Does anyone feel like nothing groundbreaking has been recently invented

[Kulindahr]

The next world-transforming invention will be a cable strong and durable enough for building an elevator to orbit. That will reduce the cost of getting to orbit by over 90%, and allow us to mine the solar system for needed resources instead of messing up the earth. It would also allow the development of retirement facilities in the equivalent of lunar gravity, allowing people to age without all the associated pain of a deteriorating body. It will make possible repair of the ozone layer and adjustment of the incoming sunlight to offset global warming. It will make possible the establishment not just of a base but a real colony on the moon, one that could be visited by people from earth not at the cost of millions, but of thousands. It will make the solar system the actual property of humanity.

 

[somerandomguy07]

Blocking HIV's Attack: Scientific American

We talked about these guys' work in my microbiology course when we went into immunology; it's some good shit. It may not be "groundbreaking" by your standards, but you would be completely in the wrong to think that science (and let's say society, at that) ever ceases to progress. Our world would be disordered if inventions were employed in the quickness that an idea is formed; arduous testing and analysis must ensue. So to attribute these inventions and developments to a single year.. well, I laugh at that.

 

[Benvolio]

We are still exploring the the full applicability of the internet and cell technology and all that they have spawned. Who would have dreamed even a few years ago that my iPad could explore the internet, be a computer, show movies. take photos and movies, send and receive email, and a bunch of stuff I don't even know about. Some of the biggest inventions will be small improvements in our existing devices.

 

[Kulindahr]

We are still exploring the the full applicability of the internet and cell technology and all that they have spawned. Who would have dreamed even a few years ago that my iPad could explore the internet, be a computer, show movies. take photos and movies, send and receive email, and a bunch of stuff I don't even know about. Some of the biggest inventions will be small improvements in our existing devices.

Science fiction writer Orson Scott Card did, in the '80s.

 

[Kulindahr]

The recent discovery and potential utilization of Majorana fermions in quantum computing. See: First hint of Majorana fermions spotted in nanowires

The first functional fusion furnace at Cadarache, France. See: the ITER website.


Remember sometimes discoveries, inventions, and developments are sudden and unpredictable. Often they depend on groundbreaking research in physics, medicine, chemistry, etc. There is no telling what our level of technology will be like in 10 years. Our lives may not be radically different than say in 50 years, but there should be some exciting new gadgets, upgrades to the ones we have, or other uses of technology in our daily lives.

Wikipedia has a pretty good article on ITER: ITER - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I still think they should have gone with a design that allowed for doing something with the heat generated, rather than just "disposing of it.


Thinking of exciting new gadgets, the Pentagon is confident that they'll have weapons run by thought by the end of the decade, and others believe the same technology could be used to give us mental control over our household appliances via chips implanted under the skin next to the skull.

 

[nondescript]

the ipad will change your life, if you let it.
of course, you have to allow it into your life, first.

 

[canesnbeach]

I've always though ITER was a little overrated, though it's a great thing we're still pursuing it. The National Ignition Facility has kinda flown under the radar, but they have a strong chance of sustained fusion some time in the near future.

Re: Cern and the LHC, that has been a greater cause of headache, still failing to find anything of great value. At the huge energies they're working, they should've found something by now. Without a change in their approach, I think they're dead in the water.

The next big thing will be something none of us expect, as has been the case through history.

 

[CowboyBob]

What's left to be invented? There's a quote from someone in the 1800's that said there's nothing remaining to be invented because everything already has. Can't find a link to it tho.

UPDATE:

Here's a link to something...

http://inventors.about.com/library/lessons/bl_appendix5.htm

That a Patent Office official resigned and recommended that the Patent Office be closed because he thought that everything that could possibly be invented had already been invented!

In 1843!

ADDED MORE:

I see it's an urban legend:

http://www.myoutbox.net/posass.htm

 

[JB3]

I've always though ITER was a little overrated, though it's a great thing we're still pursuing it. The National Ignition Facility has kinda flown under the radar, but they have a strong chance of sustained fusion some time in the near future.

Re: Cern and the LHC, that has been a greater cause of headache, still failing to find anything of great value. At the huge energies they're working, they should've found something by now. Without a change in their approach, I think they're dead in the water.

The next big thing will be something none of us expect, as has been the case through history.

They've found more than any other particle collider in history, and they've barely scratched the surface. They are closer to finding Higgs-boson than ever before, and they're also planning for the next stage in the LHC's expansion, which will provide even greater capability.

One thing you have to understand is that the LHC produces vast amounts of data that take a long period to go through. Just because we haven't heard of any earth shattering breakthrough doesn't mean that it hasn't happened yet.

 

[Kulindahr]

The next big thing will be something none of us expect, as has been the case through history.

The next big thing has already been written about by a serious science fiction author. The trouble is knowing which thing it is.

 

[canesnbeach]

@ JB3

My point wasn't that the LHC hasn't found anything, it's that it hasn't found 'anything of great value'. There's a difference. Every particle they observe has been predicted to exist by the Standard Model, so all they've done is provide confirmatory evidence. That's a great feat, surely, and necessary so the theorists know which avenues to pursue; but it's still not revolutionary. Besides, at the energies they're probing (TeVs in the double digits), they should've had conclusive evidence of the Higgs already. Maybe if they spent more time analyzing data and refining protocol, rather than measuring dicks with Fermilab, we'd have something substantial by now.

 

[Kulindahr]

@ JB3

My point wasn't that the LHC hasn't found anything, it's that it hasn't found 'anything of great value'. There's a difference. Every particle they observe has been predicted to exist by the Standard Model, so all they've done is provide confirmatory evidence. That's a great feat, surely, and necessary so the theorists know which avenues to pursue; but it's still not revolutionary. Besides, at the energies they're probing (TeVs in the double digits), they should've had conclusive evidence of the Higgs already. Maybe if they spent more time analyzing data and refining protocol, rather than measuring dicks with Fermilab, we'd have something substantial by now.

I know they've excluded some regions where the Higgs could have been found, but I hadn't seen that they'd covered all the regions. I know on something like this they tend to be very thorough and methodical; I was under the impression that they hadn't covered all the energies that needed investigation.

 

[JB3]

@ JB3

My point wasn't that the LHC hasn't found anything, it's that it hasn't found 'anything of great value'. There's a difference. Every particle they observe has been predicted to exist by the Standard Model, so all they've done is provide confirmatory evidence. That's a great feat, surely, and necessary so the theorists know which avenues to pursue; but it's still not revolutionary. Besides, at the energies they're probing (TeVs in the double digits), they should've had conclusive evidence of the Higgs already. Maybe if they spent more time analyzing data and refining protocol, rather than measuring dicks with Fermilab, we'd have something substantial by now.

Fermilab could only do so much. A much more powerful collider was necessary, and the death of the SSC necessitated its construction. (that, and the economic climate towards science in the US isn't remotely adequate to support the investment Fermilab needs)

I also think you're underestimating how revolutionary the supplying of that evidence is. We're talking about the unraveling of the universe and matter here; any evidence that a device that the LHC provides is itself revolutionary. Every confirmation of theory is a step towards greater scientific discovery.

 

[palbert]

Not a discovery but a great improvement: 30-day time release oxycontin/oxycodone, OTC.