Will Technological Advances Ever Hit an Asymptote?

I was watching Aliens the other day and I had a thought: will technical advances ever hit an asymptote? 

Here's my thinking. Ripley was drifting in hypersleep (or whatever they call it) for 57 years. Did technology advance during those years? She started in a pretty high-tech society. Would there be a noticeable change after 57 years? Does technology eventually hit an asymptote and only advance at a snail's pace?

Fifty-seven years ago for us was 1967. There was no internet. Not even ARPANET (the precursor to the internet) existed yet. A big television was 27 inches and used a cathode ray tube. Now you can buy televisions that are over 80 inches and are flat and use LEDs. The computer you have in your pocket (smart phone) would probably take up a whole room in 1967. The thought of a "personal computer" was laughable. The thought you would have it in your pocket was inconceivable. 

And the science we have learned since 1967 is amazing. I couldn't hope to list it all here.

What do you think? Could science and technology ever come to a crawl because there isn't anything else to discover or invent? Let me know in the comments below.

Rewriting Aliens

I watched the 1986 movie Aliens again a few days ago. I can't tell you how often I've watched that movie. I have it on Blu-Ray DVD so I can watch it whenever I want. I really like this movie.

***SPOILERS AHEAD***

And I, as usual, I didn't understand why they decided after the crash of the drop ship to sit tight and wait for rescue in seventeen days after being declared overdue. First of all, seventeen days makes no sense. If the trip from Earth (or where ever they came from) only takes seventeen days, why did they go into hypersleep (or whatever they called it). So that doesn't make sense to me.

But the biggest issue I have is why not send Bishop to bring down the other drop ship right away. Seems much more logical then waiting for rescue.  Now assuming LV-426 is roughly the size of Earth (it's supposed to be a moon; why in science fiction movies are they always putting people on moons?), and the USS Sulaco is in a low orbit (so the drop ships don't have to drop forever), then a complete orbit should be about 45 minutes. So Bishop heads for the uplink but by the time he gets there, the Sulaco is out of range and he has to wait, say half an hour. That gives more time for the plot to continue. 

We know the Sulaco is in orbit because they say "Nuke the site from orbit."

And, to add tension, they could have the nuclear fusion plant about to explode. Hicks could say "It's going to be close." 

(Nuclear fusion plants don't explode like thermonuclear bombs, by the way.)

I think James Cameron (who wrote and directed Aliens) must be a pantser. Otherwise, he would have figured this out.

So what do you think of my rewrite of Aliens? Do you have a better idea? Let me know in the comments below.

The above photo is being used under Section 107 of the Copyright Act: fair usage.

SUVs and Crossovers

I like to drive and I like cars. I've owned muscle cars, pony cars, sports cars, and sedans. I currently drive a sports sedan.

I define a "car" as a vehicle that is not a pickup, SUV, crossover, or minivan.

According to Car and Driver magazine, sedans don't sell well. In Fact, Ford stopped selling them (and all other cars except the popular Mustang). What people are buying now are SUVs and crossovers. Lots and lots of crossovers.

What's a crossover? It looks like an SUV but it's built on a car chassis so it handles something like a car and not a truck. You see them everywhere. The Ford Edge is a crossover although for marketing reasons, it's sold as an SUV. Look for a station wagon-like car that is puffed up like an SUV.

I've never personally owned an SUV or a crossover because I like cars. I like to accelerate, brake, and corner quickly. And SUVs and crossovers are not great at that. They might do one or two of those things, but rarely all three.

Even BMW is in the crossover game with their X series. Cadillac has a lot of crossovers.

SUVs are so popular, that Ferrari finally broke down and built one. And it probably accelerates, brakes, and corners very well (it is, after all, a Ferrari). 

Yes, sedans don't have the storage capacity of SUVs and crossovers. My sedan can comfortably hold four people. The truck space isn't cavernous. But I'd rather have the speed and cornering of my sedan than have more room for people and stuff. 

I think the reason people drive SUVs and crossovers is they care more about room and cargo space than handling and acceleration. And some tout the fact you sit high and can see better. Which I sometimes envy when trying to exit our Starbucks's parking lot.

What are your thoughts? Do you like cars or SUVs and crossovers. Let me know in the comments below.