What scientific and technological milestones can we envision 50, 100 and 150 years hence?

Each month we have the luxury of being able to look back into the past, to what people were writing 50, 100 and 150 years ago. We can do this because Scientific American has put its readers at the forefront of science and technology for more than 167 years. To mention just one example, our October 1962 issue featured Francis Crick, co-discoverer of the structure of DNA, explaining the meaning of this wondrous molecule, and psychologist Leon Festinger writing on what he meant by the term “cognitive dissonance.”

A strong past is a good foundation from which to look into the future. In that spirit, we asked our authors to train their imaginations on what the world might look like 50, 100 and 150 years from now. Will cars fly? Will we still have computers, and if so, what will they do? Will nuclear weapons be banished? Will our technology save us from a changing climate or make things worse? What is the fate of tigers and other wild creatures on an increasingly crowded planet? To what extent will we master our genes to stave off disease? And if we ever leave this planet, how will the journey change us? In the following pages, you will find answers. Not the answers—we are not making predictions but rather doing thought experiments, grounded in science fact, with an eye to illuminating today's world and provoking thought about what comes next.

—The Editors

The Future in 50, 100 and 150 Years
The Flying Car Will Finally Fly—And Drive
Will We Come To Grips With Nuclear Weapons?
Gene Therapies Will Cure Many A Disease
Extinction Countdown: The End For Many Species
Will High Tech Cool A Hot Earth?
Computing In 2165
How Humans Will Evolve On Multi-Generational Space-Exploration Missions

This article was originally published with the title Over the Horizon.

11 Comments

1. 1. julianpenrod 02:12 PM 12/19/12

   Even fifty years ago, the vision of the future included remote controlled cars; personal flying machines and jet packs; atomic energy too cheap to even monitor benefiting everybody; buildings almost a mile high, built with sleek designing nods to everything from art deco to industrial design to moderne; economics will mature to the point where everyone can be a king. Today, people drive hideously non aerodynamically ungainly junk piles with rear windows deliberately designed too small to see through and trunk lids outlandishly high, forcing motorists to buy expensive closed circuit rear view television. There are no personal jet packs or mousehold flying machines. Atomic energy is a farce. Buildings are post modern piles of brick with wqindows too small to see through, as "commentary" on socciety, but benefiting no one. And, where people could burn leaves in their backyards without disaster, today, they can be arrested for leaving their child in the car for a couple of seconds to run into a store, even though they keep an eye on them the whole time.
   From the skyrocketing in gas costs due to non aerodynamic car design, masked by the artificial uptick in gas prices due to "refinery problems", to atomic energy being immensely expensive to provide, to expensive post modern buildings being basically just plum jobs handed out to "artist" "architects" willing to bribe their way up the ladder, even to freedom shredding legislation authorizing mountains of fines for doing nothing wrong, the future we are living in is mean, mendacious and craven, defined by one thing and one thing only, greed.
   So many used to see the march into the future as the unending process of progress seeing expression, the possible entering the world to become the real. What it turned out to be, really, is an expression of the greedy and malignant using connections and underhandedness to fashion fortunes for themselves, based on srewing the "rank and file".
   Not that this doesn't benefit a number of individuals. Many who want to "argue" that "Friday The 13th Part III" is superior, say, to "Stella Dallas", simply say, "Well 'Stella Dallas' was made back then, and 'Friday The 13th Part III' was made today. And progress always goes forward. Anything that is later than something else is unquestionably better than it."

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

2. 2. julianpenrod 02:12 PM 12/19/12

   And, face it, "progress" and "accomplishment" have taken on eminently questionable, if not deplorable, meanings to many. This may cause this not to be printed or to be removed, but, just a few months ago, NPR's Alva Noe actually endorsing cheating, saying it was a sign of initiative, inventiveness and accomplished tool using!
   Of course, a numebr may insist that the past visions of the future were too difficult to even impossible to accomplish, so greed and connivery replacing advancement as a mode for the future was a natural development. That assumes they have "proved" that those developments were impossible. In that vein, however, it should be remarked that, in fact, since even 1925, there has been absolutely no new development in "science". Yes, we have magnetic levitation and microcircuits, but everything is based on principles founded in those days. At "relativity" and "quantum theory" everything stopped! There is no theory of the universe today that does not rest on those two pillars, and only those two pillars! It's become a kind of Lord Kelvin Age. Lord Kelvin said that all that would be discovered had been discovered by 1900 and the future would consist only of gaining greater accuracy in measurements. There has been absolutely no new thought accepted in "science" since 1925. It may be, as "science" devotees would insist, that that's because we've reached the end of reality, that there is absolutely nothing more. But that assumes that "scientists" can be trusted to tell the truth. That's assuming they don't withhold truth from the rank and file" on orders from the New World Order. "Science" devotees have a "proof" that "science" can be trusted, they simply make fun of you.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

