![]() |
Radiation from phones cant directly do anything to cells. Its just the wrong frequency.
Heating can damage cell's, but it has to be a lot. Theres also, always, the possibility of other undiscovered mechcanisms to which can cause damage, but no correlation has been found yet. (and when your talking of undiscovered ways, it equaly applys to most technology or food we use) That said, mobile phones do emit/recieve regular singals in order for the cell network to work at all. Unless they are turned off, they will be in occasionaly communication with the base tower. (in order to recieve calls they need to know what towers are near you, else nothing would reach you :p) |
Quote:
Besides, if radiation hurts us and at the same time increase sexual activity, the effect will be that the ratio of people getting harmed by radiation will increase. |
Not really related to what Jasiek said, but this reminds me of something I heard someone saying once: "if you throw all the people in the world into space, eventually they'll evolve to survive without oxygen"
That's extreme optimism, I think :p |
Evolution can work in jumps, but not that big a jump.
Purhapes if you starved all the planet of oxygen by, say, 80% there will be a handfull of the 6.5 billion of us that survive. Then if you leave those to bread for a thousand years, and repeat the process. You might get people that can survive on extremely low oxygen levels. Dont think you could ever get no oxygen. (or at least, no gas of somesort...maybe we could evolve a switch) Unless your batman... http://shortpacked.com/comics/20050131a.gif In general evolution can work fast, but only if theres also a huge number of people dieing too :p |
Actually, with enough evolution there won't be a need for oxygen. If we can make machines that can convert one element to another (that's how they make Oxygen tanks for astronauts, so I've heard), then it should also be possible for biological machines.
Of course evolution, in the traditional sense of the word, doesn't work that fast. However, evolution in the non-traditional sense can work much faster. With enough evolution, a biological heredity can evolve to be so aware of its surroundings - to the point where it is actually capable of calculating the exact way to better itself with almost no need at all for trial and error. Or in two words: Humans, Science. |
Quote:
We can, however, recovera lot of the wasted oxygen, as we breath out about 70% of what we take in. Quote:
We have already influenced plant and animal evolution by crossbreading and selection. It will be a long time before its accepted or applied for direct human maniplation of our genetics on a large scale. But it will happen. In fact I'll see many people playing with their genes,and others playing it safe. In many ways we will get a meta-evolution. Those genetic changes that fail will not reproduce,and others will be put off trying. Those that suceed will encorage others. As long as everyone dosnt try the same things at the same time, it should be fine. |
Yes.
In my (mostlikely controversial) view, even if we eliminate our own species altogether and create a much different but stronger species, we still win and it's still valid to say we evolved. Most importantly it will be a huge progress to our one true family, Bio. We're just a step in the way. I think about what Damon Lindelof (who probably wrote a lot of my favorite quotes, come to think about it) said, "denial is always the first step of grief". Humanity is currently at denial. There aren't many people who see the huge change humanity is really going through right now, how unprecedented it is. But looking back, we're all gonna say "How could we not predict that?". Quote:
|
not at the moment.
Mostly we need partical accelerators to do that, alllthough one element can decay into another if it isnt stable. Quote:
But we could split if some of us get too different. |
The Sarcos Exo-skeleton
I bet you could reload the batteries thanks to kinetics, human movement would move small generators, that load the battery for that beauty. Sheksay robot, mrrrau + crappy russian pop ;/ Funneh running robot. |
Wow, that is amazing!!
It's a pity the first thing they would do with it will be war related. |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5O6ik1Jr6E
And he can jump! :D Well, it surely won't make more wars, just less victims on A. the soldier side, and B. the civilian side, since soldiers will have more time to react and choose targets precisely. Oh, and we have to be ready when the aliens finally come to harvest us as slaves and steal our oceans. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbFFs4DHWys Stuff like this makes me wanna live there, in Japan... Plen - The Sporty Robot |
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
That's all so strange actually, almost no sci-fi movie shows humans having technology like that in the near future, it's always a property of some other "very advanced race". Ha!, a time when science outran the science fiction. |
Yes, happens more often then you expect though.
eg. In star trek they once encountered a race with an "advanced ion-drive system" OMG Gosh! We already have that -_- Also, in TNG (what 2400?) they still havnt solved Fermats Last Therom, yet we did a few years back. Anyway, typical from me, more AR! : http://www.mvs.net/index.html Quote:
The problem is seldom the technology itself. Modern missles are incredibly reliable and accurate too, but it dosnt stop the fuck-ups at the human end. |
Quote:
|
|
Uhm, just to see if I got it right:
Is this a prototype of a real flying saucer?! If so: OMG!! :eek: |
Well I don't know, it's all just still aerodynamics, but it's damn close :D.
http://www.engadget.com/2007/07/21/m...to-production/ That thing is also slick. Oh and, build your own hoverboard-plans are in here. |
Can you tell me since when hovercraft stopped being science fiction and became real?
|
Quote:
http://en.wikivisual.com/images/7/7d/USN_hovercraft.jpg http://www.hellas.org/military/navy/images/zubr-2.jpg |
Oh, those things are called hovercrafts? I guess what I had in mind was stuff like cars without wheels hovering above the ground :p
|
Quote:
|
Unfortunately, if it is possible to make anti-gravity divices they almost certainly will consume vastly more energy then other methods of flight.
Huge magnetic superconducting spinning discs are supposed to reduce gravity....by an absolutely tiny amount...and the results are disputed. I think a better bet would be to develop strong/light enough materials to hold a vacuum. Helium floats as its less dense then air, so therefore a near-vacuum would create even more buoyancy in a smaller space. The tricky bit would be withstanding the air pressure from outside, while using a material thin enough to be lighter then the air you are displacing with the vacuum. |
Yeah, vacuum air-ships would be a great idea.
Also, this little car is nice :D http://www.popularmechanics.com/auto...html?series=19 ROBOTS!! http://www.hizook.com/blog/2007/11/2...ghtweight-arms http://world.honda.com/HDTV/ASIMO/ |
All times are GMT +2. The time now is 09:30. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, the Magicball Network