Has Scientific Innovation Slowed Down?
Discussion
Simpo Two said:
Well this is the internet you know 
But seriously, one reaches a point in life when you can look back a few decades and take a perspective view.
You make a valid point of 'knowing where to look' - so why is all this innovation you talk about hidden? It's a pity the news is always full of politics and war; it should really be full of science and innovation and exciting things. The ISS is a great achievement - when was it last on the news?
This is something I agree with, we just don't publicise our accomplishments enough or make science\innovation an everyday part of our lives. I shouldn't have to go reading scientific journals to hear about the important breakthroughs. Those that are reported in the mainstream media are often either misreported or over-sensationalised.But seriously, one reaches a point in life when you can look back a few decades and take a perspective view.
You make a valid point of 'knowing where to look' - so why is all this innovation you talk about hidden? It's a pity the news is always full of politics and war; it should really be full of science and innovation and exciting things. The ISS is a great achievement - when was it last on the news?
I think the BBC should bring Tomorrow's World back
A fundamental problem is the calibre of people who work in the media. It is THEY who decide what we read about, what we see on TV and what we hear on the radio.
When the media was peopled with ex-soldiers, airmen, scientists, doctors etc, we got stuff that was of reasonable intelligence.
Now it is stuffed with former drama school students, exhibitionists, chefs and general woolly headed nincompoops.
And as they have little or no interest in "hard" science and facts, they assume no one else is interested either.
I have to say though, in the last couple of years, this situation has reversed a little bit - especially on the BBC - so all is not completely lost.
When the media was peopled with ex-soldiers, airmen, scientists, doctors etc, we got stuff that was of reasonable intelligence.
Now it is stuffed with former drama school students, exhibitionists, chefs and general woolly headed nincompoops.
And as they have little or no interest in "hard" science and facts, they assume no one else is interested either.
I have to say though, in the last couple of years, this situation has reversed a little bit - especially on the BBC - so all is not completely lost.
My take on this, is that probably the most significant scientific innovations that affect ordinary people, on a day-to-day basis has, like you say, probably peaked now. Major breakthroughs in domestic science will be far fewer than before.
However, whilst not a 'conspiracy theorist' - I do reckon that there are advances in military science - especially with our American cousins - that are pretty awesome, and quite a bit advanced from your average man in the street's understanding and appreciation...
I am willing to bet that there's some fairly freaky and advanced ways of fighting wars (i.e. eliminating vast swathes of personnel) now, that haven't seen the light of day so far, and probably won't, unless the s
t really hits the fan in a 'world war' fashion anytime soon.
Possibly some small, secret bits of advanced military tech are already in use with the US.
For example - I was watching a documentary about the initial US invasion of Iraq in 2003. They went into Baghdad with M1-A1 Abrams Tanks...not an especially secret or up to date example of a military tank...and the technology inside is probably known by most of the rest of the world, no?
Except that one of the tanks was disabled by a lucky hit from an Iraqi RPG round. The surviving crew got out, and instead of the rest of the task force picking up the crew and getting out of the hot zone, as they were still taking incoming fire - the crews of the other vehicles all stayed where they were, and flapped in a fairly major fashion about the disabled vehicle.
After attempting an abortive towing idea - they risked further casualties by deploying ground troops under fire back to the stricken tank, in order to place huge C5 charges to blow the tank to smithereens before leaving it there.
The reason? I quote another tank commander 'we couldn't leave the tank there, because it contains several examples of top secret technology that the US needs to keep a secret. So if we can't recover the vehicle, then we have to blow it to a million pieces...
And that was just a ground tank! If the US has what it considers to be top secret military tech in a ground tank, then it begs the question of what they also have that is REALLY secret back home on US soil, under wraps in secret military installations, no?
However, whilst not a 'conspiracy theorist' - I do reckon that there are advances in military science - especially with our American cousins - that are pretty awesome, and quite a bit advanced from your average man in the street's understanding and appreciation...
I am willing to bet that there's some fairly freaky and advanced ways of fighting wars (i.e. eliminating vast swathes of personnel) now, that haven't seen the light of day so far, and probably won't, unless the s
t really hits the fan in a 'world war' fashion anytime soon.Possibly some small, secret bits of advanced military tech are already in use with the US.
For example - I was watching a documentary about the initial US invasion of Iraq in 2003. They went into Baghdad with M1-A1 Abrams Tanks...not an especially secret or up to date example of a military tank...and the technology inside is probably known by most of the rest of the world, no?
Except that one of the tanks was disabled by a lucky hit from an Iraqi RPG round. The surviving crew got out, and instead of the rest of the task force picking up the crew and getting out of the hot zone, as they were still taking incoming fire - the crews of the other vehicles all stayed where they were, and flapped in a fairly major fashion about the disabled vehicle.
After attempting an abortive towing idea - they risked further casualties by deploying ground troops under fire back to the stricken tank, in order to place huge C5 charges to blow the tank to smithereens before leaving it there.
The reason? I quote another tank commander 'we couldn't leave the tank there, because it contains several examples of top secret technology that the US needs to keep a secret. So if we can't recover the vehicle, then we have to blow it to a million pieces...
And that was just a ground tank! If the US has what it considers to be top secret military tech in a ground tank, then it begs the question of what they also have that is REALLY secret back home on US soil, under wraps in secret military installations, no?
Not to rain on your parade but in war time something as basic as a map with waypoints on it will be secret, the communications tools if there is any encryption will be secret. The armour is almost certainly secret the point is some is secret because it is technology that you don’t want your enemy to have some is secret because letting the enemy get the maps and coms gear means you tend to arrive in ambushes or find your target is an empty field.
Military technology (which is not actually "science" - but rather the application of science and engineering) tends to remain secret for a limited amount of time. The companies and industries that develop such technology usually want to exploit the technology commercially as soon as they can so sooner or later it enters the public domain.
Indeed, the underlying SCIENCE behind "secret" military technolgy is usually already in the public domain anyway even before the military application is brought to fruition. Science works best by being public and open.
Indeed, the underlying SCIENCE behind "secret" military technolgy is usually already in the public domain anyway even before the military application is brought to fruition. Science works best by being public and open.
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff