on NASA's home page. All we have to do is set our mind to purpose.

    As far as building an actual Enterprise, i think we can make one however it wouldn't have WARP or an Anti-Matter power source. But the actual structure of it we can build.

    Who knows, one day we might have a form of anti-mater propulsion. A good number of things shown on Star Trek eventually ended up being created. Like blue tooth head sets, who could forget the communication ear pieces worn on the Enterprise of TOS. Who could forget the tablet computers which was used on the Enterprise of TOS. Or how about the holodeck on the Enterprise TNG, this hasnt happened yet but 3D is being pushed to the point that I wouldnt be suprised if we ended up with a form of a holodeck in the next 25 - 30 years.

    Nanites which give the borg healing abilities as well as being assimulated into the collective, well we have nanites which are being created as a way of artifical imune system.

    In the end I think a large number of what we see in the Star Trek series will one day eventually come to be reality in some form. Might not be tomorrow or 100 or 200 years from now but I feel it will eventually get to that technological position.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012
    milner62 wrote:
    In the end I think a large number of what we see in the Star Trek series will one day eventually come to be reality in some form. Might not be tomorrow or 100 or 200 years from now but I feel it will eventually get to that technological position.

    Great points indeed. The iPad3 can be considered a Treklike gadget as well. Oh video teleconferencing too! The statement I'm quoting above makes me very sad. I know we have most of the technology to do all of the above you stated however we are hindered by Greed on a global scale. Think of how far we'd be if it were not for greed, especially American greed (ours).
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012
    spektre12 wrote:
    Great points indeed. The iPad3 can be considered a Treklike gadget as well. Oh video teleconferencing too! The statement I'm quoting above makes me very sad. I know we have most of the technology to do all of the above you stated however we are hindered by Greed on a global scale. Think of how far we'd be if it were not for greed, especially American greed (ours).

    Think of how far along we would be if technological advancements werent associated with witch craft and sorcery.

    Hell theres good evidence that we had technology back during the sumerian and egyptian time periods that has been lost. Thats like for example most people dont know during the biblical times in Egypt there were such things as electrical batteries.

    In the ultimate end, greed is the ending point of many great technological advancements. Tesla, his advancements were stolen by Edison even though he went to greath lengths to prove Tesla`s a/c current was not the way to go. Then we have Tucker, who in 1948 built a super safe car that had many many features that we see on modern cars today but he was put under by the big three because they couldnt competitively compete with Tucker. That is how it goes, people will steal and scheme to get truckloads of money but they will not do for the betterment of others like Tucker or Tesla was wanting to do, they only want to use them to the advantage of making money for themselves. Once we get away from that then we can truely focus on advancements that will put us more like the trek universe than we are now.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012
    milner62 wrote:
    Then we have Tucker, who in 1948 built a super safe car that had many many features that we see on modern cars today but he was put under by the big three because they couldn't competitively compete with Tucker. That is how it goes, people will steal and scheme to get truckloads of money but they will not do for the betterment of others like Tucker or Tesla was wanting to do, they only want to use them to the advantage of making money for themselves. Once we get away from that then we can truly focus on advancements that will put us more like the trek universe than we are now.

    You need to watch the movie about him. It's really, good to say the least. We need another Revolutionary War for any changes like greed to be eradicated by us for the betterment of our world. Unfortunately war seems to be the answer in this day and age. Want oil, kill for it.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012
    spektre12 wrote:
    You need to watch the movie about him. It's really, good to say the least. We need another Revolutionary War for any changes like greed to be eradicated by us for the betterment of our world. Unfortunately war seems to be the answer in this day and age. Want oil, kill for it.

    I actually have the movie in bluray. Been trying to find a kitcar to build a replica of his design as well. In the end most people dont know that his car was designed in a way where if you had engine troubles all you did was go to a tucker dealership they remove four main bolts, drop the whole engine and drive axle assembly and they cart over a loaner that they rent to you while they repair your engine and you never have to rent or drive a loaner vehicle. Then theres the central head light which contary to what the movie said actually did work, it would pivot with the steering wheel of more than 15* turn of the wheels.

    I think there would be a civil war before another revolutionary war. I also think there would be another secession before there would be another civil war. But even in the time of when our civil war was fought, it was fought by a tyarrant that wanted to keep those under his thumb and expand government which is why we have government like we do today.



