RE: understanding time
July 18, 2012 at 10:14 pm
(This post was last modified: July 18, 2012 at 10:18 pm by jackman.)
(July 18, 2012 at 10:03 pm)aleialoura Wrote: We might be a lot more technologically advanced than we are now had it not been for certain... factors. I don't have to tell you what those factors are. I'm thinking you're smart enough to know.
Time itself is relative to the observer. Advancement in technology is moving so fast because it's like opening doors to find more doors on the other side. Once the first door is opened, there's no stopping it.
yeah, i realize those "factors". but i'm wondering if we went from riding horses in the past as a main method of transportation to now flying jets. it's almost like our ancestors would see jets as a very slow version of teleporting (days to cross a continent versus hours). so will a few generations into the future then have us likely using modes like teleporting as a norm? or anything on that magnitude of understanding.
granted, the funding ...
(July 18, 2012 at 10:04 pm)RaphielDrake Wrote: Well, discovery has slowed down its pace considerably. Aside from nuclear power The Higgs boson is one of the only really big discoveries we've made in quite sometime. You could argue this is because we're now concentrating on finding answers to much more difficult questions and you'd be right. The Higgs Boson is in a whole different league from almost any discovery we've ever made let alone any from before the 1950s.
That being said there is correlation that can't be ignored. Based on that correlation the rate of discovery will continue to decrease but the significance of each discovery will increase. 200 years might not cut it.
good point (in bold). 200yrs was just the example they used, i'm not banking on that being the uom.
they can land a rover on mars, yet they still have to stick a human finger up my ass to do a prostate exam?! - ricky gervais