3. 3. Crasher in reply to julianpenrod 05:23 PM 12/19/12

   I agree that the world has become a less nice place governed by greed. But to say science has not progressed???All future work is built on discoveries of the past and new ways of thinking about old issues. I think we have made enormous progess and look forward to what future discoveries will bring. I am concerned, however, that we may become so 'successful' that we trash the world we have.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

4. 4. julianpenrod 01:28 AM 12/20/12

   A matchlock, a snaplock and a flintlock are distinctly different types of firing mechanisms, but are not necessarily "progress". Even if one is quicker, easier or surer to use than another, they are all still the same basic idea. All elaborations on a theme. In the same way, a diesel engine and a gasoline engine are essentially the same thing. For that matter, a steam engine and a gasoline engine use much the same tecnology, the fuel and expanding gas are different and the expanding gas in a steam engine can be diverted for reuse. A gasoline engine and an electric motor are progress in the more traditional sense. Using basic ideas already established to miniaturize already thousand times miniaturized electronic parts another thousand times is not progress. It is an elaboration, it is an improvement, but it is in no fundamental way different. Unfortunately, too many people today, many who consider themselves "qualified" as "science" devotees to preach to eveyrone else about what is and isn't true, are so easily impressed by the glitz and hype that they think such elaborations are a distinctly new thing. There were some who were saying high definition teleision was an entirely new level of technology, simply becuase it doubled the number of pixels per inch on the screen. There are absolutely no new theories of nature that have been evinced since 1925. Or, the conspiracy that "science" claims it isn't refuses to share news of these other theories, insisting instead that "relativity" and "quantum mechanics" are valid and not just constructs "proved" by non existent "experimehts" that most "rank and file" could not afford to duplicate to find out they're frauds.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

5. 5. rloldershaw 10:39 AM 12/20/12

   
   Given the "Nightmare Scenario" that has unfolded at the LHC, the discovery of exoplanets systems that defied conventional expectations, the discovery of trillions of unbound planetary-mass "nomad" objects (Sumi et al, Nature 19 May 2011), the continuing no-show results for all "WIMP" searches, etc., etc., it is time to consider new paradigms that can actually predict these results.
   
   "How can physics live up to its true greatness except by a new revolution in outlook which dwarfs all its past revolutions? And when it comes, will we not say to each other, 'Oh, how beautiful and simple it all is! How could we ever have missed it for so long!'." John Archibald Wheeler
   
   A new paradigm for a new century.
   
   Robert L. Oldershaw
   Discrete Scale Relativity
   Fractal Cosmology

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

6. 6. DaniEder 04:24 PM 12/20/12

   Attempting to look so far into the future will only serve to provide humor when looking back from the actual future when it arrives.
   
   I don't think anyone predicted in 1963 what the combined effect of wireless telephones, tiny computers, and networking would do - as in unleashing political revolutions. One might be able to predict particular technology improvements, but the combined effect of multiple changes on things besides themselves is near to impossible.
   
   Oh, by the way, we do have "flying cars". They are called "helicopters", and are just too expensive for mass use. The weird hybrid of flying and driving on roads will remain as rare as flying boats and amphibious vehicles, because of the weight penalty of trying to do two different things. In most cases it makes more sense to use a helicopter then a car if the destination needs it.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

7. 7. S. N. Tiwary 03:04 AM 12/21/12

   Our past is the best foundation of the present. The present is the best foundation of the future. In next 50, 100 or 150 years, what the world will look like can be probably predicted on the basis the trend of science and technology at present. Car can fly. Man can live on moon and Mars. World may be a global village. One earth. One Government. One president. World becomes a single family. Complete unification may take place.
   S. N. Tiwary
   DIRECTOR
   Former Dean, Head and Acting Vice-Chancellor

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

8. 8. textra 11:37 PM 12/21/12

   I remember 1984 - that is the novel, in 1994. My favourite show was Space 1999, which also came and went without the cool space stuff. And Y2K remember that haha. Interesting to think, but the future will be full of surprises as I think we will find. I don't think "scientists" have the edge on the prediction business. The best I can think of was Jules Verne.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

9. 9. northernguy 12:00 AM 12/22/12

   I would hazard a guess and say that much of modern biology is not contained within the understanding of the 1925 period.
   
