Why has human progress ground to a halt?

[11of10]

I have stumbled upon this article, and I'd like to share it with you gang.

http://aeon.co/magazine/science/why-has-human-progress-ground-to-a-halt/

Some excerts:

Apollo almost certainly couldn’t happen today. That’s not because people aren’t interested in going to the Moon any more, but because the risk – calculated at a couple-of-per-cent chance of astronauts dying – would be unacceptable.

Risk-aversion has become a potent weapon in the war against progress on other fronts. In 1992, the Swiss genetic engineer Ingo Potrykus developed a variety of rice in which the grain, rather than the leaves, contain a large concentration of Vitamin A.

In the energy sector, civilian nuclear technology was hobbled by a series of mega-profile ‘disasters’, including Three Mile Island (which killed no one) and Chernobyl (which killed only dozens). These incidents caused a global hiatus into research that could, by now, have given us safe, cheap and low-carbon energy.

The assault on smallpox, spearheaded by a worldwide vaccination campaign, probably killed several thousand people, though it saved tens of millions more.

It's a long article, but I believe it might be interresting to a lot of people here.

PS Appologies if it should go some place else.

[Shpaget]

Chernobyl (which killed only dozens)

Some estimates put the number closer to a million.

Not that I have anything against nuclear power, on the contrary, but Chernobyl continues to be a serious problem we still haven't dealt with properly 30 years after it happened.

As for the lack of progress and technological advancement, it's understandable. We haven't had a proper war in decades.

[RainDreamer]

Well, I am reading this blog from the science lab forum:

http://waitbutwhy.com/2015/08/how-and-why-spacex-will-colonize-mars.html

Seems to say a lot about this question.

[Camacha]

Why would you think it has ground to a halt? The space race was a bubble, just like stock markets have bubbles. A whole industry got off to an overheated start, so that needed to be compensated afterwards.

We are still moving forwards. Computer technology is becoming faster every day, and more accessible every day. The average consumer has access to very high grade equipment of all sorts and sizes. In my own garage room I can produce things that were not possible to produce with a factory 20 years ago, and not at all a 100 years ago, and with my desktop computer I can do calculations that took supercomputers quite a while just 20 years ago.

Granted, a lot of this is used for trivial causes, but that is always the case. This second industrial revolution is empowering the general public and making full scale production cheaper, easier and more reliable. Good things are bound to shake out of the trees, and, in fact, they do.

[windows_x_seven]

As for the lack of progress and technological advancement, it's understandable. We haven't had a proper war in decades.

That, and most countries putting politics/money before science.

[Camacha]

Pretending the world did not almost unrecognisably changed since the last 'proper war' is just silly.

[Shpaget]

Pretending the world did not almost unrecognisably changed since the last 'proper war' is just silly.

It most certainly did. That's exactly my point.

Once the WWII was over, slowly all (or at least a lot of) the technology developed for military and kept under wraps during the war came out and became mainstream.

Look at the aviation. The jet engines were developed for the military. The first proper airliner (de Havilland Comet) entered service in 1952, but it was plagues with issues.

You see, Camcha, my argument is that because of the war the world changed. Of course, this change follows the war, it's not instantaneous.

[Camacha]

It most certainly did. That's exactly my point.

Once the WWII was over, slowly all (or at least a lot of) the technology developed for military and kept under wraps during the war came out and became mainstream.

Look at the aviation. The jet engines were developed for the military. The first proper airliner (de Havilland Comet) entered service in 1952, but it was plagues with issues.

You see, Camcha, my argument is that because of the war the world changed. Of course, this change follows the war, it's not instantaneous.

The computer technology we base our society on was almost fully developed in peace time*. The jet engines you speak of were proof-of-concepts at best. The ones that power our economy are all but developed in peace time. The same goes for almost any other conceivable modern technology.

Yes, the war changed things, but nothing stopped after that. Technology and society developed perfectly fine in absence of a war. The war just meant a short sprint in a marathon of technology we have been running since mastering fire. Let me rephrase my earlier statement: pretending the world would not develop in absence of a war is just silly. That is without even talking about the western economy and research and production machine being in shambles after the fact. Some things accelerated temporarily, many things got held back or reset to an earlier point.

*Not counting what people here consider minor wars.

Edited August 18, 2015 by Camacha

[TheCanadianVendingMachine]

So, what you're saying is that we need to start another war?

Count me in!

[RainDreamer]

Just a Cold War. That period gives us the glorious space age.

[Flymetothemun]

So, what you're saying is that we need to start another war?

Count me in!

I know it's a joke, but I'm really afraid of the person who thinks this. Imagine that, a person who'd be willing to kill for technology. He'd be a frightening person.

As for my position on tech these days, I'm not against technology, but I'm starting to turn into sort of a luddite. I think it's progressing too quickly. And some of it's being used for materialistic, marketing, and consumeristic purposes, and I am against all three. Other uses like tracking people and whatnot I think are ethically wrong.

- - - Updated - - -

Just a Cold War. That period gives us the glorious space age.

