In Brief
- Several events, both natural and man-made, can happen suddenly and at any time, completely transforming societies.
- Many of these events will not unfold the way popular conceptions have imagined they will.
- A rich-media, interactive version of the article is available here.
The best science transforms our conception of the universe and our place in it and helps us to understand and cope with changes beyond our control. Relativity, natural selection, germ theory, heliocentrism and other explanations of natural phenomena have remade our intellectual and cultural landscapes. The same holds true for inventions as diverse as the Internet, formal logic, agriculture and the wheel.
What dramatic new events are in store for humanity? Here we contemplate 12 possibilities and rate their likelihood of happening by 2050. Some will no doubt bring to mind long-standing dystopian visions: extinction-causing asteroid collisions, war-waging intelligent machines, Frankenstein’s monster. Yet the best thinking today suggests that many events will not unfold as expected. In fact, a scenario could be seen as sobering and disappointing to one person and curious and uplifting to another. One thing is certain: they all have the power to forever reshape how we think about ourselves and how we live our lives.
This article was originally published with the title 12 Events That Will Change Everything.
Already a Digital subscriber? Sign-in Now
If your institution has site license access, enter here.
See what we're tweeting about
28 Comments
Add CommentThat's a nice start of a story.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think I'd be more tempted to subscribe if it had a large image and at least one of the twelve presented before I was hit up for money...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisInteresting
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI'm old enough to remember Scientific American before it went commercial. Ah, for a return to those days...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf you go back to earlier editions of Scientific American Magazine (SCIAM) of thirty years ago, you’ll find that the articles are written for scientists and not the lay public.
It is clear that SCIAM is now written for a more general audience. (Popular science, of course, is not bad in itself.)
The magazine used to carry seven or eight articles and us scientists and mathematicians were lucky if we could understand three of them.
But we read the magazine anyway and after five or ten years, we began to understand five or six articles instead of three.
It’s sad to see SCIAM gradually disappear and just as gradually reemerge as a popular science magazine.
It’s like the proverbial frog boiling in the pot: you put him into cold water and slowly heat the water. By the time he realizes it’s getting hot, he’s too weak to jump out. I’m afraid SCIAM passed that point at least ten years ago.
We are worried, also, that the general level of the American science graduate student (minus foreign students) has dropped very far in the last twenty or thirty years.
preview preview--> SCIAM rocks!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat would happen if we discovered a giant asteroid on a collision course with Earth or if we built computers that developed consciousness?
In that we don’t, even on a theoretical basis, know what self-awareness is it seems highly unlikely that machines will become aware without that basic understanding and only then through slow incremental engineering. Thinking that computers will just become self aware like in “The Terminator” is very Hollywood but it is based on little more than morbid wishful thinking.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEven if it was possible to make machines self aware that characteristic doesn’t necessarily go hand in hand with curiosity, a need for procreation or a desire for self preservation. What will motivate a machine intellect if it even requires motivation will be what the designers engineer into it. I would think that a much more likely scenario is one where super intelligent biologicals are engineered and perceive humans as a threat then a Hollywood plot becoming reality.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEdgar Cayce had predicted that when "Gravity Control is discovered in 1957, the world will see an industrial revolution like the world has never seen before!"
He was ten years off.
I found the technology of the Flying Saucer in 1967 and patented it many years later. ( Yes, they use gravity control)
After 1989 I was able to contact Nasa and suggested to use it to power the Shuttles.
The Propulsion Engineers were against it.
A Shuttle that would not need rockets to take off?
A Shuttle that would fly with a constant acceleration of ONE G to the ISS in an hour?
A Shuttle that could fly to the Moon in a few hours?
A Shuttle thast could even fly toMars inside 24 hours?
No heatshields?
A force-field that would keep Shuttle and crew safe from collisions and radiation?
No barf-bags?
No osteoporosis?
NO WAY.
"Not interested, thank you for the copy of your Patent!"
