Xerox, your logic has no basis. The men who are investing in the product are wealthy individuals who are willing to try new things as they each did with their own companies. You have to look at all the evidence, not just one minute bit.
glenn1
Lifer
- Sep 6, 2000
- 25,383
- 1,013
- 126
If this isn't a fraud, the idea that Floydian postulated seems most reasonable... "I'm taking a guess at a power source - maybe one like the Tesla Coil? Wireless power?"
Just think of the effect being able to utilize a power source from a remote location would be. It would actually make practical and reasonable the idea of a scooter transport device (since it wouldn't need to carry as cargo it's own power generation source). No need for gasoline-powered tools or vehicles, and additionally, being able to supply electricity to any item without a power cord or batteries, would represent the sweeping change which was spoken of.
The re-engineering of cities that was spoken of, could be necessitated by a need for line-of-sight from the supply point. That means that high-rise construction would need to be phased out.
The two different models of Ginger spoken of could represent different applications of the above principle... one could be a transport device, the other a general-purpose power supplying unit (for power on the go, such as to run a computing device). Think of that possiblity - the ability to have a man portable source of electricity with you everywhere you went, that didn't need to generate it's own power by combustion or other methods. That would represent a fundamental change in the way humans interact with their environment for sure.
Would such a prospect endanger other industries? Sure would. Would there be concerns by governments and other parties? Sure would - look at the fit Europeans are having about bioengineered foods. You don't think that they would have a cow thinking about electricity that could be trasmitted wirelessly? Intriguing enough to attract the interest of folks like Jeff Bezos, and even amusing? Sure... the concept is so simple (in theory anyway), and the possibilities so great, that it would be tough for someone like Jeff not too laugh. "My God, it's such a simple idea! Why didn't i think of it?"
Just think of the effect being able to utilize a power source from a remote location would be. It would actually make practical and reasonable the idea of a scooter transport device (since it wouldn't need to carry as cargo it's own power generation source). No need for gasoline-powered tools or vehicles, and additionally, being able to supply electricity to any item without a power cord or batteries, would represent the sweeping change which was spoken of.
The re-engineering of cities that was spoken of, could be necessitated by a need for line-of-sight from the supply point. That means that high-rise construction would need to be phased out.
The two different models of Ginger spoken of could represent different applications of the above principle... one could be a transport device, the other a general-purpose power supplying unit (for power on the go, such as to run a computing device). Think of that possiblity - the ability to have a man portable source of electricity with you everywhere you went, that didn't need to generate it's own power by combustion or other methods. That would represent a fundamental change in the way humans interact with their environment for sure.
Would such a prospect endanger other industries? Sure would. Would there be concerns by governments and other parties? Sure would - look at the fit Europeans are having about bioengineered foods. You don't think that they would have a cow thinking about electricity that could be trasmitted wirelessly? Intriguing enough to attract the interest of folks like Jeff Bezos, and even amusing? Sure... the concept is so simple (in theory anyway), and the possibilities so great, that it would be tough for someone like Jeff not too laugh. "My God, it's such a simple idea! Why didn't i think of it?"
heh, though this one is weird, I was reminded by that tesla coil of a recent invention.
guiding electric flow through air, using a Laser beam (I think it was a laser beam).
they were testing it a while back, getting it to work properly, and basically the shock of electricity (or lightning, or whatever you want to call it), tends to follow the path of the Laser, because the gas that the Laser goes through becomes ionized, therefor effecting the conductivity of that gas where the laser beam is, therefor in effect, 'guiding' electricity in air.
however, I do not know much more beyond that, I don't even think they were using a laser as the 'guidance' device, but becuase I do not know all the properties and effects of a laser in air, I cannot be sure if I heard right.
guiding electric flow through air, using a Laser beam (I think it was a laser beam).
they were testing it a while back, getting it to work properly, and basically the shock of electricity (or lightning, or whatever you want to call it), tends to follow the path of the Laser, because the gas that the Laser goes through becomes ionized, therefor effecting the conductivity of that gas where the laser beam is, therefor in effect, 'guiding' electricity in air.
however, I do not know much more beyond that, I don't even think they were using a laser as the 'guidance' device, but becuase I do not know all the properties and effects of a laser in air, I cannot be sure if I heard right.
