I think futurists as a group are too heavily invested in the idea that technical and scientific advancement follow an exponential curve. Looking at what science and engineering brought us between, oh, 1890 and 1970, it's understandable how such a paradigm could seem like the new way of things. We went from horse&buggy to "The Eagle had landed" in that timespan!
But look at 1970 to present. I do not see a single revolutionary bit of applied science or engineering to come out of that, nothing with the stature of the gas turbine or penicillin. I have a pessimistic streak that feels that the 20th century (pre-1970) was the climax of the age of industry and science, and during that time we picked the ripest highest cherries off that tree.
Nanotechnology was the rage when I was in graduate school. I do not believe that we will see meaningful nanotech anytime soon - with the glaring exception of biological nanotech, molecular "machinery" cut&pasted from already-extant living cells. When I hear of talk of actual machinery being built at the molecular level, like buckytube shafts connected to polyphenylene gears ... I laughed. Tiny structures are sticky and very dissipative. There's a very good reason there are no rotary structures at the cellular (and smaller) scale.
Synergy is not a term favored by scientists. No, it belongs in the realm of sales. Idea promotion, often in the quest for funding. Argh.
My own perception/belief is that the great leap forward in technical progress was an aberration, and that over the last 30 years or so we're returning to a more usual state, one in which revolutions are occasional things, once in a lifetime. Progress will continue, but at a more sedate rate now that the cherries are picked and we have to do a lot of slogging to fill in the gaps. All my life a cure for cancer and bad teeth was 10 or 15 years away. Same with controlled fusion for electrical power. Those optimistic estimates were not based on any sort of careful analysis, but instead on the exuberance created by the whirlwind rate of change in the 3d quarter of the 20th century. Mars by 1980? No. 1990? 2001?? 2010? ...2025? Uh, sorry. My guess (unless the Chinese make a point of national pride out of it) is 2100, give or take. And that's for an endeavor whose technologies are largely in hand! |
