posted on May, 23 2008 @ 05:06 AM
What people like you don't get is that almost everything that you come into contact with on a semi-regular basis is the result of years or decades
of engineering. Every computer, every road, every engine, ever BALLPOINT PEN. There are many things that simply aren't developed enough to meet the
public's expectations of reliability and safety and longevity. Do you have any idea how hard it is to get a HUMMER to consume as little fuel as it
does? Let alone a car with fuel economy as an actual consideration. Every item you run into is the product of years of dedicated hard work and
Frankly, the majority of wild claims of machines like free energy devices and cars that run on water, and new and exciting internal combustion engines
capable of fuel efficiencies double or better than current engines, or new carburetors for double the horsepower or fuel economy are complete
bullcrap. The rest are almost all wild exaggeration. There are literally thousands of hoaxes out there, along with a generous spattering of false
advertising, and a rather large amount of sincere delusion.
Most of the technologies that actually exist, and make for interesting reading in popular science magazines and such simply aren't developed enough
for use, and, in fact, the majority of those will NEVER be developed enough for use. Oftentimes, existing solutions to problems are better than
entirely new ones. Oftentimes, initial ideas seem more promising than their results show.
Look at engines. The Wankel rotary engine sounds great on paper. But because it requires one way seals, it burns oil, and can't be made as
environmentally friendly as a conventional Otto cycle piston engine. Many other novel rearrangements of the Otto cycle suffer the same fate. Great
ideas doomed to obscurity because of environmental protection laws and manufacturing limitations. The Wankel rotary is lucky enough to be a recurring
feature in Mazda cars, most similar ideas are never picked up. The costs involved in working out the refinement of the idea to the point where it is
useful to anyone are simply too high to be worth it.
Other times, it's simple economics why certain technologies never see the light of day. Some solutions are simply too pricey, or simply not desirable
for most people, and if developing them would require large amounts of money, then it won't be developed. Look at 3D VR helmets. They're cool. But
nobody buys them. So almost nobody develops them. The underlying technology is there, the idea is there, but the product is nonexistent.
The list of reasons goes on and on. Quantum computing requires superconductors, which require cryocooling. Computer technology simply isn't up to the
point where functional AI can be created. Small proton exchange fuel cells are expensive poisoned by carbon monoxide, and thus have problems running
on anything besides pure hydrogen. Processes do not exist which can manufacture the more interesting nanomaterials in the quantities necessary for
commercialization. Barring huge advances in technology, there will not be a flying car in every garage, and a jetpack on every back. Solid state
lasers exist, but neither they, nor power sources are advanced enough for you to have a raygun.
Look deep enough into any given technology and you'll find all kinds of problems that need to be overcome to make improvements. Some are currently
insurmountable. Some, by the time they will be surmountable, won't matter because the technology they are associated with would be long obsolete.
The problem isn't technological supression, it's gullibility and unrealistic expectations. You want to play with cool science toys before everybody
else? Become an engineer like me. You'll quickly find that nothing works half as well as it seems on the news. Only after years of hard work and
frustration and *LOTS OF MONEY* does anything become a useful and dependable product for the general public.