Get ready to hide under one of those school desks with the special radiation-proof wood! Haha! /joke

[Slam_Jones]

They say necessity is the mother of invention. Scientific progress moves quickly during wartime because it needs to. If everyone is already comfortable, there's no need to go further. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

What we really need is the next "big" idea. Something revolutionary. Something like a truly reliable Em-Drive, or a Perpetual Motion Machine, or someone discovering how to build chloroplast and use it for electricity.

Right now, we're pushing the limits of what we can do with our current tech, but what we need is a game changer. Like the difference between a horse and a car. Henry Ford was quoted as saying: "If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.â€Â

[vger]

We are still moving forwards. Computer technology is becoming faster every day, and more accessible every day. The average consumer has access to very high grade equipment of all sorts and sizes.

You really can't attribute much to that. Communication technology is primarily only about two things. One is the replacement of human workers (which is only good news for the rich). The other is marketing, which does nothing to advance human development, all it accomplishes is selling more of the same stuff that is being sold anyway. The early internet was a true free and open platform where everyone with the skill could carve their own "home." It was an untamed frontier at the time, for only one reason. Big business didn't have the foresight to see what could be done with it. Now practically everything online only exists because of a chance that we'll click on some ad for something that we probably don't need. Without the things I just mentioned, computer tech would NOT be what it is today. Sorry, but finding more efficient ways to separate people from their money does nothing to advance humanity.

What we really need is the next "big" idea. Something revolutionary. Something like a truly reliable Em-Drive, or a Perpetual Motion Machine, or someone discovering how to build chloroplast and use it for electricity.

And this more to the point of the original post. The EMdrive has me VERY excited, not simply because of what it could bring to space travel, but because of the other implications of such a device actually working.

I've been meaning to post something similar in the science labs for a while - a bit of philosophical musing. For a while now I've been feeling like we're repeatedly hitting our heads on a cosmic "ceiling" in our attempts to climb higher up civilization's developmental ladder. In the case of things like space travel, or simply a better world where "want" can be mostly done away with, it seems like we reached a plateau. The dreams of the future that people in decades' past had, have all been catastrophically shot down. Our formulas for how the universe works paint a much bleaker picture than what our imaginations saw coming after humans walked on the moon. Energy is much more difficult to harness than we thought it would be. I read somewhere that even if money weren't an option, and we could build the ultimate warp ship, it would probably have to consume all of the energy in our sun just for a merry jaunt to the next star system. "Reality" has begun to feel like a cage to me, with bars made of equations that are far too limiting. If reality is that cruel, then there's just nothing we can do and our fate is in all likelihood, sealed. It has felt like the only way we can move forward, is if some new discovery proves that we're wrong about a WHOLE lot.

Objectively, in the case of the EMdrive, it's probably a fluke that doesn't actually do anything amazing. But more subjectively, it "needs to work." Humanity needs it. Ever since science became more about math than about trial and error, we've gotten a pretty good idea of what to expect. There's almost no room left for surprises. But a HUGE surprise seems like the only thing that can save us from being trapped in our current technological incarnation. Maybe I'm just too pessimistic, but for example it seems the LHC (and think for a moment about how much that cost to build and the cost of running it), while its discoveries are awesome, isn't likely to yield anything that we can use as a breakthrough to catapult civilization forward into the future that our parents and grandparents were promised.

Just a Cold War. That period gives us the glorious space age.

You would also need nations foolish enough to think that using the moon as a missile base is in any way practical or better than having them on Earth. It doesn't matter who gets nukes. Everyone knows better now, and it isn't going to happen again. Only MAYBE if some asteroid is discovered containing resources that are worth more than ALL of "material X" that exists on Earth (I'm talking a rock worth a few quadrillion $ here).

Edited August 18, 2015 by vger

[Kryten]

Just a Cold War. That period gives us the glorious space age.

Even aerospace technology has moved vastly on since 'the glorious space age', you just need to move past the obsession most people seem to have here with HSF to see it. Just compare the first tiny, spinning GSO communications satellites to today's 6-ton+ thousand-transponder three-axis-stabilised monsters, or the Thor-Deltas that launched most early ones to the Ariane 5 launching most today.

Edited August 18, 2015 by Kryten

[DaMichel]

The internet is awesome progress IMO. Sure it counts as information technology, but the ability to communicate instantly with anybody on the planet needs to be mentioned on its own.

Also the ISS. Who would have thought that US, Russia and EU would work together like that. Big diplomatic progress.

But yeah, some areas of technology really need some innovation, and the will to actually implement it (electric cars *cough*).

[razark]

Human progress has ground to a halt? That depends on how you define "progress" and "halt", I suppose. When I was born, the home computer was not a thing that existed. Today, nearly everyone carries a computer everywhere they go. Computers once talked to each other over phone lines, but now the phone is completely run by the computer.

As for war leading to invention, I'm not entirely convinced. War certainly quickens the adoption of new technology for practical uses, but radar, jet engines, and even the computer were in operation before the Second World War started.

As for my position on tech these days, I'm not against technology, but I'm starting to turn into sort of a luddite.

