4 ms·

While the accuracy of the quoted prediction is uncanny, I would be interested in reading Asimov's other, less accurate predictions. Those are usually quite amus

by pferde 9y ago

While the accuracy of the quoted prediction is uncanny, I would be interested in reading Asimov's other, less accurate predictions. Those are usually quite amusing - or sometimes sad, depending on how you feel about humanity putting focus on wrong things.

teekert 9y ago
Afaik those predictions relate mostly to nuclear power (main source power in the Foundation trilogy), from the article linked in the post among others: The appliances of 2014 will have no electric cords, of course, for they will be powered by long- lived batteries running on radioisotopes. The isotopes will not be expensive for they will be by- products of the fission-power plants which, by 2014, will be supplying well over half the power needs of humanity. But once the isotype batteries are used up they will be disposed of only through authorized agents of the manufacturer.
- swiley 9y ago
  The idea that manufacturers would coordinate that well seems silly.
- davedx 9y ago
  Hah. Interesting that he predicted large scale solar PV deployments too. (In my mind, that's an even more impressive prediction given the state/cost of PV tech in the 60's). Even more interesting, I would say (though who knows) this power mix he predicted (nuclear + solar) will be much closer to what we end up with on Mars, which he also made predictions about.
  - eesmith 9y ago
    No, he didn't. You are reading too much into his prediction because you know the outcome. He wrote: "Large solar-power stations will also be in operation in a number of desert and semi-desert areas -- Arizona, the Negev, Kazakhstan." There's nothing in the prediction which implies that the solar power would be based on PV. I think there's a higher likelihood he was thinking of heliostats. Solar One, a solar thermal power plant built in Mojave Desert, produced 10MW of electricity back in the 1980s.
    - davedx 9y ago
      > I think there's a higher likelihood he was thinking of heliostats. You mean CSP? Why do you think that? Silicon PV was available in the 1960's and widely used in the space program. It's been around for longer than the first CSP plant that was built 4 years after Asimov made his predictions in 1964. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentrated_solar_power#cite_note-21 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentrated_solar_power#cite_...
      - eesmith 9y ago
        Because solar power is older than that CSP. For example, Mouchot's work on solar power in the the 1870s - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustin_Mouchot#Solar_research https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustin_Mouchot#Solar_researc... . His machine generated steam that could be used for mechanical power. At that point it's trivial to produce electricity. It just won't be cheap electricity. In 1941 Asimov wrote the short story "Reason", which took place in a solar power satellite which beamed power down to Earth. He at this time wasn't thinking about PV, because it didn't meaningfully exist, and the story only talks about a "converter". (The station is also a mile across, and in solar orbit.) There's another SF book I read, probably written in the 1950s, about building such a power plant in Earth orbit. It used a mirror to heat up material in its focus to generate power. (One of the side plots of the story was that some TV show was being filmed on the construction site, and the lead actor, in a space suit, almost drifted through the invisible focus.) This is why I'm sure that SF at the time didn't say that solar power stations had to be PV. I looked around for something more definitive. In 1981 Asimov wrote "How Did We Find About