progress in 21st century will be equivalent to 20,000 yrs of progress at today's rate,true or false?
81595
Balderdash and bilgewater, and bullspit. You still will need humans to implement it, and we are still slow and lazy.\n\nHave you noticed we have been in the 21st century 5 years already? Have you noticed how much more progressive we are today than 6 years ago? Or have we been slowing down? We have even tired of a military engagement after 3 years. Our focus is getting shorter, and it is still US that must use the new "progress".
181204
I'm pretty sure we're already in the 21st century, dude.\nWell anyways, in the area I live in, they're starting to require students to purchase laptops to ensure a "simpler" process.
856208
no its true this is 2045....didn't you know? :)
469227
I think the full process of growth terminates at the age of 25, when it get reversed and falls into decay. So, theoretically, I would say it is possible.
394505
1991-1999. 21st Century started in 2000.
487780
It is 100 years ago.  Each century is 100 years.  We are now in the 21st century.  That happened when we hit 2000.  The millennium.  So the 20th century was between 1900 and 2000.  100 years.
720766
Probably somewhat different, but not TOO much different than today.\n\nTechnology moves fast, big big things that completely change things (such as a human-computer bio interface) won't probably be around for 50+ years.\n\nOur computers will work faster, be smaller, and do more than they do now, but unfortunately, in 20 years, you probably won't be able to clip your computer to your ear as you're walking out the door.\n\nIf computers changed rapidly like that, the price would also go WAY up, to accommodate the highly changed technology.  So the tech companies will probably phase this technology in slowly.\n\nPretty sad.  But right now, I'd be happy with a 6 hour laptop battery that comes standard.
220008
go to newsfutures.com  - 91% of the time the consensus ends up being the correct answer so it's kind of money in the bank - if you really do want to know the future.
1087116
the future is now the past
588448
Mankind will probably be able to go there, but it is quite far in the future - I'd say at least 20 to 25 years away.  Whether or not interest in doing so continues will depend on what is going on right here on earth, and whether we have the will to spend the money on the project.
551457
When spending 20 million dollars become commonplace in the future.
409713
In 20 years, the Internet likely won't exist in the same way as it does now.  We will be accessing all the Internet information through portable devices instead of huge klunky computers that are strapped to a desk.  Think of something the size of the PSP that is as powerful as the fastest desktop on the market today with complete wireless networking from anywhere.\n\nAlso, computers with wireless networking will be built into the dash of most cars in 20 years.\n\nOf course, that all assumes we eliminate our dependance on fossil fuels.  If we can't find an alternative fuel source to run our power grid, cars and transportation system, we may not need to worry about computers in 20 years as the oil may be drying up leaving no way to operate our economy.
892801
i think the world is going down hill fast i think 20 yrs ago was alot better really...technology is nice but it has took over so much people can't seem to live without it
533842
In short, you can't be 100% certain, but a very long term trend would have to break unpredictably for it not to be.  Read on for details.\n\nThere is, as you have pointed out, substantial evidence that the universe is expanding. To understand how we surmise that it is still expanding in spite of the "old news" effect (most of the measurements of expansion rely on light that left its sources hundreds of millions to billions of years ago) you need to understand some of the details of how we quantify the expansion.\n\nThe expansion rate is quantified in units of velocity/distance. The Hubble constant, for instance is generally expressed in units of km/s per mega-parsec (1 Mpc = 3.27 million ly = 3.086x10^22 meters).  The current value for the Hubble constant is ~70 km/s per Mpc by our most accurate measurements. This means that on average, for every megaparsec  of distance ***an object that is not gravitationally bound to our observation point*** recedes at about 70 km/s. \n\nWe can also estimate the rate of change in the Hubble constant.  For instance, as something made of mass (such as the universe) expands, its own gravity is fighting that expansion and slowing it down. It might not be enough to halt the expansion, or it might be.  This is the distinction between an open universe that expands forever, a closed universe that falls within its own Schwarzschild radius and eventually will contract, and a flat Universe that will expand forever but is slowing at a rate such that the expansion will halt at infinite time. \n\nWe find the change in the Hubble constant  by measuring the recessional velocity (from which you can find the Hubble  constant) for  more distant objects. The more distant, the longer ago the light left that object, permitting us to calculate what the Hubble constant was in the past.\n\nIt is this sort of data that has recently shown us that not only did the expansion of the universe not slow as much as expected for the given mass present, about 5 billion years ago it appears the expansion began to accelerate.\n\nBut what about today?  With all these data from sources that are millions to billions of light years away, how do we know that, say yesterday, it didn't stop expanding?\nWe don't know for sure, however we have measured the trends of the expansion over time, and those trends would have to change VERY dramatically due to some unanticipated phenomenon.  The universe's expansion over time follows a fairly simple relationship, and has followed it for over 13 billion years. When we look as close as a hundred million parsecs, there is a clear expansion that follows this trend.  The trend would have had to change suddenly and unpredictably, in fairly recent (cosmologically speaking) history for it to now be contracting.\n\nThis would be analogous to tracking a projectile flying from the muzzle of a gun for 30 feet towards a target.  We have taken into consideration wind speed, gravity, muzzle velocity and so far the course is precisely as we predicted. Then, with 6" to go something happens that causes the projectile to deviate from its course significantly.  Perhaps a bird falls out of the sky, or there was a block of glass in front of the target that we did not see. That is how sudden a change we would need to explain why the universe is no longer expanding if it isn't expanding today, when it WAS expanding just 50 million years ago at the end of a 13.65 billion year trend.\n\nSo, you are right.  It might not be expanding, however a far simpler interpretation of the data is that the trend we have observed over a billions of years time scale has continued for the last 100 million.
140027
about 12-19% over the next 5 years
869096
It is clearly true.\nThe halflife is the amount of time it takes for half of the atoms in a sample to decay. But it does not mean that the other half will be gone in the second period of time, only half of what is remaining.\nSo in 24,000 years you will have 1/2, in another 24,000 years you will have 1/2 of that, or 1/4. In another 24,000 years you will have half of that or 1/8. In another 24,000 years you will have 1/16, and when 100,000 years is past, you will have between 1/16 and 1/32 of the original amount.\n\nThe link has educational illustrations of the process.\n\n;-D It is better not to make any in the first place!
1172383
A.\n\nIn 19 years, it went up by a factor of 31.948.\n\n31.948^(1/19) = 1.20 = 20% increase every year.\nIn another 20 years, that's 31948 * (1.2^20) = 1224810