Tech level "descriptions"

[Reban]

Is it plausible that the period from WW1 through the Cold War is a technology anomaly ... a period of unnaturally accelerated advancement due to a perfect storm of forces that encouraged advances in technology at a pace far greater than the natural rate of adaption of societies in general.

Without the "high-population", "balkanized", "fight for survival", "us vs them" driving forces, the natural march from TL 4 to TL 5 to TL 6 to TL 7 to TL 8 would have been closer to 100 years per TL. Time for several generations to get used to and accept new ways of doing things and society to re-stabilize before facing another social upheaval.
The jump from electronics (TL 7) to Tactical lasers, Flying cars, and fusion power (TL 8) seems to be taking longer than the jump from the first biplane (TL 5) to the first jet aircraft (TL 6).

Have I missed something in this thread? Because on pp.511-513 of T5 the rules actually cover how TL advancement speeds up or slows down for any particular society or species.

Intelligent species discover technology and advance through the successive Tech Levels at rates determined by genetic, environmental, and cultural factors.

As the progress a species moves between Lethargic, Average and Fast phases which define how many generations they spend at a given tech level.

So Solomani at TL4 to TL6, roughly WW1 to 1950 were in a Fast phase of development which meant they spent roughly one life span or we might say generation at each TL.

The factors that caused that Fast Phase that Atpollard lists definitely come under the cultural and environmental factors.

 

[KDLadage]

No, you missed nothing. I did. Which means I was placing far too much emphasis on how many years had passed in a short band of tech levels, while not taking the cultural and historical context into account.

 

[McPerth]

Is it plausible that the period from WW1 through the Cold War is a technology anomaly ... a period of unnaturally accelerated advancement due to a perfect storm of forces that encouraged advances in technology at a pace far greater than the natural rate of adaption of societies in general.

I'm not sure about this whole period, but while WWII sure it was.

Perhaps the best example is in the air, where WWII started with most powers having still biplanes, in some cases (Italian CR 32, USSR's I-15), and in other cases as obsolescent aircraft still remaining in some squadrons (UK's Gladiator), and ended in some cases with jet fighters (UK's Meteor and German's Me 262 being the most famous).

In contrast, the F4 Phantom lasted in USAF from 1960's to 1990's, and F14 Tomcat from 1970's to 2000's (albeit in both cases, with modifications and modernizations, but not at the same level).

 

[Ulsyus]

As bacteriae adapt and new resistences are appearing and no new families of antibiotics are fond or developed, we are aware if would be quite more difficult, and the fight against bacterial diseases has nearly reached an equilibrium, not advancing nor regressing too much for several years.

I thought I saw something last week on the news about a new technique for battling bacterial infections developed at Adelaide University, but haven't been able to find a link for it yet. If so, it'll be the first breakthrough in some time. This goes to reinforcing the idea that if something's not considered a high national/international priority then it'll progress more slowly as the funding won't be there the push the research at a faster pace.

...In contrast, the F4 Phantom lasted in USAF from 1960's to 1990's, and F14 Tomcat from 1970's to 2000's (albeit in both cases, with modifications and modernizations, but not at the same level).

fast-jet development may have slowed down, but look at the rate at which mobile phone technology developed through the nineties and naughties: breakneck by comparison.

 

[McPerth]

fast-jet development may have slowed down, but look at the rate at which mobile phone technology developed through the nineties and naughties: breakneck by comparison.

True. As long as hard competition is in the table, many firms try to keep the edge, even if that means cutting the proffits, but when the point is reached where developement costs are not amortized, I expect that to slow down.

One of the reasons of lack of antibiotics develoment is just this: developement costs are not amortized, and no need to kep your market quote. In mobile pones, as most benefits come from applications and use, not from selling them, developement is better amortized, and you need to innovate if you want to keep your maket quote.

But see that in the 1960's it ws expected that fusion power will be "just arround the corner" (as it still is), and flying cars and Moon bases were expected by year 2000. None of this has gone up to expectations.

Another example would be precisely space developement. After reaching moon (to no real benefit, aside form prestige), things have slowed quite a bit, and now there seems to be little interest on it. But if some power begins to show interest (e.g. making again Moon walks with the intent to put a base there), there's a possibility it spurs again, just for prestige/competition reasons, giving it another TL boost.

 

[Ulsyus]

But see that in the 1960's it ws expected that fusion power will be "just arround the corner" (as it still is), and flying cars and Moon bases were expected by year 2000. None of this has gone up to expectations.

They're good points, but going back to those pesky phones, for a while there they looked like something out of ST Original Series.

Smartphones today look and run a lot like the way handcomps seemed to be described in the original Traveller 2300 (we laugh now at the computers in CT!).