    As far as the oil goes, we got enough oil in our own borders that if we didnt bend to the whilms of insane envromentalists we could be just like Chile that last I checked had gas selling for $0.70 a gallon cause their just swimming in the stuff. But nope people buy into the enviromentalists and complete morons like al gore with their scare tactics and then we give money to them and they keep saying what we want to hear after being scared so we keep giving them money. I just hope with the outcry over the damage the tsunami on Japan is doing to the western sea board of the US by those enviromentalists will open up the eyes that these wack jobs complain about anything is destroying the enviroment. But then again enviromentalists have been documented using terroristic tactics to get their way but we turn the blind eye.

    This is why I think we would have states leaving the union before we see a civil war or a revolutionary war.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012
    milner62 wrote:
    As far as the oil goes, we got enough oil in our own borders that if we didn't bend to the whims of insane environmentalists we could be just like Chile that last I checked had gas selling for $0.70 a gallon cause their just swimming in the stuff. But nope people buy into the environmentalists and complete morons like Al gore with their scare tactics and then we give money to them and they keep saying what we want to hear after being scared so we keep giving them money. I just hope with the outcry over the damage the tsunami on Japan is doing to the western sea board of the US by those environmentalists will open up the eyes that these wack jobs complain about anything is destroying the environment. But then again environmentalists have been documented using terrorist tactics to get their way but we turn the blind eye.


    Well said sir or ma'am. I really despise people like that who hold us back. I'm all for cleaner, cheaper, better but I'm realistic about it. The EPA should be shut down. They do more harm than good. The environment has been here billions of years and we aren't moving fast enough to destroy it. They should be worried about asteroids hitting us or like you talked about Tsunami's. Mother Nature is far more destructive than we puny humans are.

    Oh, as for the headlight Tucker designed, BMW stole that idea and so did Audi and Mercedes.

    :D
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012
    The vast majority of humans do live in harmony in Star Trek but not all of them. I think its from cornucopian technologies that alow humans to exsist in peace not the fact that we are not alone or have been visited by aliens for the first time. My 2 cents.

    Sorry Hairyman but I have to totally disagree with you. Technology is just things and lets face it there are lots of wealthy people who want for nothing and have access to all sorts of wonderful doodads that are greedy, hubristic jackholes that make the world a more miserable place for being here. What we need is not better ways to build things or better ways to organize ourselves but better people to build and organize. We need a moral awakening.

    To quote a better man than myself
    The means by which we live have outdistanced the ends for which we live. Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles but misguided men.

    -- MLK Jr.

    I still think we can make a better world but unfortunately it's going to be WAY harder to convince everyone to embrace morals and ethics than to build replicators and warp drives.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012
    No. Even if we had near-endless resources, there are too many people who just NEED to tell other people how to live, whether its how to live a lifestyle or what god to follow or whatever. How much anger is there today by people who have plenty but are angry solely because someone else has more? If anything, new tech would make it worse, both because people would have more free time to be obsessive and dedicated to The Cause, and because of the new forms of destruction available with that new tech. How much destruction would be their be if some sect, angry about the Federation giving equality to 'soulless machines,' started ramming cargo freighters into cities at Warp 4? If anything I think the wars would get nastier simply because they'd be about less tangible things. Not fun.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012
    I've always believed that it isn't mankind's introduction to aliens that cause the problems to go away, it is the advent of technology.

    How much of your income is spent on transportation, food, and fuel? In an age of transporters, replicators, and anti-matter reactors, most of what we consider an economy is non-existent. Poverty, disease, and war are almost all related to a lack of transportation, clean and healthy food, and fuel and the quests to get them. Remove the need for those and you have pretty much ended the causes of most wars. Even wars based on religious or political purposes have a resource management undertone. Even Bin Laden was a US ally until they quit funding is fight against the Soviets.

    So, to me, it is possible for mankind to reach that state of unity. But to quote Quark, "Let me tell you something about Hew-mons, nephew. They're a wonderful, friendly people – as long as their bellies are full and their holosuites are working. But take away their creature comforts... deprive them of food, sleep, sonic showers... put their lives in jeopardy over an extended period of time... and those same friendly, intelligent, wonderful people will become as nasty and violent as the most bloodthirsty Klingon."