<< Dude, he's right, they really were real, I swear. They used magnets. They had to lay down special surfaces underneath to make them work. You couldn't use them in real life unless there were surfaces, so there wasn't a market except for people with as much money as movie studios. I saw a thing about it on TV once. >>
At first I was amused. VERY amused. Now I'm just SAD that there are still people who BELIEVE this. Dear Lord. :disgust:
By the way....as even the most TRIVIAL experimentation with magnets will tell you, laying down special electromagnetic surfaces and putting a "hoverboard" (ROFL) with magnet over it would have one effect: The "hoverboard" would spring up very quickly, FLIP OVER, and SLAM into the other magnet. Opposites attract. There's no way you could stabilize the board to "hover." It would immediately turn itself to attract the board, and if the electromagnets were even close to strong enough to make the board hover and support a person, there would be NO WAY you'd be picking that board back up without turning the "special surface" off. --And the force of the magnets would be more than enough to throw the "rider" of the board and flip the board whether there was a rider on it or not.
Ricky
DesignDawg
This is ludicrous! We all know that only the Bitboys possess the power to create a technological product that will change the world and that is true. 
Magnetic Levitation "hover boards" -- Tee-hee. Looks like fun, but, as has been pointed out, it only works in movieland. Take a look at the way a mag-lev train works. Now there ARE working versions of those. It takes one heck of an investment in a supporting infrastructure to make one of these puppies work, however. But, if I agree to suspend disbelief in the improbable / impossible (like I do at the movies, if I can force myself), I still have to ask those who favor this idea just how it would revolutionize this society's cities. The report didn't say that this would revolutionize the way pre-teen and teenaged boys live in cities. It said that it would revolutionize city life. Those little blue-haired ladies peering out through the space between the top of the Buick dashboard and the top of the steering wheel ain't gonna be flying around on hover boards. Nor is Joe Wall-Street.
Some of the assertions made here about "teleportation" are simply not based in fact. No "thing", in any conventional sense, has ever been teleported. (Or, if it has, there has been no credible report of a verifiable process for accomplishing such a feat.) I suspect that a widely circulated report about near-instantaneous PHOTON displacement is the basis of this rumor. Though high energy physicists like to talk about the dual nature of energy / matter and the fact that photons display characteristics of both, there's no doubt that a photon is very different, in a practical sense, from a "thing" -- at least from the human perspective. I would say that teleportation is not a long way off. I would say that it's infinitely far off, if we're talking about the "beam me up, Scotty" variety. I suspect that, like many other such flights of fancy, there may eventually be a methodology that accomplishes the near-instantaneous transposition of an object from one point in this space to another point in this space. But that methodology will be quite different from the current unsophisticated (to the point of being absolutely silly) concept. When men first thought of flying to the moon, they thought they'd get there on wings or by being projected from the mouth of a cannon in a bullet-like device. I suspect that it is actually possible to send a man to the moon in a cannon projectile, given sufficient advances in materials science, but I don't think he'd enjoy the ride. However, I suspect that his condition when he arrived on Luna would be considerably better than the condition of the unfortunate soul who gets teleported there! Those who doubt me should consider the energy equivalence of matter, not to mention the complexity of the control issues involved.
The transfer of energy through the air is not a new concept. As has been mentioned, Tesla was high on the idea. (One of his experiments along these lines caused a heck of a structural fire that annoyed his neighbors no end.) Devices on the ground have been powered by microwave transmission from space. (I know of one experiment in Japan.) Doesn't seem like a very practical concept for powering transportation devices on the surface of a planet. Someone mentioned the need to do away with tall structures to enable line-of-sight energy transmission. How about the people? What a way to get a tan, from the inside out!!! The point is, if it's enough energy to power a vehicle, it's too much to beam through people, unless you like them "well-done".
I'm hoping that it is a super-efficient (and reasonably safe) mode of personal transportation. (The idea of the "Metro" version costing $2,000 would seem to rule out mass transportation, unless the cost estimate refers to individual modules in a mass transit system. Doesn't seem likely.) In a world where some people are still starving and where many grow up without decent housing or clothing or education, I get really tired of seeing two ton SUVs belching pollutants, squandering fossil fuels, increasing the risk of death by crushing to everyone in sight, and piloted by lone occupants talking on their cell phones. Fad or not, that stupidity needs to stop.