So, we aren't flying to work (as opposed to some flying at work) or telling the kids to put their hover boards away. We do however have a level of computing available that was not really considered (except for Gibson and a few others).

I'm struggling trying to think of other areas where we're better off than it was imagined during the 50's-70's we be at...

 

[atpollard]

I'm struggling trying to think of other areas where we're better off than it was imagined during the 50's-70's we be at...

Microwave Popcorn.

 

[KDLadage]

I'm struggling trying to think of other areas where we're better off than it was imagined during the 50's-70's we be at...

Dentistry.

 

[whulorigan]

Microwave Popcorn.

Well actually . . .

The "Radar Range" was invented in the late 1940's thru the creation of Microwave Popcorn . . .

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microwave_oven and scroll down to the "Discovery" Section.

 

[WistfulD]

I'm struggling trying to think of other areas where we're better off than it was imagined during the 50's-70's we be at...

Every edition of GURPS: Ultra-tech has to have a section at the front "apologizing" for the things in the last edition listed as TL 9 or 10 that have come to fruition since the previous edition was printed.

Transponders may not be new tech, but the ubiquitous presence of RFID tech would have made 50s sci fi writers wet their pants. Same with lasers and bar codes.

If I go camping, I don't have a flying car or robot butler to take me there, but I have chlorine-embedded smart wool socks and GPS to get me there and keep me warm and clean. The 50s envisioned the future as having bold, blunt, in-your face technology. The real world changes are subtle.

 

[KDLadage]

The real world changes are subtle.

...and more often than not, far more useful and with a lot more social implication than the early writers could have anticipated.

Nobody, for example, in those days could (or would) have anticipated the more interesting ways information is disseminated globally now, often through the resistance of local governments.

 

[Timerover51]

Has anyone ever considered an uninhabited planet with a high Tech Level, indicating the presence of usable ruins?

 

[McPerth]

Has anyone ever considered an uninhabited planet with a high Tech Level, indicating the presence of usable ruins?

I guess it would be interdicted soon, to investigate this high tech, but disapeared society...

In any case, I'd expect at least of them in Millieu 0 (remanants of Rule of Man) or in TNE setting (remanants of the Imperium)

 

[whulorigan]

Has anyone ever considered an uninhabited planet with a high Tech Level, indicating the presence of usable ruins?

In T5, the Trade Code for that is "Dieback" ("Di"):

T5 Core Book: p. 494:

Di Die-Back

The world was once extensively settled and developed, but at some time in the last thousand years its inhabiting sophonts died out leaving behind the remnants of their civilization

A Die-Back world UWP has a nonzero Tech Level.

 

[WistfulD]

Has anyone ever considered an uninhabited planet with a high Tech Level, indicating the presence of usable ruins?

Sure. Once, right after I read The World Without Us, I made a ~TL 7-8 planet where everyone had been "raptured" by who-knows-what some time within the last 100 years. They built their nuke plants with liquid sodium reactors, so the large cities were still usable. Of course everything did have a lot of damage and such, but there was a lot that could start right up again with a week or two of work.

 

[Timerover51]

In T5, the Trade Code for that is "Dieback" ("Di"):

Oh, okay. So that has been given consideration in the most recent rules. Andre Norton used that quite frequently as a plot device. Did very well with it.

 

[KDLadage]

...{snip} I made a ~TL 7-8 planet where everyone had been "raptured" by who-knows-what some time within the last 100 years {snip}...

Did you do the whole "much of the planet was reclaimed by Mother Nature thing? I have always found this aspect of Population: 0 scenarios fascinating.

 

[WistfulD]

Somewhat. I'm a big fan of those photoshoots they occasionally do on cities on old islands abandoned since the end of the cold war or the demilitarized zone in Cypress. The plants and animals have taken over. In even a few years, the act of no one around to keep water out of places it isn't ment to be means that certain parts of a city have collapsed in what seems to be overnight. Other parts last surprisingly long, and there will be concrete evidence of our cultures eons into the future.

The PCs found a 8 story mixed use appartment building with a first floor cafe on the edge of the skyscraper section of downtown and set it up as a base of operations for runs into the downtown to try to collect important banking and cultural data. The idea was that they were there for a month or two while the ship was going back for actual scientists, and that they should set up a beachhead near where the culturally significant data might have been stored, but safe from collapse, etc.

They brought in a portible generator, some pumps, and a water supply and tried to get the building up and running. The wanted to get heat, lights, toilets and clean tap water, and a satelite relay set up in this building so that the scientists could come down and do their job without spending all their time setting up creature comforts and without living in tents on MREs.

We had a blast with explaining the challenges of integrating (lower case) alien technology, and doing things like draining the basement, finding pipe and repairing the plumbing, and adjusting for the local wiring.

