# After Electricity?



## MrShatter (Sep 28, 2010)

What comes next? In the world we live in today almost everything is powered by electricity. However, electricity has limits - and humans will try their best to eliminate those boundaries. How will they do this? Theories? Ideas? Will it ever happen? if so, what comes next? 

How can we improve electricity? Either by eliminating it, or by eliminating all possible boundaries.


----------



## Dylio (Jul 4, 2011)

In the future there'll probably be way more efficient means of harvesting electricity to use to keep up with the advancement of society. Technology is advancing at an impeccable rate, and the things we will be able to do with our technology in the future will be nearly limitless, i like to think so anyways.


----------



## laxlax10289 (Jul 18, 2011)

We don't need to improve electricity........... electric current travels at speeds proportional to the speed of light.
Everything that it powers has a short distance (circuit inside your phone, etc.).
No need to make that faster, because over such a small distance, that shit transmits instantly.

What we do need is better methods for generating power to turn into electricity (fuel cells, fusion plants, biomass, etc.), as well as better conversion methods for converting other forms of energy into electricity (more efficient converters).


----------



## MachinegunDojo (Dec 27, 2009)

It'd be nice if we could make products that were self sufficient, though there is a limit and I think we should really look towards requiring less energy in our daily lives, I don't REQUIRE a big screen that uses 300W to watch a movie. I actually started watching videos on my phone and Nintendo 3DS and it suites me fine without having to boot up my computer. Same goes for browsing the web. But these activities in themselves are not required, I can read a book as well which uses no energy but my own which would be used anyway.

I would like to see more research into making things more and more simple. An example would be herbal medicine(something I contemplated recently), we can research medicine now a days in ways we could not before. Thereby learning things about simple techniques that don't actually require any real technology that we haven't already had for thousands of years. This is knowledge that we can keep even if we must live without current resources. This is just one example of the many possibilities but has no real bearing on energy but rather know how....


----------



## absentminded (Dec 3, 2010)

You can't really improve upon electricity.

You could create optical computers, which would work "faster" than electronic, but electricity would be necessary to make it work anyway.

Electricity is the end-point of technology. It's the easiest force to focus in fine detail and power levels and this makes it useful for almost everything.


----------



## NotSoRighteousRob (Jan 1, 2010)

zero point energy, or some form of perpetual energy machine. electricity is just another form of energy so it could easily be substituted by another. Thermal and kinetic have the most potential that I am aware of although they still are currently being converted to electricity in order to power our devices. We would have to redesign the way everything functions to ever change things completely.

@*MachinegunDojo

*careful, I used to do the same thing watching movies on my little 2" mp3 player and now I can't see my laptop without glasses. I can't prove there is a correlation but who knows.

*i should note that it was only a maximum of a 10 year span that this took place, and that I never really cautioned myself when it came to eye protection in the sun and other such things.


----------



## DarklyValentine (Mar 4, 2010)

hells bells that made no sense to me...and that's impossible
Current was chosen by those few in the world who truly understand it his name was tesla a genie genus jeans or somfing or other he was, unlike say perhaps you

I mean what do you think op, I mean you started this post....i assume one is talking about the transference of electrons to power devices 

Still if you care to elaborate any am perfectly prepared to weigh in with something profound

I am all out of ideas unless someone can define gravity and what power sources we can harvest from that


----------



## MrShatter (Sep 28, 2010)

DarklyValentine said:


> hells bells that made no sense to me...and that's impossible
> Current was chosen by those few in the world who truly understand it his name was tesla a genie genus jeans or somfing or other he was, unlike say perhaps you
> 
> I mean what do you think op, I mean you started this post....i assume one is talking about the transference of electrons to power devices
> ...


I was playing InFamous 2. Everything seemed to be electrified. Are there any alternatives? Pure speculation. Is there a world in which Cole's powers would be useless?


