Bungie Universe
This topic has moved here: Subject: Do you think our technology will match that of the UNSC in 500 years?
  • Subject: Do you think our technology will match that of the UNSC in 500 years?
Subject: Do you think our technology will match that of the UNSC in 500 years?

Spartans never die... they just revert to last checkpoint.


Posted by: That Atheist
Posted by: Apocalypse 1313
Augmentation will likely be a very common process.

Indeed...regulations will be required to prevent...deformations


Think about plastic surgery. People are always gonna wanna be better than they currently are. Its part of the competition instinct.

  • 04.15.2011 1:49 AM PDT
  • gamertag: sum0ne
  • user homepage:

Thanks for Team Snipers Bungie.
Mythic Member, Legendary Member and back and forth. i just can't make up my mind!
Campaign - Halo C.E.>Halo 2>Halo 3
Multiplayer - Halo 2>Halo 3>Halo C.E.
Just about every thing I post is my opinion and nothing more. Be subjective. Respect other's opinions. Try to understand other's point of view.

Posted by: EnragedElite67
I don't really get where your going with the nuclear age thing, just because we have nuclear weapons doesn't mean we can't innovate technologies (Just look at the Cold War).In the nuclear age unless a country wants mutually assured destruction they will not send nukes unless it is supported. Russia will not nuke the US since we would nuke them back. World is gone, only someone who is extremely stupid or crazy would do that. And it isn't to a certain degree, that is a fact war=great advancements in technology. Look at what the internet was originally, look at radar, lots of our technology we use was once developed strictly for war purposes.
First I'll say I really hope you are right but I'm not so sure. All it takes is one leader of a smaller country with nukes to start some thing that will essentially put us back to the bronze age. North Korea, Pakistan, etc... Do you think that if Saddam would have had the opportunity to hit the U.S. with nukes he would have? Of course. Honestly, I really hope you are right.

My point is that war does bring technological advances but a nuclear war would pretty much set humanity back for a long, long time.

  • 04.15.2011 5:24 PM PDT

'There are many aspects of the universe that still cannot be explained satisfactorily by science; but ignorance only implies ignorance that may someday be conquered. To surrender to ignorance and call it God has always been premature, and it remains premature today.'
-Isaac Asimov

Posted by: notnooborelite
Posted by: EnragedElite67
I don't really get where your going with the nuclear age thing, just because we have nuclear weapons doesn't mean we can't innovate technologies (Just look at the Cold War).In the nuclear age unless a country wants mutually assured destruction they will not send nukes unless it is supported. Russia will not nuke the US since we would nuke them back. World is gone, only someone who is extremely stupid or crazy would do that. And it isn't to a certain degree, that is a fact war=great advancements in technology. Look at what the internet was originally, look at radar, lots of our technology we use was once developed strictly for war purposes.
First I'll say I really hope you are right but I'm not so sure. All it takes is one leader of a smaller country with nukes to start some thing that will essentially put us back to the bronze age. North Korea, Pakistan, etc... Do you think that if Saddam would have had the opportunity to hit the U.S. with nukes he would have? Of course. Honestly, I really hope you are right.

My point is that war does bring technological advances but a nuclear war would pretty much set humanity back for a long, long time.

Yea like I sad a crazy man Kim Jong Il..... one of those idiots. Nuclear war oh now that clarifies it up yes a nuclear war would destroy human civilization. Since it wouldn't really be a war it would just be Mutually Assured Destruction.

  • 04.15.2011 8:08 PM PDT

919263146451025311493204END
1119996204135253422342538320242END
10234254236384412425512455175END
919525486131742032515267END

The truth is, none of us will ever know, because none of us will be alive in that time. We might be looking down, but that's our best bet.

  • 04.15.2011 8:45 PM PDT

Frankly I think Star Trek tech is more of what we're going towards. (aside from maybe warp drive)

  • 04.15.2011 8:52 PM PDT

Et Eärello Endorenna utúlien.
Sinome maruvan ar Hildinyar.
tenn' Ambar-metta!

I say probably would be around the same as the UNSC.

  • 04.15.2011 8:57 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I like the Mk V armor.

Totally, we already have lasers. But, in space, no way. We won;t have those types of ships that powerful, Macs aren't actually possible, And I doubt we'll manipulate worm-holes to send bombs in strong enough to erase Jupiter(Even if it was solid).

  • 04.16.2011 12:39 AM PDT

no. nonono

Posted by: Primo84
In terms of vehicles, weaponry, and overall technology, much better. Although this is assuming we discover a viable alternate energy source to replace fossil fuels.