    If we ever do reach a state of unity, it'll be because of the technology we develop, not the aliens we meet.

    This I agree with. Even anthropologists have pointed to our Globalization of capitialism as something that needs to be balanced but are soon finding that it is going to reach its finite cap when the planet can no longer sustain us. SO Technology is going to breach this gap but will it be free? There will be a point that will break this current system not sure when but it will happen.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012
    Sorry Hairyman but I have to totally disagree with you. Technology is just things and lets face it there are lots of wealthy people who want for nothing and have access to all sorts of wonderful doodads that are greedy, hubristic jackholes that make the world a more miserable place for being here. What we need is not better ways to build things or better ways to organize ourselves but better people to build and organize. We need a moral awakening.

    To quote a better man than myself


    I still think we can make a better world but unfortunately it's going to be WAY harder to convince everyone to embrace morals and ethics than to build replicators and warp drives.

    I whole heartedly agree with Alien_De_Jour. Morals and ethics are an imperative factor if we as a people are to move on. Greed and powermongering is hampering human progress to a staggering degree. Money is considered power (not all powerfull) but power non the less. The people who have this power WILL NOT give it up without a fight.

    From what i've read and seen in this world is that the poeple we put incharge have failed us, our world leaders have failed us, time and time again. Be it from greed or power mongering, corruption, severe lack of moral and ethical guidance and absolutly no regard for life in any form. I'm not saying all have failed because there have been good leaders. The good leaders however seem to be followed up by the morally vacuous next guy that happens to have the backing of equally unmoral, unethical, control hucksters.

    I was trying to make the point of: Take away the need for money to buy food, clothes, roof over your head, creature comforts by creating technologies that make acquiring necessities for survival easy to obtain and for all the masses to enjoy. The next step would be to sort out the lazy people from the ones who wish to accomplish something be it a small town house builder to the guy who designes the first ship that will leave our solar system. Do you want to be remembered? HOW do you want to be remembered?

    Be ever vigilant for the person who would wontedly destroy your life and the things you love because its fun. Forgive and let go of the blood grudges we have formed with each other over the centuries. We the people as a whole are fractured. We lack world wide unification because our leaders can't let go of their "power".

    Power exsist where men and women believe power exsist. Without people there is no power, money has no worth and one man or woman can't control what isn't there. My 2 cents.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012
    spektre12 wrote:
    Well said sir or ma'am. I really despise people like that who hold us back. I'm all for cleaner, cheaper, better but I'm realistic about it. The EPA should be shut down. They do more harm than good. The environment has been here billions of years and we aren't moving fast enough to destroy it. They should be worried about asteroids hitting us or like you talked about Tsunami's. Mother Nature is far more destructive than we puny humans are.

    Oh, as for the headlight Tucker designed, BMW stole that idea and so did Audi and Mercedes.

    :D

    That is the sad thing. The EPA along with the enviromentalists are controling what others do because they want people to agree with them which is now why we have laws on emissions. I mean really we do emisison testing to get rid of smog, ok smog is formed by three byproducts, two of which comes from cars but cars do not emit these two byproducts and havent been since 1969 when emission control systems just started to come out. For instance Nox is one building block of smog, the EGR valve came out in 1969 to combat Nox by lowering the combustion chamber temperature which prevented Nox from being formed. Then you have HC which is unburned few, by 1973 we had catalytic converters out that uses cermaic and platnium cores to store heat from the engine to burn this unburned fuel out of the exhaust system. But yet we still have scare tactics of smog from cars even though weve had emission systems to combat that.

    And who might you say got the emission testing started? Yep our good buddies in California, they strongarmed the government by telling them that either they mandate emission testing or they will mandate it for themselves as their state rights and then all vehicles sold in California like vehicles sold in Canada and over seas would have to be built to sastify the "law" California did this because people are ignorant and complain about the air being so thick with smog you could cut it in Hollywood. Funny because there were natives living in that valley and the smoke from their camp fires created a haze in that stagnate valley which prompted spanish explorers to call it the vally of smoke. There is no air circulation but the rest of the country has to suffer from the stupidity of a few.