Regards,
Jim
Some of the assertions made here about "teleportation" are simply not based in fact. No "thing", in any conventional sense, has ever been teleported. (Or, if it has, there has been no credible report of a verifiable process for accomplishing such a feat.) I suspect that a widely circulated report about near-instantaneous PHOTON displacement is the basis of this rumor. Though high energy physicists like to talk about the dual nature of energy / matter and the fact that photons display characteristics of both, there's no doubt that a photon is very different, in a practical sense, from a "thing" -- at least from the human perspective. I would say that teleportation is not a long way off. I would say that it's infinitely far off, if we're talking about the "beam me up, Scotty" variety. I suspect that, like many other such flights of fancy, there may eventually be a methodology that accomplishes the near-instantaneous transposition of an object from one point in this space to another point in this space. But that methodology will be quite different from the current unsophisticated (to the point of being absolutely silly) concept. When men first thought of flying to the moon, they thought they'd get there on wings or by being projected from the mouth of a cannon in a bullet-like device. I suspect that it is actually possible to send a man to the moon in a cannon projectile, given sufficient advances in materials science, but I don't think he'd enjoy the ride. However, I suspect that his condition when he arrived on Luna would be considerably better than the condition of the unfortunate soul who gets teleported there! Those who doubt me should consider the energy equivalence of matter, not to mention the complexity of the control issues involved.
The transfer of energy through the air is not a new concept. As has been mentioned, Tesla was high on the idea. (One of his experiments along these lines caused a heck of a structural fire that annoyed his neighbors no end.) Devices on the ground have been powered by microwave transmission from space. (I know of one experiment in Japan.) Doesn't seem like a very practical concept for powering transportation devices on the surface of a planet. Someone mentioned the need to do away with tall structures to enable line-of-sight energy transmission. How about the people? What a way to get a tan, from the inside out!!! The point is, if it's enough energy to power a vehicle, it's too much to beam through people, unless you like them "well-done".
I'm hoping that it is a super-efficient (and reasonably safe) mode of personal transportation. (The idea of the "Metro" version costing $2,000 would seem to rule out mass transportation, unless the cost estimate refers to individual modules in a mass transit system. Doesn't seem likely.) In a world where some people are still starving and where many grow up without decent housing or clothing or education, I get really tired of seeing two ton SUVs belching pollutants, squandering fossil fuels, increasing the risk of death by crushing to everyone in sight, and piloted by lone occupants talking on their cell phones. Fad or not, that stupidity needs to stop.
Regards,
Jim
ninjazed:
One more thing. So what if AnandTech readers let their imaginations fly? OctoberBlue seems a bit too smug
I guess I can see where that post came off sounding smug. That wasn't my intention though. One challenge of this medium is the absence of tone-of-voice and facial expressions. I really wasn't being smug, and I wasn't trying to squelch anyone's imagination.
Actually I think it's pretty cool that people are coming up with all kinds of wild ideas. Maybe that's the biggest value of IT right now: it's giving us a chance to flex our imaginations.
It's just that as I'm reading some of the posts, and thinking, "hey, that's a pretty cool idea", at the same time I keep going back to the incredibly over-the-top, outrageous hype surrounding this thing as presented in that first article.
So the point of my last comment was basically that I have to believe, as people are writing about unicycles and scooters, that the people doing the writing are thinking something like, "Yeah, this will be a pretty cool device, but boy the hype sure was over the top."
I have to believe that no one is thinking, "Yeah, and five years from now there won't be any buses or cars or airplanes. We'll all be riding around on motorized rollerskates!" If anyone is thinking somehting like that, well, I can't apologize for offending them because any kind of reality check would.
Soccerman:
Cold Fusion, who gives a damn, when REAL fusion is about 10 years away anyway.
But cold fusion would be better than ordinary fusion, because you don't have to build enourmous, reactor-type facilities to contain it. Even way back in the early '80s the pop science magazines were speculating about it as a portable, limitless source of energy. floydian said "I'm taking a guess at a power source" and you yourself said, "more money the MS in 5 years? no problem, have you any idea how HUGE the Automotive and Oil industries are? the internet is PUNY compared to them."
That's exactly my point. An energy source of this magnitude would take away a huge portion of that oil industry money. A big reason for them to try and stop it. It would also fit the description: environment enhanced by energy without pollution, no more drilling oil or strip mining coal, campuses and cities retro-fitted for it, etc. Did you ever see the movie "Chain Reacion"?
With all this, I still don't think it's cold fusion. I actually think it's a hoax or marketing ploy of some kind. But I don't want to be too dogmatic. How about this: What if it's a very advanced holograph machine?
This could explain the laughter, especially if the initial demonstration included something like the participants suddenly seeing themselves in 3D, as if a twin were there, or maybe some humorous trick like placing their heads on Arnold Schwarzenegger's body or something.
Campuses would be affected as professors would use this instead of video tapes. Cities would be affected, with a twist on the transportation theory, a lot of people wouldn't have to go to an office anymore but could do work on their PC at home and attend staff meetings via holograph, like an advanced net-meeting. That has some creepy aspects to it too though. Can you imagine your boss' holograph invading your living room and asking why you haven't got those reports done?:disgust:
They didn't mention the entertainment industry, which would be strongly affected by such a device. But it is much closer to the technology we already have, so it's a more practical possibility. Nah, that's probably not what it is. My money's still on a hoax, but have fun guessing!