   Virus, autoimmune, genetic disorder etc. are concepts that are not just the result of better technology giving us the ability to measure ever more accurately. The improved technology allowed us to see something that we didn't even imagine existed. Having seen them we now must develop theories and try to understand how it all works. Our efforts in this regard still leaves much room for improvement both in understanding and managing them.
   
   Yes it's true that when we look at the work of Maxwell and Faraday we just can't understand how they could have accomplished what they did with the crude level of experimental capacity available to them. However I think they themselves would be amazed to see how we tweaked, bent and twisted their concepts into a civilization that has elements beyond their understanding.
   
   I would imagine that Faraday would say that all he did was systematically measure some known phenomena which led him to notice and measure some others. Similarly Maxwell would probably say he just subjected Faraday's work to mathematical analysis and drew some conclusions.
   
   I am sure that both of them would say that it took real genius to build our modern society just by starting with their work. I am sure both of them would contest the notion that the internet and the web just sort of automatically follow from their work.
   
   Maxwell's kinetic theory of gases allows one to study laminar flow. That allows one to develop a properly engineered foil which, when attached to the appropriate energy source, can eventually let you put a man on the moon and then bring him back. I think Maxwell would be the first to say that there was a lot of genius and creative thinking between theory of gasses and successful reentry.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

10. 10. HubertB 10:22 AM 12/24/12

    The articles making fun of failed predictions ignore that many of the science fiction writings of Jules Verne are now ancient history. We have gone 20,000 leagues under the sea. We have gone into orbit and then to the moon. New York is now the capital of the world, or at least the headquarters of the United Nations. The rest of his predictions made 150 years ago have become possible with today's technology.
    
    Perhaps we should ask what in the background of those making successful predictions gave them that ability.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

11. 11. Steven 06:06 PM 12/31/12

    Perhaps looking forward 150 years would best be put in perspective by looking back 150 years, to the 1870's when the 7th Cavalry with Custer in command was fighting the battle of the Little Bighorn, or Custer's Last Stand, with the Sioux, using horse cavalry for transportation.
    We are still fighting wars, although we certainly a killing a lot more people now, going from the dozens or hundreds, to thousands and millions. Hopefully science will be harnessed for peace rather than war, but I expect human nature to remain the same, even in 150 years so probably will have wars.
    Will people still get married, have children. I don't know. Technologically, artificial wombs and artificial fertilization and reproductive research could result in children born without disability, and perhaps there could be an end to disease, with advancing medical technology, but would there be profit in it. Probably people will still be trying to make money.
    I remember a Star Trek episode in which a person from the past was going to come into the future with a lot of possessions, but the crew member said wealth and possessions were no longer relevant, that if someone wanted something, they would just ask for it and it would be provided through the advanced technology synthesizers.
    We might have something similar with desk top manufacturing, essentially printing out objects three dimensionally. I think that will progress, possibly with a end to a lot of light manufacturing, but you couldn't probably build a train or ship with desk top manufacturing, but possibly a lot of the parts.
    Will we still have pets, dogs or cats, or will there be computer simulations. Possibly computers will have personalities and even down load or reproduce persons identity or personality into a computer. That would depend on a lot of progress, possibly quantum computing.
    Will we find other dimensions, travel through dimensions, through time, to the future or the past.
    Far fetched for sure, but we might be able to move forward or back a few milliseconds or transit to another dimension for for a few millimeters or milliseconds.
    Will the basic structure of the universe be understood, will we use antimatter propulsion or power, interstellar rocket ships, faster than light drive.
    We might be close, but I doubt some of these things will ever be possible in our known universe.
    Maybe we will be able to move beyond our known universe, but I doubt it in 150 years.
    Communicate with the dead, or the spiritual world, really a big question, but I doubt it.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this