    That is like the government is removing ZDDP also known as Zinc from automotive oils all because they say it causes premature failiure of the catalytic converter. Problem is though Zinc is a very good antiwear additive that protects flat tappet lifters from wear. Given new cars all have roller lifters now, but the older cars that are still on the road need this Zinc to keep the camshaft and valve train from failing prematurely. Well this is nothing but a government tactic to get old cars off the road because they last longer and are easier to maintain not to mention inspection on these vehicles is cheaper as well. I also have proof that the zinc killing catalytic converters is false. I drive a 1978 Mercury every day and has almost 200,000 miles on it without a overhaul. The car still sports the orignal Ford logoed dual catalytic converters from 1978 on it, Zinc reached its peak concentration by 1984/1985 and then started to drop. My vehicle put on a ASM emission test, listed as a 1994 F150 truck with the correct information for my engine and driveline actually allowed my vehicle to pass a stricter emission test with the orignal factory equipment with flying colors.



    On the topic of stolen ideas, that happens everywheres. Ford had air ride suspension (what we call today airbag suspension) offered in their vehicles in 1958. Ford took the idea from a inventor that created a small car company that didnt last long that used rubber bags filled with air for suspension back in 1910. Then lets see, oh everyone remembers the cars from the late 90`s early 2000`s bragging about their convertible hard top? Well Ford was there first in 1957 with the Ford Sunliner retractable hard top. Everyone knows about automatic convertible tops that goes up if it starts to rain? Well Ford was there in 1955 with a convertible top that would rise if it started to rain. Everyone says PCV systems came out in 1968, wrong Chevrolet had them as early as 1961 and Ford had them as early as 1955 for those sold in California. Automatic signal seeking radios in cars dates back to around 1960-61. Then there was a inventor that created a kit to modify your production vehicle to have automatic parking assist back in 1957 it was called the "Park Car" which uses the spare tire to make getting in and out of parking spots easy. Push button automatic transmissions were used by Chrysler in the late 1950`s. In the 1930`s they had a feature that you load up your cigaretts in and you push a button and a cigarett would pop out lit ready to go. Then we had what was called traffic viewers which was piece of cut glass in a fancy style that you attached to your dashboard and if you coudlnt see the stop light you could see the glow of the light even in daylight on the traffic viewer. Day/Night mirrors thats 1950`s technology also. Then padded dashboards and seat belts were offered by Ford in 1955.

    In the end if a automaker is proclaiming a technology new and orignal odds are its not new or orignal cause it was stolen off optional features from the 1940`s, 1950`s, or the 1960`s.
    ReginaMala wrote: »
    No. Even if we had near-endless resources, there are too many people who just NEED to tell other people how to live, whether its how to live a lifestyle or what god to follow or whatever. How much anger is there today by people who have plenty but are angry solely because someone else has more? If anything, new tech would make it worse, both because people would have more free time to be obsessive and dedicated to The Cause, and because of the new forms of destruction available with that new tech. How much destruction would be their be if some sect, angry about the Federation giving equality to 'soulless machines,' started ramming cargo freighters into cities at Warp 4? If anything I think the wars would get nastier simply because they'd be about less tangible things. Not fun.

    That is it in a nutshell. Its people wanting to control others. Thats why I am just quietly supporting seccession and breaking away because things are getting to bad with the whole do as I say not as I do mentality. I mean hell you cant even find adult stores here anymore so if you need something for your love life with your partner you have to order online. The religious wack jobs ran them all out of town and now their working on strip clubs proclaiming that their children walking past the closed doors of the clubs are being tempted and corrupted by them. One even said the strip club across the street from the church was corrupting their members. I laugh and say well if you didnt have such a boring sermon maybe they wouldnt be inticed to go into the strip club to feel alive. Most sermons are nothing but boredom with the monotone voice and the preaching of how your going to hell if you dont live your life the way I interpert you should.

    I just dont buy into all that, I believe in a higher power but I feel that there is too much gray area to lump everything as good or bad. If I take money as a gift from a friend but come to find out that money was stolen by him does that mean I stole the money? In my opinion no. Its like if I find a bag of money on the ground and no one is around if I keep it and tell anyone does that make me in the wrong? In my opinion no, if I turn it in odds are they will pocket the money instead through corruption. Thats like if I am at a store and they ring me up and they scan the items but two high dollar items they missed scanning, am I obligated to tell them? In my opinion no because its not my job to tell them how to do their job. If they skip scanning an item and dont charge me for it I technically did not steal it cause they gave it to me in a check out back after not charging me for it.