One more thing. So what if AnandTech readers let their imaginations fly? OctoberBlue seems a bit too smug
I guess I can see where that post came off sounding smug. That wasn't my intention though. One challenge of this medium is the absence of tone-of-voice and facial expressions. I really wasn't being smug, and I wasn't trying to squelch anyone's imagination.
Actually I think it's pretty cool that people are coming up with all kinds of wild ideas. Maybe that's the biggest value of IT right now: it's giving us a chance to flex our imaginations.
It's just that as I'm reading some of the posts, and thinking, "hey, that's a pretty cool idea", at the same time I keep going back to the incredibly over-the-top, outrageous hype surrounding this thing as presented in that first article.
So the point of my last comment was basically that I have to believe, as people are writing about unicycles and scooters, that the people doing the writing are thinking something like, "Yeah, this will be a pretty cool device, but boy the hype sure was over the top."
I have to believe that no one is thinking, "Yeah, and five years from now there won't be any buses or cars or airplanes. We'll all be riding around on motorized rollerskates!" If anyone is thinking somehting like that, well, I can't apologize for offending them because any kind of reality check would.
Soccerman:
Cold Fusion, who gives a damn, when REAL fusion is about 10 years away anyway.
But cold fusion would be better than ordinary fusion, because you don't have to build enourmous, reactor-type facilities to contain it. Even way back in the early '80s the pop science magazines were speculating about it as a portable, limitless source of energy. floydian said "I'm taking a guess at a power source" and you yourself said, "more money the MS in 5 years? no problem, have you any idea how HUGE the Automotive and Oil industries are? the internet is PUNY compared to them."
That's exactly my point. An energy source of this magnitude would take away a huge portion of that oil industry money. A big reason for them to try and stop it. It would also fit the description: environment enhanced by energy without pollution, no more drilling oil or strip mining coal, campuses and cities retro-fitted for it, etc. Did you ever see the movie "Chain Reacion"?
With all this, I still don't think it's cold fusion. I actually think it's a hoax or marketing ploy of some kind. But I don't want to be too dogmatic. How about this: What if it's a very advanced holograph machine?
This could explain the laughter, especially if the initial demonstration included something like the participants suddenly seeing themselves in 3D, as if a twin were there, or maybe some humorous trick like placing their heads on Arnold Schwarzenegger's body or something.
Campuses would be affected as professors would use this instead of video tapes. Cities would be affected, with a twist on the transportation theory, a lot of people wouldn't have to go to an office anymore but could do work on their PC at home and attend staff meetings via holograph, like an advanced net-meeting. That has some creepy aspects to it too though. Can you imagine your boss' holograph invading your living room and asking why you haven't got those reports done?:disgust:
They didn't mention the entertainment industry, which would be strongly affected by such a device. But it is much closer to the technology we already have, so it's a more practical possibility. Nah, that's probably not what it is. My money's still on a hoax, but have fun guessing!
Eug
Lifer
- Mar 11, 2000
- 24,145
- 1,793
- 126
It would be nice if someone could develop a common sense pill. Judging by the fact that so many people bought into the IT (Idiot Technology?) hype, we are in dire need of this new pill invention.
<< Hybred electric motors since the late 60's. Desalination plant concepts that could efficently produce drinkable water from salt-water. All of these things have been bought by large corperations and BURIED. >>
Both those technologies exist and are in use today. But corporations are usually not that stupid. They don't implement them because usually they are just too damn expensive, at least in their perception. Hell, it still costs Toyota and Honda more to make those hybrid cars than they sell them for. And it makes currently no sense like for a country with lots of fresh water to desalinate sea water. Things change for countries like Saudi Arabia.
By the way, the rapid growth of the scooter is not going to solve any problems. It would also be interesting to see scooters during winter in Toronto or New York. The only way to address this congestion problem is to seriously increase the infrastructure of public transport. I'm sure as hell not going to take the bus if it means waiting 30 minutes at the bus stop in -15C weather. However, I would if it meant waiting <10 minutes, or taking the subway. It would definitely make me happier if I didn't have to pay CAD$20000+ for a reliable car, because the operating costs of a car are still much higher than taking the bus. Just think of how much computer equipment that would buy.