I, too, am opposed to industrializing of textile manufacturing. Let us go smash some spinning frames.

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

I know it's a joke, but I'm really afraid of the person who thinks this. Imagine that, a person who'd be willing to kill for technology. He'd be a frightening person.

[...]

"We have amazing technology, but all we use it for is to kill other people!"

[sp1989]

Honestly we have hit a wall with the development of technology. However I don't believe that this is for any other reason than that within the next 10-20 years there will be an explosion of revolutionary technology that is currently in its infancy. Right now we are reaping the benefits of technology that was dreamt about or in it infancy 40-50 years ago. So we have honestly just hit a wall or a throttle back before the next explosion or acceleration towards the future of our dreams or an Orwellian nightmare depending on how you look at it.

Each generation lives the dreams of the past generation I suppose thats a sad irony.

[Camacha]

You really can't attribute much to that. Communication technology [...]

Your story breaks down right away. There is a huge emancipation of technology, manufacturing and knowledge happening and everyone is benefiting. This technology is more than selling the next iPhone or smartwatch. It is about people being able to buy workstation grade computers with just a small portion of their disposable income. They have access to technologies that the professionals of just 10 years ago did not have. The lines between professional and amateur are blurring. People can use high-end CAD software for fee, have parts manufactured for a minor free, design and program electronics and share that knowledge with previously inaccessible people around the world. People build all sorts of useful or even game changing bits of hardware and software. People build advanced laboratories in their basements to do their own research, create programs to do distributed research on ad hoc super computers and run advanced simulations. People are even funding ideas they like with their own money, breaking the traditional mould of banks loaning big companies money, but doing nothing for the small guy. Meanwhile, more and more people have access to the vast and ever growing library of knowledge the human race possesses. More people participating is more development.

Consumers are not just consumers any more, they have started becoming producers too. It is not probable that will stop, and is likely only to escalate. Better and faster technologies will become available. We already see that some amateurs are capable of doing more than professionals because they are amateurs, not restricted by commercial interests, certain laws, or outdated industry knowledge.

Get with the program, or get stuck in the old world, but we are not in Kansas any more

[StrandedonEarth]

So, what you're saying is that we need to start another war?

Count me in!

As the great Alfred E. Neumann once said: "Help fight the population explosion. Support your local war!"

[Camacha]

As the great Alfred E. Neumann once said: "Help fight the population explosion. Support your local war!"

Meat for the grinder!

[Flymetothemun]

I, too, am opposed to industrializing of textile manufacturing. Let us go smash some spinning frames.

Yes, brother! Take up thy hammers! We begin at nightfall! We shall be in Botany Bay by January!

[CG_Kerbin]

This reminds me of one of the only good things to come out of the cold war was the space race. Nothing like a good competion to get a rocket moving

[NuclearNut]

To be honest I think it is a phase, kind of like the luddites who smashed the factory equipment during the industrial revolution. To be conservative, that is to not want your life to change that much, is quite natural. It is also wrong. We must change, and to hold back progress is not merely causing stagnation, it causes regression. Progress will still occur if those opposed to it support it or not; necessity tends to be a very persuasive voice.

I wish we had just gone with nuclear energy at first, and not prevented it from developing. If we went with nuclear, there would be no rush to do something about global warming, something would have already been done.

Some estimates put the number closer to a million.

Not that I have anything against nuclear power, on the contrary, but Chernobyl continues to be a serious problem we still haven't dealt with properly 30 years after it happened.

As for the lack of progress and technological advancement, it's understandable. We haven't had a proper war in decades.

That report is from a conspiracy theory website thinly disguised as a research website. That other report on chernobyl, which I regret to say I have read, is not valid or honest. It rabidly ignores all of the basic rules of health physics and contradicts the WHO report. The number, from memory, using the LNT model (which overestimates things) was around 4000. That is really nothing, even half a million would be nothing. The WHO reported that outdoor air pollution was responsible for over 2.6 million last year only , nuclear fission makes up around 10% of all electricity production. Even if you had a chernobyl every year you would still not have more deaths from nuclear energy than air pollution.

Chernobyl, while not completely optimal, is not much more of a problem than it was ten years ago, what needs to be done is to seal it in a nice cap of high grade concrete and leave it. To remove the corium would be more or less an impossible task, and to leave it as it is is foolish.

[justidutch]

I don't think human progress has ground to a halt at all. In fact, I would say the opposite: that human progress is going quicker than ever.

I keep reading news everyday, from all kinds of sources, about progress across all sorts of fronts. Cosmology. Particle physics. Material sciences. Programming techniques. Manufacturing methods. All that kind of science stuff and way more fields I haven't mentioned.

Then there is the un-sciencey side of things. I do believe that we are (albeit too) slowly but surely making progress in the various arts and humanities. More and more people are becoming aware of the evils caused by prejudice and hate. Music, literature, art, etc, are all continuing to evolve and progress.

As the human population continues to grow exponentially, each of the various fields of sciences, arts and humanities also get more brainpower.

Or maybe I'm just a silly optimist/humanity fanboi.