Solar Power", available at https://archive.org/stream/HowDidWeFindAboutSolarPower-English-IsaacAsimov/solarpix#page/n0/mode/2up https://archive.org/stream/HowDidWeFindAboutSolarPower-Engli... . That booklet predicts PV use for the future. (It's also where I learned specifically about Mouchot's work.) In the 1980s he know the cost of PV power was growing ever cheaper. What it doesn't answer is what Asimov thought in the 1960s. He might simply have left it open, as he did in "Reason". So, I could be wrong about my belief. But it's surely not obvious that Asimov is specifically predicting PV over other possibilities that he reasonably know about.
- eesmith 9y ago
  There are several other failures from the 50 years in the future piece for the World's Fair: > Jets of compressed air will also lift land vehicles off the highways, which, among other things, will minimize paving problems. Smooth earth or level lawns will do as well as pavements. Bridges will also be of less importance, since cars will be capable of crossing water on their jets, though local ordinances will discourage the practice. > you will be able to reach someone at the moon colonies > Most surprising and, in some ways, heartening, 2014 will see a good beginning made in the colonization of the continental shelves. Underwater housing will have its attractions to those who like water sports, and will undoubtedly encourage the more efficient exploitation of ocean resources, both food and mineral. General Motors shows, in its 1964 exhibit, the model of an underwater hotel of what might be called mouth-watering luxury. The 2014 World's Fair will have exhibits showing cities in the deep sea with bathyscaphe liners carrying men and supplies across and into the abyss.
- ThomPete 9y ago
  It can be argued that the reason that didnt happen was because of all the anti-nuclear protests that made it a toxic energy.
  - eesmith 9y ago
    I don't think that argument holds water. There are no radioisotopes which fit that requirement. The closest is 238Pu, which is most commonly used in RTGs, but also in a few pacemakers. A fridge pulls about 60W, so let's say the battery needs to supply 80W on average (assume some heavy-duty capacitors to smooth things out). Wikipedia says that the power density of 238Pu is 0.54 watts per gram. That's about 150 grams of 238Pu per household. http://ne.oregonstate.edu/rebuilding-supply-pu-238 http://ne.oregonstate.edu/rebuilding-supply-pu-238 says 238Pu costs roughly $8 million per kilogram. If we can reduce that by 100x then that's still $12,000. It seems like it's cheaper to have things hooked up to a power grid, with batteries for those short times that grid power doesn't work, than to use radioisotopes.
    - ThomPete 9y ago
      The point is that if we haven't had all the opposition we would have been further with our development in this area.
      - eesmith 9y ago
        I understood the point. My response was that there are two options: 1) discover a radioisotope we don't know about, or 2) find some way to reduce the price by a factor of 1,000. The thing is, we know all of the radioisotopes now, at least, all with a lifespan measured in years and which can be made on macroscopic scales. Thus, it can't be #1. (Or, which alternative do you think is better?) Are you proposing that it's #2? If so, why do you think a factor of 1,000 in cost savings is possible? One way to make 238Pu is to start with spent nuclear fuel. If we had enough spent nuclear fuel to make batteries for every household, we would have had far more nuclear power in the first place.
        9y ago
Udik 9y ago
If you check the original article, the vast majority of his predictions is widely off the mark. This article is rather dishonest in trying to single out a few excerpts, even out of context, to paint a different picture.