<< Hybred electric motors since the late 60's. Desalination plant concepts that could efficently produce drinkable water from salt-water. All of these things have been bought by large corperations and BURIED. >>
Both those technologies exist and are in use today. But corporations are usually not that stupid. They don't implement them because usually they are just too damn expensive, at least in their perception. Hell, it still costs Toyota and Honda more to make those hybrid cars than they sell them for. And it makes currently no sense like for a country with lots of fresh water to desalinate sea water. Things change for countries like Saudi Arabia.
By the way, the rapid growth of the scooter is not going to solve any problems. It would also be interesting to see scooters during winter in Toronto or New York.
The only way to address this congestion problem is to seriously increase the infrastructure of public transport. I'm sure as hell not going to take the bus if it means waiting 30 minutes at the bus stop in -15C weather. However, I would if it meant waiting <10 minutes, or taking the subway. It would definitely make me happier if I didn't have to pay CAD$20000+ for a reliable car, because the operating costs of a car are still much higher than taking the bus. Just think of how much computer equipment that would buy. I think that it is some type of transportion device also. I saw a news program about the inventor and he is quite brilliant, and invents products that involve some sort of travelling.
octoberblue
It's all good, I hold no beef with 'ya. I know how easy it is to get misconstrued. I'll have to agree that the hype is so great, I'm not sure that the "invention" will live up to IT.octoberblue
It's all good, I hold no beef with 'ya. I know how easy it is to get misconstrued. I'll have to agree that the hype is so great, I'm not sure that the "invention" will live up to IT.octoberblue
i know what it is... a portable porter potty. it all seems clear... "the only problem is if u will be allowed to use it" because you would be literally taking a crap in public. cities will build around it, cause there won't be any need of public restrooms, it is much cleanier because has anyone ever looked at the public bathrooms lately? ewwww. Much more environmentally safe because all the crap will be going into that Kamen guys mouth. because this is ALL BS. But if its not this is REALLY INTERESTING!
I think that they will have something out and therefore don't think that this "IT" is just vaporware. Because of the inventor, and the people who are backing the company, I think that it will be major, but the question is whether or not it will be life altering as some of the news reports have stated. My hunch is that it is some type of transportation device, and don't think that its some type of teleport (like Star Trek). Researchers are having enough trouble teleporting just one atom.
sigh..
octoberblue:
That's exactly my point. An energy source of this magnitude would take away a huge portion of that oil industry money. A big reason for them to try and stop it. It would also fit the description: environment enhanced by energy without pollution, no more drilling oil or strip mining coal, campuses and cities retro-fitted for it, etc. Did you ever see the movie "Chain Reacion"?
I was referring to you(I don't remember who) saying if it isn't cold fusion, it isn't anything.
fact is, if it was a teleporter, it would have a similar (and much faster) effect on the oil and automotive industries then fusion reactors that work (cold fusion, however is a different matter, however, I'll believe it when I see it).
the company would still grow much faster then MS did if it was a teleporter that they've invented.
Jaywallen, you've sortof lost me now..
octoberblue:
That's exactly my point. An energy source of this magnitude would take away a huge portion of that oil industry money. A big reason for them to try and stop it. It would also fit the description: environment enhanced by energy without pollution, no more drilling oil or strip mining coal, campuses and cities retro-fitted for it, etc. Did you ever see the movie "Chain Reacion"?
I was referring to you(I don't remember who) saying if it isn't cold fusion, it isn't anything.
fact is, if it was a teleporter, it would have a similar (and much faster) effect on the oil and automotive industries then fusion reactors that work (cold fusion, however is a different matter, however, I'll believe it when I see it).
the company would still grow much faster then MS did if it was a teleporter that they've invented.
Jaywallen, you've sortof lost me now..
Eug,
<< By the way, the rapid growth of the scooter is not going to solve any problems. It would also be interesting to see scooters during winter in Toronto or New York. The only way to address this congestion problem is to seriously increase the infrastructure of public transport. I'm sure as hell not going to take the bus if it means waiting 30 minutes at the bus stop in -15C weather. However, I would if it meant waiting <10 minutes, or taking the subway. It would definitely make me happier if I didn't have to pay CAD$20000+ for a reliable car, because the operating costs of a car are still much higher than taking the bus. Just think of how much computer equipment that would buy. >>
I find myself mostly in agreement with you -- except for this point. IF an almost total switchover to extremely efficient, non-polluting personal transportation were to take place in the cities, it would have a huge effect on almost every aspect of the lives of city dwellers. It would also have an effect on life in general on the planet because of factors like...