----------



## sprinkles (Feb 7, 2010)

Electricity isn't really a thing, it's a property of matter itself, and it is unlikely that we will find another useful one any time soon (if ever). We can only try to come up with more optimized fuels (the matter portion) and conductors. What if we decide to use light? Well, even light is electromagnetic in origin.

Edit: also, even nature itself depends on electricity to work. All we have done is harness what is already there for our own ends.


----------



## Cover3 (Feb 2, 2011)

I will make electricity so cheap, that only the rich will be lighting candles.


----------



## oHowiwonder (Aug 12, 2011)

I think of unlimited energy source (solar and/or fusion) which would allow wireless electricity throughout the globe (and hopefully universe). Also have nano tubes 100 percent efficient to transfer energy anywhere. I think boundaries will be eliminated.


----------



## Manhattan (Jul 13, 2011)

We won't eliminate electricity. Instead, we will find ways to work around it's limitations. HowStuffWorks "How Wireless Power Works"

I can envision the use of a harmless, radiant force that can power all devices within it. Though, this might just be well refined wireless electrical power.

Could entanglement be used for wireless power?


----------



## sprinkles (Feb 7, 2010)

ManhattanINTP said:


> We won't eliminate electricity. Instead, we will find ways to work around it's limitations. HowStuffWorks "How Wireless Power Works"
> 
> I can envision the use of a harmless, radiant force that can power all devices within it. Though, this might just be well refined wireless electrical power.
> 
> Could entanglement be used for wireless power?


I'm sure one day we will have something like that. I think we need to work on better wireless technologies first, though. We still send out a beam and just hope it hits, or send out a huge wave and hope it hits. It is still hard to control what happens when it is going over the air (signal interference, degradation, obstructions, etc)


----------



## Manhattan (Jul 13, 2011)

That sounds like even more of a case for quantum entanglement! What is between the signal origin and receiver is irrelevant.

Imagine if we sank a heat-to-electricity device into the earth's core. It could use solid-state or more conventional technology to generate electricity. It would be aimed at being a self-sustained, renewable energy device able to send power to the entire world. Laying traditional wiring would be cost-prohibitive. Transferring power through sound, light, and microwaves would also be prohibitive. Entanglement may be the only cost effective option.


----------



## blit (Dec 17, 2010)




----------



## Einstein (Aug 10, 2011)

I think we will always use electricity in some way.


----------



## MiriMiriAru (May 1, 2011)

absentminded said:


> You can't really improve upon electricity.
> 
> You could create optical computers, which would work "faster" than electronic, but electricity would be necessary to make it work anyway.
> 
> Electricity is the end-point of technology. It's the easiest force to focus in fine detail and power levels and this makes it useful for almost everything.


This



sprinkles said:


> Electricity isn't really a thing, it's a property of matter itself, and it is unlikely that we will find another useful one any time soon (if ever). We can only try to come up with more optimized fuels (the matter portion) and conductors. What if we decide to use light? Well, even light is electromagnetic in origin.
> 
> Edit: also, even nature itself depends on electricity to work. All we have done is harness what is already there for our own ends.


And this

There is nothing after electricity. It is so basic. Really, the question to ask is "what would be the most efficient ways to generate, store and transfer electricity?"


----------



## whisperycat (Aug 9, 2009)

*Magnetic fields*

Think magnetism. It's a natural force. Get two magnets, push the like poles together, you can actually feel the invisible force. You don't have to burn coal or split atoms to make it. It's non toxic, silent, odourless and invisible. This is a terrible state of affairs, as any oil company bean counter will tell you. People can be made to pay til their nose bleeds for petrol, the discovery of oil, it's extraction, refining and distribution makes untold millions of people very, very rich. Yet some kid can hold a magnet in his hand, without having to pay a penny! Outrageous. Expect magnetism to be studiously ignored by researchers looking for oil substitutes, because they're not really looking for oil substitutes, they're looking for oil-revenue substitutes.