Super soldiers, interstellar space travel, and vacuum combat? Let's just say I wont hold my breath.
Yeah, pretty much what I was thinking.

  • 04.16.2011 12:40 AM PDT


Posted by: egore11
Macs aren't actually possible


O RLY?

  • 04.16.2011 12:53 AM PDT

I hope we can get off the planet in 500 years. If not, we might be all different kinds of screwed.

I'd rather have our technology get to the levels of pre-Halo firing humans.

  • 04.16.2011 12:59 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Nate Cleaves

NASA was going to colonise mars in 2020, but Obama canceled the mission when 75% of it was already done! The question is not if we can, but would we actually do it. If we really want to, we can colonise mars in the next 30 years. Also ftl obeys the laws of phisics, mabey not in the halo way though. It will be more like warp drive in star trek. Matter cannot go beyond the speed of light, but we can warp space so that the space we are on is going ftl reletive to the outside universe. Ever hear of inflation?

[Edited on 04.16.2011 6:07 AM PDT]

  • 04.16.2011 6:07 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Nate Cleaves

The Human race is in the most exposed, most dangerous time period it will ever experience. We have the capability to destroy the only planet we are on, and poorer, more extremist nations are getting control of that capability. If we are able to colonise at least 1 other planet we will be past that.

  • 04.16.2011 6:10 AM PDT

I'm dual-weildin' mah SMG's!

Assuming that Chickenpede doesn't destroy us all by then, I think it wil be similar. Guns and Overall tech is better, we can build large spaceships and can take large amounts of civilians into space. Colonization is a maybe if we find another hospitable planet (Unless Mars has Water and we can Sterilize Venus or something). Plasma Weapons is a maybe, but not like a handgun.

However, things like Slipspace, Halo arrays, Portals...I have doubts.

  • 04.16.2011 6:48 AM PDT
  • gamertag: Poy357
  • user homepage:

We would definitely have established life on other planets.

Perhaps we would be slightly more advanced than the UNSC and reached Covenant level of weaponry ,shields and technology ,but I doubt we unlocked the secret of faster-than-light travel by then.

  • 04.16.2011 8:47 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

"Time was your ally human. But now it has abandoned you. The Forerunners....have returned. And this tomb... is now yours". - The Didact


Posted by: MMO

Posted by: hotshot revan II

Posted by: MMO

Posted by: hotshot revan II
US focusses more on war then space colonisation.

If the world keeps being that stupid,humans will die out.


Not going to deny it, but your spelling makes you seem like an angry Briton.

Anyways, considering we have 70% of the technology in Halo already (at the very least in it's earliest stages of development) assuming we don't blow ourselves up, and can find a decent energy source, we should outpace Halo in 500 years.


-Why?

-UNSC have colonised 800 planets,terraformed most of them and build entire cities on them and provide food for billions of peope on these planets.

-Focussed, colonised, typical "all wars are America's fault attitude"

-800 planets within UNSC territory =/= 800 planets colonized. Not to mention that the UNSC has a lot of planets like Harvest, almost solely dedicated to producing agricultural goods for the rest of the UNSC.
In these days,we can barely give food to a few millions of poor people around the world.So just having a decent energy source isn't enough,a good step but not even enough.

What's the point of having just an energy source,if you continue to use it for warfare?Discard your weapon research foolish Humans.

A large part of my energy source comment involved Earth just surviving the next few centuries. Without a cleaner, less limited replacement for oil, which oh so much of our technology runs on, we probably won't last the next 500 years.

And in a society without war, there is constant over-population and scramble for resources. Humanity cannot sustain itself without war. Even assuming we covered every solid mass in the galaxy with farms and houses, eventually we'd run out of something we need to survive.


-Ok

-There were 210 inner colonies alo,e and those planets were populated by millions of people.Which is pretty impressive,if the UNSC was stupid like us like "omg we need better weapons to kill ourselfs" then they wouldn't have survived.
Oh and all of those 800 planets were colonised.
http://www.halowars.com/gameinfo/timeline2.aspx

-Terrible excuse,if war is your first priority then Humans wlll either nuke themself back to stoneage or wipe themself out.Even in war period ,Human population can increase alot.Just look at WOII ,it didn't stopped us from reaching 7 billion of people,even some countries in Africa where there is constant rebellion,yet the population our there increases massively.But unless it's a genocide offcourse.

Colonisation is the first priority,look at now,we can't even feed millions of Humans here,meanwhile oil is running out and idiot governements focus on warfare instead of clean energy.
I'm looking at you USA.