If Nasa by June 15, 2010 decides to commit suicide, by not paying me my fee of $50 million (The invention was evaluated at $600 Billion), it will go to Russia or India.
They could use an Industrial revolution
The 180 would-be-Astronauts waiting in the wing will hardly get a chance after that.
Whoever rules Space, rules the World.
The greatest event that would mean advancement was left out.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEdgar Cayce predicted that in 1957 Gravity Control would be discovered and then the world would see an industrial revolution like it never had seen before.
I discovered the technology of the Flying Saucer in 1967.
Yes, they use gravity control.
Edgar was ten years off.
Yes I found hundreds of new uses, that would mean new industries. Many militairy ones too.
In 1980 I was able to suggest to Nasa to use it for the Shuttles.
The Propulsion Engineers were against it.
Who would need them if:
A Shuttle would not need rockets to take off but use VTOL?
A Shuttle could fly, using a constant acceleration of ONE G and reach the ISS in an hour?
Reach the Moon in a few hours and land there?
Have a forcefield to protect crew and Shuttle from collisions and radiation?
No heat shields?
No osteoporosis?
No barf-bags?
NO WAY !
"Not interested, thank you for the copy of your Patent!"
After Edgar Cayce's prediction, the Hudson Institute evaluated it in 1956 at $600 Billion, if the USA would have it before Russia.
When Nasa decides not to commit suicide and pay me my fee of $50 million by June 15, 2010, the 180 would-be-Astronauts, waiting in the wing will get their chance.
It will take one year (or less) to convert the Shuttles, which then can fly for another ten years on a monthly or bi-weekly basis.
It may cost $100 Million or less to convert the Shuttles.
Now one Shuttle trip to the ISS costs One Billion Dollars.
After conversion they could make twenty trips for that price.
Maybe the Rocket Propulsion Lobby will persuade Nasa not to give in.
Then it will be offered to Russia or India and the Astronauts-in-Waiting will hardly get a chance ever to fly.
They may insist of not using any Astronauts.
Whoever rules Space, rules the World.
It is possible that aneutronic nuclear fusion could change everything starting from energy generation until space propulsion.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiswww.crossfirefusor.com/nuclear-fusion-reactor/overview.html
These 12 certainly aren't all that are possible. The worst and best of things are not usually foreseen (or at least accepted).
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThese 12 certainly aren't the only ones to change everything. The worst and the best events are rarely foreseen (or accepted). http://www.engineeringchallenges.org list misses some obvious physically possible tech, probably considered as crackpotish by the academia. They will, as before, be proven wrong.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOnce again the Shell Oil editors of SCIAM, don't miss an opportunity to take a swipe at the Energy Supply that makes Big Oil shiver in fright - namely Nuclear Fusion Energy. So SCIAM claims Nuclear Fusion is highly unlikely before 2050. Brian Wang, who actually knows about Nuclear Fusion, and is not on Big Oil's payroll had this to say:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"...almost certain and before 2025. Even partial success can allow fission to close its fuel cycle by allowing transmutation of uranium 238 and enable single stage to orbit space planes. Note vastly better superconductors helps progress to fusion energy. Totally successful commercial nuclear fusion can reduce energy costs by 5-100 times and trigger an economic boom which enables faster technology development..."