----------



## absentminded (Dec 3, 2010)

@whisperycat

Let's say that you pull two magnets apart and then let go. You see them accelerate toward one another and you hear a 'click' when they collide. Obviously you've found a new untapped energy source.

Well, no, actually you haven't. You see, magnetism is no different from gravity. Both forces function through "fields". When you lift an object up to an arbitrary height h, you expend the exact same amount of energy lifting it as you obtain from it when you let it fall again. (You actually loose energy because the falling object has to displace air as it falls.)

Magnetic fields are exactly the same. The energy required to remove a magnetic from another magnetic field (or force it into one, depending on your purpose) is equal to the energy that is 'gained' from it's attraction to (or repulsion from) the opposing field.

Please know what you're talking about before you talk about it.


----------



## 0 1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 (Nov 22, 2009)

Nonsense! Magnets can work; I has proof.








Sersiously though...
I think one day the structure of all of our machines will be replaced on the nano-level. At that small scale, it may be more effective to transfer energy through structural reactions rather than electricity, the same way your DNA transfers information. Though, for this to happen without feeding them with electricity, we'd also need to find an abundant source of energy small enough to fit onto the nanobots. If we can make them as effecient as living organisms, they may be able to tap some of the same food sources that they use.


----------



## whisperycat (Aug 9, 2009)

absentminded said:


> @_whisperycat_ Please know what you're talking about before you talk about it.


Gosh, thanks for the lecture, and all I posted was tongue in cheek observation. And- please try not to faint- I do have an education. Maybe you should sign up for an "Assumptions" class? You'd probably do very well :wink:


----------



## absentminded (Dec 3, 2010)

whisperycat said:


> Gosh, thanks for the lecture, and all I posted was tongue in cheek observation.


My apologies. I have no way to tell whether or not you were serious and I've grown used to otherwise intelligent people believing in energy from magnets.



> And- please try not to faint- I do have an education.


I'm actually quite relieved.



> Maybe you should sign up for an "Assumptions" class? You'd probably do very well :wink:


I aced that class. Richard Wad was the professor.


----------



## Epizeuxis (May 23, 2011)

Antimatter. Antimatter/matter annihilation.

...

A new kind of energy will emerge on the surface on the Earth. Photonic Energy. 

...

Just crapping.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk


----------



## wuliheron (Sep 5, 2011)

Zero point energy. Instead of stealing oil from the middle east, we'll steal energy from alternate universes. A little here, a little there, and nobody will ever notice.


----------



## MiriMiriAru (May 1, 2011)

darylimjz said:


> Antimatter. Antimatter/matter annihilation.
> ...
> A new kind of energy will emerge on the surface on the Earth. Photonic Energy.
> ...
> Just crapping.


Wouldn't these just be different forms of electricity generation, as opposed to actually being different forms of energy in and of themselves?


----------



## The Proof (Aug 5, 2009)

Cover3 said:


> I will make electricity so cheap, that only the rich will be lighting candles.


the good candles are already very expensive, which surprised the hell out of me

anyway, nanophotonics are going to replace electronics in the far future, because photons can carry more information more quickly, problem is getting the costs down, raising awareness etc

Nanophotonics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

or maybe not, maybe electronics are here to stay forever, like people who go to las vegas and think they met the original elvis


----------



## MiriMiriAru (May 1, 2011)

The Proof said:


> the good candles are already very expensive, which surprised the hell out of me
> 
> anyway, nanophotonics are going to replace electronics in the far future, because photons can carry more information more quickly, problem is getting the costs down, raising awareness etc
> 
> ...


Nanophotonics will be amazing for data transfer and communications, but it's not a power generation or delivery system. It would still likely need electricity to generate the photons. 

I don't think electricity will be superseded because it is pretty fundamental. What will be superseded are the ways we generate and transmit electricity, which are currently quite crude, being generally sophisticated versions of steam turbines.


