Is technology the new evolution

[top red]

In previous centuries humans would develop to improve their way of surviving. In that last hundred years or so we have developed technology to make our lives easier. Does this mean we are advancing mentally and retarding physically or is this continued natural evolution?

 

[Anonymous]

Correct. We have reached an evolutionary dead end. In order to evolve further we need to start designing and engineering.

See futurists, Michio kaku, dawkins, feynman etc etc

 

[top red]

Its too late to read but what are Michio Kaku's speculations for the future?

 

[Anonymous]

String theorist.

Wikipedia has answers.

 

[top red]

Ah good old string theory......

 

[RaeUK]

Ah good old wikipedia......

 

[Poultice]

Can somebody please explain Super String Theory to me ?

 

[Swanaldo]

I'd have a job describing Silly String Theory.

Here to be uneducated.

 

[Poultice]

I'd have a job describing Silly String Theory.

Here to be uneducated.

Well I tried to improve myself last night by asking Child wot it wuv awl abhout. She said it was all bollox coz Physisiisicists is just maffmuttisions wot can't count, and I am in no position to argue with her.

 

[Anonymous]

Yeah that's surprisingly close to the truth - string theorists often have a problem with equations outputting infinity as a result, which in the physical "real" world means something is either incorrect or incomplete. non-quantifiable.

the latest big thing in the field is whether or not the LHC can provide any data supporting anti-de-Sitter space/conformal field theory correspondence as first proposed by Juan Maldacena.
here is a rather nice little artical he wrote: http://homepage.mac.com/photomorphose/documents/qpdf.pdf