1. the improvement such a change would entail in atmospheric quality -- When everybody and his Aunt Agnes is no longer trundling about in two-ton steel cocoons propelled by fossil fuel engines, the air suddenly becomes easier to breathe.
2. the reduction of the costs to society in maintaining the special infrastructures for fuel source exploration, refinement, distribution -- You use less dinosaur remains, you don't have to pump as much of it out of the ground, refine it, and carry it to service stations.
3. the reduction of the costs to society of maintaining large, high-traffic-volume roadways -- Large trucks would no longer be necessary. Why? Super high efficiency personal vehicles could virtually eliminate the need for large volume heavy traffic corridors between places that were not industrial sites. And that would suddenly make the use of rail traffic for the support of industry a much more attractive alternative. And just at a time when exciting and efficient new technologies along these lines are becoming available.
Of course, there's that word "IF" up there at the beginning of all of that. But IF is what IT is all about -- unless this is all just hype. You're talking about conventional scooters, or something closely related when you say that they're incapable of changing city life. Actually, scooters have changed life in London for many people, and they've been reducing traffic congestion in many Southern European cities for decades. And anyone who's been to Amsterdam has seen what even the lowly bicycle used en masse can accomplish along the lines of efficient transportation of large numbers of people.
Did you take a good look at the patent papers? In its various permutations, this device is always a single-axle transport with one or two wheels. Can't keep it standing? If you read the papers and know the physics you'll see that a proper implementation of the proposed device would be unbelievably hard to upset, far more stable over broken ground (or ice) than a multi-wheeled vehicle. From the standpoint of dynamic balance, this sort of thing has it all over the motorcycle and the car -- IF it can be implemented correctly.
Consider, too, the fact that this widget need not conform to ordinary standards of scooter architecture. The drawings accompanying patent applications seldom resemble the finished product closely. What if a scooter could be produced in a form which is enclosed, yet portable -- or at least storable in a very compact form? When I first heard about IT, I suggested that it might be a scooter with a single large wheel which encompasses the passenger compartment. This would be possible, if difficult, to construct with current materials and mechanical technologies. (I think, however, that I was incorrect in this supposition because the device needs to be really small to enable it to fulfill the "hype". And I can't imagine how to make device of the type I envisioned small enough. No matter which way you look at it, one of the largest problems with a car is -- where the heck do you park it?)
Okay, so we're all inundated daily with talk about dishwashing detergents that are going to revolutionize our lives. That's a good reason, besides a little knowledge of physics, to be skeptical about this whole thing. But I think that, if you ignore the salient features of the "scooter" depicted in those papers and look, instead, at the principles that underly it the single-axle portion of the design, you might be able to think of a LOT of different and very effective ways the concept might be applied to personal transportation.
When we look at the way city traffic was managed at the turn of the previous century, we can't help but wonder just how many people got run down by horse-drawn carriages and wagons -- and how much "debris" must have existed on the roadways. (Imagine a nice, muggy summer's day following a heavy rain! As large animal dung goes, horse is one of the better ones to step in. Cow is bad. Pig and sheep is right out! But horse manure in the city streets was more than a stench in the air and a mess on your boots. It contributed significantly to disease, particularly tetanus and other such maladies, in cities of that time. Just as automobile, bus and truck exhaust contributes to death by respiratory ailment now.)
Nowadays, there are lots of streets that have a pronounced tendency to turn humans into road kill. Think how overpowering our awareness of cars is, day in an day out, both when we're riding in them and when we're trying to walk without being run over by them. What if personal transportation could be made fast and efficient, but requiring scarcely more space or supporting infrastructure than transport by shanks mare? What if that device' cost were roughly a tenth the cost of a cheap automobile, and it's operational and insurance costs even more disparate?
I have no idea if Kamen has accomplished something of this magnitude, but such a device could actually have astounding effects upon human life -- especially in cities. If auto and truck traffic, and their ravages upon human safety and health, were rare to non-existent in cities like New York, imagine how pleasant such cities could become as places to live. Just a little speculation.
Regards,
Jim
<< By the way, the rapid growth of the scooter is not going to solve any problems. It would also be interesting to see scooters during winter in Toronto or New York. The only way to address this congestion problem is to seriously increase the infrastructure of public transport. I'm sure as hell not going to take the bus if it means waiting 30 minutes at the bus stop in -15C weather. However, I would if it meant waiting <10 minutes, or taking the subway. It would definitely make me happier if I didn't have to pay CAD$20000+ for a reliable car, because the operating costs of a car are still much higher than taking the bus. Just think of how much computer equipment that would buy. >>
I find myself mostly in agreement with you -- except for this point. IF an almost total switchover to extremely efficient, non-polluting personal transportation were to take place in the cities, it would have a huge effect on almost every aspect of the lives of city dwellers. It would also have an effect on life in general on the planet because of factors like...