----------



## The Proof (Aug 5, 2009)

Zombie Jesus said:


> Nanophotonics will be amazing for data transfer and communications, but it's not a power generation or delivery system. It would still likely need electricity to generate the photons.
> 
> I don't think electricity will be superseded because it is pretty fundamental. What will be superseded are the ways we generate and transmit electricity, which are currently quite crude, being generally sophisticated versions of steam turbines.


yea it's pretty tough to beat as an energy transport media, it's too efficient to replace... yet!

even if they manage to teleport it (which I think researchers already did on some islands somwhere I forgot), it's still electricity! aaah! it's inescapable!


----------



## wuliheron (Sep 5, 2011)

Spintronics is a very likely alternative to nanophotonics that can not only process information at close to the speed of light, but also enable room temperature quantum computing. However, the current revolution taking place is in neuromorphic architectures which do not lend themselves to either type of circuitry and cannot be replaced with conventional Von Neumann or quantum computing architectures.


----------



## sanari (Aug 23, 2011)

INTJ seeing-the-future-moment. Everything must cease and you will listen. j/k

Electricity will first become wireless...no more cords. Then humanity will utilize solar cells in everything - we will increase it's output and decrease the size. We will also gather from the moonlight.

Then and/or concurrently, we will harness nanoparticles to create energy... or bio-particles. We will make slaves of ameobas, to put it simply and grossly over-exaggerating.

Ameoba slavery! That is the future.

I have spoken - so let it be written - so let it be done. j/k


----------



## MiriMiriAru (May 1, 2011)

sanari said:


> INTJ seeing-the-future-moment. Everything must cease and you will listen. j/k
> 
> Electricity will first become wireless...no more cords. Then humanity will utilize solar cells in everything - we will increase it's output and decrease the size. We will also gather from the moonlight.
> 
> ...


'Tis still electricity though. It's ubiquity cannot be undone!


----------



## sanari (Aug 23, 2011)

Zombie Jesus said:


> 'Tis still electricity though. It's ubiquity cannot be undone!


Is not! We are harnessing energy! Is the energy that powers life still electricity? [Don't answer that, lol.]

BAH!


----------



## dalsgaard (Aug 14, 2010)

Fuck data transfer by electricity or optics. Quantum computing please.


----------



## Sarin (Aug 30, 2011)

Why should we try to improve something that already works...??

The only thing that could use some improvement, are the ways of generating it.
Most of our electricity is generated by converting chemical energy into heat, which can be used to boil water, which is used to power turbines that are connected to huge dynamo's.

The best improvement would be the replacement of chemical energy by something more efficiënt or to use natural motion of water to power the turbines.
Put a huge water wheel in front of a waterfall or in a another place where there are strong (tidal) currents... hook up a generator and gravity will do the rest, this will save the expensive construction of artificial lakes and dams. 

Or maybe a storm powered generator.. which is basically a large and sturdy windturbine located in places where hurricanes occur.
(The income generated by the generated power may even cover some of the damages caused by the storm).

Just some basic ideas.. maybe not flawless, but they prove that chemical energy is not the only source of generating electricity and certainly not the best.


----------



## MiriMiriAru (May 1, 2011)

Sarin said:


> Why should we try to improve something that already works...??
> 
> The only thing that could use some improvement, are the ways of generating it.
> Most of our electricity is generated by converting chemical energy into heat, which can be used to boil water, which is used to power turbines that are connected to huge dynamo's.
> ...


Exactly, it's not electricity, but the methods of generating it that need to be replaced. I'm under the impression that the current method is quite inefficient, as there are so many conversions, from fuel to heat, from water to steam, from kinetic energy to electricity, there is a lot of loss. There must be better ways. 

For example, photo-voltaic solar panels convert solar radiation into electricity. Could not something similar be done with the radiation produced in nuclear reactions (it should be, considering that's what the sun)? (This might not be better, or even feasible, I'm just thinking-typing).


----------



## jameswood037 (Oct 19, 2011)

Lets see our scientist will be found new idea instead of electricity.


----------

