3 ms·

What's the significance of jet engines? I'm not an aerospace engineer, but I'm pretty sure the 787 Dreamliner would be rather impressive to a 1982 aircraft desi

What's the significance of jet engines? I'm not an aerospace engineer, but I'm pretty sure the 787 Dreamliner would be rather impressive to a 1982 aircraft designer. But more relevant to the issue at hand, structural engineering: The height of the tallest building in the world has doubled over just the past decade. I don't know if it's downright unimaginable, but it's very real and significant progress.

MichaelSalib 14y ago
The significance is that I have friends in the aerospace industry and from talking to them, I've learned that technological progress in this area has been much much slower than in IC fabrication. Would a 1982 aircraft designer be impressed with a 787? Sure. There have been a bunch of incremental improvements. But those improvements are on the order of 1%/year rather than Moore's law. My point is that if you're spending all your time dealing with Moore's law, it may not occur to you that Moore's law doesn't apply anywhere else. The height of the tallest building in the world has doubled over just the past decade. I don't know if it's downright unimaginable, but it's very real and significant progress. Really? What technological innovations in structural engineering were needed? It seems to me that construction costs are not falling very significantly and that a handful of very tall buildings has more to do with the infusion of cash to isolated areas where land is (relatively) cheap than it does with major advances in structural engineering.
- yummyfajitas 14y ago
  1%/year over 300 years is nearly a 20-fold improvement. Also, while the construction improvements in the past 30 years may not be major, framed-tube and trussed-tube construction will be 50 years old next year. You may be right that we have currently reached the pinnacle of technology, and that nothing else is possible except in the fields of iPhone games and social dating sites. The dead end in robotics may be approaching, even though it has resulting in a 150% improvement in manufacturing productivity since 1985 (we currently produce 70% more with 30% fewer people). But that's not a bet I'd be willing to take.
  - MichaelSalib 14y ago
    1%/year over 300 years is nearly a 20-fold improvement. I'm not sure it makes sense to assume steady incremental growth over such long time frames. I mentioned 1%/yr when considering improvements over the last 3 decades. You may be right that we have currently reached the pinnacle of technology This is not a claim I've made.
    - yummyfajitas 14y ago
      Either you believe technological progress will make building dikes/etc easier in 200-300 years, or you don't. Which is it?
daniel-cussen 14y ago
Nah...Maybe in stealth tech, but the fastest jet is still the SR-71 from 1966. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SR-71_Blackbird http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SR-71_Blackbird

MichaelSalib 14y ago

The significance is that I have friends in the aerospace industry and from talking to them, I've learned that technological progress in this area has been much much slower than in IC fabrication. Would a 1982 aircraft designer be impressed with a 787? Sure. There have been a bunch of incremental improvements. But those improvements are on the order of 1%/year rather than Moore's law. My point is that if you're spending all your time dealing with Moore's law, it may not occur to you that Moore's law doesn't apply anywhere else. The height of the tallest building in the world has doubled over just the past decade. I don't know if it's downright unimaginable, but it's very real and significant progress. Really? What technological innovations in structural engineering were needed? It seems to me that construction costs are not falling very significantly and that a handful of very tall buildings has more to do with the infusion of cash to isolated areas where land is (relatively) cheap than it does with major advances in structural engineering.

yummyfajitas 14y ago
1%/year over 300 years is nearly a 20-fold improvement. Also, while the construction improvements in the past 30 years may not be major, framed-tube and trussed-tube construction will be 50 years old next year. You may be right that we have currently reached the pinnacle of technology, and that nothing else is possible except in the fields of iPhone games and social dating sites. The dead end in robotics may be approaching, even though it has resulting in a 150% improvement in manufacturing productivity since 1985 (we currently produce 70% more with 30% fewer people). But that's not a bet I'd be willing to take.
- MichaelSalib 14y ago
  1%/year over 300 years is nearly a 20-fold improvement. I'm not sure it makes sense to assume steady incremental growth over such long time frames. I mentioned 1%/yr when considering improvements over the last 3 decades. You may be right that we have currently reached the pinnacle of technology This is not a claim I've made.
  - yummyfajitas 14y ago
    Either you believe technological progress will make building dikes/etc easier in 200-300 years, or you don't. Which is it?

daniel-cussen 14y ago

Nah...Maybe in stealth tech, but the fastest jet is still the SR-71 from 1966. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SR-71_Blackbird http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SR-71_Blackbird