I had a family of fox-analogues (starfoxes, my group is inventive ) that had set up home in the cafe, and there was a debate about shooting them/driving them out. Afterwards, the adult male starfox made stopping by to see what they were doing with his old home a daily basis. By the time they left, the PCs all wanted to bring him along as a pet (nevermind the foolishness of that idea).

We discussed how ungardened non-native plant species would compete with area native plants at the edge of the city. Where mouse-analogues would be, and how much eating food grown in an unattended modern city would pollute them and what that would do to predators.

Overall, there was much fun to be had in what was, effectively, just a modern city, with a bunch of space men whose advanced super-tech was largely irrelevant (you have a fusion powered ship's boat with anti-gravity? Really? Can it help me find replacement plumbing parts?).

 

[Nathan Brazil]

(bold is mine)

You forget that, according MT:RC (and converting to Solomani counting from the table in MT:IE page 6), page 34, solomani reached J2, and so were at TL 11 at -2398 (2120 AD, solomani counting, so about 100 years after TL 9, according the timeline you give us), and TL 12 (J3) at -2210 (2299 AD, Solomani counting, so about 180 years after TL11). Then the Long Nigth avoided them to reach further.

Unfurtunately, as TL 10 is not attached to any jump increase, I cannot find the date Solomani reached it, but must (off course) be at some point between 2020 AD (TL9) and 2120 AD (TL 11).

While this does not void your point of TL increase time increments growing, instead of diminishing as have been last centuries, I guess that they are broader, and so breackthroughs that mark a TL change are more difficult to achieve as you go higher.

This may help...
The specific numbers are from GURPS: Interstellar Wars, Page 130 in world generation indicates years and maximum TL for Terran worlds depending on campaign date
G:IW
TL Date
8 2025 AD to ?
9 ? to 2127 AD
10 2128 AD - 2235 AD
11 2235 +

From that source...
TL 11 is Jump 3
TL 10 is Jump 2
TL 9 is Jump 1 and Jump 0 (Jump 0 is the "experimental drive" used during and soon after First Contact (2098 AD) .25 parsecs max, double fuel)
TL 8 is from the Core Rulebook

Jump 3 and meson weapons are developed by Terrans during the Eighth Interstellar War (A.D. 2228-2238), but too late for the conflict. Integrated and used by the Ninth Interstellar War (A.D. 2245-2256). The Vilani never developed meson weapons accordiing to that source (High Five Terrans!)

With That..
G:IW TL 11 = T5 TL 12
G:IW TL 10 = T5 TL 11
G:IW TL 9 = T5 TL 9-10?

So as far as years go for the Solomani
TL 11 2128 AD
TL 12 2235 AD

 

[simonh]

The jump from electronics (TL 7) to Tactical lasers, Flying cars, and fusion power (TL 8) seems to be taking longer than the jump from the first biplane (TL 5) to the first jet aircraft (TL 6).

I think that's because there's actualy so much underlying technology in common between, as an example, piston-powered prop aircraft and jets. It's very easy to slice up inventions and consider them as separate technologies, but actualy there are huge synergies between some groups of technologies and wide gulfs between others. Many of the things we think of as separate technologies are really just different applications of the same underlying science.

Both types of engine require a thorough understanding of the behaviour of combusting gasses, and advanced materials technology to construct robust engines. In reality they're both very closely related to each other in terms of the pre-requisites for their development. After all the first gas turbine design dates back to 1791, they just didn't have the materials to make one yet but the basic principles were understood even then. It's possible (though IMHO extremely unlikely) a society might develop one of these and just never think of the other, but once they did the alternate approach would only be a year or two of R&D away. No major breakthroughs would be required to implement it.

So the innovations of the early to mid-20th century I think are better seen as the development of a whole family of applications based on improvements in actually a very few underlying basic technologies. The materials science that enable the construction of rockets, jets, sports cars, supertankers and main battle tanks are the real technological breakthroughs. All these devices were actually conceived of decades, even centuries before the materials science was developed to allow their actual construction.

I'm not trying to knock down the skills and talent of the people that developed these things, just looking for the limiting factors that prevent or allow a society to develop a given technology.

In many cases the limiting factors might be population. I can imagine a world with a smaller population than earth that might have all our current technical and scientific knowledge, but have to make hard choices about what they devote their engineering and manufacturing capacity towards. They might opt to only develop (very efficient) propeller driven craft, just because they can't afford to devote the manpower and infrastructure to also support jets.

Simon Hibbs

Edit: I've read cogent and persuasive arguments that, aside from materials science and manufacturing processes, the one single technology that enabled all of the advances of the 20th century was the Micrometer. Without it none of our modern engineering would be possible. With it, many of our advances were basically inevitable. I think there's a good argument for Quantum Mechanics to be pretty fundamental as well. Without it, digital computers would still be stuck in th 50s.