Tom Oldman wrote:But aren't you applying the science of NOW to the far future, Dirk? Perhaps by 4017 some new processes would be fairly simple. You have a 'black box' the size of, say, an 18-wheeler with an input chute. You drop the air car into it and the box hums, slurps, crunches, lets off condensation in the form of simple steam, a buzzer sounds and several bins along the side of the box receive ingots of whatever metals are in an air car. You don't have to explain it, it just is.
Call it the Stanislawsky Car Rendering Asunder Process (SCRAP).
~Tom
There is a point in a story when Sci-fi may become magic should the author let it. If one adopts the attitude that anything is possible (given enough time) then science becomes magic, or the stalking grounds of the Gods. I ridicule this attitude in my book Remembrances and Reconciliation when in the year 12484 C.E., 0110101011 01110100 Jones discovers the link between collisional quenching of excited-state bismuth atoms by various gases and the meaning of love. I feel (in that superior way of mine) I can ridicule that attitude because I feel I know enough to believe that although the universe is causal, it is not deterministic. Instantaneous travel across great distances by means of quantum entanglement is the latest sci-fi magic. Such a thing is possible in conception, but applied to biologic systems, I know with certainty just below absolute that what we speculate now will not be the result. We, in our 20th-century materialistic determinism, that is a false philosophy, are wrong.
Huh?