Fast-Track to Fusion options that I can pretty much guarantee you that SCIAM has refused to even look at:
Bussard's IEC Fusion:
http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/03/new-pictures-and-updated-goals-for-emc2.html
Focus Fusion:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVif4hUAJ8c
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1518007279479871760&q=Google+tech+talks+lerner&pr=goog-sl
Super Marx Deuterium & Laser Fusion-Fission Hybrid:
http://nextbigfuture.com/2009/10/winterberg-compares-super-marx.html
Reversed Field Pinch Fusion:
http://www.sciencecodex.com/upping_the_power_triggers_an_ordered_helical_plasma
General Fusion (Shockwave Fusion):
http://nextbigfuture.com/2009/09/general-fusion-will-leverage-computer.html
DARPA's Handheld Nuclear Fusion Reactor:
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/07/darpas-handheld-nuclear-fusion-reactor/
Muon Catalyzed Fusion:
http://newenergyandfuel.com/http:/newenergyandfuel/com/2009/10/05/the-new-cold-fusion/
Cold Fusion / LENR:
http://nextbigfuture.com/2009/03/neutron-tracks-detected-in-cold-fusion.html
Kolic Spherical Plasma Fusion:
http://www.prometheus2.net/
Tri-Alpha Energy's Aneutronic Colliding Beam Fusion:
http://nextbigfuture.com/2007/06/tri-alpha-energy-raises-40-million-in.html
Similar to Tri-Alpha, Helion Energy:
http://www.helionenergy.com/
Another Dense Plasma Focus Fusion System:
http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/01/another-large-dense-plasma-focus.html
Winterberg Impact Ignition Fusion:
http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/01/attaining-high-velocities-for-impact.html
Magneto-Inertial-Fusion (MIF):
http://nextbigfuture.com/2009/12/magneto-inertial-fusion.html
Excellent summary on the future of Commercial Fusion Energy:
http://www.physicsessays.com/doc/s2005/page_fusion051.pdf
I agree that the California "big one" earthquake will devastate the state, but a much bigger event will dwarf this one by far. If the Yellow Stone mega-volcano explodes, the entire northern portion of North America will be affected. How likely is this to happen can only be guessed at, but isn't predicting the California earthquake more or less a guess.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIm disappointed by the high chances ascribed to robots self-awareness. Computers are mere machines/instruments and will never be more than that. Life underwent billions of years to acquire the sophistication and autonomy to navigate various environments. We dont understand lifes self-organization yet it seems inherently alien to programmable computers and its difficult to see how they could break free from the shackles of program code. Computers and robots will forever be prisoners of the fundamental limitations of their algorithmic nature and G�del's Incompleteness theorem.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFascinating. Can't wait to see which event occurs first. Love the graphics too.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf you think SCIAM has dumbed down take a look at New Scientist in the UK. You have to go a long way to find a decent science article in it nowadays and most of the comments sections reduce themselves to an undergraduate argument about evolution/creationism and associated abuse. It's like reading the Catholic Herald.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAlong the lines of AI development, design systems, such as CAD, will probably start taking over the actual making of the designs, rather than just being tools for a person to use for designing. Likely, early versions would use parameters entered by an engineer to create a prototype that would need some tweaking by a person. Later versions would probably create a finished design pretty much on their own.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHorizon program in the UK covered fusion power - seems the Koreans are around 15 years away from commercial
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYou have too pay for this now!!!! What??
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat! you have to pay for this now!!! Wow that's really a low blow this use to be my favorite site. :(
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisInteresting that you selected 12 events and not just 10 as is normal?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisInteresting that you selected 12 important events and not 10 as is normal?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYou need 12 to "stick out"?
Why not 37 then?
http://atlantagreenguy.wordpress.com/2010/06/17/filler-up-phil/
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisCheck out this story as well..
I think I hit these pointers. My site is below, but my blog is above.
http://www.ecomech.net
Darpa is a slave to politicsAnd does not serve the public!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisA better use of the TAW50 AND the trb3 would be in our service sector!!no more trains or trucks!
ennui, So times up,what happened? Russians,Indians interested? Hope so.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPlease reply.
I think it's great that SCIAM is now slanted more towards a general, but nevertheless educated, audience. I can only see that as good from an economic point of view for the magazine itself, as well as good for a general audience, starving for more in-depth scientific information. Since I am not a professional scientist, then at least now, in this new format, I can finally have access to a more pprofound and interesting view of recent scientific developments. It's a win, win for everyone, except perhaps that narrow and small band of scientific specialists, who have their own pet publications, anyway.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDoc Edwards, Knoxville, Tennessee
JStreet:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSounds as if the need for a mag/site is bubbling to the top. At critical mass it/they will come into being.