    Something like this has happened before, I went to lowes and got 6 bags of dirt, the expensive stuff not the cheap, and told the woman running the register we had 6. She scanned one and punched stuff in on the scanner to say I figured it was 6. The price came out cheaper than I expected but I paid and left, by time I got to the car and check the recept I found out I was only charged for one bag of dirt. I could have went back and let them know but hey if I give a customer too much money back that is on me. If I forget to charge a customer for a service that is on me. This is that gray area I am talking about, doing this doesnt make you a bad person and you stole items, but it also doesnt make you a good person either. You are neutral, in the middle between good and bad in that gray area.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012
    Good point about technology; I suppose if everyone could have everything they wanted for free from a replicator people wouldnt have much to fight over

    not really. people would just find new things to fight over and new reasons to fight. its human nature.
    As for FTL speeds, general relativity theory actually provides the theoretical foundation for warp speed

    huh? actually its pretty clear on the fact that nothing can accelerate to the speed of light. infinite mass and all that.
    Humanity is much more likely to destroy itself before we even get past our own solar system

    indeed. its already nearly happened a few times. sooner or later I have no doubt whatsoever that it will happen
    and even if we do get that far and find other intelligent life, we're much more likely to automatically assume their hostile and fubar first contact so much that they just wipe our asses out.

    yeah thats true. that, or they actually will be hostile. assuming there is other intelligent life, common sense says that not all of it will be friendly. sidenote: ever see that masters of horror episode 'the screwfly solution'? wouldn't be at all surprised if that ended up happening to us
    Bridging back to number 1 and the gap between invention, development and practical useage, over-population, famine, disease, dwindling resources, and war over it all will probably stunt true space exploration to the point where if anything a couple of ships might be sent out to the closest possible M-class planetary systems looking for salvation. However, if I were those people I would abandon Earth and try to completely start over the right way on a new planet

    I doubt anybody being sent out like that would be provided with the resources to do something like that, for that very reason
    Reguardless first contact with any alien race friendly or hostile will result in the world throwing their differences aside. I think hostile alien`s would result in coming together and throwing differences aside more than a friendly alien race. It will be the situation where we all have a common enemy among us and its the hostile alien life forms.

    why would we just throw everything aside just because hostile aliens show up? we were united in world war 2 against a common enemy and that didn't stop us from being hostile toward eachother
    The reality is we dont want alien interaction. The first contact with an alien life form could result in a world wide plague as we are exposed to organisims not native to our planet.

    indeed. just remember what happened when europeans reached north america
    Tesla, his advancements were stolen by Edison even though he went to greath lengths to prove Tesla`s

    what achievements? he made a bunch of absurd claims about technology he claims to have invented and could never provide any evidence for, nor could he or anyone else reproduce what he claimed to have done
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2012
    Gene Roddenberry describes an Utopia - something that is that we may theoretically see feasible, something to strive for, but very hard to actually implement.

    So, can it be done?

    Maybe. To some extent. Look at the world today. Yes, there are still plenty of conflicts. But there are also plenty of regions without violent conflict. Europeans seemed to have a new war every few years. But that changed a lot in the past. There are many reasons for it, but I believe one of the most important ones may simply be that many "old" resource conflicts have become less important and instead everyone is dependent on each other.

    Startrek technology- even in the TOS age - is fantastic. They may not have replicators yet in Kirk's age, but even then, they already had some kind of "astronaut's rations" that seemed to be created by the ship. So food isn't a big problem. And their energy resources were gigantic, capable of faster than light travel and a single ship being able to devastate a planet. In Archer's era, they had civilian, privately owned freighters. At this point, other material resources become less critical - space flight seems rather "cheap" and allow them to mine metals and other materials from asteroids or other, uninhabited planets.

    Ultimately, humans form societies because they are stronger if they work together. They come in conflict and get to violence once they do not have resources to maintain everyone. Startrek's technology seems so far reaching that they may not feel this type of resource limitations as strong.

    So yeah, it may be possible - if we had this kind of amazing technology, it could be a global and even an interstellar phenomenon. There is no guarantee such technology is possible, though, but even a lot less maybe enough.
Sign In or Register to comment.