by pferde 9y ago

teekert 9y ago

Afaik those predictions relate mostly to nuclear power (main source power in the Foundation trilogy), from the article linked in the post among others: The appliances of 2014 will have no electric cords, of course, for they will be powered by long- lived batteries running on radioisotopes. The isotopes will not be expensive for they will be by- products of the fission-power plants which, by 2014, will be supplying well over half the power needs of humanity. But once the isotype batteries are used up they will be disposed of only through authorized agents of the manufacturer.

swiley 9y ago
The idea that manufacturers would coordinate that well seems silly.
davedx 9y ago
Hah. Interesting that he predicted large scale solar PV deployments too. (In my mind, that's an even more impressive prediction given the state/cost of PV tech in the 60's). Even more interesting, I would say (though who knows) this power mix he predicted (nuclear + solar) will be much closer to what we end up with on Mars, which he also made predictions about.
- eesmith 9y ago
  No, he didn't. You are reading too much into his prediction because you know the outcome. He wrote: "Large solar-power stations will also be in operation in a number of desert and semi-desert areas -- Arizona, the Negev, Kazakhstan." There's nothing in the prediction which implies that the solar power would be based on PV. I think there's a higher likelihood he was thinking of heliostats. Solar One, a solar thermal power plant built in Mojave Desert, produced 10MW of electricity back in the 1980s.
  - davedx 9y ago
    > I think there's a higher likelihood he was thinking of heliostats. You mean CSP? Why do you think that? Silicon PV was available in the 1960's and widely used in the space program. It's been around for longer than the first CSP plant that was built 4 years after Asimov made his predictions in 1964. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentrated_solar_power#cite_note-21 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentrated_solar_power#cite_...
    - eesmith 9y ago
      Because solar power is older than that CSP. For example, Mouchot's work on solar power in the the 1870s - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustin_Mouchot#Solar_research https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustin_Mouchot#Solar_researc... . His machine generated steam that could be used for mechanical power. At that point it's trivial to produce electricity. It just won't be cheap electricity. In 1941 Asimov wrote the short story "Reason", which took place in a solar power satellite which beamed power down to Earth. He at this time wasn't thinking about PV, because it didn't meaningfully exist, and the story only talks about a "converter". (The station is also a mile across, and in solar orbit.) There's another SF book I read, probably written in the 1950s, about building such a power plant in Earth orbit. It used a mirror to heat up material in its focus to generate power. (One of the side plots of the story was that some TV show was being filmed on the construction site, and the lead actor, in a space suit, almost drifted through the invisible focus.) This is why I'm sure that SF at the time didn't say that solar power stations had to be PV. I looked around for something more definitive. In 1981 Asimov wrote "How Did We Find About Solar Power", available at https://archive.org/stream/HowDidWeFindAboutSolarPower-English-IsaacAsimov/solarpix#page/n0/mode/2up https://archive.org/stream/HowDidWeFindAboutSolarPower-Engli... . That booklet predicts PV use for the future. (It's also where I learned specifically about Mouchot's work.) In the 1980s he know the cost of PV power was growing ever cheaper. What it doesn't answer is what Asimov thought in the 1960s. He might simply have left it open, as he did in "Reason". So, I could be wrong about my belief. But it's surely not obvious that Asimov is specifically predicting PV over other possibilities that he reasonably know about.
eesmith 9y ago
There are several other failures from the 50 years in the future piece for the World's Fair: > Jets of compressed air will also lift land vehicles off the highways, which, among other things, will minimize paving problems. Smooth earth or level lawns will do as well as pavements. Bridges will also be of less importance, since cars will be capable of crossing water on their jets, though local ordinances will discourage the practice. > you will be able to reach someone at the moon colonies > Most surprising and, in some ways, heartening, 2014 will see a good beginning made in the colonization of the continental shelves. Underwater housing will have its attractions to those who like water sports, and will undoubtedly encourage the more efficient exploitation of ocean resources, both food and mineral. General Motors shows, in its 1964 exhibit, the model of an underwater hotel of what might be called mouth-watering luxury. The 2014 World's Fair will have exhibits showing cities in the deep sea with bathyscaphe liners carrying men and supplies across and into the abyss.
ThomPete 9y ago
It can be argued that the reason that didnt happen was because of all the anti-nuclear protests that made it a toxic energy.
- eesmith 9y ago
  I don't think that argument holds water. There are no radioisotopes which fit that requirement. The closest is 238Pu, which is most commonly used in RTGs, but also in a few pacemakers. A fridge pulls about 60W, so let's say the battery needs to supply 80W on average (assume some heavy-duty capacitors to smooth things out). Wikipedia says that the power density of 238Pu is 0.54 watts per gram. That's about 150 grams of 238Pu per household. http://ne.oregonstate.edu/rebuilding-supply-pu-238 http://ne.oregonstate.edu/rebuilding-supply-pu-238 says 238Pu costs roughly $8 million per kilogram. If we can reduce that by 100x then that's still $12,000. It seems like it's cheaper to have things hooked up to a power grid, with batteries for those short times that grid power doesn't work, than to use radioisotopes.
  - ThomPete 9y ago
    The point is that if we haven't had all the opposition we would have been further with our development in this area.
    - eesmith 9y ago
      I understood the point. My response was that there are two options: 1) discover a radioisotope we don't know about, or 2) find some way to reduce the price by a factor of 1,000. The thing is, we know all of the radioisotopes now, at least, all with a lifespan measured in years and which can be made on macroscopic scales. Thus, it can't be #1. (Or, which alternative do you think is better?) Are you proposing that it's #2? If so, why do you think a factor of 1,000 in cost savings is possible? One way to make 238Pu is to start with spent nuclear fuel. If we had enough spent nuclear fuel to make batteries for every household, we would have had far more nuclear power in the first place.
      - 9y ago

Udik 9y ago

If you check the original article, the vast majority of his predictions is widely off the mark. This article is rather dishonest in trying to single out a few excerpts, even out of context, to paint a different picture.