1. the improvement such a change would entail in atmospheric quality -- When everybody and his Aunt Agnes is no longer trundling about in two-ton steel cocoons propelled by fossil fuel engines, the air suddenly becomes easier to breathe.
2. the reduction of the costs to society in maintaining the special infrastructures for fuel source exploration, refinement, distribution -- You use less dinosaur remains, you don't have to pump as much of it out of the ground, refine it, and carry it to service stations.
3. the reduction of the costs to society of maintaining large, high-traffic-volume roadways -- Large trucks would no longer be necessary. Why? Super high efficiency personal vehicles could virtually eliminate the need for large volume heavy traffic corridors between places that were not industrial sites. And that would suddenly make the use of rail traffic for the support of industry a much more attractive alternative. And just at a time when exciting and efficient new technologies along these lines are becoming available.
Of course, there's that word "IF" up there at the beginning of all of that. But IF is what IT is all about -- unless this is all just hype. You're talking about conventional scooters, or something closely related when you say that they're incapable of changing city life. Actually, scooters have changed life in London for many people, and they've been reducing traffic congestion in many Southern European cities for decades. And anyone who's been to Amsterdam has seen what even the lowly bicycle used en masse can accomplish along the lines of efficient transportation of large numbers of people.
Did you take a good look at the patent papers? In its various permutations, this device is always a single-axle transport with one or two wheels. Can't keep it standing? If you read the papers and know the physics you'll see that a proper implementation of the proposed device would be unbelievably hard to upset, far more stable over broken ground (or ice) than a multi-wheeled vehicle. From the standpoint of dynamic balance, this sort of thing has it all over the motorcycle and the car -- IF it can be implemented correctly.
Consider, too, the fact that this widget need not conform to ordinary standards of scooter architecture. The drawings accompanying patent applications seldom resemble the finished product closely. What if a scooter could be produced in a form which is enclosed, yet portable -- or at least storable in a very compact form? When I first heard about IT, I suggested that it might be a scooter with a single large wheel which encompasses the passenger compartment. This would be possible, if difficult, to construct with current materials and mechanical technologies. (I think, however, that I was incorrect in this supposition because the device needs to be really small to enable it to fulfill the "hype". And I can't imagine how to make device of the type I envisioned small enough. No matter which way you look at it, one of the largest problems with a car is -- where the heck do you park it?)
Okay, so we're all inundated daily with talk about dishwashing detergents that are going to revolutionize our lives. That's a good reason, besides a little knowledge of physics, to be skeptical about this whole thing. But I think that, if you ignore the salient features of the "scooter" depicted in those papers and look, instead, at the principles that underly it the single-axle portion of the design, you might be able to think of a LOT of different and very effective ways the concept might be applied to personal transportation.
When we look at the way city traffic was managed at the turn of the previous century, we can't help but wonder just how many people got run down by horse-drawn carriages and wagons -- and how much "debris" must have existed on the roadways. (Imagine a nice, muggy summer's day following a heavy rain! As large animal dung goes, horse is one of the better ones to step in. Cow is bad. Pig and sheep is right out! But horse manure in the city streets was more than a stench in the air and a mess on your boots. It contributed significantly to disease, particularly tetanus and other such maladies, in cities of that time. Just as automobile, bus and truck exhaust contributes to death by respiratory ailment now.)
Nowadays, there are lots of streets that have a pronounced tendency to turn humans into road kill. Think how overpowering our awareness of cars is, day in an day out, both when we're riding in them and when we're trying to walk without being run over by them. What if personal transportation could be made fast and efficient, but requiring scarcely more space or supporting infrastructure than transport by shanks mare? What if that device' cost were roughly a tenth the cost of a cheap automobile, and it's operational and insurance costs even more disparate?
I have no idea if Kamen has accomplished something of this magnitude, but such a device could actually have astounding effects upon human life -- especially in cities. If auto and truck traffic, and their ravages upon human safety and health, were rare to non-existent in cities like New York, imagine how pleasant such cities could become as places to live. Just a little speculation.
Regards,
Jim
Eug
Lifer
- Mar 11, 2000
- 24,145
- 1,793
- 126
For the low pollution technology, there's nothing stopping us from developing public transport using similar technology. It does not have to be in a scooter. In fact, there are buses in Vancouver right now which run on hydrogen and the "exhaust" is water. (However, I'm ignoring the energy needed to create the hydrogen)
And, regardless of the technology in a scooter, it still ain't gonna work in a Toronto snowstorm. It's too damn cold and the slush is far too deep. I like the idea of the super small vehicles becoming available in Europe and China though. Too bad they'd have to fight against the housewife-driven SUVs around here.