  • 04.16.2011 9:03 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

"Time was your ally human. But now it has abandoned you. The Forerunners....have returned. And this tomb... is now yours". - The Didact

Who said that we will reach the level of the Forerunners and Covenant?

I want humanity see constructing entire artifial planets and create superweapons that can damage the precursors,who -blam!- up with the laws of physics.

  • 04.16.2011 9:04 AM PDT

"Find where the liar hides, so that I may place my boot between his gums!" - Rtas 'Vadum

Posted by: hotshot revan II
-There were 210 inner colonies alo,e and those planets were populated by millions of people.Which is pretty impressive,if the UNSC was stupid like us like "omg we need better weapons to kill ourselfs" then they wouldn't have survived.
Oh and all of those 800 planets were colonised.
http://www.halowars.com/gameinfo/timeline2.aspx

Read that again. The worlds went from fortress worlds to tiny, desolate populations - barely suitable to called a colony, more like outpost worlds. It also says the territory covers 800 worlds. Any planet that is in a Human system will be classified as a Human world, even though it is no inhabited. In the future we could lay claim to this solar system in which all 8 planets would be human controlled worlds, even though the 4 Gas giants would have no one living on them.

Posted by: hotshot revan II
Colonisation is the first priority,look at now,we can't even feed millions of Humans here,

There is plenty of food here. Take sub-Saharan Africa as an example. The problem is due to distribution and inflation. The infrastructure of these countries is poor, so food cannot get to where it is needed most. Inflation means that the cost of living skyrockets. In Zimbabwe there is plenty of food, the problem is, is that a loaf of bread can cost 2 million dollars.

Posted by: hotshot revan II
meanwhile oil is running out and idiot governements focus on warfare instead of clean energy.

You will now swallow those words.

Posted by: hotshot revan II
Who said that we will reach the level of the Forerunners and Covenant?

I want humanity see constructing entire artifial planets and create superweapons that can damage the precursors,who -blam!- up with the laws of physics.

How can Humanity in the future damage that which does not exist?

[Edited on 04.16.2011 9:54 AM PDT]

  • 04.16.2011 9:42 AM PDT

Some of the UNSC technology seem ridiculously below what it should be.

  • 04.16.2011 11:25 AM PDT

Technology has advanced tremendously and in 15 years I bet people could live in the international space station and in 20 travel off planet!

  • 04.16.2011 1:14 PM PDT

we have had the tech for hover cars since the 60s the reason we dont have them is because people cant drive regular cars to begin with. why would they release a vehicle that can hover if we can control something that is on the ground to begin with???

  • 04.16.2011 3:37 PM PDT

So do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us...


Posted by: cameo_cream
FTL drives are also a very real possibility. Without getting all technical, the physics are theoretically possible.


No, they're not. Mass Dilation, google it.

  • 04.16.2011 4:19 PM PDT

"Peace, gentlemen...
Peace is the ultimate goal of the Traxus Project.
Peace not in our time but in the future.
Future generations will benefit from the work begun here today.
Gentlemen, I give you the Traxus Project"

Well....similar, equal, or above would require that FTL travel be achieved.

That is something I believe will never really happen.

Furthermore, I don't believe there are likely to be any really tenable extra-planetary colonies, let alone interstellar.
People are pretty much just too *blam* arrogant and stubborn to see any light of reason or truth beyond the reach of their own egos.

...but it is nice to have d.r.e.a.m.s..isn't it?

[Edited on 04.16.2011 4:31 PM PDT]

  • 04.16.2011 4:19 PM PDT

AT-AT walkers: killing rebels since 1861

It all kind of depends on the invention of faster than light travel. Other than that, yes. I imagine it to be similar to the technology in Hamilton's "Reality Dysfunction"

  • 04.16.2011 4:21 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

*cough* Back to the Future Part II, 2001 Space Odyssey, <insert any other book/movie written about mankind in the future>

The point I'm trying to make is that in general movies and books overestimate our future technological achievements.

[Edited on 04.16.2011 4:32 PM PDT]

  • 04.16.2011 4:26 PM PDT

"Peace, gentlemen...
Peace is the ultimate goal of the Traxus Project.
Peace not in our time but in the future.
Future generations will benefit from the work begun here today.
Gentlemen, I give you the Traxus Project"


Posted by: Strike Force
*cough* Back to the Future Part II, 2001 Space Odyssey, <insert any other book/movie written by mankind in the future>

The point I'm trying to make is that in general movies and books overestimate our future technological achievements.



Indeed so.

  • 04.16.2011 4:31 PM PDT