"Weapons Technology of the Future" up on Fantastic Worlds

[jordan179]

Reposted my 2000 Usenet and 2006 Livejournal essay "Weapons Technology of the Future" onto Fantastic Worlds (http://fantasticworlds-jordan179.blogspot.com/2011/02/weapons-technology-of-future.htmlRead more... )

Comments

[polaris93]

I just added this comment to your post on fantastic worlds

[ford_prefect42]

... 100 years is well beyond the predictability event horizon. we're lucky to be able to predict combat on a decadal timescale.

However, on a 100 year timescale, I would expect artificial intelligence augmented humans directing clouds of nanotech assemblers/disassemblers.

[jordan179]

That's on the full list, at Fantastic Worlds. Note though that nanotech machines aren't magic: in particular, they have to reach their targets, and a teeny tiny machine with a teeny tiny propellor or jet is slow. The nanotech would be better delivered by a larger machine, say something insect-sized capable of flying at 50-100 mph, and those machines delivered by subsonic mini-missiles.

Combat would be quite layered in terms of the size of the combatants, with the largest ones being bigger than modern main batle tanks and the smallest ones the size of viruses.

[ford_prefect42]

Yes, *but* nanotech assemblers could aggregate to form larger faster items. Further, they can scavenge locally available resources to create chemical explosives, etcterea.

Anyway, at the hundred year threshold, I am profoundly sceptical of any form of "men running around" style of combat.

[zerorevenge]

Good Lord. I hope you guys are wrong. Who likes the idea of everything being computers? Isn't that the cause of the Terminator and Matrix movies?