And, regardless of the technology in a scooter, it still ain't gonna work in a Toronto snowstorm. It's too damn cold and the slush is far too deep. I like the idea of the super small vehicles becoming available in Europe and China though. Too bad they'd have to fight against the housewife-driven SUVs around here.
the funny thing is that the electronic plans in the patend are way simpler then say, an electronic lock.
IT probably will be some cheesy transport device, but maybe it is:
Internet-driven Trashtalk.............
IT probably will be some cheesy transport device, but maybe it is:
Internet-driven Trashtalk.............
Oh, I absolutely agree in principle, Eug. Public transportation would seem to be more widely applicable, if somewhat less exciting in its implications for the individual's life style. Only reason I'm leaning toward scooters as an explanation of the IT phenomenon is that a scooter might conceivably cost the stipulated $2,000. I can't imagine what mode of public transportation could be broken up into units costing $2,000.
BTW, not to say that it would be easy to make a scooter work all year in Toronto, but I rode a Triumph 650 Tiger motorcycle (admittedly somewhat modified) from Los Angeles to visit friends in Dillingham and Port Moller Alaska in February of '71 and March of '72. (Those places are out on the Peninsula / beginning of the Aleutian chain. Single-track vehicles aren't really that tough to control in ice and snow. The main reason you don't see bikers (or at least THIS biker) on the road when there's much in the way of frozen precipitation is all the sideways Buicks. It's just too danged hard to get out of the way when a domestic road barge starts slewing about all over the lane ahead of me. But, if I didn't have to share the road with these much larger vehicles, I'd be out there. If you're properly attired and equipped, it's doable. It's conceivable to me that it could even be easy -- with the right application of technology.
I'm sure we're all going to ponder this for a while. Probably the purpose of the whole thing. It's fascinating to think about the possibilities. I've got to think, given the report, that this "thing" is going to be "attractive" in some way. When cars first appeared on the scene, they immediately appealed to people. If they had also been cheap, they'd have sold like the proverbial hotcakes. If someone could manage to come up with a vastly cheaper, more practical replacement for the automobile and tool up to produce it in sufficient numbers, it might take the scene by storm. It could certainly make someone beaucoup bucks.
But I'm going to try to figure out if anything besides some mode of transportation could have the social and fiscal effects described in the report while costing 2 grand per unit. Any ideas?
Regards,
Jim
BTW, not to say that it would be easy to make a scooter work all year in Toronto, but I rode a Triumph 650 Tiger motorcycle (admittedly somewhat modified) from Los Angeles to visit friends in Dillingham and Port Moller Alaska in February of '71 and March of '72. (Those places are out on the Peninsula / beginning of the Aleutian chain. Single-track vehicles aren't really that tough to control in ice and snow. The main reason you don't see bikers (or at least THIS biker) on the road when there's much in the way of frozen precipitation is all the sideways Buicks. It's just too danged hard to get out of the way when a domestic road barge starts slewing about all over the lane ahead of me. But, if I didn't have to share the road with these much larger vehicles, I'd be out there. If you're properly attired and equipped, it's doable. It's conceivable to me that it could even be easy -- with the right application of technology.
I'm sure we're all going to ponder this for a while. Probably the purpose of the whole thing. It's fascinating to think about the possibilities. I've got to think, given the report, that this "thing" is going to be "attractive" in some way. When cars first appeared on the scene, they immediately appealed to people. If they had also been cheap, they'd have sold like the proverbial hotcakes. If someone could manage to come up with a vastly cheaper, more practical replacement for the automobile and tool up to produce it in sufficient numbers, it might take the scene by storm. It could certainly make someone beaucoup bucks.
But I'm going to try to figure out if anything besides some mode of transportation could have the social and fiscal effects described in the report while costing 2 grand per unit. Any ideas?
Regards,
Jim
It's obviously the beginning of mechwarrior mobile combat suits
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1112000/1112411.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1112000/1112411.stm
Automatic toilet seat that lowers when it hears the presence of a female approaching.
Boy we sure could use those around here....
OTOH, computer related: Perfect 2D quality for nVidia cards without resorting to a soldering iron!
Cheers!
Boy we sure could use those around here....
OTOH, computer related: Perfect 2D quality for nVidia cards without resorting to a soldering iron!
Cheers!
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 411
Facebook
Twitter